Skip to main content

Full text of "Cobbett's complete collection of state trials and proceedings for high treason and other crimes and misdemeanors from the earliest period to the present time"

See other formats


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 


A    DIGESTED    INDEX 


TO 


HOWELL'S  EDITION  OF  THE  STATE  TRIALS, 


BY    DAVID   JARDINE,   Esq. 

OF   THE   MIDDLE   TEMPLE,   BARRISTER   AT   LAW. 


AN  Index  to  HovveU's  Edition  of  the  State  Trials  has  long  been  a 
desideratum :  amongst  all  classes  of  readers,  and  particularly  amongst 
members  of  the  legal  profession,  it  has  been  a  constant  subject  of  regret 
that  so  valuable  a  repository  of  historical  and  constitutional  information 
should  be  almost  inaccessible,  as  a  book  of  reference,  for  want  of  a  con- 
venient Index.  The  publishers,  having  determined  to  close  the  Work 
with  the  Thirty-Third  volume,  have  much  satisfaction  in  being  able  to 
annoimce  to  the  Public,  that  a  digested  Index  to  the  whole  collection 
is  now  nearly  ready  for  the  Press,  and  will  be  published  early  in  the 
Year  1827,  and  form  the  Thirty-Fourth  volume  of  the  entire  Work. 

In  making  this  Compilation,  the  object  has  been  to  furnish  the  general, 
as  well  as  the  professional  Reader,  with  an  easy  instrument  of  reference 
to  every  thing  contained  in  the  collection ;  and  it  has  been  considered 
that  the  simplest  method  of  arrangement  will  be  best  calculated  to  effect 
this  object  The  Index,  therefore,  merely  consists  of  two  Tables,  alpha- 
betically arranged ;  the  first  being  a  Table  of  Names,  with  a  short  abstract 
under  each  name  of  the  Contents  of  the  Work,  so  far  as  they  relate  to 
the  individual  to  whom  the  name  belongs,  and  a  reference  to  the  passages 
in  which  he  is  mentioned  :  the  second  being  a  Table  of  principal  matters, 
containing  references  to  all  the  leading  subjects,  and  all  the  incidental 
circumstances,  throughout  the  whole  collection.  The  heads  of  reference, 
in  both  Tables,  have  been  made  as  numerous  and  particular  as  possible, 
with  a  view  to  afford  a  large  number  of  such  points  as  may  most  probably 
occur  to  the  memory  of  the  Reader,  and  by  which  he  may  be  guided 
directly  to  the  object  of  his  search. 


COMPLETE    COLLECTION 

OF 

State    Trials 

« 

AND 

PROCEEDINGS    FOR    HIGH    TREASON    AND    OTHER 

CRIMES  AND  MISDEMEANORS 

FROM    THE 

EARLIEST  PERIOD  TO  THE  YEAR  1783, 
WITH  NOTES  AND  OTHER  ILLUSTRATIONS: 

COMPILED    BY 

T.  B.  HOWELL,  Esq.    F.R.S.  F.S.A. 

S^  AND 

CONTINUED 

FROM   THE   YEAR    1783    TO   THE    PRESENT    TIME: 

BY 

THOMAS  JONES  HOWELL,  Esq. 


VOL.   xxxm. 

[BEING    VOL.    XIL    OF   THE    CONTINUATION] 
57  GEORGE  IIL...A.  D.  1817 1  GEORGE  IV....A.  D.  1820. 


LONDON: 

LONGBfAN,  REES,  ORME,  BROWN  &  GREEN;  J.  M.  RICHARDSON;  KINGS- 
BURY,  PARBURY,  &  ALLEN;  BALDWIN,  CRADOCK,  &  JOY;  E.  JEFFERY 
&  SON ;  J.  HATCHARD  &  SON ;  R.  H.  EVANS ;  J.  BOOKER ;  J.  BOOTH ; 
A»D  BUDD  &  CALKIN. 

1896. 


•  •  * 


Lmm  OF  THE 
AUG  21  1900 


T.   C.  HiMirif, 
FriBlcr, 
PatenuMSer-row  Preih 


NOTICE. 

B  Y  the  present  volume^  this  Series  of  State  Trials  (termi- 
nating with  the  Reign  of  his  late  Majesty)  is  brought  to  a  close ; 
nor  is  there,  at  the  present  moment,  any  intention  to  continue  the 
publication  of  Modem  State  Trials  to  a  more  recent  period. 
Availing  themselves, ,  therefore,  of  the  opportunity  which  thus 
presents  itself,  the  Publishers  have  completed  their  arrangements 
for  the  early  appearance  of  a. Gei^ekal  Digested  Index, 
embracing  the  contents  as  well  of  the  First  as  of  the  Second 
Series. 

In  selecting  from  the  very  numerous  cases  which  fall  under 
the  denomination  of  State  Trials,  those  which  form  the  Second 
Series,  care  has  been  taken  to  reject  none  the  omission  of  which 
would  be  inconsistent  with  the  genial  object  of  the  work.  Of 
those  which  have  been  omitted,  some  did  not  appear  to  be  of 
su^ffident  importance  to  counterbalance  the  inconvenience  of  the 
great  eMension  of  the  work  which  their  insertion  would  have 
occasioned;  and  others,  in  so  far  as  relates  to  material  points, 
are  f idly  reported  elsewhere. 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS 


TO 


VOLUME    XXXIII. 


GEORGE  THE  THIRD,  A.  D.  1817. 

Page 
()98.     Proceedings  in  the  High  court  of  justiciary  at  Edinburgh 

against  ALEXANDER  M'LAREN  and  THOMAS  BAIRD, 

for  Sedition^  a.  d.  1817   • • •••• 1 

699.  Proceedings  in  the  High  Court  of  Justiciary  at  Edinburgh^  on  two 

successive  Indictments^  raised  by  his  Majesty's  Advocate^  against 
WILLIAM  EDGAR^  for  administering  unlawful  Oaths^  a.  d. 
1817  145 

700.  Proceedings  in  the  High  Court  of  Justiciary  at  Edinburgh^  on  two 

successive  Indictments,  raised  by  his  Majesty's  Advocate,  against 
ANDREW  M'KINLEY,  for  administering  unlawful  Oaths,  a.  d. 
1817   275 

Proceedings  against  JAMES  M'EWAN  and  others  at  Glasgow  ...     629 

701.  Proceedings  in  the  High  Court  of  Justiciary  at  Edinburgh,  against 

NEIL  DOUGLAS,  Universalist  Preacher,  for  Sedition,  a.  d. 
1817 633 


GEORGE  THE  FOURTH,  A.  D.  1820. 

702.    The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  ARTHUR  THISTLE- 
WOOD,  for  High  Treason,  a.  d.  1820   681 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS. 

703.  The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  JAMES  INGS,  for  High 

Treason,  a.  d.  1820 ••• «• «....     957 

704.  The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  JOHN  THOMAS  BRUNT, 

for  High  Treason,  a.  d.  1820 1177 

705.  The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  WILLIAM  DAVIDSON 

and  RICHARD  TIDD,  for  High  Treason,  a.d.  1820 1337 

ADDENDA   to  ihe  Case  of  VALENTINE  JONES,  Esq.,   yd.  x.  of 

this  Continuation,  p.  336 • •• 1567 


STATE 


I       T 


STATE    TRIALS, 


698.  Proceedings  in  the  High  Court  of  Justiciary  at  Edinburgh 
against  Alexander  M'Larek  and  Thomas  Baird,  for 
Sedition^  March  5th — 7th:  67  George  III.  a.  d.  1817. 


flIGti  COURT  OF  JUSTICIARY. 

March  5,  1817. 

Present, 

Hl  Hon.  Bamd  BmfU^  Lord  Justice  Clf^rk. 

Lord  Bermani* 

IjardGUiies. 

lAudPHmiify. 

Lord  Baton. 

Countelfor  the  Croum* 

.  Rl  Hon.  Alejotider  MataiuKMe^  Lord  Adfo- 
-    cate  [afterwards  a  l<»d  of  Session  and  Justi- 
ciary,  with  the  title  of  Lord  Meadowhank.J 
Janes  Wedderktmj  Esq.  Solicitor^eneral. 
H.  H.  Dmifwiondy  Esq. 
J.  A,  Maeonoekiey  Esq. 

H,  Wmraukry  Esq.  Agent. 

Coiamlfor  Alexander  M*Lat€n. 
Jckn  Clerk,  Esq. 
J.  P.  Grant,  Esq. 
James  CamjieUy  Esq . 

Mr.  JR.  Morion^  Agent. 

Counsel  for  Thomas  Baird, 

Thmas  Jeffery,  Esq". 
Benry  Cockbum,  Esq. 
X  5.  Stewart^  Esq. 

Mr.  J.  Campbell,  W,  S.  Agent. 

Xorrf  Jftf^ior  C2»r&.  —  Alexander  M'laren 
and  Thomas  Baird«  attend  to  the  indictment 
against  you,  which  the  clerk  of  Court  will  read. 

"  Alexander  m«laren,  now  or  lately 

weafer  in  Kilmamack,  in  the  county  of  Ayr, 
and  Thomas  Baird,  merchant  there,  you  are 
indicted  and  accused,  at  the  instance  of  Alex- 
ander Maoonodiie  of  \Meadowhank,  his  ma- 
jesty's'  advocate,  for  his  majesty's  interest: 
thai  albeit,  by  the  laws  of  this  and  of  every 
other  well-governed  realm,  Sedition  b  a  crime 
of  a  heinous  nature,  and  seveitly  punishable : 

VOL.  xxxm. 


yet  true  it  is  and  of  verity,  that  you  the  said 
Alexander  M'Laren  and  Thomas  Baird  are 
both  and  each,  or  one  or  other  of  you,  guilty 
thereof,  actors  or  actor,  or  art  and  part :  in  $o 
far  as,  you  the  said  Alexander  M*Laren  did, 
at  a  public  meeting,  held  at  Dean-park,  in  the 
vicinitv  of  Kilmarnock  aforesaid,  on  the  7th 
dajT  of  December  1816,  or  on  one  or  other  of 
the  days  of  that  month,  or  of  November  im- 
mediately preceding,  or  of  January  immedi- 
ately following,  which  meeting  was  attended 
by  a  great  multitude  of  persons,  chiefly  of  the 
lower  orders,  wickedly  and  feloniously  deliver 
a  speech,  containing  a  number  of  seditious  and 
in&mmatory  remarks  and  assertions,  calculated 
to  degrade  and  bring  into  contempt  the  go- 
vernment and  legislature,   and  to  withdraw 
therefrom  the  confidence  and  affections  of  the 
people,  and  fill  the  realm  with  trouble  and  dis- 
sention ;  in  which  speech  there  were  the  fol- 
lowing or  similar  wicked  and  seditious  expres- 
sions : — "  Tliat  our  sufferings  are  insupportable, 
is  demonstrated  to  the  world ;  and  that  they 
are  neither  temporary,   nor  occasioned  by  a 
transition  *  from  war  to  peace,'  is  palpable  to 
all,  though  all  have  not  the  courage  to  avow 
it.    The  fact  is,  we  are  nUed  by  men  only  so* 
ficitous  for  their  own  a^randizement ;   and 
they  care  no  farther  for  the  great  body  of  the 
people,  than  they  are  subservient  to  their  ac- 
cursed purposes.    If  you  are  convinced  of  this, 
my  countiymen,   I  would  therefore  put  the 
question,  are  you  degenerate  enough  to  bear 
it  ?    ShaJl  we,  whose  forefathers  set  limits  to 
the  all-grasping  power  of  Rome;   shall  we, 
whose  forefathers,  at  the  never  to  be  forgotten 
field  of  Bannockbum,  told  the  mighty  Edward, 
at  the  head  of  the  most  mighty  array  ever 
trod^  on  Britain's  soil,   '  Hitherto  shait  thoa 
come,  and  no  farther;'  shall  we,  I  say,  whose 
forefathers  defied  the  efforts  of  foreign  tyranny 
to  enslave  our  beloved  country,  meanly  permit, 
B 


31 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  Alexander  McLaren 


C4 


{ii  Our  day,  wifkettt  a  murmiir,  a  base  oligaithy 
to  feed  their  filthy  yermin  on  our  vitals,  aud 
rule  us  as  they  will  ?    No,   my  countrymen. 
Let  us  lay  our  petitions  at  the  foot  of  the 
throne,   where  sits  our  August  Prince,  whose 
gtacious  nature  will  incline  his  ear  to  listen  to 
tiie  cries  of  his  people,  which  1^  is  bound  to 
do  by  the  laws  of  the  country.    But,  should 
he  be  so  infatuated  as  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to- 
their  just  petition,  he  has  forfeited  their  allegi- 
ance.   Yes,  my^  fellow  townsmen,   in  such  a 
case,  to  helL  with  our  allegiance."    And  you 
the  said  Alexander  MLaren  did,  shortly  there- 
after, deliver,   or  cause  to  be  delivered,  your 
said  speech,  in  manuscript,  to  Hugh  Crawford, 
printer  in  Kilmarnock,  to  be  by  him  printed  and 
published.    And  you  the  said  Thomas  Baird 
having  been  present  at  the  said  meeting,  and 
having  heard  the  said  speech,  and  others  of  a 
similar  tendency,  delivered  there,  did,  shortly 
thereafter,   and  in  the  course   of  the  said 
months  of  December   or  January,,  wickedly 
and  feloniously  print,  or  cause  or  procure  to 
be  printed,   at  the  printing-office  of  the  said 
Hugh  Crawford,   id  Kilmarnock  aforesaid,  a 
seditious  tract  or  statement,  intituled,  "  Ac- 
count of  the  proceedings  of  the  public  meeting 
of  the  Burgesses  and  Inhabitants  of  the  town 
ofKifinainock,  held  on  the  7lh  of  December 
1816,  for  the  purpose  of  deliberating  on  the 
most  proper  method  of  remedying  the  present 
distresses  of  the  country,  with  a  ftiU  report  of 
the  speeches  on  that  occasion  ;*'  which  printed 
tract  or  statement  did  contain  a  number  of  se- 
ditious and  inflaipmatory  remarks  and  asser- 
tions, calculated  for  the  purposes  above  men- 
tioned ;   and,   in  particular,   a  report  of  the 
said  speech  of  you  tne  said  Alexander  M'Laren, 
with  the  passage  aforesaid,   in  the  same,  or 
nearly  the  same  terms ;  as  also  the  following 
wicked  and  seditious  passages,  viz.  page  ninth, 
. — "  And  a  House  of  Commons — but  the  latter 
is  corrupted ;  it  is  decayed  and  worn  out ;  it 
is  not  really  what  it  is  called,  it  is  not  a  House 
of  Commons/' — Page  tenth — "  The  House  of 
Commons,  in  its  original  composition,  con- 
sisted only  of  commoners,   chosen  annually 
by  the  universal  suffrage  of  the  people.    No 
nobleman,  no  clergyman,  no  naval  or  military 
officer,  in  short,  none  who  held  places,  or  re- 
ceived pensions  from  government,  had  any 
right  to  sit  in  tliat  House. — ^This  is  what  the 
House  of  Commons  was,  what  it  ought  to  be, 
.and  what  we  wish  it  to  be ;  this  is  the  wanted 
change  in  our  form  of  government — the  Com- 
mons House  of  Parliament  restored  to  its  ori- 
ginal purity ;  and  this,  beyond  a  doubt,  would 
strike  at  the  root  of  the  greatest  part  of  the 
evils  we  groan  under  at  the  present  day."-*- 
Page  eleventh,  "  la  it  any  wonder,  my  friends, 
that  this  country  is  brought  to  its  jpresent  unpre. 
bedented  state  of  misery,  when  the  rights  of  the 
people  have  been  thus  wantonly  violated  1'*-^ 
^age  twelfth,  "  But  let  us  come  nearer  home*. 
J^ok  at  the  year  1793,  when  the  debt  amounted 
to  two  hundred  and  eleven  millions,  and  the 
annual  taxation  to  about  eighteen  millions ; 


when  liberty  began  to  rear  her  drooping  head 
in  the  country^  when  associations  were  framed 
from  one  end  of  the  kingdom  to  another,  com- 
posed of  men  eminent  for  their  talents  and 
virtue,  to  assert  their  rights ;   when  a  neigh- 
bouring nation  had  just'  thrown  off  a  yoke 
which  was  become  intolerable — ^what  did  the 
wise  mien  of  this  coavtry  do?    Why,  they 
declaved  war,  not  only  against  the   French 
nation,  but  also  against  the  friends  of  liberty 
at  home.*' — Page  twenty-ninth,  "  Our  oppres- 
sors have  taxed  the  very  light  of  heaven ;  and 
they  seem  surprised  and  indignant  that  we 
should  not  bear  the  insupportable  burden,  with 
which  folly,    corruption,   and  avarice,    have 
loaded  us,  without  reluetance  and  eomplatnl?-* 
— Page  thirty-second,  **  Their  reverend  hire- 
lings would  convince  you  that  you  are  suffering 
under  the  visitation  of   the  Almighty,   and 
therefore  ought  to  be  submissive  under  the 
chastenii^  atroke.''"-'Page  thirty-fifth,   ^  We 
have  these  twenty-five  years  been  condemned 
to  inceMant  and  unparalleled  slavery,  by  a 
usurped  Oligarchy,   who  pretend  to  be  our 
guardians  and  repvesentatives,  while,  in  fsLCi, 
they  are  nothing  but  our  inflexible  and  deter- 
mined enemies.**—^'  They  have  robbed  ns  oF 
our  money,  deprived  us  of  our  friends,  violated 
our  rights,  ana  abused  our  privileges.** — **  At 
present  we  have  no  representatives ;  they  are 
only  nominal,  not  real ;  active  only  in  prose- 
cutmg  their  own  designs,  and  at  the  same  time 
telling  us  that  they  are  agreeable  to  our  wishes.^ 
— ^And  you  the  said  Thomas  Baird  having  ob- 
tained a  number  of  copies  of  the  said  printed 
tract  or  statement,  cootaiDing  the  said  falser 
wicked,  and  sedKioufi  nasaages,  and  othcia  of 
a  similar  tMidency,  ana  being  altogether  of  a 
seditious  nature,  did,  in  the  coerso  oi  the 
said  months  of  December  and  January,  and 
of  February  immediately  following,  at  your 
shop  in  KUmamoek  aimsaid,  wickedly  and 
feloniously  sell,  publish,  and  circulate,  or  cause 
to  be  sold,  published,  or  circulated,  many  of 
the  said  copies  thereof,  at  the  price  of 'fourpence 
each,  or  other  small  sum,  one  of  which  was 
then  and  there  purchased  by  Hugh  Wilson, 
weaver  in  Kilmarnock.     And  you  the   said 
Alexander  McLaren  and  ThoDM»  Baird  having 
been  apprehended  and  taken  before  WilUaai 
Eaton,  esq.,  sheriff-substitute  of  the  county  of 
Ayr,  did,  in  his  presence,  at  Kilinamock,  on 
the  26th- day  of  Febraary  1817,  both  and  each 
of  you  emit  and  subscribe  a  declaration  :  which 
declarations,    being  to  be  used  in  evidence 
against    each  of  you  respectively,    and    the 
manuscript  of  nineteen  pages,  and  the  half 
sh^et  of  paper,  tilled  on  the  back,  **  No*  5,*^ 
both   referred  to  in  the  said   declaration   of 
you  the   said  Thomas   Baird,   being    to    be 
used  in  evidence  against  you  the  said  Hiomes 
Baird,  as  also  three    copies  of  the  printed 
tract,  or-  statement,  above  mentioned,  beie^ 
to  be  used-  in    evidence   agaipst  both    and. 
each  of  vou,  will  be  lodged  in  due  time  in, 
the  hands  of  the  clerk  of  the  high  court  of 
justiciary,  before  which  you  are  to  be  trieif^ 


si 


and  Th&mas  Bairdjbr  S^khn, 


A.  D.  1817. 


16 


ttat  ywx  nay  have  sn  opportunify  of  Mefn^ 
the  tane.  At  letst,  times  and  places  foresaid 
respectively,  the  said  seditious  speedi  was 
wickedly  aod  feloniously  delivered,  ooBttibibg 
the  said  or  aroilar  wicked  and  seditious  ex- 
pressions :  and  the  said  seditious  tract  or  state- 
meat,  coDtaioing  the  said  seditious  and  in* 
dammaioiy  paasages,  and  others  of  a  similar 
tendency,  was  wicJkedly  and  felonioosly  printed^ 
sold,  pablished,  and  circulated,  or  caused  or 
procured  so  to  be,  as  above  mentioned :  and 
you  the  said  Alexander  M'Laren  and  Thomas 
Baipd  are  both  and  each.  Of  one  or  other  of 
you,  guilty  thereof,  actors  or  actor,  or  art  and 
pait.  All  which,  or  part  thereof,  beins  found 
proven  by  the  verdict  of  an  assize,  beu>re  the 
lord  justice  general,  the  lord  justice  derk,  and 
lords  commissioners  of  justiciary,  you  the  said 
Alexander  M'Laren  and  Thomas  Baird  ought 
to  be  punished  with  the  pains  of  law,  to  deter 
others  from  committing  the  like  crimes  in  all 
time  coming. 

"  H.  Home  Dbumkovd,  A.  D.*' 


LIST  OF  WITKK8SES. 


1. 


2. 


William  Eaton,  esquire,  sheriff-eubstitQte 

of  Ayrshire. 

Thomas  Weir,  sheriff-clerk-^epate  of  Ayr^ 

shine. 

3.  Alexander  Murdochj  writer  in  Ayr. 

4.  Amirew  Fmnie,  merchant  in  Kilmarnock. 

5.  WUiiam  Merrkj  wrigbt  there. 

6.  Hugh  Crmrfordf  printer  there. 

7.  Thomas  Murray,  journeyman  to  the  said 
Hugh  Crawford. 

6.  Jamer  JohatsUme,  muslin-agent  there. 
9.  David  Ramsay  Andrews,  writer  there. 

10.  Hugh  Wibon,  weaver  there. 

11.  Jamn  Samson,  weaver  there. 

12.  David  Bow,  shopman  to  Thomas  Baird, 
merchant  in  Kilmarnock. 

U.  HoMx  Dbummovd,  a.  D. 

LIST   OF   ASSIZE.  * 

CoaMty  of  Edinburgh. 

Jtanes  Watson,  of  Saughton. 
Charles  Eraser,  of  Williamston. 
Alexander  Falconer,  baker  in  Dalkeith. 
William  Crichion,  glazier  there.  « 
WUUam  Watson,  farmer,  Middle-Ksnleith. 
John  Dodds,  fanner,  Saughton-mill. 
John  Drysdale,  farmer,  Clermiston. 

Couttiy  of  Haddington. 

George  Remtie,  of  Fantassie. 

Daoid JPringle,  of  Blegbie. 

David  Skhrving,  farmer  at  £ast-Garleton. 

Peter  Sheriff',  fanner  at  Drem. 

John  Hukp,  junior,  grocer  in  Haddington* 

County  of  LinUthgow, 

¥atm&n  Shmrpy  younger  of  Houston. 

Jafei  Stewart,  of  Birniy. 

James  Gardner,  junior,  merchant  in  Bathgate. 

JbAit  Colder,  farmer  at  Drumcross. 

John  Buttell,  farmer  at  Mosside. 


CUy  vf  TAMnargh, 

WUliam  MoriWi^  jeweller,  South-brjd'ge-dtrcet^ 
Edinburgh. 

Walter  Lamb,  upholsterer  in  Edinburgh. 

Archibald    M'Kinlay,    haberdaiihcr    in   Edin- 
burgh. 

John  Baxter,  confectioner  there. 

ShatTp  Callender,  clothier  there. 

William  PiUtison,  junior,  haberdasher  in  Edia* 
burgh. 

Andrew  Mellis,  haberdasher  there. 

John  Pollock,  insurance  broker  there. 

James  Hbtc(/ini,  jeweller  tliere. 

John  Drtanmona,  manufacturer  there. 

Alexander  Andehon,  general-agent  there. 

James  Spence,  perfumer  there. 

Peter  Brown,  hnen-draper  there. 

William  Kennedy,  glover  there. 

James  Gilchrist,  clothier  there. 

Charles  Howden,  shoemaker  there. 
,  Edward  XxUchrist,  haberdasher  there. 

James  Virtue,  Button-manufacturer  there. 

James  Richmond,  insurance-broker  there. 

James  Stoddart,  wine-merchant  there. 

Andrew  Wauchope,  turner  there. 

Town  ofLeith, 

James  Duncan,  ship-owner  in  Leith. 
James  Harper,  corn-merchant  there. 
Wm.  Uumay,  wine-merchant  there, 
/osaet  JSkitmer,  cooper  there. 
John  Oowan,  wood*4nerchant  there. 
Charles  Murray,  wright  there. 
John  SomeruUle,  tanner  tliere. 

Ad.  Gillies. 

D.  MoKTFBNUY. 

David  DduoLAS^ 

I/frd  Justice  Clerk. — Alexander  M*Lareti 
and  Thomas  Baird ;  What  do  you  say  to  the 
libel  ?  are  you  guilty  or  not  guilty  ? 

Ptfne/i.— Not  guilty. 

The  following  Defences  had  been  given  in. 

Depbvcbs  for  Alexander  M'Laren,  Weaver  in 
Kilmarnock,  to  the  Indictment  at  the  in- 
stance of  Alexander  Maconochie  of  Mea- 
dowbank,  his  Majesty's  Advocate,  for  his 
Majesty^s  interest,  for  Sedition. 

^'The  panel  has  been  employed  horn  his 
early  youth  in  his  trade  as  a  weaver.  He  has 
always  preserved  the  most  sober  and  orderly 
habits,  and^  if  necessary  he  could  bring  forward 
complete  proof  of  his  uniform  and  steadjT 
loyalty.  He  never  was  engaged  in  any  riot  or 
disturbance  whatever,  and  never  was  connect- 
ed, or  accused  of  being  connected  with  any  of 
the  societies,  or  combinations  of  men  formed 
for  unlawful  purposes,  or  whose  objects  have 
been  regarded  with  suspicion.  He  was  a  vo- 
lunteer in  the  Glasgow  Highland  regiment 
during  the  whole  period  of  its  establishment, 
and  when  the  volunteer  system  was  put  an  end 
to,  he  transferred^  his  services  to  the  local 
militia.  During  the  greatest  part  of  his  service, 
he  was  a  serjeant,  a  situation  which  he  ob- 
tained by  Ids  good  conduct. 


71 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ofAktander  M'Lareu 


C8 


U 


Of  lale  yeaiiytlu^mieliamoBgiiiaDyoUiierty . 
lamented  the  distresses  of  the  ceuotiVy  from 
which  he  himself  had  severely  suiTerea  in  his' 
situadbn  and  prospects.  He  tiierefore  approv- 
ed of  the  petitions,  which  were  presented  in 
such  numhers  to  his  royal  highness  the  Prince 
Begenty  and  the  two  Houses  of  parliament,  the 
object  of  which  was  to  obtain  relief. 

**  A  meeting  was  held  near  Kilmarnock  in 
the  month  of  December  last,  at  which  a  great 
multitude  of  people  attended,  for  the  pnrpose 
of  considerinff  of  the  expediency  of  petitioning 
his  royal  highness  the  Prince  Ilegent  and  the 
Houses  of  Parliament,  upon  the  present  dis- 
tressed state  of  the  country,  and  the  subject 
of  parliamentary  reform.  The  panel  was  pre- 
sent at  that  meeting,  and  made  a  short 
speech,  not  in  the  terms  alleged  in  the  libel, 
but  in  other  tetms,  which  appeared  to  him 
to  be  warranted  by  law  in  such  a  case. 
The  meeting  was  afterwards  addressed  by  other 
persons;  certain  resolutions  were  agreed  to; 
petitions  were  drawn  out,  addressed  to  the 
Frince  Regent,  and  to  the  two  Houses  of  par- 
liament. These  petitions  having  been  signed 
by  a  great  number  of  persons,  were  sent  to 
Ix)ndon  and  presented.  The  petitions  ad- 
dressed to  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament  were 
presented,  read,  and  ordered  to  lie  on  the  table 
of  each  house.  In  his  speech,  the  panel  did 
nothing  more  than  lawfully  recommend  the 
said  petitions^:  and  he  denies  that  he  is  guilty 
of  the  crime  of  sedition. 

^'The  panel  took  no  charge  whatever  of 
printing  the  pamphlet  produced  with  the  libel ; 
and  he  finds  that  his  own  speech  is  inaccurately 
reported. 

**  It  is  an  evident  misconception,  that  such 
a  speech,  spoken  at  a  lawful  meeting  for  lawful 
purposes,  was  calculated  to  degrade  and  bring' 
into  contempt  the'  government  and  legisla- 
ture, and  to  withdraw  therefrom  the  confidence 
and  affections  of  the  people,  and  fill  the  realm 
with  trouble  and  dissentions.  If  there  are 
grievances  or  abuses,  or  such  men  as  bad  rulers, 
or  bad  ministers,  those  who  complain  against 
them,  or  petition  against  them,  do  only  exer- 
cise their  legal  rights.  The  panel,  while  he 
was  disposed  to  petition  for  redress  of  griev- 
ances, was  filled  with  the  same  reverence  for 
the  legislature  and  all  its  different  branches, 
and  for  the  government  of  the  country  as 
established  by  law,  that  is  impressed  on  the 
mind  of  every  good  subject. 

'*  Under  protestation  to  add  and  eik. 

"  John  Clekk. 
**  J.  P.  Grakt. 
"  James  Campbell." 

LIST  of  exculpatory  WITNESSES. 

Hugh  WiUon,  weaver,  Kilmarnock. 
Jumet  Samson,  ditto,      ditto.  ' 

James  Johnstofie,  muslin -agent  there. 
John  Kennedif,  schoolmaster  there. 
John  £/!ac^iMW(^  Vool-spinner  there. 


Dbfs«cs8  for  Thomas  Baiid,  to'the  IndicUnent 
at  the  instance  of  his  Majesty's  Advocate 
for  the  Crime  of  Sedition. 

**  The  panel  denies  that  he  is  guilty  of  the 
crime  diarged  against  him.  He  was  not  a 
speaker  at  the  meeting  mentioned  in  the 
indictment,  and  neither  spoke  mor  v^rote  any 
of  the  words  there  set  forth.  He  also  denies 
that  he  printed  or  published  any  of  the  said 
words;  and  if  any  circumstances  shall  be 
proved  tending  to  connect  him  with  the  publi* 
cation  or  sale  thereof,  he  has  no  doubt,  both 
from  the  tenor  of  the  said  words  and  the  nature 
of  his  concern  with  them,  that  it  will  be 
apparent  that  he  is  entirely  guiltless  of  the 
crime  here  charged. 

*'  Under  protestation  to  add  and  eik. 

•*  F.  Jeffrey. 

**  H.  COCKBURH, 

**  J.  S.  Stewart.** 

list  of  exculpatory  witnesses. 

John  Andrews,  chief  magistrate  of  Kilmarnock. 
DaM  Hamsay  Andrews,  writer  there. 
WaJUer  Andrews,  writer  there. 
Andrew  Finnie,  merchant  there. 
James  Johnstone,  muslin  agent  there. 
John  Brown,  writer  there. 
Baiiie  William  Brown,  manufacturer  there. 
John  WilUe,  assessor  of  taxes  there. 
Bjoberi  Howie,  merchant  there. 
Tfiomas  Murray,  printer  there. 
The  Rev.  James  Kirkwood,  relief  minister  there,, 
residing  at  Riccarton. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — ^Have  the  counsel  Cor 
the  panels  any  objections  to  state  to  the 
relevancy  of  this  indictment  ? 

Mr.   Campbell, — I  appear  on  behalf  of  the 
panel,  Alexander  M'liiren.      It  is  not   my 
intention  to  state  any  objections  to  ttie  relevancy 
of  the  libel,  but  to  explain  to  the  Court  and 
Jury  the  nature  of  the  concern  which  he  had 
in  the  transactions  now  brought  before  this 
Court.    At  the  same  time,  it  is  proper  I  should 
state,  that  we  who  are  his  counsel  hold  it  to  be 
the  undonbted  law — and  law  which  has  never 
been  questioned  in  this  part  of  the  country — 
that  it  is  the  province  of  the  jury  to  consider 
both  the  facts  and  the  law  of  the  case — that  it 
is  for  them  to  say  whether  the  facts  charged  in 
the  indictment  are  proved  in  the  course  of  the 
trial,  and  if  they  find  them  proved,  whether 
these  facts  do  amount  to  the  crime  charged. 
And  that  being  the  case,  we  hold  that  we  are 
not  deprived  of  the  benefit  of  any  pleas  which 
we  may  afterwards  maintain,  by  any  interlo- 
cutor of  relevancy  now  to  be  pronounced. 

I  conceive  also,  that  in  justice  to  the  panel 
and  in  justice  to  the  opposite  side  of  the  bar, 
(who  always  meet  me  with  liberality,  and  whom 
I  wish  to  meet  in  the  same  manner),  I  should 
at  once  and  openly  state  the  nature  of  the 
defence  we  intend  to  maintain,  and  should  say 
something  of  the  history  and  character  of  the 
I  panel. 


^ 


and  Timtu  Bakd/or  SeUition. 


9} 

Tlie  paaely  after  learmng  the  tnde  of  m 
*«reayer,  to  the  coooty  of  Perth,  went  to 
Glasgow,  where  be  continued  a  good  many 
yean.  He  acted  as  assistant  foreman  in  a 
■lecrantile  bouse,  and  during  the  whole  of  his 
-engagement  gave  entire  satisfaction  to  his 
employer.  Seventeen  years  ago  he  entered 
into  the  Highland  corps  of  yolunteers  in  tluit 
city,  and  soon  rose  to  the  rank  of  serjeant,  and 
continued  with  the  corps  till  it  was  disbanded, 
and  the  volunteer  associations  were  discon- 
tinued. He  next  went  to  Kilmarnock,  where 
a  great  many  weavers  are  occupied  in  working 
lor  the  manufacturers  of  Glasgow ;  and«  at  the 
same  time,  he  again  gave  his  services  to  the 
public,  by  entering  into  the  local  militia  corps 
of  that  district,  in  which  corps  |ie  continued 
down  to  1812,  when  the  period  of  its  service 
expired.  And  not  only  was  there  no  complaint 
against  him  during  all  these  periods,  as  a  man 
either  troublesome  or  quarrelsome,  but  he 
maintained  in  Kilmarnock,  during  the  period 
of  nearly  eight  years  during  which  he  lived 
there,  a  character  remarkable  for  sober  habits, 
attachment  to  good  order,  and  to  the  govern- 
ment of  the  country ;  and  last  harvest,  during 
a  riot  which  occurred  about  a  scarcity  of  meal, 
so  far  was  he  from  taking  any  part  in  the  riot, 
that  when  a  house  was  to  be  attacked,  he  put 
himself  forward  along  with  two  constables  in 
order  to  protect  the  house.  He  enjoyed  the 
same  decent,  respectable,  and  good  character, 
till  this  charge  of  sedition  was  brought  against 
him. 

He  does  not  deny  that  he  attended  the 
meeting  in  December.  His  means  of  subsist- 
ence, and  those  -of  his  neighbours  about  him, 
had  been  graduslUy  declining.  They  had  ar- 
rived, before  the  period  I  speak  o%  at,  1  hope, 
their  worst  state  of  distress ;  for  he  worked 
fifteen  hours  a  day  for  5s.  a-week,  although  he  is 
not  only  one  of  the  best  workmen,  but  so  expert 
as  to  be  able  to  execute  the  best  work  in  the 
shortest  time.  And  I  will  prove,  that  other 
workmen  who  could  execute  as'  good  work, 
bot  who  were  not  so  expert  and  expeditious  as 
my  client,  were  able  to  obtain  only  3s.  a-week. 
The  panel  admits  that  in  this  distress  he  began 
to  think  of  the  causes  which  had  reduced  his 
neighbours  and  himself  froin  a  condition  in 
which  they  were  prosperous  and  happy  to  a 
state  in  which  they  could  scarcely  gain  the 
means  of  subsistence ;  he  confesses  he  came 
to  be  of  opinion,  tfiat  the  evils  were  partly 
owing  to  toe  excessive  taxation  which  had 
been  imposed  on  the  country;  and  he  and 
some  othera  thought  it  right  to  call  a  meeting 
of  the  inhabitants  of  the  place  where  he  resided, 
to  consider  the  propriety  of  a  petition  to  the 
legislature  on  the  subject  of  their  distresii^  its 
causes,  and  what  appeared  to  them  to  be  the 
proper  remedies; 

Thev  conceived,  that  to  do  this  was  their 
nndouDted  right ;  and  it  will  not  be  denied  on 
the  opposite  side  of  the  bar,  that  such  was 
their  right.  There  is  no  charge  in  the  indict- 
ni^t  that  the  meeting  was  illegal.   .It  was  a 


A.  D.  1817. 


uo 


I 


legal  neeting  which  they  were  entitled  to 
hold :  it  was  for  a  legal  purpose ;  there  was  no 
harm  in  going  there;  and  every  person  waa 
entitled  to  state  the  grievances  he  felt,  and  in 
a  manner  that  might  induce  the  meeting  to 
take  constitutional  measures  for  what  he  con- 
ceived would  bring  them  relief.  Tl^  panel 
did  not  intend  to  take  any  part  in  the  proceed- 
ings, nor  to  open  the  meeting  as  he  did.  fiut 
those  persons  who  were  to  have  opened  the 
proceedings,  were  not  equal  to  the  task  wbea 
the  time  came,  and  he  was  asked  to  undertake 
what  was  refused  by  the  others.  He  went  into 
a  house  in  the  neighbourhood,  and  hastily 
threw  upon  paper  some  observations  which  he 
wished  to  submit  to  the  meeting.  He  did  ad- 
dress the  meeting,  but  he  did  not  submit  to  it, 
— and  there  were  not  contained  in  that  paper— 
what  are  cited  as  offensive  expressions  in  the 
last  part  of  the  indictment. 

As  to  tl^e  passage  about  a  corrupt  adminis- 
tration, which  is  cited  in  the  indictment,  it  was 
in  the  manuscript,  but  was  not  spoken  in  the 
field.  I  admit  that  the  manuscript  afterwards 
went  into  the  hands  of  the  committee  of  the 
petitioners,  at  the  request  of  the  committee,  in 
order  to  be  printed  in  an  account  of  the  pro* 
ceediogs,  but  he  had  no  concern  in  printing 
that  account. 

With  regard  to  the  expressions  which  are 
charged  as  seditiously  directed  against  the 
legislature,  we  shall  satisfy  the  jury,  and  shall 
show  your  lordships,  ^hat  giving  them  a  fair 
construction,  they  contain  nothing  improper 
against  any  of  the  orders  of  the  state,  against 
the  King,  the  House  of  Lords,  or  H'ouse  of 
Commons.  In  sound  construction,  the  ex- 
pressions apply  only  to  the  administration  for 
the  time,  and  every  person  at  such  a^  meeting 
is  entitled,  if  he  thinks  it  right,  to  attack  the 
policy,  and  conduct  of  ministers.  I  need  not 
enter  into  the  question,  whether  there  has 
been  roal-administration  or  not;  but  every 
person  feeling  himself  aggrieved  is  entitled  to 
state  his  grievances,  and  more  particulariy  at 
a  meeting  convened  for  the  purpose  of  apply- 
ing to  the  legislature  for  redress.  This  will 
not  be  denied.  And  what  was  done  in  conse- 
quence of  this  meeting,  and  of  the  speeches 
which  were  made  there?  Every  thing  was 
conducted  in  a  regular  and  orderly  manner;, 
no  injury  was  done  to  any  property  or  to  any 
person ;  the  only  consequence  of  the  meeting 
was,  that  three  petitions  were  resolved  on,  one 
to  the  Prince  Regent,  another  to  the  House  of 
Lords,  and  the  third  to  the  House  of  Commons ; 
which  last  petition,  when  presented  to  that 
House,  was  ordered  to  be  brought  up  and  to 
lie  on  the  table.  This  i*  proof  that  the  peti- 
tions contained  nothing  that  was  offensive  to 
the  Prince  Regent,  nothing  seditious,  nothing 
offensive  to  the  Houses  of  rarliament.  Every 
thing  that  resulted  was  legitimate  and  proper. 

Taking  the  whole  circumstances  into  consi- 
deration, it  clearly  appears,  that  th#  first  pas- 
sage objected  to,  relates  to  the  measures  of 
ministers ;  and  I  will  prove  even  by  witnesses 


11> 


57  GEORGfi  III. 


Trial  rfdUmnitr  M*Liiren 


112 


for  tlie  cTOwn>  th^t,  bo  fa»  was  my  dtent  from 
employing  any  exprieasions  disrespectliil  to- 
wards the  head  of  the  govemme&t,  that  he  did 
quite  the  reverse,  and  ftpoke  with  the  titmost 
respect  of  the  Prince  Regent. 

This  being  the  situation  of  the  maCtefy  and 
my  client  having  done  nothing  but  what  he 
was  entitled  to  do,  we  ^all  show  that  the  lan- 
guage he  used  was  no  other  than  what  he  was 
completely  authorised*  to  use.  In  numerous 
petitions  to  parliament,  much  stronger  lao** 
guage  has  been  used,  and  found  not  only  to 
be  not  seditious,  but  to  be  not  disrespectful  to 
the  House.  What  was  the  language  held  when 
Parliamentary  Reform  was  llrst  talked  of  at 
the  Thatched-house-tavem  ?  in  the  second 
resolution  of  that  meeting  it  was  said,  **  This 
meetipg,  considering  that  a  general  application 
by  the  collective  b(^y  to  the  Commons  Ilouse 
of  Parliament  cannot  be  made  before  the  close 
of  the  present  session,  is  of  opinion,  that  the 
sense  of  the  people  should  be  taken  at  such 
times  as  may  be  con? enient  this  summer,  in 
order  to  lay  their  ^veral  petitions  before  par- 
liament early  in  the  next  session,  when  their 
pmposition  for  a  Parliamentaty  Reformation, 
wUhout  ufkick  neither  the  liberty  of  the  natkm  <wn 
be  preserved,  n&r  the  permanence  of  a  wise  and 
virtuous  administration  can  be  secured,  may  re- 
ceive that  ample  and  mature  discussion  which 
so  momentous  a  question  demands/'  *  These 
are  strong  terms,  and  imply,  that,  without  le^ 
formation  in  the  representation  of  the  people, 
the  liberty  of  the  subject  is  in  danger ;  and  if 
there  is  any  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
passage,  look  to  the  letter  written  by  Sfr.  Pitt 
to  Mr.  Froet,  in  which  it  is  said,  that  Reform 
'^  is  essentially  necessary  to  the  independence 
of  parliament,  and  the  liberty  of  the  people.'' f 
Down  to  this  day  strong  language  is  always 
used  in  petitions  on  that  subject  and  never 
objected  to,  except  when  the  House  of  Com- 
mons is  denied  to  represent  the  people,  or 
matter  is  introduced  against  the  House  that  is 
not  relevant  to  the  object  of  the  petition. 

It  has  been  laid  down  by  constitutional 
lawyers  and  statesmen,  by  lord  Thurlow,  by 
Mr.  Pitty  and  Mr.  Fox,  that  where  the  language 
is  expressive  of  the  grievance,  however  strong 
it  may  be,  it  is  justifiable.  I  therefore  submit, 
that,  as  it  is  competent  to  put  such  language 
into  a  petition  to  parliament — ^as  such  lan- 
guage has  not  been  held  objectionable  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  it  cannot  be  considered 
as  seditious,  or  as  tending  to  bring  the  legisla- 
ture into  contempt.  If  such  language  is  law- 
ful in  petitions  to  parliament,  then  it  must  be 
held  lawful  in  the  speeches  and  resolutions 
made  at  meetings  pi^paratory  to  such  peti- 
tions. For  there  would  be  an  inconsistency 
and  absurdity  in  saying,  that  such  language 
might  be  lawfully  used  in  a  petition,  which  if 
used  in  discussing  whether  it  should  be  in- 
serted in  the  petition  would  be  unlawful.    If 

>   ■  ■   ■        »   1   II     I  H      III    ■       .1      W^— —■  I        11    III     ,11      .— .PW«— .^W^MMW^— — " 

*  1  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  493,  note. 
t  1  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  494,  note. 


it  should  be  neeessary,  we  shall  make  out  to 
the  satisfaction  of  your  lordships  and  the  jury, 
thatthe  language,  even  as  stated  in  the  indid- 
ment,  does  not  amount  to  sedition. 
Having  stated  thus  much,  I  conceive  I  have 

3«ned  the  nature  of  the  defence  we  mean  to 
ead,  at  sufficient  lehgth  to  make  the  oppo- 
site sHle  of  the  bar  aware  of  the  nature  of^our. 
defence,  and  I  think  it  unneceisary  to  detain 
your  lordships  any  longer. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — ^It  is  a  perfectly  fair 
and  distinct  statement. 

Mr.  Mrey,'^!  appear  here  in  behalf  of 
Thomas  JBaird.  k  suppose  we  are  all  agreed, 
that  it  it  the  right  and  province  of  ^the  jury  to 
take  into  consideration  both  the  facts  and  the 
law  of  the  case;  first,  to  find  whether  the  fiicts 
libelled  are  proved ;  and  then  to  judge  of  the 
import  of  the  facts  so  proved.  We  have  no 
desire  to  quash  the  trial  in  any  prelimioaiy 
stage  of  the  proceedings ;  and,  notvcithstand* 
ing  some  incorrect  stater,  ents  in  the  libel,  as 
we  do  not  wish  to  shrink  f^om  investigation, 
we  shall  not  trouble  your  lordships  vriUi  any 
preliminary  objections  to  the  relevancy. 

I  have  little  farther  to  state  in  addition  to 
the  written  defences.  Mr.  Baird  is  a  ^mer- 
chant in  Kilmarnock,  and  has  always  main- 
tained, not  only  an  irreproachable  but  a  re- 
spectable character  in  the  estimation  of  both 
his  superior  and  equals.  He  also  has  served 
his  country  in  a  military  capacity,  and  held, 
successively,  commissions  in  different  bodies 
of  volunteers.  In  the  last  corps  to  which  he 
vras  attached,  he  served  down  till  ihe  dissolu- 
tion of  the  volunteer  system  in  1813,  when  the 
allowances  which  had  been  given  to  them 
were  taken  «way ;  and  his  conduct,  character, 
and  sentiments,  were  always  considered  loyal, 
respectable,  and  praiseworthy. 

He  also  had  entertained  ideas,  the  wisdom 
and  propriety  of  which  cannot  here  be  made  a 
subject  of  discussion :  But  to  what  he  consi- 
dered as  defects  in  the  constitution,  he  wished 
to  apply  none  but  constitutional  remedies.  A 
spectator  -of  the  general  distress  around  him, 
and  a  participator  in  it,  he  believed  that  the 
evil  was  ascribable,  at  least  in  part,  to  a  de- 
fective representation  in  the  Commons  House 
of  Parliament;  and  he  therefore  thought  it 
proper  to  present  a  respectful  petition  to  the 
legislature  on  the  subject.  He  attended  the' 
public  meeting  which  assembled  for  that  pur- 
pose ;  but  he  did  not  take  any  part  in  tlie  dis- 
cussion, not  being  gifted  with  powers  of 
oratory,  nor  wishing  to  obtrude  himself  on  the 
public  notice.  He  did  however  attend  the 
meeting,  and  he  heard  the  speeches — which 
were  not  so  violent  as  they  have  been  repre- 
sented. 

Some  expressions  were  at  the  time  repit)- 
bated  by  him,  as  tending  to  throw  an  odium 
on  the  geneml  cause  of  Reform ;  and  after- 
wards, when  it  was  determined  that  some 
account  of  the  proceedings  should  be  publisbei^, 
and  the  orators  gave  in  t^if  tpeeckes  to  the 


131 


and  Thiuu  Bamlfor  Sidiliint. 


A.  D.  1817. 


CM 


commitee  for  pablieatioD,  he  repeated  his  oik 
jectioDs  ftgatost  printing  Mveral  passagM  which 
appeared  to  him  to  be  improper ;  bttC  he  was 
oTemikd  by  a  majority  ot  the  committee,  who 
wished  a  full  publication  of  the  proceedings. 
As  the  fuoda  of  the  petitioners  were  low^  it 
eocurred  to  the  committee  that  some  small 
pittance  might  be.c<41ected  from  the  publiea- 
tion,  to  defray  the  expenses  necessary  for  the 
pfepaiatioa  dT  the  petitions.  In  this  way,  he 
oonaemed  to  the  publiealioRy  but  at  the  same 
time  protested  against  puUisluDg  any  impropet 
ezpccssions ;  but  not  hayiag  any  idea  (as  such 
a  oiscoveiy  indeed  had  not  then  been  made  in 
any  quarter)^  that  the  expressions,  tfaoagfa 
censarable^  were  of  a  naittre  to  infer  criminal 
Gonseqaeneesy  be  gare  no  critical  attention  to 
the  minute  contents  of  the  publication,  nor 
considered  himself  responsible  for  them.  In 
Older  to  forward  the  end  in  ?iew,  which  was 
not  to  excite  violence  or  sedition,  but  merely 
to  raise  money,  it  was  determined  that  the 
members  of  Ae  committee  should  distribute 
and  sell  as  many  copies  of  the  pamphlet  as 
possible ;  and  my  client  agreed  to  sell  some  of 
^ibem. 

Tbese  are  the  facts  of  the  case.  As  to  the 
leleTancy,  mnch  will  depend  on  the  interpre* 
tation  to  be-  given  to  the  words  libelled  on. 
We  do  not  think  it  necessary  at  present  to  say 
any  thing  farther  on  that  point,  as  we  shaU 
prove  that  the  expressions  used  were  materially 
aifierent  from  those  lib^ed  in  the  indictment. 
When  tba  tets  are  disclosed  in  the  evidence, 
we  shall  have  a  fitter  opportunity  for  remark* 
ing  on  them. 

Lord  AdvoaUe. — ^It  is  unnecessary  for  me  to 
say  any  thing  as  to  the  candid  statement 
which  has  been  made  on  the  other  side  of  the 
bar.  I  admit  that  it  is  not  only  the  right  of 
the  jury,  but  that  it  is  their  bouaden  duty  to 
hay  upon  their  oaths,  whether  the  natter 
charged  is  sedition  or  not.  In  that  I  concur 
with  my  teamed  friends,  and  therefore  I  necfd 
say  ttodiing  more. 

Lord  Juttice  Clerk. — ^Your  lordships  have 
heard  what  has  been  said  on  behalf  of  the  pri- 
soners, and  what  has  been  said  by  the  lord 
advocate.  I  have  to  ask  your  lordships,  whe- 
ther you  have  any  observations  to  offer  on  the 
relevancy  of  this  indictment. 

iiovd  Hermand. — ^I  am  of  opinion  that  the 
indictment  is  relevant ;  and  I  think  there  can 
be  little  doubt  on  the  point  with  those  who 
bear  me.  The  learned  gentleman  who  opened 
the  defence  admitted,  that  an  attack  on  parlia* 
ment  oonstitntes  sedition;  adding,  that  his 
client  did  not  apply  his  expressions  to  the 
legislature,  but  to  the  ministers  of  the  day.  It 
nay  be  so,  but  that  is  tiot  what  is  stated  in 
this  indictment,  to  which  alone  I  can  attend  at 
ptesent.  Past  of  the  chaige  goes  veiy  deepv 
They»  iMt  on  pretence  of  a  dntiful  petition. 
Sttch  pretences  ace  always  made.  T^%  your 
lovdships  will  attend  to  what  we  find  stated : 
^  Ijdt  Of  lay  onir  petitiena  at  the  fwit  of  &e 


throne,  where  sile  o«r  august  prince,  whoso 
gracious  nature  will  incline  his  ear  to  listen  to 
the  cries  of  his  people,  which  he  is  bound  to 
do  by  the  laws  of  the  country."  AH  this  is 
extremely  good ;  but  what  follows  ?  "  But, 
should  he  be  80  infatuated  as  to  turn  a  deaf 
ear  to  their  just  petition,  he  has  forfeited  their 
ellegiaace.  Yes,  ray  fellow-townsmen,  in  such 
a  case,  to  h^U  toUh  ow  aUtgUmce/'  Is  that  not 
sedition?  Accompanied  with  an  overt  act, 
would  it  not  be  high  treason  ?  I  have  no  hesi- 
tation in  saying  it  would. 

Things  may  turn  out  differently  on  the  proof 
from  what  is  represented  in  the  indictment ; 
and  I  should  n^ice  to  find  it  so.  But,  with 
regard  to  the  speech  and  the  publication,  aa 
here  stated,  is  uiere  not  a  direct  attack  on  tho 
legislature  ?  Another  pflMsage  is :  ''A  House 
of  Commons,  but  the  latter  is  corrupted ;  it  i» 
decayed  and  worn  out;  it  is  not  really  what  it 
is  called;  it  is  not  a  House  of  Commons.^ 
We  are  told  this  is  only  an  attack  on  the  mi- 
nisters. It  b  an  attack  on  the  House  itself. 
Any  petition  containing  such  expressions,  I 
always  understood,  would  be  rejected  by  the 
Houee  of  Commons.  "  At  present  we  have 
no  representatives ;  they  are  only  nominal,  not 
real;  actite  only  in  prosecuting  their  own 
designs,  and  at  the  same  time  telling  us  that 
they  are  agreeable  to  our  wishes.''  Is  that  not 
a  broad  attack  on  the  legislature  T  I  shsll  bo 
glad  if  the  facts  charged  are  not  made  out^ 
They  cleaity  amount  to  sedition  as  they  are 
stated. 

Lord  GiUieSj-^-l  concur  in  the  opinion  which 
I  have  now  heard,  so  far  as  to  think  the  indict- 
ment relevant.  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  ia 
relevant,  and  that  the  ordinary  interlocutor 
must  be  pronounced.  The  indictment  states, 
that  at  a  meeting  '*  attended  by  a  great  multi- 
tude of  persons,  chiefly  of  the  lower  orders," 
one  of  tae  panels  delivered  a  certain  spee<^ 
which  speech  was  afterwards  ciixulated  by  the 
other  prisoner.  » 

As  to  the  nature  and  objects  of  the  meeting, 
no  information  is  given  in  the  indictment ;  I 
must  therefore  hold  it  to  have  been  a  lawful 
meeting.  But  the  libel  goes  on  to  state,  that 
^  panel  "  wickedly  and  feloniously  delivered 
a  speech  containing  a  number  of  seditious  and 
inflammatory  remarks  and  assertions,  calcu* 
lated  to  degrade  and  bring  into  contempt  the 
government  and  legislature,  and  to  withdraw 
Uierefrom  the  confidence  and  affections  of  the 
people,  and  to  fill  the  realm  with  trouble  and 
dissention.''  This  is  certainly  a  charge  of 
sedition ;  and,  if  the  expressions  cited  in  the 
indictment  were  delivered  for  the  purpose 
there  statikl,.  they  must  bo  regarded  as  sedi*> 
tiotM.  I  need  deliver  no  opinion  farther  at 
present,  for  the  facta  chaiged  in  the  indict- 
ment, an^f  stUl  more,  the  wieked  and  febniou» 
intentione  therein  aseribed-  to-  them,  are  denied 
by  the  panels.  AJl  these  matters  remain  to  be 
the  subject  of  proof;  and  I  should  be  arvogiat- 
ing  to  myself  the  province  of  the  jury  and  Of 


w 


57  GEORGE  IIL 


Triid  ofAlexatukf  M*Larnt 


[16 


your  lordship,  if  I  said  aaj  thing  farther  at 
this  period  or  the  trial ;  for  after  the  proof  only 
can  any  satisiactory  opinion  be  given  on  the 
subject. 

Lord  PitnttUy,—^Swm  after  the  printed  copy 
of  this  indictment  "was  put  into  my  hands,  I 
considered  it  with  a  view  to  the  question  of 
relevancy;  and  although  the  counsel  for  the 
panels  have  not  disputed  the  relevancy  of  the 
indictment,  but  reserved  to  themselves  the 
liberty  of  making  such  observations  as  may 
appear  to  them  proper  after  a  proof  shal)  have 
been  led,  it  would  have  been  the  province  and 
the  duty  of  this  court  to  stop  the  trial  at  this 
stage  if  it  had  appeared  to  us  that  the  indict- 
ment is  not  relevantly  laid. 

ThMefence  has  been  very  properly  explain- 
ed by  the  counsel  for  the  panels ;  and  I  shall 
be  happy  if  they  make  out  that  defence,  either 
in  exculpation,  or  in  alleviation  of  the  crime 
charged  in  this  indictment.  The  only  question 
at  present  is  as  to  the  relevancy  of  the  indict- 
ment ;  and  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that 
in  my  opinion,  it  is  relevanf ;  nnd  that,  there- 
fore, the  ordinary  interlocutor  should  be  pro- 
nounced. 

The  major  proposition  of  the  indictment 
charges  sedition  in  general  terms.  This  is  an 
unexceptionable  charge,  which  has  never  been 
objected  to,  that  I  know  of,  but  in  one  case, 
where  the  question  reg^ding  it  was  argued, 
and  the  objection  was  repelled.  I  allude  to 
the  case  of  Sinclair.*  It  is  known  to  every 
lawyer  that  sedition  is  a  crime  recognised  by 
the  laws  of  this  country.  It  is  a  crime,  in- 
deed, the  trial  and  punishment  of  which  must 
be  coeval  with  government. 

It  IS  stated  that  the  one  panel  made  a  speech 
which  contains  inflammatory  remarks  and  se- 
ditious expressions,  and  that  the  other  panel 
circulated  a  pamphlet  containing  that  and 
other  seditious  speeches.  Paragraphs  of  it 
have  been  read,  and  I  will  not  consume  time 
with  reading  or  commenting  on  any^f  them 
at  present.  No  person  who  reads  them  can 
doubt,  that  the  general  nature  of  them  is  to 
excite  commotion,  and  to  prepare  the  way  for 
resistance  and  for -overturning  the  government. 
That  this  is  the  general  tendency  of  (he  facts 
charged,  no  person  can  doubt.  It  would  also 
be  wasting  the  time  of  the  Court  to  read  the 
passages  of  the  luminous  commentary  by  Mr. 
Hume  on  the  crime  of  sedition,  or  to  refer  to 
the  authorities  and  the  precedents  which  have 
occurred  in  this  court. 

The  counsel  for  the  panels  are  correct  in 
stating,  that  it  is  the  province  of  the  jury  ulti- 
mately to  determine,  not  only  as  to  the  facts  of 
the  utterance  and  the  publication  of  the  ex- 
pressions mentioned  in  the  libd,  but  also  with 
regard  to  the  law,  whether  the  expressions  are 
to  be  held  seditious  or  not.    On  that  point 

—  ...   11   1..I      1    I    M     I     .,     I,  I       I  ,1    III    II        I   ,  I    I 

*  See  the  debate  on  the  Relevancy  of  the 
Indiotment  in  Smdair's  wse^  2  Blow,  Mod.  St. 
Tr.  784. 


there  can  be  no  doubt;  atid  there  never  was 
doubt  as  to  it  at  any  period  of  the  history  of  this 
court.  The  Court,  however,  in  considering  of 
the  relevancy,  must  determine  in  the  first  in- 
stance whether  the  expressions  complained  of 
appear  to  them  to  be  seditions,  and  to  amount 
to  the  crime  of  sedition ;  and  on  this  subject  I 
cannot  entertain  the  shadow  of  doubt. 

Lord  Retton. — I  have  no  dpubt  as  to  the  re- 
levancy of  the  indictment.  We  have  nothing 
to  do  at  present  with  the  truth  of  the  state* 
ments  in  it.  The  only  question  now  is,  whe- 
ther the  averments  of  the  public  prosecutov 
are  put  in  proper  shape  and  terms  in  this 
charge.  The  jury  will  decide  not  only  on  the 
bare  fhcts^  but  on  the  legal  import  of  them, 
and  will  say  whether  the  panels  are  guilty  or 
not  of  the  crime  of  sedition. 

I  have  no  doubt  of  the  sufficiency  of  the 
averments  made  by  the  public  prosecutor.  He 
has  averred  circumstancesy  which,  if  proved, 
amount  to  sedition.  His  averments  amount  to 
this,  that  what  was  said  and  published  was  not 
only  calculated  to  produce  pernicious  conse^ 
quences  affecting  the  government  and  legisla-^ 
ture,  but  must  have  been  meant  for  seditious 
purposes.    The  indictment  states,  that  the  pur- 

r>se  of  the  panels  was  vricked  and  felonious; 
consider  that  the  speech  said  to  have  been 
delivered  by  one  of  tne  panels  is  seditious  in 
all  its  parts,  and  tends  to  excite  discontent  in 
the  country.  It  was  delivered  in  the  open  air, 
before  a  multitude  of  the  lower  orders  assembled 
to  hear  it.  The  panel  is  alleged  to  have  stated 
that  their  sufferings  were  intolerable,  and  in 
coarse  and  calumnious  language  to  have  said^ 
**  A  base  oligarchy  feed  their  filthy  vermin  on 
our  vitals,  and  rule  us  as  they  will.^'  I  consider 
this  expression  as  tending  directly  to  vilify  the 
government,  and  weaken  the  affections  of  the 
country  towards  its  legislature.  In  this  speech 
he  talks  of  successful  resistance.  He  speaks 
of  the  reformation,  and  of  the  resistance  made 
to  the  English  when  their  progress  was  stopped 
at  Bannookbum.  What  were  the  feelings 
meant  to  be  excited  in  the  audience  ?  He  was 
attempting  to  degrade  the  government,  in 
order  to  stimulate  his  hearers  to  resistance ; 
and,  to  give  them  confidence,  he  mentioned 
former  instances  of  successful  resistance.  No 
doubt  he  proposes  that  the  petition  shall  be 
laid  at  the  foot  of  the  throne ;  and  he  pays  a 
compliment  to  t1|e  Prince  Regent.  But  what 
does  he  add  ?  **  Should  he  be  so  infatuated  as 
to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  their  just  petition,  he  has 
forfeited  theit  allegiance.  Yes,  my  fellow- 
townsmen,  in  such  a  case,  to  hell  with  our 
allegiance.**  Is  there  no  intimidation — is  there 
no  threat  intended  by  such  language  ?  It  is 
true  the  expression  ^*  just  petition*'  is  employ- 
ed ;  but  who  is  to  judge  whether  the  petition 
is  just  ?  Were-4l)09e  at  the  meeting  to  judge  ? 
It  was  in  efiect,  saying,  if  our  petition  is  not 
listened  to,  we  are  alMolved  from  our  alle* 
glance.  If  the  expressions  shall  be  proyed^ 
Uie  language  is  seditious  in  a  high  degree.  • 


171 


ttmi  T%omag^i^irdfir  SkdHwn. 


A.  D:  1817. 


LIS 


Lord  Justice  Clerk, — I  entirdy  concur  in  the 
Opiiiiong  which  have  been  deliyered  as  to.  flie 
wofiaee  and  doty  of  the  jury  in  a  case  of  thi» 
kod.  It  XI  not  necessary  ror  me  to  state  any 
tfaioff  further  at  present,  than  that  no  douU 
can  he  entertained  that  this  indictment  is  rele» 
TBnt. 

Alexander  H^ren  and  Thomas  fiaird : 
Attend'to'tfae  interlocutor  of  the  court  as  to 
the  relevancy  of  this  indictmcpl. 

VOL.  XXXIII.  » 


But  ibis  pand  is  not  only  accused  ef  ex- 
pressing himself  in  this  seditions  manner  wfiile 
in  the  beat  «f  addressing  his  audience,  but  he 
is  also  said  to  hare  delivered  up  Uie  MS.  of  his 
speech' in  order  to  be  printed.  If  thisbe  proved, 
then  not  only  did  he  use  seditious  language  in 
the  heat  of  his  address,  for  which  he  might 
have  been  in  a  certain  degree  exousablCy  if 
momentarily  not  master  of  himself,  but  he  af- 
terwards did  the  utmost  in  his  power  to  circu* 
late  this  sedition.    It  was  not  likely  that  the 
speech  would  be  heard  of  beyond  the  place 
where  it  was  delivered,  witliout  some  eflbrt 
yrete  used  to  disseminate  it,  but  he  shewed  his 
anxiety  to  obtain  for  it  a  wider  circulation. 

The  indictment  is  clearly  relevant  as  to 
M'Laren.  It  is  likewise  so  as  to  Baird*  He 
was  present  at  the  meeting.  I  do  not  say  the 
purpose  of  the  meeting  was  illegal.  Baiid  be- 
came the  trumpet  of  that  meeting,  and  is  said 
lo  have  circulated  an  account  of  this  very 
speech,  which  is  charged  as  having  been  de- 
livered by  McLaren.  If  the  public  prosecutor 
proves  his  averments,  he  makes  out  that  a  di- 
rect attack  was  made  on  the  legislature,  and  in 
strong  terms  oa  the  House  of  Commons.  "  No 
nobleman— no  clergyman — no  naval  or  mili- 
tary officer — in  short,  none  who  held  places, 
or  received  pensions  from  government,  had 
any  right  to  sit  in  that  House.*'  And  again, 
**  Is  it  any  wonder,  my  friends,  that  this  coud- 
t^is  brought  to  its  presentunprecedented  state 
Of  misery,  when  the  rights  of  the  people  have 
been  thus  wantonly  violated?^'  And  in  ano- 
ther place  it  is  said,  **  we  have  these  twenty- 
five  years  been  condemned  to  incessant  and 
unptoalleled  slavery,  by  a  usurped  oligarchy, 
who  preteqd  to  be  our  guardians  and  represen- 
tatives, while,  in  £act,  they  are  nothing  but  our 
inflexible  and  determined  aienries." — **  They 
have  robbed  us  of  our  money,  deprived  us  of 
&aa  friends,  violated  our  rights,  and  abused 
our  privileges." — *•  At  present  we  have  no  re- 
presentatives ;  they  are  only  nominal,  not  real ; 
active  only  in  prosecuting  their  own  designs, 
and  at  the  same  time  telling  us  that  they  are 
i^greeable  to  our  wishes."  If  this  is  not  a  di- 
rect attack  on  a  branch  of  the  legislature,  I  do 
not  know  what  can  be  an  attack  on  it. 

Our  present  business  is  only  to  judge  of  the 
lelevancy  of  the  indictment,  and  then  a  jury 
w31  judge  both  of  the  law  and  the  fiicts  of  the 
case.  If  they  think  neither  of  the  panels  used 
these  expressions,  or  circulated  them,  or  if  tlrey 
are  of  opinion  that  they  are  not  inflammatory 
and  seditious,  it  is  thenr  part,  not  ours,  to  find 


*^  The  Loid  Jaetiee  Qezfc  and  lords  com- 
missioners of  justiciary  having  considered  the 
crimifMd  indictment,  raised  and  pursued  at  ihe 
instance  of  bis  majesty's  advocate,  for  his  flKa« 
jesty's  interest,  against  Alexander  McLaren 
and  Thomas  Baird,  panels,  th^  find  the  in- 
dictment relevant  to  iiifer  the  pains  of  law ; 
but  allow  the  panels,  and  each  of  them,  to 
prow  all  fecto  and  eiocamstances  that  may 
tend  to  exculpate  them,  or  either  of  them,  of 
alleviate  their  guilt,  and  remit  the  panels,  with 
the  indictment  as  fouad  relevant,  to  the  know- 
ledge of  an  assize. 

«  0.  BoTii,  I.  P.  D." 

The  following  persons  were  then  named  to 
pass  upon  the  assize  of  the  panels. 

James  Watson^  of  Saughton. 
John  Dodds,  farmer  at  Saughton  Mill. 
John  DrysdaU  farmer,  Ciermiston. 
Daoid  Pringle,  of  Blegbie. 
J<^  Stewart,  of  Binny. 
John  Colder,  farmer  at  Drumcross. 
John  Rusielf  farmer  at  Mosside. 
William  Marshall,  jeweller,   South    Bridge^ 

Edinburgh. 
Archibald  JMP^EmZtry,  haberdasher  in  Edinburgh. 
John  Baxter,  confectioner  there. 
Jamei  Hawden,  jeweller  there. 
William  Kenne&f,  glover  there, 
WUUam  Umdsay,  wine-merchant,  Leith.  . 
John  Gowan,  wood-merchant  there. 
Jame$  Stoddart,  wine-merchant,  Edinburgh. 

Lord  Justice  Cktk, — Are  the  dedaratioiis  of 
^e  prisoners  admitted  f 

lir.  Oerk. — ^Yea,  my  loid. 

SVIDEKCX   FOR  TB£   CaOWIT* 

Andrew  Tinnie  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Drummand, 


You  are  a  merchant  in  Kilmarnock  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  Dean  Park  in  the  vicinity 
.of  Kilmarnock  ?-^I  do. 

How  far  is  it  firom  Kilmarnock  ? — ^About  half 
a  mile. 

Do  you  remember  that  a  public  meeting 
was  held  at  the  Dean  park  on  the  7th  of  Dec« 
last?— I  do. 

Was  there  a  great  number  of  persons  at  it  ? 
—'I  think  about  4,000. 

A  great  number  of  the  lower  orders?— 
Yes. 

Do  you  remember  that  speeches  were  made 
at  that  meeting  ?-~  Yes. 

Who  opene4  the  business? — Alexander' 
M*Laren.         ^ 

Is  that  the  person  there? — It  is. 

He  made  a  speech  ?-^Yes. 

What  was  the  speech  about,  sir  7-^ About 
the  business  that  the  meeting  was  called  for^* 
which  was  for  the  purpose  of  deliberating  on 
the  best  mode  of  petitK>ning  for  parliamentary 
reform. 

Do  you  remember  any  part  of  his  speech 
any  of  the  words  that  he  us^  ?— Tfothing  par- 
ticular, except  one  passage  near  the  end.  ^ 

C 


r 


19] 


£7  GBORGE  III. 


7rMf  qfAtumndfff  M*Larem 


[20 


Repeat -thd  passage  as  near  as  you  rametDber 
it?— «<  We  wiU  lay  our  petidons  at  the  foot  of 
the  throne  (or  let  us  lay^  I  do  not  remember 
exactly  which),  where  stts-our  august  prince, 
whose  generous  -  nature  will  incline  his  ear  to 
hear  the  cries  of  hi»  people,  which  lie  is  bound 
to  d6  by  tbe  constitutional  laws  of  the  country ; 
and  we  *  are  thereby^  •bound  to  give  him  our 
allegiance.  But  if  he  should  be  so  infetuated 
as  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  the  ireneral  cries  of  his 
people  (or  Toiee  of  his  people^  I  do  not  know 
which),  to  hell  with  allegiance.^ 

Is  that  the  whole  of  the  passage  P — ^The 
whdie  of  the-  passage,  as  fur  a»  I  recollect. 

Lord  AdoocaU.—!  wish  to  know  whether 
M'Lareu  in  his  speech  stated  that  a  number  of 
resolutions  had  been  drawn  up  by  the  com- 
mittee, which  were  about  to  be  read' f— Yes, 
about  the  close  of  his  speech,  after  the  expres- 
sion I  alluded  to,  I  think. 

Mr.  Drummond. — Did  he  recommend  any 
body  to  be  called  to  the  chair  of  the  meeting  ? 
— He  said  the  committee  unanimously  recom- 
mended Mr.  Johnstone. 

And  did  he  propose  him  to  be  elected  to  the 
chair  ? — Yes,  I  understood  so^ 

He  was  called  to  the  chair  ?—  He  was  called- 
to  the  chair. 

Did  vou  see  Mr.  Johnstbae  in  the  other  room 
to-dayr— Idid. 

Did  you  ever  see  a  printed  account  of 
M'Laren's  speech? — ^Yes. 

Was'  it  in  an  account  of  the  proceedings  of 
the  meeting  ?L— In  a^  pamphlet. 

Is  that  the  pamphlet? 

[The  pamphlet  wak*  handed  t^the  witnessi] 

That  is  one  of  them. 

The  rest  are  the  same  ?—I  understood  so. 

Did  you  read  McLaren's  speech  ? — ^YeS. 

Did  It  appear  the  same  as  that  delivered  at 
the  meeting  ? — No ;  there  was  a  difference  par- 
ticularly as  to  that  passage. 

L(trd  JvUiee  Cterib— You  mean  the  passage 
in  reference  to  allegiaoee? — ^Yes,  my  lord. 

l»Tr.  Dr&mm(M<f.^~Wnr  you  point  outtaus 
particularly  what  is  the  difference  between  that 
printed  passage  and  what  he  said  ?^— There  is 
one  part  which  I  think  is  omitted. 

What  is  that  ?r~"  And  we  are  thereby  bound 
t6  give  him  our  allegiance.'' 

Do  you  observe  any  other  difference? — I 
thinK  tnat  instead^  of  **  to  their  just  petition,*' 
he  said,  **  to  the  general  cries  or  roice  of  his 
people.*^ 

Lord  JuUk€  Cierk.-^^Jvai  petition"  are  the 
words  you  see  there ?'-^Yes,  my  lord. 

Mr!  I^rummond, — Any  othfer ' difference?— 
The  words  *'  he  has  forfeited  that  allei^ance," 
were  never  mentioned  that  I  beard ;  and  nor- 
thing that  1  remember,  but  ^  to  hell  with  alle- 
giance.'' 

'  Mr.  Clmrk  wisbed:tc^&iiow  what  the  witness 
had  said* 


Mr.  Dnmmmd, — Tbe  witness  did  sot  hear 
the  words  **  he  has  forfeited  that  allegiance.** 

WUnen, — That  is  what  I  meant  to  say.  **  To 
hell  with  allegiance,"  is  all  that  I  heard  at  the 
meeting. 

Had  you  any  charge  as  to  printing  tliat  pam- 
phlet?— I  was  appointed  ta  a  charge  about 
thej^rintinv^  but  I  never  acted  to  it. 

Who  had  die  charge  along^with  you  T — ^Mr. 
Bairdl 

And  who  else  ? — Mr;  Walter  Andrew. 

A  Writer?— Yes. 

You  took  no  charge  though  you  were  ap- 
pointed to  superintend  the  printing  ? — I  was 
appointed,  but  never  was  at  uie  meeting  called 
for  the  purpose. 

How  were  you  appointed  to  that  charge? — 
By  the  committee. 

Was  Baird  a  member  of  the  committee  ? — 
He  was. 

Do  you  know  who  printed  the  statement  oC 
the  proceedings? — It  was  given  in  to  Mr» 
Crawford,  I  understood^ 

Cburf,— That  will  not  do. 

Mr.  Drtdirmom^.-^Were  you  ever  present  at 
the  printing  f — I  was,  in  Crawford's  shop. 

Did  you  ever  get  any  copies  of  the  printed* 
statement  from  Crawford  ?^— I  did-  get  from: 
Crawford  printed  copies. 

Court, — Did  you  buy  them  ?<— I  was  to  pay 
for  them. 

Lord  Etrmand. — Then  you  did  buy  them  ^ 
— I  did  not  buy  them  particularly. 

Mr.  Drummond, — Do  you  know  whether 
Baird  sold  any  of  them? — ^He  did. 

t>id  Baird  ever  tell  you  so  i— He  said  hei 
got  quit  of  them  ;  but  he  did  not  say  he  sold ' 
ttiem. 

Did  he  say  he  got  quit  of  them  all  ? — ^He 
said  so. 

Did  he  ever  get  any  from  you  ? — ^About  fonr 
doxen. 

They  were  of  those  you  got  from  Crawford  T 
—They  were. 

Did  you  give  him  all  you  had  ? — ^No,  I  had 
eleven  or  thereby  left. 

Had  you  any  conversation  afterwards  with 
Baird  about  those  remaining?'— I  am  not 
certain  if  I  had.  I  do  not  recollect  at  present 
if  I  had. 

I  think  vou  said  Baird  mentioned  he  had  got 

quit  of  all  his.    Did  he  make  any  remark  on 

^ournot  having  got  quit  of  yours  ?— 'I  said  I  had 

still  eleven  or  thereby;  and  he  seemed  surprised 

as  he  had  got  quit  of  all  bis. 

Lord  Hermttnd,—W\aX  did  you  understand 
by  getting  quit  of  them  ? — Tlie  committee  had 
liberty  to  ger  what  they  wanted ;  and  copiea 
ward  given  to  them  when  applied  for. 

Cotir^— The  witness  does  not  understand 
the  question.  Was  any  price  taken  for  them  f 
— I  understood  they  were  to  be  4d.  each ;  thai 
this  was  fixed  by  the  committee. 


dil 


wmi  nomas  Bairdjir  SidHian, 


A.  D.  I«17. 


[33 


Wtre  tliey  disposed  of  by  sale  or  by  gift  ? — 
I  do  not  know  woether  Baird  sold  them  or  not. 
He  was  to  pay  for  them. 

LordAdBoade. — Did  you  ever  go  to  Craw- 
ford's with  fiaird  to  inquire  after  the  .publica- 
tion ? — I  did. 

What  did  yoo  ask  ?—  We  asked  if  any  of  the 
pamphlets  were  ready. 

Which  Off  you  asked  ? — I  am  not  certain. 

Yon  both  went  for  diat  purpose  } — ^Yes. 

Andrew  Fimde  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Jtffrejf 
for  Thomas  Baird. 

Yon  have  mentioned  that  yon  (wo  wese  both 
members  of  the  committee  for  arranging  about 
this  meeting? — Yes. 

.  Were  there  many  other  members  ? — From  20 
^  30>  I  think. 

•  These  were  eonstituted  before  the  meeting 
was  held  ? — Part.  There  were  moK  added  a!& 
ierwaras* 

.  Was  any  notice  given  to  4he  magistrates 
about  the  meeting? — ^Mr.  Baird  and  I  were 
nominated  to  call  npon  the  magistrates^  toin- 
£>rm  them  of  the  meeting. 

Yon  went  ? — ^I  did  not.  Mr.  Baird  said,  he 
went. 

Did  he  report  that  the  magistrates  had  no 
-objeotions  to  the  meeting  ? — ^He  did. 

Tbere  was  no  interference  of  the  magistrates? 
—None. 

Were  yoopresent  at  the  meeting? — ^Yes. 

Was  Mr.  Uaird  there  ? — ^He  was. 

Did  he  speak  ? — ^No. 

Did  yon  hear  him  make  any  remarks  es- 
-preasing  satis&ction  or  dissatisfaction  -on  what 
was  said  ? — ^I  heard  htm  make  a  remark  about 
the  fMosage  I  was  talking  of  in  Alexander 
McLaren's  speech  coneemiDg  allegiance. 

What  did  he  say? — He  said  it  was  a  pity  it 
Jiad  been  spoken. 

He  disapproved  of  it  ?— Yes. 

Yon  said,  yoo,  Mr.  Andrew,  and  Mr.  Baird, 
were  appointed  to  take  char|pe  of  the  printiug 
«.of  an  account  of  the  proceedings? — Yes. 

Was  any  motive  alleged  for  the  pdoting^ — 
At  wasTor  defraying  me  expenses  attending 
the  meetiog. 

Was  there  any  discussion  at  the  meeting  of 
the  commitiee  about  the  proprie^  or  impro- 
priety of  printing  the  wnole  of  what  had 
been  so  stated  at  the  public  meetiDg  ?»Yes, 
there  was. 

Did  any  body  object  to  the  printing  at  all  ? 
— ^I  think  two  were  not  for  printing  at  all ;  Mr. 
Jolmston,  and  Alexander  McLaren. 

Was  M'Lareo  a  member  of  Che  committee  ? 
—Yes. 

Did  Mr.  Baird  take  any  part  in  that  discus- 
jnon  ?^I  do  not  remember  that  he  did. 

Was  there  any  discussion  ubout  the  propriety 
«f  pnnliog  certain  parts?— Yes..  . 

Did  Mr.  fiaird  take  any  part  in  that  discus- 
«on?— Hedid. 

Was  he  for  printing  all  the  words  ? — ^No,  he 
not 

What  words  did  he  djeet  tO|  or  what  pas- 


sage ? — ^I  do  not  remember  any  other  -passage 
than  that  about  allegiance  in  McLaren's 
speech. 

What  did  lie  say  as  to  that  passage  ? — 
That  he  would  be  inclined  to  keep  it  out  alto- 
gether. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  ^Ise  about  it? — ^I  do 
not  remember  particularly  any  thing  else  ho 
said. 

Was  that  proposition  of  his  adopted  by  'the 
committee  or  not  ?— No ;  it  was  not. 

Did  it  appear  to  you,  that  Mr.  'Baiid  ai>* 
proved  or  not  of  that  passage? — He  disap- 
proved of  that- passage,  and  wished  it  to  be  l«t 
out. 

Did  you  understand  that  rii  4he  members  of 
the  committee  were  to  take  copi^es-of  thisstnte- 
ment,  to  forward  the  sale  of  it,  and  to  account 
for  the  4i.  for  each  copy? — ^Yes;  the  com- 
mittee were  at  liberty  to  -get  what  tiumber 
they  wanted, 'for  the  purpose  of  defraying  the 
expenses. 

bid  they  all  get  copies^?— <I  do  not  •know 
who  did  and  who  did  not. 

Mr.  Baird  keeps  a  shop  ?— Yes. 

Did  aUlhe  members  of  the -committee  "keep 
shops  ? — No. 

What  kind  of  a  shop  is  Mr.  Baird's  ?— A 
grocer's  shop. 

Has  there  been  any  other  generkl  meeting 
since  this  in  Dean  Park?—None  that  I  know 
of. 

Certain  resolutions  were  adopted  which  are  to 
be  found  in  the  printed  statement,  and  peti- 
tions 40  parliament  were,  in  coikformi^  to  them, 
prepared  and  forwarded  ? — Yes. 

Was  'there  any  disturbance  or  tumult  at 
Kilmarnock  since>that  date? — I  do  not  recol- 
lect of  any. 

Do  you  recollect  any  disturbance  recently 
before  that,  a  riot  about  meal  ? — ^Yes.    ^ 

Before  the  public -meeting  took  place,  about 
autuinn  ?— Yes;  I  do  not  know  the  exact  time 
when  it  was. 

Idond  Aivooaie. — ^You  said  that  Baird  disap- 
proved of  printing  the  passage  about  allegiance: 
do  yon  remember  whether  M'Laren  said  any 
thing,  and  what  did  he- state  about  that  passage? 
— ^I  think  he  said,  that  if  the  committee  thought 
there  was  any  thing  wrong,  he  would  rather  it 
were  kept  out  altogether. 
'  That  was  as  to  At  passagein  his  own  speech  ? 
—Yes. 

When  Mr.  Baird  objected  to  printing  the 
passage,  did  he  stale  his  reasons  why  he 
thought  it  an  improper  passage  to  be  printed  t 
— The  reason  was  not  stated  therei  that  I  re- 
member ;  but  when  he  and  I  were  talking  of 
it  by  ourselves.  ^ 

And  what  did  he  say  ?— He  said  to  me  it  was 
a  veiy  indecent  expression. 

He  slated  liothing  to  the  committee  of  his 
reasons  ? — ^Not  that  I  remember. 

Andrew  Finme  cross-examined  by  Mr.  QtwU 
for  AbeKender  McLaren. 

I  ask  the  witness  to  fook  at  the'  printe4 


33] 


57  GEOKGIC  HI. 


Trial  ofAtvumitr  M'Latm 


[34 


Speech,  and  find  tbese  vrofds, ''  The  fact  b,  we 
are  ruled  by  mea  only  solidtoaa  for  their  own 
aggrandisement"? — I  see  them. 

Were  these  words  spoken?— I  do  not  re- 
member. 

"  And  they  care  no  further  for  the  great 
l)0dy  of  the  people,  than  they  are  subservient  tu 
their  accursed  purposes.''  Was  that  spoken  ? 
I  do  not  remember.  I  paid  almost  no  atten- 
tion to  any  part  of  the  speech,  except  that  about 
allegiance. 

How  did  it  happen  that  you  remember  that 
passive  so  particularly,  and  none  of  the  rest  of 
the  speech  ? — ^It  strudc  me  particularly. 

Then  you  do  not  mean  to  pronounce  aa 
epinion  as  to  aay  thing  that  was  uttered  by 
M'LareDy  except  the  passage  about  allegiance? 
—No. 

Do  you  remember  what  passed  about  the 
opeaiug  of  this  meeting  ?  who  asked  McLaren 
to  open  it? — I  do  not  reipember  who  asked 
him. 

Did  he  rolanteer,  or  was  he  requested  to 
open  the  meeting  ? — He  was  backward  to  open 
the  meeting. 

And  he  was  asked  by  the  coomittee  ? — He 
was  asked  by  the  committee. 

When  was  he  asked  ?->At  a  meeting  of  the 
committee. 

Lord  Advocate. — How  many  days  before  the 
meeting? — I  am  not  certain. 

It  was  some  days  f — ^It  was  some  days,  I 
think. 

Mr.  Gerk. — Are  you  sure  it  was  some  days 
before  the  meeting  ? — I  am  certiun ;  for  imme* 
diatefy  or  the  night  before  the  meeting,  he 
said  he  was  in  doubts  whether  he  would  do  it 
or  not. 

Did  you  use  any  particular  means  to  keep 
tlie  passage  about  allegiance  in  your  recoUec* 
tion  ?— It  struck  me  so  forcibly  at  the  time, 
the  language  was  so  ttrong,  I  kept  it  in  my 
memory. 

You  fipientioned  other  passages.  What  part 
p(  the  passage  do  you  allude  to  just  now  ?  Did 
you  consider  the  whole  passage  strong  ? — ^The 
word  hell  struck  me.  That  was  the  particular 
part  I  thought  was  wrong.  I  did  not  consider 
.any  thing  wrong  in  the  rest  of  it  at  the  time. 

Did  you  write-  down  the  passage  P — No. 

Are  you  quite  confident  of  your  recollection 
of  the  whole  of  the  passage  f — I  am  quite  oon- 
6deat  it  was  very  near  to  what  I  repeated. 
Whether  the  words,  "  cries,"  or  "  voice,  were 
used,  as  I  said  before,  1  am  not  sure  of;  but  I 
am  confident  as  to  the  rest  of  the  pasaage. 

LordAdvoeate. — At  the  meeting,  had  McLaren 
any  paper  with  him  ? — I  saw  none. 

Did  you  ever  see  any  paper  with  his  speech 
on  it  ? — Never. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  speak  of  the  terms  of 
it  after  it  was  printed  ? — I  recollect  of  him 
iayiag  repeatedly,  that  the  passage  about  alle- 
giance was  a  quotation  fvom  Shakespeare  which 
came  into  his  mind. 


When  did  he  first  say  that—  Was  it  at  the 
meeting  of  the  committee  ? — 1  do  not  recollect 
of  his  ever  saying  that  at  the  committee ;  but  I 
have  heard  him  repeatedly  say  so. 

WUliam  Merrie  sworn. — Exaniined  by 
Mr.  Drummond. 

Are  you  a  writer  in  Kilmarnock  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  remember  being  at  a  public  meeting 
held  near  Kilmarnock  on  the  7lh  December 
last  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  the  speeches  made  at  that 
meeting  ? — Part  of  them. 

Who  made  the  first  speech?  —  Alexander 
McLaren. 

Is  that  the  man  behind  me  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  any  part  of  his  speech  ?— 
Very  little  of  it. 

Do  you  remember  aay  words  near  the  oon- 
dttsion  of  it  ? — Yes. 

Can  you  repeat  them  ? — The  hindmost  part 
of  it  was,  ''^hell  with,"  or  '^Ibr  such  alle- 
giance." 

What  allegiance  was  that  be  was  speaking 
about  ? — If  I  remember  right,  he  was  wishing 
the  people  to  address  their  august  soTereign ; 
and  he  meant  their  allegiance  to  him. 

Did  he  give  any  reason  why  this  allegiance 
was  to  go  to  hell  ? 

Mr.  C/erfc.— He  has  not  said  that. 

Mr.  Dnamnomd, — ^Why  did  he  apply  the  ex- 
pression to  such  allegiance?  What  did  he 
say  ? — If  1  remember  right,  it  was,  **  if  he 
tamed  a  deaf  ear  to  the  voice  of  his  people." 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  petitioning  ?-~ 
Yes,  he  winied  ^e  people  to  petition  their 
august  sovereign. 

What  more  do  you  say  of  this  speech  ? — I  do 
not  remember  more. 

Lord  Ilermaad.^He  has  ^plained  enough  I 
think. 

Mr.  J>iiiiffiioni.—Do  yen  remember  any 
other  part  of  his  speech  ? — No. 

Did  he  use  any  words  to  shew  what  his 
meaning  was  when  he  spoke  of  the  voice  of 
the  people  ? — Not  that  I  remember  of. 

Lord  ^lAK)c«te.— You  said  he  wished  the 
people  to  address  their  august  sovermgn ;  and 
then  you  stated  he  said,  **  if  he  turned  a  deaf 
I  ear  to  the  voice  of  his  people."  Did  he  add 
anything? — I  do  not  remember  wheUier  he 
added  any  thing  or  not. 

After  he  used  the  words,  ^  if  he  turned  a 
deaf  ear  to  the  voice  of  his  people,"  did  he  say 
any  thing  or  not  about  "  to  hell  with  such  aU 
legianoe  ?** — ^That  came  afterwards. 

Lord  Hermamd. — Did  he  mention  in  what 
way  the  voice  of  the  people  was  to  be  express* 
ed  ? — ^No,  he  wished  the  people  to  petition. 

Lord  Advocate, — Did  you,  after  this  meetings 
see  a  publication  called  **  Account  of  the  Pro- 
ceedings of  the  Public  Meeting  of  Uie  buf> 
yeiees  and  inhabitaatt  of  the  town  of  Kil^ar- 


95] 


aid  Tkomoi  Baud  fir 


h,  D.  )«}T. 


b» 


nock,  bftld  on  Ihe  7th  December  iat6» .  for  the 
purpose  of  deliberating  on  the  most  proper 
method  of  remedjing  the  present  distresses  of 
^e  conntTj,  with  a  fnll  report  of  the  speeches 
oa  that  oeeasion"?— I  never  saw  it»  except 
•Be  day  Ijisgon  the  tdble  before  the  sheriff. 

WUHkm  Menit  GT0s»-examined  by  Mr.  Grcmt, 

Do  yoa  know  wbat  was  the  purpose  of  the 
meeting  ?— It  was  fot  tbt  purpose  of  petitioning 
the  aoTeieign. 

Do  you  know,  if  in  point  of  fact,  petiliona 
were  drawn  up  and  signed  by  the  persons  who 
were  at  the  meeting  ?~I  coiiLd  not  say. 

Did  yon  sign  any  of  the  petitions  younelf ! 
—No. 

Did  yon  ondeistand  from  what  passed^  thai 
it  was  tiie  intention  of  McLaren  to  induce  the 
people,  and  you  as  one  of  then],  to  petition  the 
legislatnre,  or  to  excite  violence  and  disturb* 


lard  AdooeaU. — ^I  object  to  this  queelioik 

Idtrd  Jutike  GMc— The  UBderstanding  or 
c^nion  of  any  witness  is  not  to  be  lutened  to 
in  evidence. 

Mr.  GtmI.— What  did  vmi  ooB«Bt  tohe  the 
object  of  M^Laiea'tspeenl 

luriAdoocaU. — ^If  this  course  of  examina- 
tion go  on,  there  can  be  no  objectiopr  to  my 
reexamining  the  witness.  I  did  not  finish  my 
examinatioD  of  him,  but  on  the  idea  that  I 
could  not  put  such  questions. 

Mr.  Cferifc.-^We  hare  put  a  question,  and 
we  should  not  be  interrupted.  'ih»  lord  advo- 
cate puts  in  his  claim  to  put  such  questions.  But 
he  must  not  interrupt  us  in  older  to  make  an 
examination  himself. 

€010*^— He  has  no  such  intention. 

Mr.  QtmUj-^l  put  this  other  question :  In 
point  of  bet,  did  this  speech  excite  tike  people 
to  commotion  or  dietaminee  ? — ^No. 

Then  was  none  upon  that  occasion  f — 
Hone. 

Was  it  the  tendency  of.MliKien's  speech, 
from  what  yon  observed,  and  from  what  passed, 
to  create  eommotion  or  disturbance^  or  to  in- 
doce  petitions  to  be  sent  to  the  Prinoe  Regent 
nnd  the  two  houses  of  parHament  ?— -It  wai  to 
indnoe  the  people  to  petition  the  Prince  Regent 
and  the  two  houses  of  partiaraent. 

Did  he  oxptesB  himself  in  any  way  with  re- 
gard to  the  person  of  the  Prince  Regent  in 
tfant  speech  ?--Not  that  I  remember  of. 

When  he  advised  diem  to  lay  their  petitions 
at  the  foot  of  the  throne,  did  he  say  anv  thing 
uCttie  angnst  prineef-*I  do  not  remember  anv 
thing  of  the  throne;  but  he  mentioned  hn 
aogost  mhicc 

hk  what  terms  t-^In  ihvourable  terms. 

In  terms  perfectly  legal  and  becoming  a  good 
snhjectT^Yes. 

Euffk  O-m^ord  swoTn.-^£xamiDed  by 
Mr.  SoUdtor  Generai, 

Are  you  a  printer  ai  Kilmarnock  ?-^Yes» 


I  De  yoq  remember  a  meeting  hdd  in  De- 
cember last  in  tbcneighbeuihoQdof  thattewn) 
—Yes. 

Was  a  MS.  aceount  of  the  pfoeeediags  at 
that  meeting  afterwards  beought  lo  yott  t»  btf 
printed?— Part  of  iu 

Did  you  attend  the  meeting  ? — Ko« 

Look  at  that  ? 

[Pamphlet  handed  to  the  witness.] 

That  was  printed  in  my  office. 

Who  brought  it?— The  part  I  saw  was 
brought  by  David  Andrew,  I  think. 

Was  any  body  in  company  with  him?— I 
think  not. 

Courf .— Has  Andrew  any  more  names  than 
oa«?«-l  do  not  know. 

Mr.  SoUcU&r  Generai, — Did  you  see  him  in 
the  other  room  to-day  ? — I  did. 

Who  attended  the  press  while  this  MS.  wat 
printed  ? — I  did  not  see,  as  the  printing-office 
IS  at  a  distance  from  die  shop,  and  1  was  only 
occasionally  there. 

Did  Thomas  Baird  attend  the  printing? — I 
think  I  saw  him  once  or  twice ;  I  am  certain 
once. 

Are  you  able  to  say  whether  this  publication 
is  a  true  copy  of  the  mS.  that  was  Drought  to 


you  ? — I  cannot  say. 
"^     ^  it?—' 

whom  I  employ. 


Who  printed  it  f— Thomas  Murray,  a  man 


Haye  you  been  paid  for  the  printing  ? — No. 

Who  is  to  pay  you  ? — ^The  persons  who  em* 
ployed  me. 

who  are  thev  ? — ^I  look  to  Mr.  David  Ai^ 
drew,  Mr.  Andrew  Finnic,  and  Mr.  Baird. 

Lord.  Ad9oeate. — What  was  done  with  the 
publication  after  the  printing? — Cqpies  were 
taken  ftom  me  in  quantities :  Mr.  baifd  got 
a  qoaatity,  aad  Mr.  Finnie  and  others  got 
quantities. 

Mr.  jSsficitor  Gfeneri/.^-How  '  ttnoy  co|nes 
were  printed  ?— About  400 1  think. 

How  many  did  Baifd  get  ? — ^I  cannol  My. 

Can  yott  say  abauft  what  nnmbarP— iWa 
might  be  four,  five,  or  atx  doien. 

Lord  Jdvocate, — Do  you  know  M'Laren  ?-* 
Within  this  short  time. 
Did  he  ever  complain  of  his  speech  being 

Erinted  inaccurately  ? — No,  J  never  i|>oke  to 
im  in  my  life,  to  my  knowledge. 

Thomoi  Murrmf  sworn,— ^Eimmiaed  by 

Are  you  journeyman  to  Mr.  Cmidbrd  ? — Mr* 
Crawford  is  my  emplojer. 

[The  pamphlet  vras  shown  to  the  witness.] 

Was  that  printed  at  Mr.  Crawford's  printing 
office  ? — Yes. 

By  you  ?— Yes. 

Is  it  a  correct  copy  of  the  MS.  giren  yon  for 
the  pnipoae  of  being  printAd  ?^TI»ra  ware 
some  alterations  in  the  proofs. 

Corrections  of  the.  press  ?— Yes. 


«7] 


57  GfiORGB  m. 


2Vm/  ofMuuMitr  M'Laren 


(a,s 


What  altenUions ?«-Typographical  errors: 
and  peiiiaps  in  bodm  sentenoes  grunmatical 
alterations. 

Were  there  any  alterations  of  the  sense  P — 
None  that  I  remember  of. 

Who  gave  in  the  MS.  ?— The  first  part  I  re- 
ceived fi^m  Mr.  Crawford. 

Who  gave  you  the  rest  ? — I  received  it  at 
different  times. 

From  whom? — ^It  was  sometimes  given  in 
when  I  was  not  in  the  oflice,  and  sometimes 
when  I  was  in  it. 

Who  gave  you  any  part  of  it? — Mr.  David 
Andrew. 

Did  Mr.  Webster  bring  any  of  it? — Once,  I 
leoMmber* 

^    Who  came  to  superintend  the  printing,  and 
to  inquire  after  it?— That  person. 

Any  body  else  f — No. 

Mr.  Baiid  ? — ^He  was  twice  or  three  times  at 
the  utmost. 

For  the  purpose  of  inquiring  about  the  pub- 
tication? — He  was  several  times  in  the  office. ' 

What  did  he  do  when  he  came  ? — ^He  came 
to  the  office  along  with  Mr.  David  Andrew  to 
look  over  the  first  proof. 

Did  they  make  any  alterations  ? — One  was 
proposed  1^  Mr.  BainL 

What  was  it  ? — ^I  do  not  know. 

Can  you  point  it  out  in  the  publication  f^—^ 
No,  for  I  never  had  it  in  my  hand  but  now  and 
before  the  sheriff  of  Ayr. 

Was  any  alteration  made  in  consequence  ? — 
None. 

Why  was  it  not  made  ? — ^It  was  a  grammati- 
cA  alteration  that  was  proposed,  I  thought  the 
alteration  proposed  was  wrong,  and  I  had  a 
right  to  make  the  pamphlet  giammatical. 

What  became  of  the  MS.  from  ^ich  the 
imbUcation  was  printed? — It  went  as  all  of 
them  do,  it  was  destroyed ;  I  was  not  desired 
to  preserve  it. 

Lord  ilANioale.— Look  at  the  passage  on 
page  r. "  to  —  with  allegiance,''  was  that 
Dlank  in  the  MS.  ? — If  I  remember  rightly, 
that  part  mt  the  MS.  was  erased,  written  over 
again,  then  erased  and  interiin^;  and  I  do 
not  know  but  I  ordered  my  apprentice  to 
leave  the  blank,  as  I  oonld  not  make  it  out 
To  make  the  sentence  join  properly,  I  left  it 
blank* 

Did  Mr,  Baird,  when  he  came  and  looked 
over  the  MS.,  object  to  the  blank,  or  state  any 
thing? — He  never  looked  over  it. 

You  said  Mr.  Baird  came  with  Mr.  Andrew 
and  looked  over  the  first  proof.  Did  he  mdce 
any  observation  about  the  blank  thete  left? — 
That  was  not  in  the  first  proof;  the  proof  I 
spdce  of  was  the  proof  of  the  first  pages  of  the 
pamphlet* 

I%oma»  Mmrmf  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Jeffrey 
tor  Thomas  Baird. 

-  Weietheproof  sheets  tent  to  any  one  to  be 
revised  ?— They  were. 
To  whom?— To  Mr.  David  Andrew. 


Any  to  Mr. 
brance. 


f — ^Never,  to  my  remem- 


fPart  of  the  MS.  was  shown  to  the  witness.] 

Mr.  Drummond, — ^Did  you  ever  see  that  be- 
fore ?— I  never  saw  it  befi>re ;  it  never  came 
into  my  hands. 

Thonm  Myrr^  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Greitf 
for  Alexander  M^'Laren. 

Was  any  part  of  the  MS.  pencilled  ?— I  do 
not  remember ;  the  MS.  was  very  imperfect, 
and  was  partly  well  and  partly  ill  written ;  it 
was  partly  in  quarto  and  partly  in  folio,  in  dif- 
ferent bands. 

Do  you  remember  the  part  that  contains  the 
blank,  what  size  of  the  paper  was  there  ? — It 
was  folio.  I  remember  it  quKe  well.  There 
were  two  sheets  of  foolscap  paper  written  on 
without  being  folded. 

Was  it  of  die  size  of  this,  folded  and  written 
on  as  this  f — 

[A  sheet  of  folio  paper  shown  the  witness.] 

Yes. 


JeMci  MmUme  sworn. — Fjcamined  by 
Mr.  SoUcUor  General. 

Do  you  remember  a  public  meeting  at  Dean 
park,  near  Kilmarnock  r — ^Yes. 

Do  you  know  that  there  was  a  committee  to 
prepare  and  adjust  the  business  of  that  meet- 
ing ? — I  do. 

Of  whom  did  it  consist? — I  really  cannot 
tell ;  of  a  number  of  persons ;  of  myself  for 
one.  . 

Was  Mr.  M'Laren  one  ? — ^Yes. 

Mr.  Baird?— Yes. 

Were  any  resolutions  prepared  before  the 
public  meeting  ? — Yes. 

Were  they  read  to  the  meeting  which  took 
place  ? — Yes. 

You  attended  that  meeting  ? — I  did. 

Who  first  spoke  ? — ^Alexander  M*Laren. 

Was  there  any  meeting  of  this  committee 
after  that  public  meeting  ?--<Yes,  that  efen- 
ing. 

For  what  purpose  ? — The  particular  purpose 
was,  to  consider  whether  they  should  pnnt  their 
resolutions  and  speeches. 

Who  attended  that  meeting  P  VTere  the 
panels  there  P — I  think  so. 

Was  it  resolved  there  to  print  the  speeches 
and  resolutions  ? — Yes. 

The  several  speakers  gave  in  copies  of  their 
speeches  P — I  believe  so,  but  I  did  not  see  them 
given  in. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  at  all  giren  in  ? — ^No- 
thinff  but  my  own  speech. 

Were  you  present  when  the  prooft  of  the 
proceedings  were  revised  t— I  was  not  present 
at  the  revision  of  any  of  them. 

[The  pamphlet  was  shown  to  the  witness.] 

Is  that  the  publication  of  the  proceedings 
which  took  place  at  Dean-park  at  the  time  yon 
mention  ? — 1  suppose  so. 


it9l 


mad  Tlumu  B&hri/or  StUtbm. 


-A.  D.  I8I7. 


C30 


By  ^vbom  does  it  appear  to  be  printed? —  t 
By  Hugh  CraiHM.  ! 

Was  it  resolved' at  the  oommittee  that  he 
sbcnild  be  the  printer  f — ^Not  particularly. 

Do  yoa  know  the  MSS.  were  sent  to  h'im  ? — 
I  do  not  know. 

Did  yott  never  read  the  pamphlet?— No. 

Not  even  yoor  own  speech? — No;  I  gave  it 
to  Mr.  Walter  Andrew  v>  revise.  i 

Are  these  the  resolutions  that  were  read  to 
the  meeting } — I  have  glanced  at  them.  I  can- 
not say  particnlarly  they  are  the  resolotions, 
but  generally  I  believe  so. 

Lord  AdoocaU. — ^You  are  acquainted  with 
McLaren  ?— Yes. 

He  was  a  member  of  the  committee? — 
Yes. 

YoQ  have,  of  coarse,  had  conversations  with 
him  about  the  meeting  and  the  publication  ? — 
Yes»  in  a  general  way. 

Did  yon  ever  hear  if  Baird  or  he  complained 
of  inaccBiacy  in  the  statement  given  of  the 
proceedings  ? — ^Yes ;  Alexander  M'Laren. 

What  did  he  say? — That  one  sentence  at  the 
end  of  his  speech  in  the  printed  account,  and 
cited  in  the  indictment  was  not  in  the  original 
M3«  He  said  it  runs  in  this  way :  speaking  of 
the  petition  being  presented  to  tne  Prince  Re- 
gent, ''he  hoped  he  would  lend  his  gracious  ear 
to  it,  as  he  was  bound  to  do  by  the  constitu- 
tion ;  but  if  he  did  not  do  so,  then  to  hell  with 
allegiance.^  I  think  he  said  this  was  not  in 
the  original  speech. 

Did  yon  hear  his  speech  ? — Only  the  sound 
of  it. 

Did  you  hear  any  of  the  words  of  it  daring 
the  meeting  ? — I  cannot  say  I  did. 

What  did  M'Laren  say  was  the  inaccuracy  P 
— He  complained  of  the  latter  part  of  the  sen* 
fence  altogether  being  in  it  at  all,  because  it 
was  not  in  the  MS. 

Did  be  complain  of  the  word  ^  hell  T 

Mr.  CierL^l  object  to  the  question.  There 
is  DO  such  word  in  the  publication. 

[Ibe  witness  was  ordered  to  withdraw.] 

Xord  .ideooafe.— The  drift  of  the  eiamina- 
tion  I  vras  carrying  on  at  the  time  was,  to 
bring  out  of  the  witness  what  was  the  conver- 
sation between  him  and  McLaren — whether 
McLaren  objected  to  certain  parts  of  the  pub- 
Ucation  which  he  is  alleged  to  have  done.  The 
witness  said  he  never  read  that  publication.  I 
am  entitled  to  put  the  question,  in  order  to 
ascertain  the  witness's  recollection ;  and  par- 
.ticulariy,  whether  M'Laien  complained  of  any 
word  bein^  in  the  MS.  I  submit  that  the  ques- 
tion I  put  IS  competent,  viz.  whether  M'Laren 
complained  of  *'  hell  to  allegiance^'  being  in 
the  MS.  The  thing,  I  admit,  is  now  irreme- 
diable, because  my  learned  friend  has  instruct- 
ed the  witness  by  stating  that  there  is  no  such 
word  in  Ac  publication ;  Vat  I  say  it  was  ir- 
regnlar  in  my  learned  friend  to  intormpt  me 
and  thus  to  prepare  the  witness. 


Mr.  CterL— Nobody  is  more  oompetent  to 

{mt  regular  questions  to  witnesses  than  my 
ord  advocate,  but  I  cannot  permit  him  to 
proceed  irregularly.  What  was  the  question 
put?  Whether  McLaren  complained  of  hell 
being  in  therMS.  That  was  implying  that 
the  words  were  in  the  printed  pam|)hlet,  and 
nobody  is  entitled  to  suggest  a  fidse  fiict  to  a 
witness.  No  fact  must  b^  assumed  in  putting 
a  question  to  a  witness. 

Lord  Advocate, — ^I  wish  the  Court  to  keep  in 
recollection  what  the  question  was  to  whidi  I 
wished  to  get  an  answer — whether  or  n# 
M'Laren  complained  of  being  misrepresented 
b^  '*  heir  being  in  the  printed  copy.  My 
friend  now  admits  that  the  question  was  not 
irregular. 

Mr.  Clerk. — ^The  question  is  not  as  it  was 

put  originally. 

Lord  Advocate. — ^I  put  it  to  the  Court  that 
such  was  the  question. 


Lord  Jmtke  Gerk,-^!  do  not  see  any  thiofp 
out  of  form  here. 

Lord  Adoocatej^^Tbe  opposite  counsel  were 
out  of  form  in  interrupting  me,  and  they  have 
rendered  the  question  useless.  If  they  again 
interrupt  me,  let  them  first  desire  the  witness 
to  be  removed. 

[Witness  brought  back.] 

In«whatvray  did  he  say  he  was  misrepresent-* 
ed  ? — ^I  did  not  say  so.  I  say  he  complained 
of  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence  being  ^put  in, 
because  it  was  not  in  the  MS. 

Then  he  did  not  complain  of  being  misrfr^ 
presented? — Yes,  in  one  word  that  he  did  no^ 
pronounce  the  word  **  their,"  or  **  our,"wfai^ 
comes  in  before  *'  allegiance.'' 

You  are  looking  at  the  printed  statement 
Did  vou  not  say  that  you  had  not  seen  it  be- 
fore f— I  did  not  say  I  had  not  seen  it;  I  said 
I  had  not  read  it. 

Lard  JuUke  Clerk, — He  says  M'Laren  com- 
plained of  being  misrepresented  with  respect 
to  a  word  before  ^  allegianee/'  and  he  is  en- 
titled to  look  at  the  pamphlet. 

WHnen. — As  ftr  as  my  judgment  leads  me 
to  take  notice,  he  complained  of  any  thing  w 
tervening  between  the  word  ^  to"  and  "  alle- 

S'ance,"  because  it  was  not  in  his  original  MS. 
e  never  intended  to  say  it;  it  was  merely  a 
word  of  some  Play  that  oconrred  to  his  memory, 
and  he  let  it  out. 

Mr.  Solicitor  G^teraL—jyid  he  tell  yon, 
then,  how  the  passage  should  have  been 
printed  ? — He  told  me  the  identical  words  he 
used.  The  last  words  of  the  sentence  were, 
^  to  hell  allegiance." 

Lord  Advocate. — ^Did  he  complain  of  the 
passage  as  stated  in  the  indietneat  ?— Yes ;  he 
gave  the  indictment  to  me  to  read. 

Lord  Jmtkc  Oerfc.— He   said   tlie  passage 


Ml 


57  GEOltGl  m. 


Trial -qfAlttMnider  M'Larmt 


tss 


was  not  toiTCcdy  giv^  ekher  in  tke  indielfDeot 
or  the  priDt«d  account  t — Exactly. 

Lord  AdoQcote.^^}htw  long  is  it  since  be 
«ade  this  complaint  to  yon  ? — I  think  the  very 
day  he  received  the  indictment. 

Jama  JMiutoM'tevoss-^xamned  by  Mr.  Jeffrey 
for  Thomas  Baird. 

Yoi^  mentioned  that  both  of  the  paneb  were 
members  of  the  committee  with  you.  Was 
JUr.  Baird  at  the  pnUic  meeting  f — ^Yes. 

Did  yen  then*  or  al  any  •ther  time,  hear  him 
make  any  ffemacks  upon  McLaren's  speech  ?— > 
No,- 

Did  y«tt  ttot  hear  him  at  any  odier  time 
.loake  any  revtfks  7— Yes,  I  have  heard  him 
several  times  complain,  and  say  it  was  a  pity 
the  last  sentence  had  been  put  in. 

Spoken,  ot  put  in  ? — It  was  a  pity  it  had 
been  spoken  at  all. 

Were  yon  present  at  the  meeiiag  about  the 
printing  ? — Yes. 

Was  any  objection  made  to  that  passage  ? — 
*!  was'agamst  the  printing  altogether^  not  that 


with  belter  timas.    What  were  then  the 
neral  wages  ? — Abont  12«.  a  week,  from  12«.  t# 
Us. 

I  ne^  not  therefore  aak  if  there  was  th# 
greatest  possible  distress  at  Kitmamock  f -^ 
There  can  be  no  doubt  of  it. 

Yon  talked  of  the  meeting  which  was  held 
near  Kilmarnock.  What  was  its  object  f  — 
Solely  to  petition  the  Prince  Regeift,  and  boA 
Houses  of  Parliament,  to  consider  the  grievances 
of  the  country.  It  was  enr  opinion,  that  one 
irrest  reason  of  them  was  the  defective  state  of 
the  representation,  more  particularly  in  our 
part  or  the  country ;  and  therefore  we  partictk- 
farly  recommended  attention  to  that. 

Were  any  other  objects  in  view  besides  pe- 
titioning, any  other  means  thought  of  in  order 
to  obtain  redress  of  these  grievances  ? — ^None. 

Was  any  conversation  ever  held  in  youy 
presence  by  M^I^ren  that  tended  to  any 
other  purpose  than  what  is  in  the  petition  ? — 
None. 

Did  you  ever  hear  from  him  any  hint,  that 
induced  you  to  believe  he  entertained  disloyal 


I  thought  there  was  any  thibg  wrong  in  the  |  opinions,  or  seditious  intentions  ? — Never 


^ttblicatAOB ;  but  judging  Ifrom  my  own,  I  sup-  { 
|M)sed  aA-  the  speeches  weoe  made  up  in  a  hun- 
ffied  way,  and  wooU  not  stand  the  scmtiny  of , 
4ihe  public  eye. 

Do  you  remember  Mr.  Baird  making  any 
objections  to  the  publication  ?— -I  do  not  par- 
ticularly. 

.  -  Do  yon  know  any  thmg  of  ilie  reasons  stated 
far  ot  agttnst  the  psinting  ?«^The  pnblication 
w&s  le  defeay  the  eipenses  inenntd  at  €xe 
public  meeting. 

■  Was  the  sale  of  the  ^blkation  intnsted  to 
any  ^riiaolar  pefS4»sf«-3k>  she  eommiMee  in 
foserflil. 

[The  MS.  of  the  witness's  speech  was  shown 

to  him.] 

Was  that  written  More  or  after  the  maei- 
ing  t — Before. 
You  ofl^iated  as  chairman  at  the  meeting  ? 

—Yes. 

•Jenflf  Mmione  ei088««xsnrined  l>y  Mt.  ihwM 
for  Alexander  McLaren. 

You  are  a  muslin  agent  ? — ^Yes. 

For  any  of  the  Glasgow  houses  i — Yes. 

From  that  oivcunstaooe,  have  you  an  op- 
portunity of  .being  much  acquainted  with  the 
situation  of  the  manufacturers  in  Kilmaroook  ? 
,— I  think  so. 

At  present  now,  what  may  the  most  active 
weaver  be  able  to  clear  in  the  course  of  a 
week?— At  present  things  are  ratheir  better 
than  they  were  some  time  ago.  From  a  cal- 
-  culation  I  hare  made,  an  active  weaver  may 
^t  present  gain  about  5t.  6d.  a  week. 

What  might  he  be  able  to  gain  a  week  on  an 
•nei^ge  of  Uie  last  year? — From  4s.  to  4s,  6J. 

Hsrw  many  hours  work  a  day  was  necessary 
to  gain  this.  snm?-^At  least^  fioia  14  -to  1$ 
hours. 

You  hare  compared  this  period  of  dbtress 


Have  you  occasion  to  know  whether  lie  was 
of  a  peaceable  and  orderly  disposition  and 
habit  of  life  ? — I  never  heard  or  saw  any  thing 
to  the  contrary.         '^ 

How  long  have  you  been  acquainted  witii 
him  ? — ^These  eight  years. 

Does  it  consist  with  your  knowledge  thathd 
was  a  member  of  a  volunteer  corps  at  ulasgowt 
^I  have  heard  that  he  was. 

Do  you  know  of  his  being  in  the  local  mi- 
litia, or  Kilmarnock  volunteer  corps  ? — lie  was 
in  the  rifle  corps  at  Kilmarnock.  ^ 

'  Was  the  public  meeting  conducted  in  aik 
orderly  and  peaceable  manner  ? — I  considered 
it  so.  It  was  with  no  other  intention  I  underr 
took  the  management,  and  that  any  gentleman 
will  see  from  my  speech. 

What  was  the  state  of  fhe  weather? — It 
was  Tery  coarse.  There  was  hail^.and  wind, 
and  snow. 

Perhaps  that  was  the  reason  you  did  not 
hear  the  speech  ?^TbBt  was  the  reason  ;  I  just 
heard  the  sound,  but  not  the  words. 

It  was  not  vreatber  well  calculated  fbr  -^y 
person  hearing  a  speed)  distinctly  ?*>->It  vnd 
very  bad  indeed. 

Yon  said  you  wert  present  at  a  meeting  of 
the  committee,  when  it  was  proposed  to  print 
die  proceedings,  and  that  M'Laren  was  there, 
and  that  you  objected  to  the  printing.  Did 
any  other  peraon  object? — Mr.  M'Lsu«n  ob- 
jected particularly  to  the  printing  of  his 
speech. 

What  passed  upon  that  occasion? — ^There 
was  a  great  deal  of  altercation  as  to  the  print* 
ing  ;  and  it  was  at  last  agreed  that  those  who 
had  made  speeches  should  give  them  to  a 
committee  appointed  to  superintend  the  print- 
ing. 

Did  Mr.  McLaren  still  object  to  his  speech' 
being. printed  f — He  said,  though  the  restweilv 
printed,  he  did  not  see  any  reason  for  printin|f 


amd  nomoi  BaMJbr  SmUe^. 


asf\ 

and  that  be  bad  no  mteation  tkat  monitng  of 
•pcaktDgitaiL 

Were  jon  present  at  any  meeting  of  the  com- 
mittee prerjons  to  the  pnblic  meeting,  for  ar- 
lansiog  about  the  public  meeting  ??— Yes,  I  was 
•t  them  ail,  I  think. 

At  a  previous  meeting  were  any  steps  taken 
as  to  appoiatiBg  a  person  to  open  the  pro- 
oeedingsat  the  pubtic  meetiDg?— -It  was  dis- 
cussed ;  and  after  a  great  deal  of  discussioB, 
M.*Jju2m  agreed,  thai  if  no  other  person  came 
forward,  he  wonld  do  it ;  and  he  raenfeioned  to 
ae  since  the  meeting,  he  had  no  idea  he  should 
open  the  business,  as  another  person  had  given 
a  kind  of  promise  to  do  it,  ana  that  person  not 
appearing  on  the  field,  he  went  to  a  public- 
house  uid  prepared  some  ebsenrations.  I  saw 
him  the  ai^  befofet  he  raeelingi,  when  be 
tohl  me  he  had  hopes  another  person  would 
openiL 

Do  yon  know  who  that  other  penon  was  ? — 
Tes,  M'l^ren  told  me. 

Was  the  name  of  that  other  peiwm  publicly 
mentioned  ? — No,  it  was  not. 

Was  either  of  ypu  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee that  superintended  the  printiag? — ^None 
of  us. 

Do  yon  know  anything  o^  a  distonbanoe  that 
iDoJc  place  about  meal  previoos  to  the  meeting  ? 
— I  heard  of  it. 

Were  yon  atKilmamoek  atthe  time  7— I  was 
about  two  shops  from  it  at  the  time.  I  did  not 
eoQSider  it  a  mob  or  distnrbanee. 

Have  you  occasion  to  know  how  MlaiPen 
condneted  himsidf  upon  that  oooisionf— No,  I 
faav<enot. 

You  said  you  hare  known  him  eight  yean* 
Did  ynu  erar  know  him  to  be  oolinected  with 
any  body  of  men  assembled  for  any  seditious 
or  illegal  purpose  f— Never,  so  ^  as  I  knew 
him,  otherwise  I  would  never  have  kept  com- 
paa^  with  him. 

You  ar^  an  extensive  agent?— Itleri  are  some 
much  more  extensive  than  I  am. 

Have  yoa  ever  heard  MfLareh  wet  a  member 
of  any  society  for  any  purpose  t"<-Of  none  )»% 
^'  ittea. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[34 


Cswf  .^Does  this  comnuttea  stiU  contimie  i 
— Hoy  the  committee  does  not  continue. 

Mr.  GntAt^'WwB  tfaia  committee  open  for 
an^  person  to  go  to  ?— We  never  had  a  meeting 
imA  wat  noc  op«B ;  and  there  were  always 
Sana  ocben  present  besides  the  members  of 
the  committee.    Any  one  was  asked  to  attend. 

Wase  a»y  pieeaaiions  taken  to  Iceep  your 
mceeding^  secret  firom  tha  magistnoes  f— 
None. 

Was  it  emir  hiaftad  or  proposed  that  it  would 
be  twcasaaiy  to  keoD  the  psooaedangs  seotat 
finnn  the  magistrates  r — ^Never. 

la  point  of  lao't,  were  the  raagisttales  made 
M^iatad  with  the  intention  of  the  meeting  > 
—I  believe  so.  I  «aUed  and  told  Mr.  fiaird  I 
«ohll  not 'attend  unless  the  magisttates  were 
nade  acquainted  with  the  intended  meeting< 

V0L.1XXIII. 


Be  was  anpomt^  ^o  tell  th«m.  Mr.  Ba!« 
said  he  had  criled  on  the  magistrate^  but  had 
not  found  him,  and  he  said  be  would  go  agaiti, 
and  I  understood  from  him  he  did  go  again. 

Was  there,  according  to  your  knowledge, 
any  obstfuction  offere4  by  the  magistrates  tb 
the  meeting?— I  saw  nbtle. 

Do  you  kno^r  whether,  in  point  of  fact,  pe- 
titions, founded  on  the  resolutions  adopted  a:t 
that  meeting  were  prepared  to  the  Prince 
Regent  and  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament  ?-^ 
They  were. 

Did  you  read  them  over?— I  think  nearly. 
I  heard  diem  all  read. 

Does  it  consist  with  your  knowledge  that 
they  were  forwarded  ?— I  was  toW  so  by  Mr. 
Baird.  I  read  in  the  public  papers  that  they 
werepresented. 

If  1  were  to  show  you  a  printed  copy  of  the  • 
petition,  should  you  remember  it  f 

Lord  Advocate, — Nothing  iasaid  in  the  in- 
dictment >about  the  petition., 

Mr.  CMr^Mach  will  be  said  in  defence 
upon  this  veiy  fact  about  which  we  are 
examining  the  witness. 

Lord  Adooeate, — ^Defences  have  been  given 
in  for  the  panels,  and  no  notice  is  taken  in 
them  of  productions  being  to  be  made.  Your 
lordships  will  take  notice  of  this.  I  only  wish 
you  may  keep  this  in  view. 

LordJugUee  Clerk. — We  must  receive  what- 
ever may  go  to  exculpate  the  panels. 

[The  account  of  the  petition  in  a  printed  copy 
of  the  Journals  of  the  House  of  Commons 

was  handed  to  the  witness.] 

« 

Mr.  Gran/.*-* Were  these  the  terms  of  the 
petition  7 — ^As  far  as  my  judgment  serves  ma» 
that  is  the  substance  of  the  petition. 

Have  jrouany  doubts  whether  this  is  the 
slme  petition? — I  have  none  at  all.  Nona 
can  suppose  my  memory  is  such  as  to  say  these 
are  the  identical  words. 

Your  answer  is  quite  proper.  I  have  put  a 
cross  at  the  margin.  Say  whether  you  recollect 
particularly  that  the  words  there  form  part  of 
the  petition  ? 

lord  iMNKote.-—!  consented  toa  fawqoes- 
tions  being  pvt  to  the  witness,  hot  I  now  ob- 
ject to  any  farther  questions  that  are  not  cross. 

Mr.  Grant, — ^I  am  just  finishing  this  part  of 
the  examination.  I  have  only  to  read  a  pas- 
sage, and  ask  the  witness  whether  he  remem- 
bers it.  ''  When  we  came  to  discover  those 
alarming  facts,  our  hearts  stood  appalled,  as  if 
we  had  trod  on  a  volcano :  We  looked  around 
for  the -cause,  and  we  found  it  in  the  very 
corrupt  and  defective  representation  of  the 
people  in  parliament.  We  found,  that  the 
Commons  House,  whose  members  ought  to  bcL 
chosen  annually  by  the  peopfe — should  be  the 
organ  of  the  people^s  voice — ^the  guardians  of 
their  rights  and  of  -  the  public'purse — had  lost 
all  control  over  the  sarvants  oC  the  Crown,  atid 

D 


35]        57  GEORGE  in. 


Trial  qfJlkxander  McLaren 


[39 


had  become  aubserrieoi  to  the  will  of  the 
minister  of  the  day :  That  the  great  body  of 
the  people  are  excluded  from  their  elective 
fraochise — that  a  majority  of  your  honomrable 
House  are  returned  to  parliament  by  proprietors 
of  rotten  boroughs^jlhe  influence  of  the  Treasury 
and  a  few  other  indiYiduals;  and  that  seats 
therein  are  bought  and  sold  like  tickets  for  the 
Opera." 

Were  these  the  words  in  the  petition  ? — I 
think  these  identical  words  were  in  the  petition 
which  was  forwarded  to  parliament,  and  or- 
dered to  lie  on  the  table,  I  believe. 

You  remember  being  shewn  this  printed 
publication.  You  said  M'Laren  complained 
of  the  latter  part  of  his  speech  being  inserted 
because  it  was  not  in  the  manuscript  ? — ^Yes,  I 
did. 

Say  what  part  was  not  in  the  manuscript? — 
I  cannot  say  what  were  the  words  he  spoke  at 
the  meeting.  What  he  said  to  me  was,  that  he 
concluded  with  a  line  of  a  play,  and  it  was  **  to 
hell  allegiance/' 

Mr.'  CA^Ae.-^Did  he  say  that  any  part  of  the 
passage  before  that  was  not  In  his  manuscript  ? 
— He  just  said  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence  was 
not  in.  the  manuscript. 

You  said  you  haa  a  conTersation  with  him 
when  he  shewed  his  indictment,  and  that  he 
complained  as  you  have  stated.  Had  you  any 
other  conversation  with  him  on  the  subject 
than  on  that  occasion  ? — Perhaps  there  might 
be  two  or  three,  but  to  the  same  purpose. 

Did  he  attempt  to  influence  you  as  to  what 
evidence  you  should  give  at  this  trial? — ^Neither 
of  us  considered  I  should  be  called  on  to  give 
evidence.  I  did  not  know  what  he  had  spoken, 
nor  about  the  selling  of  the  pamphlets. 

Lord  Advocate, — We  have  had  a  very  elo- 
quent petition  read.  By  whom  was  it  com- 
posed f — I  do  not  know. 

Did  any  member  of  the  committee  compose 
it? — The  committee  for  superintending  the 
printing  were  appointed  to  compose  it,  namely, 
Thomas  Baird,  W.  Finnic,  W.  Andrew, 
D.  Andrew,  and  W.  Webster. 

They  produced  it  to  you  as  their  own  com- 
position r— It  was  produced  and  read  at  the 
meeting. 

Did  they  say  anything  that  led  you  to  suppose 
that  it  was  not  their  own  composition  P — I  do 
not  think  they  did.  • 

Did  they  not  say  from  whom  they  got  it  7— 
They  did  not.  There  was  some  amendment 
made  upon  it. 

Upon  vour  oath  can  you  state  that  none  of 
them  said  to  you  anything  about  the  getting 
of  the  petition  f  ~I  heard  nothing  of  it. 

Did  any  member  of  the  committee  give  you 
to  understand  they  had  not  drawn  up  that  pe- 
tition, but  sot  it  (^m  another  quarter? — It 
would  be  ridiculous  for  a  man  to  speak  posi- 
tively  to  a  thing  he  does  not  recollect  of. 

Hugh  Wibqn  sworn.— Examiued  by 
.  Mfk  Jjnttfff^ond, 

Were  you  at  a  public  meeting  in  Dean-park, 


about  the  beginning  of  Detember  P — ^I  believe 
it  might  be  about  Uiat  time. 

Who  was  the  preses  of  the  meeting  ? — James 
Johnston. 

Who  made  the  first  speech? — ^Akxaader 
M.'Laren. 

Did  you^read  an  account  of  the  raeech  ?-?> 
Yes. 

Was  it  correct  ?-^I  do  not  remember. 

Did  it  appear  correct  or  incorrect,  generally 
speaking  ?— -Yes,  it  appeared  correct.  . 

Did  you  see  anythmg  that  was  incorrect  ? — 
I  cannot  say  that  i  did. 

Doyou  know  where  it  was  sold  ? — ^At  Thomas 
BairdV 

[Pamphlet  was  handed  to  the  witne9s.J 

Did  you  buy  this  copy  in  Baird's  shop  ?— - 
Yes,  I  believe  I  did ;  I  am  certain  I  did. 

Do  you  see  your  subscription  there?— Yes. 

Where  did  you  write  it? — In  Mr.  BrownV  ■ 

Who  was  in  the  shop  when  you  bought  it  ? — 
I  do  not  recollect. 

Lord  AdvooaU.-^ATe  there  any  booksellers  in 
Kilmarnock  ? — ^Yes. 

Hugh  WiUon  cross-examined  by  Mr.  QraiU 
for  Alexander  McLaren. 

What  was  the  object  of  the  meeting? — To 
consider  the  propriety  of  petitioning  paniament 
for  a  reform. 

Had  the  meeting  any  other  object  ? — ^None^ 
that  I  know  of. 

Did  any  person  recommend  aaything  else  ^ 
^Not  that  I  heard. 

Did  you  hear  the  panel  McLaren  speak  upon 
that  occasion  ? — ^Yes,  I  was  there  at  the  time,  X 
heard  part  of  his  speech. 

Was  it  a  very  stonny  day  P — ^Veiy  stormy. 

Was  there  hail?— Yes. 

Were  many  umbrellas  up? — ^A  great  num- 
ber. 

Was  any  noise  made  by  the  pattering  of  the 
hail  upon  them  so  as  to  prevent  you  from 
hearing  ? — ^Yea. 

Was  every  thing  conducted  in  an  orderly  and 
peaceable  manner? — Yes,  they  did. 

Did  you  sign  the  petitions  to  the  legislature  ^ 
— Yes. 

Do  you  recc^ect  what  the  terms  of  the  pe* 
titions  were  ? — ^No,' 

Are  vou  well  acquainted  with  the  panel 
Alexander  McLaren  ? — ^Yes.  - 

How  long  have*  you  been  acquainted  withr 
him? — ^A  great  many  years;  five  or  six,  or 
better. 

What  character  has  he  possessed  as  to  peaee- 
abledemeanourandloyalty  ?— A  good  character^ 
as  far  as  I  know. 

Has  he  had  the  reputation  of  being  seditious 
and  troublesome,  or  loyal  and  peaceable  ?— 
The  latter. 

Was  he  ever  connected  with  any  sod^7 — 
I  do  not  know ;  he  was  a  member  of  fSe  com-- 
ipittee  for.  petitioning  for  reibrm.   >  ^  ,    - 

But  with  none  other  ?^With  no  other  thail 
knowo£ 


d7] 


ttiuf  Tkomat  Batrdjbr  SetUtioH, 


A.  D.  1817. 


[38 


Do  yon  think  joa  would   probably  have 
lieard  of  it  if  tlM  fact  had  been  so  t — I  think 


so. 


HaTejoD  erer  heard  him  iklk  of  the  measores 
of  government  ? — Yes. 

What  waj  did  he  express  himself? — ^He  used 
to  approye  of  the  measures  of  government. 

um  you  eyer  hear  any  arguments  between 
him  and  others  on  politics  ? — Yes,  he  took  the 
government  side. 

Do  yoQ  know  of  his  having  been  a  member 
of  any  miUtary  body? — I  believe  he  served  in 
the  Local  Militia,  in  the  Rifle  corps. 

Did  you  look  on  him  as  a  man  of  a  sedi- 
tious turn  of  mind,  or  as  a  friend  to  the  go- 
vernment?— ^As  a  friend  to  the  government. 

Did  jou  ever  hear  any  imputation  to  the 
contrary  cast  on  him? — I  do  not  remember 
-ever  hearing  any. 

Do  yon  know  any  thins  about  his  objecting 
to  his  speech  being  printed  ? — No. 

Lara  Advocate, — ^Do  you  know 
the  petition? — No. 

Did  yon  ever  read  it? — ^Yes. 


you  know  who  drew 


Dand  Bow  sworn. — Eiamined  by 
Air.  DrwnnoHdm 

What  is  Mr.  Baird?— He  has  a  grocer's 
shop. 

Were  the  pamphlets  sold  at  Mr.  Baird*s 
shop? — Yes. 

Many  of  them? — ^Many.  I  could  not  say 
as  to  the  number. 

Some  doaens? — Yes;  some  dozens. 

Fifty  copies? — I  believe  there  mif^U 

What  were  they  sold  for? — ^Fourpence  each. 

DaM  Bom  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Jeffity 
for  Thomas  Baira. 

Do  you  know  if  they  were  sold  any  where 
^e? — ^Yes. 

LordAioocaU, — Where? — Different  persqns 
of  the  committee  got  them. 

Mention  who  got  them? — Mr.  Finnie,  Mr. 
Johnstone. 

How  do  you  Imow  that? — Because  I  saw 
them  given  away.  They  were  given  to  be  sold 
by  Mr.  Baird. 

Besides  thpse  given  to  the  members  of  the 
committee,  several  dozens  were  sold  in  your 
shop  ? — ^Yes. 

Jamtt  Sainton^  sworn, — Examined  by 
Mr.  Drummond, 

[The  pamphlet  was  handed  to  the  witness.] 

Qave  you  seen  this  pamphlet? — ^Yes. 

Have  you  seen  in  it  the  statement  of  a 
speech  said  to  have  been  made  by  you  ? — Yes. 

Have  yon  read  it?  Is  it  a  fair  account  of 
what  von  said  ? — ^It  is  near  about  it. 

Did  you  corop6se  the  speech  yourself?-^ 
No. 

Where  did  you  get  it? — From  Mr.  Baird. 
•    Before  the  meeting!— Yes. 

Did  you  speak  or  read  it  ?— 'I  read  it. 


James  iSamfoii  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Jeffrey 
for  Thomoi  Baird.    . 

Look  at  what  is  written  before  the  beginning 
of  that  speech,  where  it  is  stated,  that  a  Mr. 
Burt  and  a  Mr.  White  could  not  attend,  but 
had  transmitted  addresses  to  be  read  to  the 
meeting.  Yours  was  given  in  the  name  of 
Mr.  Burt,  and  you  understood  it  was  Mr. 
Burt's  speech  you  read? — Mr.  Baird  said  Mr. 
Burt  haa  sent  it  to  him. 

It  was  not  Mr.  Baird's  writings  but  Mr. 
Bun's?— Yes. 

The  following  Declarations  of  the  Panels 
were  then  read. 

Declaration  of  Alexander  M'Laren^ 

At  Kilmarnock,  the  26th  day  of  February 
in  the  year  1817,  in  presence  of  William 
£aton,  Esq.  Sheriff-substitute  of  Ayrshire, 
appeared  Alexander  M'Laren,  weaver  in 
Kilmarnock;    who  being  examined,  de- 
clares. That  he  is  a  native  of  Perthshire, 
and  in  April  next  he  h^s  been  eight  years 
in  Kilmarnock.    Declares,  That  ihere  was 
a  public  meeting  held  at  the  Dean  Park, 
near  Kilmarnock,  on  the  7th  of  Decem- 
ber last :  That  that  meeting  was  for  the 
purpose  of  petitioning  Parliament  for  a 
reform  of  gnevances.  Declares,  That  pre- 
vious to  that  meeting  there  was  a  com- 
mittee of  certain  individuals  in  Kilmar- 
nock, for  the  purpose  of  bringing  about 
the  said  meeting :  That  the  declarant  at- 
tended that  committee,  and  David  Itam- 
say  Andrews,  writer  in  Kilmarnock,  Tho- 
mas B{drd  and  Andrew  Finnic,  merchants 
there,  also  attended  that  meeting,  and  the 
declarant  has  reason  to  suppose  they  were 
members  of  it  as  well  as  nimself.    De- 
clares, That  the  declarant  first  appeared 
on  the  hustings  and  opened  the  meeting ; 
and  being  shewn  an  ''Account  of  the 
Proceedings  of  the  Public  Meeting  of  the 
Burgesses  and  Inhabitants  of  the  town  of 
Kilmarnock/'  and  wherein  is  engrossed, 
on  part  of  the  fifth  page,  sixth,  and  part 
of  the  seventh  page,  what  the  declarant 
said  at  opening  the  above  meeting.  De- 
clares,   That  the  declarant  has  perused 
said  speech,  and  it  is  near  what  the  de- 
clarant said  on  the  above  occasion,  except 
what  is  said  about  the  middle  of  the  se- 
venth page  about  allegiance>  which  the 
declarant  thinks  he  did  not  deliver  in  the 
words  as  expressed  in  the  publication. 
Declares,  That  on  the  morning  of  the 
above  meeting,  the  declarant  put  into  wri- 
ting what  he  must  say  at  the  opening  of 
the  meeting :  That  he  afterwards  gave  his 
part  of  the  manuscript  to  those  who  were 
appointed  by  the  committee  to  superii^ 
tend  the  printing  of  the  proceedings,  that 
the  same  might  be  published  along  with 
the  rest.'  .Declares,  That  James  John- 
stone, muslin  agent  tn  the  Waterside  of 


IIOJ 


57  GEOBGE  UI. 


Trial  o/Akxamdtr  U'Lare* 


L49 


Rilraarnock,  was  called  to  the  chair,  and 
on  that  occasion  he  made  a  nteech,  vhkh 
was  much  approved  of  hj  those  present. 
Declares,  That  the  resolutions,  as  engross- 
ed in  said  publication,  are  the  same  that 
were  read  at  the  public  meeting,  and  the 
manuscript  was  read  to  the  committee, 
previous  to  the  meeting,  by  Thomas 
Baird,  merchant  in  Kilmarnock,  one  of 
the  members.  Dechu^s,  That  Hugh  Craw- 
ford, printer  in  Kilmarnock,  was  employed 
to  jpnnt  the  proceedings  of  the  meetmg, 
which  were  utetwards  sold  at  fourpence 
a-piece,  to  enable  the  committee  to  de- 
fray the  expenses.  Declares,  That  the  de- 
clarant attended  «  meeting  of  the  commits 
tee,  when  those  who  spoke  gave  in  their 
manuscripts  for  printing,  and  the  decla- 
rant thinks  the  foresaid  Thomas  Baird  was 
present :  That  a  committee  was  appointed 
to  superintend  the  printing,  and  the  said 
Thomas  Baird  and  Andrew  Fionie  were 
«f  that  committee.  And  being  shtewn 
the  printed  report  before  mentioned,  de- 
"clares.  That  he  heard  none  of  the  authors 
find  fiiult  with  any  thing  that  is  therein 
contained;  and  the  said  publication  is 
doqueted  and  signed  by  the  declarant  and 
•Sheriff  as  relative  hereto.  Declares, 
That  the  words  on  the  sixth  page,  '*  The 
fact  is,  we  are  ruled  by  men  only  solici- 
tous for  their  own  aggrandizement,  and 
they  care  no  farther  for  the  great  body  of 
the  people  than  they  are  subservient  to 
their  accursed  purposes,**  were  in  the  ma- 
nuscript wrote  by  the  declarant,  but  were 
not  repeated  by  him  at  the  public  meeting 
when  on  the  husting^s  as  above.  And  the 
foregoing  declaration  being  distinctly 
read  over,  he  declares  that  it  cont^uns  the 
truth.    In  witness.  Sec.  &c. 

Declaration  of  Thomas  Baird. 

-AX  Kijmamock,  the  26th  day  of  February 
in  the  year  1817,  in  presence  of  William 
Eaton,  Esq.  Sheriff-substitute  of  Ayrshire, 
appearied  Thomas  Baird,  merchant  in 
Kilmarnock;  who  being  examined,  de- 
clares, That  there  was  a  meeting  of  several 
persons  in  the  town  of  Kilmarnod^  in  the 
month  of  November  last,  for  the  purpose 
of  taking  Into  consideration  whether  or  not 
there  should  be  a  general  meeting  for  the 
purpose  of  petitioning  the  Prince  Regent  | 
and  both  Houses  of  Parliament  for  a  re- 
form :  That  the  declarant  was  preses  of  the 
first  meeting  only:  That  there  were  seferal 
•after  meetings,  some  of  which  the  declarant 
attended,  and  the  7th  of  December  last 
was  fixed  for  a  general  meeting  at  the 
Dean  Park :  That  the  declarant  attended 
•that  meeting,  and  Alexander  M'Laren, 
"weaver  in  iLilmarnock,  mounted  the 
hustings,  and  opened  the  meeting.  with«  a 
speech :  That  Jaxnes  Johnstone,  mslin 
•ngent  in  KUmamock,  ^p^a^  called  to  the 
vhair^  and  read  a  9peeo|^,tQjhe  mating 


from  a  memorandum  book.  And  being 
9hown  a  manuscript  consisting  of  nine- 
teen pages,  declares.  That  he  is  pretty 
certain  that  it  as  the  same  that  he  read 
to  the  meeting,  and  which  the  declarant 
saw  some  days  afterwards  in.  Walter 
Andrew's  office,  and  which  is  doqueted 
and  signed  as  relative  hereto.  Declares, 
That  the  proceedingn  were  ordered  to  bo 
printed,  and  the  declarant  was  appointed 
Dy  the  committee,  along  with  several 
others^  to  superintend  the  printing  :  That 
Uie  declarant  assisted  ii^  correcting  the 
grammatical  errors  in  the  Manuscript, 
along  with  the  said  Walter  Andrew,  and 
the  declarant  assisted  a  little  at  the  print- 
ing-office in  correcting  the  proof  copy. 
And  beiog  shown  a  half-sheet  of  paper^ 
tided  on  the  back  '<  No.  5.  Mr.  Burt'a 
letter/'  declares.  That  said  words  ace  of 
the  declarant's  band-writinp^  and  the  said 
halMieet  of  paper  was  given  in  hv  the 
declarant  to  the  printer,  along  witti  the 
rest  of  the  manuscripts ;  and  said  half- 
sheet  of  paper  is  doqueted  and  signed  by 
the  decnrant  and  sheriff-subMttnte  as 
relative  hereto.  Declares,  That  the  pro- 
ceedings of  said  meeting  were  printed 
by  Hugh  Crawford,  and  a  great  Mmber 
of  copies  were  sent  to  the  declarant's 
•hop,  and  be  reuiled  liheni  at  fourpence 
a-piece;  and  being  shown  a  cop^p  e€ 
the  publication,  declares^  That  it  is  a 
copy  of  the  proceedings  whieh  weie  pub^*- 
lished  and  circulated  as  above,  and  is 
doqueted  and  signed  as  relative  hereto  ; 
all  which  he  decides  to  be  true.  In-  wit- 
ness whereof,  &c.  &c. 

SVIDBXCS  tZI  BXOULrAflTION. 

Jamm.  Smmrn  swom.-^-Examined;  \ff 

Mr.  'Crani, 

*        _ 

Yon  remember  a  public  meeting  at  Kilmar- 
nock last  December.  Was  it  for  the  purpose 
of  petitioning  parliament  ?  or  what  was  th« 
object  ? — To  petition  parliament. 

Were  von  a  membier  of  any  committee  re- 
garding that  meeting  ? — Yes. 

Are  you  well  acquainted  with  the  objects  of 
those  who  were  concerned  in  that  meeting  ?-— 
I  know  as  to  any  meetings  I  was^  at  of  the 
committee,  what  I  heard  there. 

What  was  its  object  then?—- Entirelyto  pe- 
tition pariiament. 

Do  you  know  who  were  proposed  to  open 
the  business '  of  the  meeting  by  a  speech  ?^^ 
Different,  persons. 

Do  you  remember  any  of  their  names^?-*! 
could  not  say  I  entirely  recollect,,  except  him  - 
that  did  it ;   bnt  I  know  that  others  were  pro- 
posed. 

At  what  time  was  it   proposed  that  Infr. 
H'Laren  should  open  the  meeting? — About  a-, 
weelf. before  jthQ.paeetiog  took  ris^i  * 

Hid  he  accept  readily  thi^.mfi^  of  •  ofteMg 
the  meet]i^9.J-«lie  did  la^ 


4  > 


41] 


awB  juMMMf  BnnLjw  Sttknon^ 


A.  B«  i«n* 


CM 


Did  te  dqtet  to  doiiif  it?— Y«ik 

Did  lie  mtggm  toy  one  ebe  to  do  ttf— 


Whom  f— Mr.  Blackwood. 

Did  be  suggest  any  other  penon? — He  was 
for  imposing  it  on  me. 

Did  you  consent  to  do  it? — Ho, 

What  was  the  last  time  he  urged  yon  f — 
ilboM  an  kQw  befinrt  the  meclkkg  took 
Mace* 

Did  he  state  he  was  Mtpawd  or  unnre- 
pared  ? — I  did  not  know  ttuA  he  had  anjthinff 
orepared ;  but  he  said  he  wei  not  a  fit  hand 

It  wi»  on  ironr  refusal  that  he  undertook  the 
office  himself? — ^Tes. 

What  was  the  object  of  the  petition  ?  What 
was  it  about? — ^To  obtaid  a  reform  in  parlia- 


Was  there  any  conf  ersation  as  to  what  was 
to  be  done  in  case  the  petitions  were  not  as- 
sented to  ? — Yes. 

Whafwas  to  be  done? — ^Tb  petition  again. 

Did  you  hear  Mr.  M'Lau-en  make  his 
apeedi  ?— I  was  present  and  heard  some  of  it^ 
but  I  did  not  hear  it  distinctly. 

From  what  cause  ? — One  reasod  was>  that  I 
was  behind  him,  and  the  wind  carried  the. 
aoand  of  his  voice  to  die  other  side  ;  and  as  X 
knew  I  had  to  read  a  speech  myself,  I  was  a 


late?  Did  be  oppoM  those  ttiat  mm%  mi  tile 
Opposition  side  WYes. 

Was  he  a  man  ^yen  to  riototti  prooeedings, 
or  was  he  industrious  sC  his  business,  and  quiM 
in  his  tonduct?— 'He  was  indnstrioQl  ^  Ui 
bnsinessy  and  quiet  in  his  conduot. 

Was  he  ever  connected  with  any  aoefittfv 
except  this  coannitlee  ? — No,  n«TW. 

Is  he  a  sober  man,  or  is  he  given  to  ciwpiiliy 
and  liquor  ?-^Not  that  I  know  of ;  hois  a  sober 


FioiB  the  general  import  of  die  epe«c1s  dM 
ywigatbeaiu  purpose  WaS|loetoite  riot  end' 
dbturbance,  or  to  induce  People  to  come  fy^ 
ward  to  sign  this  petition  ? — Tiie  latter. 

Do  you  know  that  petitions  were  proposed  ? 
--lfc>ttlQS&.  The  resolutions  wei«  roid  and 
approved  of,  and  the  petitiOtiff  were  to  be  ae-^ 
cording  to  the  spirit  or  these  resolutions^ 

Wb^  ste^  were  taken  for  preparing  the 
petitions?—)  could  not  say  positively  t^ut 
tbat« 

Did  you  ngn^  any  petitions  ? — Yes. 

How  many? — -Tbree,  I  think. 

To  whom  were  they  addressed  ?^-To  the 
Prince  Regent,  the  House  of  Lords,  and  the 
House  of  Commons. 

Do  you  know  whether  they  were  forwarded  ? 
— ^I  beliere  they  were. 

Were  you  ever  molested  in^  consequence  of 
having  signed  any  of  these  petitions  ?-^No. 

Did  you  overhear  of  any  6ne  being  mo* 
tested?— No. 

Hftve-you  known  Mr.  M*Iiaren  a  long  time  f 
— A  considerable  time. 

In  yoor  opinion  what  was  his  character  as  to 
qinetness  of  demeanor  and  loyalty  ?-^He  was 
regarded  as  one  of  the  loyalest  men  where  he 
lived  previous  to  this  charge  of  sedition^ 

Have  you  ever  oonverawl  with  him  on  poli* 
tieal  questioBS  r-*SometiineB'  about  thv  doors ; 
and  I  have  heard  him  disj^ute  withothei%  and 
support  the  side  of  administration. 

How  lon^  ago  i»  it*  since -you  heard  bin  eat- 
pteM  his  opmkn  on  saeb  subfeeMi  ?(«-«More  than 
a^rm^iafieii 

In  disputing  with  others  what  M%^46A^  hi^i 


Were  yon  present  at  At  coianittee  when 
there  was  a  talk  of  printing  tba  proceedings  J**^ 
zcs. 

Did  yon  see,  or  hear  read  before  the  oom^ 
mittee,  a  manuscript  nurporting  to  be  a  speech 
of  Mr.  McLaren? — It  was  not  at  that  com- 
mittee I  think ;  it  was  at  a  previous  one. 

There  was  a  sobeeqaevt  ooxBnrtttee?-«Y6S. 

And  you  heald  read  eivev  wlwt  f«ifovted 
to  be  a  speech  of  Mr.  McLaren  ? — Yes. 

[fThe  pamphlet  was  handed  to  the  vritneaa^} 

Dkl  yo«  ever  read  this  pulditeatio»?-^Y4^ 

De  you  sedoHeet  a  passage  m  the  p¥ulfed 
speech  about  allegiance? — I  could  aal  sa^;  I> 
think  so. 

Look  at  these  words.  Da  ytta  riUVeiiib«iF 
bearkig  die  manueeript  read?  and  do  ybu 
recollect  in  it  the  words  at  the  end  diour 
allegiance,  and*  so  on,  which  are  nbw  in*  that 
prittled  piper  V-I  eoaM  not  say  they*  W€re 
there. 

Can  you  say  they  werr  Ae<i  there  T-^ttley 
were  not  there,  X  thinh^  when  he-delivered  the 
pwper. 

Say  what  was  not  there  ?— I  think  the  tW6^ 
or  three  last  lines  were  ttot  ia  the  manuseript : 
*'  Yes,  my  flellow  countyyittfepM^^  imp  sa^h>  a  casi^ 
to  -^^^  with' our  allegian4l«<i'' 

Do  you  recollect  the  app^iVttOft  of  tKtf 
manuscripr!-^!  thlnk4VWttS<roMedii«if  a^nditi- 
row  strip  Ulie  a  ^heet*  folded^  over  agi^iii; 
It  had  been  folded,  I  think,  before  if  wtiiM 
written  o&t 

Was  the  papM  foldod  thur?-f  A?^e«l  Of* 
foolscap-paper  shown  to  the  witness  folded  ia 
octavo.]'^  lea,,  it  was  folded  in  that  manner.' 

Waa  it  written  bookwise  F-^Ves,  t  thinl^< 
so. 

I  do  not  ask' you  who  did  what  I  am  going; 
to  mention,  but  did  any  body  at  that-comnii" 
tee,  not  Mr.  Whuehj.  make  aav  pencil  mark* 
ing  ou  that  p^per  ? — YesyX  think  tliey  did.   It* 
was  not  Mr.  M^ren. 

Do  you  know  what  theeO' marks  Were?>*-L 
did  not  see  the  marks* 

Did  you  hear  any  persoaread  tbe  alteratioa 
made  by  the  marks  ?-^Ye9» 

Was  this  correction  imntediately^  read  ?-^ 
Yes. 

Did  the  person  who  read  that  conrectionvead  • 
it  as  a  correction  he  had  made  withthese  peadL 
marks  P^-I  think  ho  did, 

WhK^  was  the  puqKwt  oCtbat  cofreoiioal-^ 
It  is  now  at  the  end  of  this'printed  sMOth. 

You  8iglMd<.tli«  p^litioa'to'  iM»«HoaSfiM>f 


431 


£7  GEOROE  lU. 


Trial  tjf  Alexander  M'Laren 


[44 


.  Commons :  should  you  know  the  purport  of  it 
if  you  saw  it  r — I  think  I  should. 

Look  at  that  ?  Jpage  82,  of  the  printed  yotes 
of  the  House  ot  Commons.] — I  cannot  re- 
collect eyery  word  or  sentence.  I  think  that 
is  the  petition.  I  see  sentences  that  were 
there. 

You  recollect  the  words  where  you  see  a  X  ? 
r~I  could  not  say  positlTely. 
•  Do  you  recollect  any  of  them  ? — One  part 
ahout "  indemnity  for  the  past"  in  the  sentence 
— [The  passage  which  Mr.  Grant  read  was 
pointed  out  to  the  witness.] 

Do  you  remember  that  passage  ? — I  cannot 
remember  it.' 

James  Samaon  cross-examined  by  the 
Lord  Adoocate, 

Who  were  present  when  these  pencil  marks 
were  made  on  the  manuscript  speech } — ^I  for 
one. 

I  suppose  so.  Who  more? — ^John  Ken- 
nedy. 

That  is  two.  Any  more  ? — Archibald  Craig. 

That  is  three.  Who  else  was  there  ? — I  do 
not  recollect  any. 

Do  you  say  there  were  no  more  present  ? — 
There  were  others. 

Let  us  hear  the  names  of  some  more  of  them  ? 
—Mr.  Baird  was  there. 

Was  M'Laren  ? — He  was  there. 

Was  it  by  any  of  those  you  haye  named 
that  the  pencil  marking  was  made  ? — Tes. 

Which  of  them?— Mr.  Baird. 

You  have  the  book  lying  before  you,  tell  us 
what  was  altered?  —  The  latter  clauses  or 
clause. 

Was  any  thing  put  in  or>  left  out  ? — It  was 
put  in  the  manuscript  by  Mr.  Baird. 

Did  he  give  his  reason  for  putting  it  in  ? — 
Yes;  because  the  manuscript  deliyered  was 
not  complete  according  to  the  way  in  which 
the  speech  was  spoken,  and  therefore  Mr.  Baird 
put  it  in.  .   , 

Did  Mr.  M'Laren  make  any  objections  to 
this  alteration  ? — I  did  not  hear. 

Mr.  Grant. — ^We  would  haye  brought  seve- 
ral witnesses  in  addition  to  those  for  the 
crown,  to  testify  as  to  the  character  of  the 
prisoner  McLaren ;  and  it  is  my  duty  to  inform 
you  of  a  mistake  by  which  we  haye  been  de- 
priyed  of  this  opportunity.  The  letters  of 
exculpation,  with  instructions  to  cite  witnesses 
to  proye  the  good  character  of  the  prisoner 
'^M'Laren,  were,  by  a  mistake  of  the  proprietors 
of  the  coach  at  Kilmarnock,  forwarded  to  a 
person  of  the.  some  mane  as  that  on  the  address 
on  the  parcel  in  a  Afferent  town^  aiui  not  re- 
turned till  the  night  of  Thursday  before  the 
trial,  which  circumstance  we  are  m  condition 
to  proye  to  your  lordships;  and  we  have 
therefore  nothing  we  can  legally  produce  in 
addition  to  the  testimony  given  of  their  cha- 
racters. But  we  haye  certificates  which  your 
lordships  may  perhaps  allow  to  be  read. 

Lord  JuUice  Ckrkt-^Hoi  at  preseut;    you 


may  state  the  import  of  them  in  the  address  to 
the  jury ;  but  they  cannot  be  put  in  here  in 
evidence. 

Lord  Adoocate, — If  apy  statement  had  been 
made  to  me  of  a  wish  that  the  trial  should 
have  been  delayed,  I  would  have  willingly 
conceded  the  delay. 

Mr.  Grpnt, — ^Tbe  thiAg  was  not  ttiought  of 
sufficient  importance,  and  the  mistake  did  not 
appear  till  last  night. 

Mr.  Clerk, — Your  lordships  have  heard  some 
evidence  which  shows  that  the  meeting  was 
for  the  purpose  of  petitioning  the  Regent  and 
the  two  Houses  of  rarliament.  And  you  have 
heard  that  a  petition  was  forwarded  to  the 
House  of  Commons ;  and  reference  has  been 
made  to  a  paper,  which' we  state  to  be  a  copy  of 
the  printed  votes  of  that  house.*  We  wiidi 
to  produce  evidence  of  this,  and  of  some  others 
of  the  same  description,  for  the  purpose  of 
showing  what  sort  of  language  is  permitted  to 
that  House.  I  need  not  state  how  necessary 
it  is  for  our  plea  to  show  you  what  language  it 
is  lawful  to  use  in  such  cases.  lu  preparing 
the  petitions,  and  in  debates  on  the  subject, 
such  language  must  of  course  also  be  permit- 
ted. We  can  have  the  productions  proved  by 
Mr.  Grant. 

Lord  Advocate, — I  think  it  competent  to  ob- 
jtet  to  these  productions,  and  to  the  evidence 
proposed  to  be  brought  as  to  the  accuracy  of 
them. 

Mr.  C/crA:,— Doyou  admit  them? 

Lord  Adoocate. — \  have  not  read  them,  and 
I  know  nothing  of  them. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk, — The  lord  adyocate  only 
admits  that  it  is  the  practice  to  print  votes  oif 
the  House,  and  that  these  offei^  in  evidence 
have  the  appearance  of  being  copies.  It  is 
not  usual  to  call  on  counsel  to  be  evidence  in 
the  trial.  As  an  agent  for  the  prisoners  could 
not  be  admitted  as  evidence,  I  think  it  would 
be  better  to  call  on  some  other  person  than 
Mr.  Grant.f  I  observe  a  noble  lord  present 
whose  testimony  might  be  given. 

Lord  Gilliet, — Mr.  Grant  can^be  examined 
as  a  hayer. 

Ljrd  Advocate, — I  go  so  far  as  to  say  that 
I  haye  no  reason  to  doubt  the  genuineness  of 
the  copies. 

Mr.  Clerk, — I  conceive  you  haye  been  in 
the  use  to  receive  papers  from  agents,  and  to 
examine  them  as  havers  of  these  papers.  An 
agent  does  not  give  parole  evidence  in  the 

'  *  £yen  the  printed  Journals  are  not,  in  Eng- 
land, ^evidence.  8  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  685; 
1  Phil.  Ey.  406. 

f  Mr.  Grant  the  proposed  witness,  was  one 
of  the  counsel  for  the  panel  M'Laren ;  he  was 
at  the  time  of  this  trial  a  member  of  the  House 
of  Commons^ 


451 


and  Tkotttttt  Btttrdfm  Sedition. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[46 


cause,  but  only  gifet  his  testimony  to  the  au- 
thenticity of  a  pgper  in  his  poflsesBion;  that  is 
all  that  Mr.  Grant  would  be  asked  to  do.  Mr. 
Grant  can  certify,  not  only  that  he  believes 
them  to  be  the  printed  Totes  of  the  House  of 
Commons,  but  |also  that  he  lecetyed  them 
under  cover  from  the  Vote-office,  certifying  to 
him  that  they  are  the  votes  of  the  House  of 
Commons. 

Lord  Adoocate. — The  evidence  would  not  be 
complete ;  Mr.  Grant  can  only  explain  how  he 
came  by  these  papers. 

Jjord  JvMtice  Clerk, — In  a  legal  sense  what 
Mr.  Grant  could  certify  would  not  make  them 
evidence.  The  question  of  their  being  actually 
the  votes  of  the  House  would  remain  to  be 
established. 

Mr.  Gerk. — After  they  are  made  public, 
they  are  matters  of  notoriety,  which  any  per^ 
sons  may  refer  to  before  your  lordships. 

Lord  AdvocaU.^I  admit  my  belief  of  their 
genuineness. 

John  JndretDS  sworn. — Examined  by  Mr. 
Jeffrey  for  Mr.  Bidrd, 

Are  you  chief  magistrate  of  Kilmarnock  ?— 
Yes. 

Were  you  in  that  office  in  December  last  ? — 
Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  a  public  meeting  in  the 
Dean-park  ? — I  do. 

Did  you  receive  any  notice  or  application 
regarding  that  meeting } — ^I  think  I  aid ;  one 
or  two  days  before  it  took  place. 

Who  waited  upon  you? — Mr.  Baird  met  me 
in  the  street,  and  told  me  of  the  meeting  a  few 
days  before. 

Wliat  did  he  state  to  you  ? — ^That  he  was 
appointed  by  the  committee  to  wait  on  me,  to 
inform  me  the  meeting  would  take  place  if  I 
would  allow  it^  and  that  if  I  would  not  he 
wrguld  give  up  the  intention  of  holding  it ;  I 
said  I  did  not  approve  of  the  meeting,  but  I 
thoiwht  I  eoold  not  prevent  it. 

VT^M  it  a  numerous  meeting  P — I  could  noi 
say,  I  was  not  there. 

Does  it  consist  with  your  knowledge  that 
the  conduct  of  those  at  the  meeting  was 
orderiy  or  otherwise  ? — ^There  Was  notmng  of 
riot  or  disturbance  that  I  heard  of. 

No  breach  of  the  peace  ? — ^None. 

Have  there  been  any  since?  —  I  know  of 
none ;'  I  recollect  none. 

Was  there  any  kind  of  disturbance  recently 
before  ?-^In  September,  I  believe. 

You  are  acquainted  with  Mr.  Baird  ?— >Yes, 
I  have  been  long  acquainted  with  him. 

He  is  in  a  respectable  way  of  life  ? — ^Very 
respectable. 

11 'he  a* quiet  and  peaceable  person,  or 
tomnltnous  . and  disorderly? — Always  peace- 
able. 

Doel  it  <$OBsist  vftith^your.  knowledge  that  he^ 
hdd  a  military  cominission  in  a  volunteer  or*' 
local  militia  cdrps  ?^I  'generally  uiuierstood  he 
^|s  a  captain. 


Have  you  seen  him  acting  in  that  capacity  ? 
— ^I  think  I  have. 

Down  to  what  time  did  he  so  act  7 — I  could 
not  say. 

WaUer  Andrew  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Cockbum, 

What  are  you  ?  A  writer  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  know  Mr.  Baird  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  rerpember  the  meeting  held  at  Kil- 
marnock in  December  last? — ^Yes. 

There  was  a  committee  for  arranging  the 
business? — Yes. 

Were  you  a  member  of  it? — ^Yes. 

Was  Mr.  Baird  ?— Yes. 

You  have  seen  him  at  the  committee  ?— I 
have. 

Do  you  recollect  any  discussion  after  the 
meeting  about  printing  the  speeches  delivered 
there  ? — ^Two  or  three  days  after  the  meeting 
Mr.  Baird  called  on  me  with  the  manuscript 
of  a  speech  which  was  delivered  there.  I  said 
I  thought  indecorous  expressions  were  in  it^ 
which  ought  to  be  kept  out.  He  urged  that 
objection  at  a  meetmg;  but  the  objection 
was  overruled. 

What  were  the  precise  expressions  which  yon 
called  indecorous  or  vulgar  ?  Do  you  remem- 
ber the  expressions  ? — I  could  not  repeat  the 
words :  the  passage  was  the  same  in  the  ma- 
nuscript, as  in  the  printed  pamphlet,  where  I 
read,  *^  which  he  is  oound  to  do  by  the  consti- 
tutional laws  of  the  country;  but  should  be  be 
so  infatuated  as  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  their 
just  petition,  he  has  forfeited  that  allegiance^ 
Yes  I  my  fellow-townsmen,  in  such  a  case  to 
with  allegiance.'' 

What  was  it  you  objected  to  f— What  I  have 
read. 

And  Mr.  Baird  concurred  in  that  objection, 
but  he  was  out-voted  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  there  an^  other  speech,  to  the  printing 
of  which  he  objected  ? — ^The  last  in  the  pam- 
phlet ;  the  speech  of  Mr.  Kennedy. 

What  was  his  objection  to  Kennedy's  speech  ? 
— ^He  said  it  was  nonsense. 

Did  he  object  to  any  of  the.  othen  ?--^To 
part  of  Mr.  Burt's. 

What  was  the  objection  to  it  P—  He  said  it 
would  have  been  letter  if  it  had  been  clothed' 
in  milder  language. 

From  your  conversation  with^him,  did  you 
understand  him  to  be  the  author  of  that  speech  ? 
-^No.  He  expressed  regret  that  some  of  it 
was  not  expressed  in  milder  language. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  express  a  desire  to 
have  every  thing  dgne  quietly,  so  as  to  give 
oiTenca  to  nobody  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  there  any  riot  at  the  meeting?— Not- 
that  I  heard  of. 

Did  he  ever  express  to  you  any  desire  tfant 
government  should  be.  overawed  ?7-No. 

He  wished  regularity  of  prokjeeding? — ^He 
said,  the  only  object  was  to  petition  constittf- 
tionally,  so  as  to  give  offiince  to  no  one.     .       . 

What  was  the  object  of  printing  the  pro- 
ceedings?—To  defray  the  expenses  intenrred. 


4ffi 


1  ^HB^ass  in. 


Wtf  ^^fumiv  NflMm 


r4e 


Rer.  JAmef  IGr ihooorf  sworn ^ — fixumined  by 

Mr.  Jeffrey. 

Are  yoa  acquainted  with  Mr,  Baird?*-rl 
have  had  that  pleasure  for  nearly  two  years. 

Do  you  know  him  intimately? — Very  inti* 
mately.    No  one  more  so. 

In  the  course  of  yi>ur  aoquamtanee  with  Mr. 
Baird,  have  youlnd  ODQTeraatioiis  with  hira 
•a  political  sttfagects  ?— I  have. 

Has  he  ei^prnsed  hH^  sentiments  with  apptr 
rept  .sii^cen]^  4n4  eon?i^an?— rWith  the 
greatest  I  have  no  doubt. 

Did  he  express  9n  attaoUoieiit  to  the  ooasti- 
tution  as  established  by  laW)  or  a  doiix*  to 
have  it  altered  ? — He.  eiipressed  %  desire  (hat 
the  popular  part  of  the  constitution  shouU  be 
fUieB^thened  an4  inen^gsi^*  MTer  that  the 
constitution  should  be  ov^rlQXted* 

He  wished  some  r^fomnstion  of  the  rcpfe- 
aentation  of  the  Hojase  9f  Comwiaiis  f— Yea. 

Did  he  ever*  eif^l^^  by  what  means  he 
thought  ^lis  )ihott]4  be  ^yitenqpled? — I  have 
oft^n  h/eard  him  say  h?  w^  anxious  that  any 
thing  Uke  viol^nqe  sho^  <  be  avoided,  aad 
that  none  but  constitutional  meaaur^a  ^ouM 
\/e  taken. 

Does  Mr.  Bair4  attei^i  your  congnegatioD  7 
—Yes. 

Is  he  a  man  of  peacfoaSle  an4llK>i9li.con4uct? 
i^-To  the  best  of  my  knowled^  he  ie  sow 

Did  he  ever  discover  any  ^onjew^y  lo  rioteus 
or  disorderly  cooduot  ?-rrl  %Md^'Obiirted  ajiy 
ti^Dg  or  that  kind  i«  him*. 

He  is  a  peaoeable  jam  WI  think  4P» 

Has  he  si^y  f}imil|[)-rHei  haa  «#iref«l  chilr 
dren. 

Dp  you  Ihink  Mm  Q9^bb)  of :  i|»tonlionaI1y 
exciting  tumult  or  violence  among  the  people? 
—I  should  cei^tajiily  think  he  it  itog^iheff  in- 
capable of  designedly  doing  so. 

John  WyUie  syfon, — Examined  by 
Mt.  CoMum, 

Do  you  hold  anr  officer  ^t^f  gtHrarmnent  ? 
—I  am  surveyor  of  tiM^fflr.t)i«  thiWI  diatiiet  of 
Ayrshire. 

Do  you  hold  any  military;  eeiminisaioD  ?-*-( 
ifraa  in  thei  Volpm^erp  till  1609,  %iid  Istill  hold 
^ooromi^sion  m^  I^o^al  HtliUtia. 

I  need  hardly  ask  you  if  y^  eve  a  Mm  re^ 
fe^mer  yoursrtf fr-J  imm  9/im^^.mfmtins» 
%!  auch  purpiwHS* 

.  Yo>iare  r^tbeir.iiLiQifteriaUy  ineUn^dC  I  |W^ 
•ome.    Do  yp^,kn^vt  Ml •  JM^  ?— Y<es. 

What  app«ar«4  to*  be  hif  politieal  aei^ti- 
i|j9^8  Ff^ue  je^DMd.W  be  a.  ftieB4  tothe  cdiih 
etitution,  but  wished  a  refiuia  19  tb^  repreae»- 
t«|ion. 

He  had  no  desire  to  overturn  thoi  dOPItita* 
tian^—I  h^ve.h^aid  bii%.  wa^ly.  e;rtol  the 
oonstituticuu 

Xa  he  a  :<|^|.iiiani^Ye9»  h«  baa  beea.  ao 
ei^  ^^  I  kMiFbiqiy  and  th^t>  h  tb^  gteatM.: 
part  of  hiaiife.; 

lahe.reapfjiBtlMe  in  pfiiot  of  sHlMtioiil^ 


Htre  YOU  temd  idciig  wKk  bhn  is  ny 
eorpa  ?-^I  was  anbalteniy  and  he  was  mcaptan 
in  the  Apshire. 

Did  his  oonduoC  as  an  officer  give  satida^ 
tioo  ?— He  was  a  ^^try  active  officer. 

Do  you  know  of  a  aseeting  held  at  Kil- 
mamodL  in  Deoember  last  ?^-I  beard  of  it. 

Had  you  any  conversation  with  Mr.  Baiid 
about  it? — ^Yes,  once  or  twice.  I  beard  %. 
{gentleman  read  an  account  of  the  proceedings 
m  a  company  from  a  Glasgow  paper. 
■*  Did  you  ever  hear  Mr.  oaird  say  any  thing 
about  the  speeches  ? — I  never  heard  him  make 
any  remarks  on  them. 

Do  you  know  Mr.  M'Laren  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  he  in  that  corps  you  spoke  of? — ^Yea, 
in  my  company. 

Did  he  behave  well  ? — ^As  far  as  I  know, 
sir. 

John  Brovm  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Jeffrey, 

Are  Tou  a  writer  in  Kilmarnock  ?— Yea^ 

Have  you  a  partner  in  business  ?— Yes,  the 
town-clerk. 

Are  you  acquainted  with  Mr.  Baird?— Very 
well. 

Is  he  a  respectable  man  ? — One  of  the  most 
so  in,  the  town. 

Has  he  a  family  ? — He  is  a  widower,  vridi 
four  or  4ve  children. 

Do  you  recollect  a  meeting  in  December 
last  for  petitioning  parUament  ? — ^Yes,  I  do. 

Do  you  know  wheiher  a  oommittee  met  be- 
fore and  after  that  meeting } — I  believe  one  sat 
several  days  befoue  the  meeting. 

Were  yon  a  member  of  it  t — ^No>  nor  vras  I 
ever  at  the  meeting. 

Did  Mr.  Baiid  ever  etunmunicate  to  you 
what  was  passing?— Scarcely  a  day  passed  in 
which  we  did  not  converse  on  the  oocotrenees 
of  the  meeting ;  and  I  was  in  the  habit  of  adu 
ing  what  passed  at  the  committee. 

What  did  be  state  as  the  object  of  the  peti- 
tioners ? — ^To  prooire  a  reform  in  parliament* 

By  what  means  ?^^By  constitntional  means. 

Did  he  disavow  violence  or  other  means  ?*— 
MostdiMincftly. 

You  know  Mr.  Baird  was  at  the  pvblio 
meeting:  Did  he  give  you  any  aoeonnt  of  what 
took  place  there  ?-*Yes^he  told  me  who  spoke* 
When  the  proeecdings  were  pnUished,  I  was 
amrpcised  at  seeing  a  pacagiaph  which  I  did 
not  look  for,  and  I  told  him  it  was  a  pitjr  it 
was  there.  He  sud  he  disapproved  of  it  him- 
self, and  was  against  printing  it  at  aU^  but  thai 
a  vote  was  taken  on  the  subject  by  the  com- 
mittee, and  they  determined  to  print  it,  as  they 
didnot  wiah  i^gaibled  statcmeirt  of  the  prO' 
ceedings  to  go  before  the  public. 

Did  he  make,  obaorvations  ott  any  of  the 
other  speeches?— He  pointedly,  o^eoted  ta' 
McLaren's  speech. 

Did  he  object  to  any  of  rtbe^  oAem  ?— *He 
diaararoffed  of  one  ov.two,  n  baring  lan^ag*  > 
t»ft  treeni  and  'disHwpaetiul. 

Does  it  consist  with  your  knowMf%4bat  \^* 


4«] 


and  Thomas  Btttrd fir  Sedition, 


A.  O.  1817. 


1 50 


haa  held  comnusnoos  in  militaiy  iy>rp8  ?-^He 
commanded  a  compaDj  of  rifle  Tojunteers  for 
'some  time. 

Did  he  give  satisfaction  in  his  military  ca- 
pacity ? — ^I  Defer  heard  any  complaint  against 
nim.  I  always  conceived  he  behaved  like  a 
gentleman. 

Was  he  lately  amwinted  a  commissioner  of 
police  of  the  townr— Yes,  at  last  annaal  elec-' 
tioo. 

From  what  you  know  of  him  was  he  sincere 
in  his  sentiments  in  favour  of  constitutional 
modes  of  proceeding  for  obtaining  redress  of 
grievances? — ^There  is  no  question  of  that. 
He  never  approved  of  any  other  than  constitu- 
tional modes  of  redress.  I  have  known  him 
intimately  these  eight  or  ten  years. 

Was  he  likely  to  say  or  do  any  thiog  to  pro- 
duce discontent  ? — I  conceive  he  would  be  the 
last  man  in  the  world  to  be  guilty  of  any  thing 
of  the  kind. 

Are  youderk  to  the  road 'trustees? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  understand  Mr.  Baird  objected  to 
these  expressions  not  as  being  improper  in 
themselves  but  as  likely  to  lead  the  persons 
.who  uttered  them  into  a  scrape  ? — He  did  not 
appear  to  be  apprehensive  of  any  coesequences 
to  result  from  them,  but  he  objected  to  them 
.  as  improper  expressions. 

Are  yon  acquainted  wi^  MILaren? — ^A 
little.    I  have  met  him  on  business. 

Do  yott  know  anything  of  his  character  f — ^I 
never  heard  anything  against  him. 

Ijord  AdvocaU, — Gentlemen  of  the  jury ;  you 
have  heard  from  the  indictment  th^tt  tne  panels 
are  charged  generally  in  the  major  proposition 
with  the  crime  of  sedition,  a  crime  well  known 
in  the  law  of  Scotland,  and  with  the  general 
description  of  which  you  must  be  already  fa- 
miliar, but  with  which,  at  all  events,  you  have 
had  addiuonal  means  of  being  made  acquaint- 
ed, ttcfOL  the  luminous  and  satisfactory  judg- 
ments of  their  lordships,  delivered  this  morn- 
ing in  tlie  commencement  of  ^h&trial.    I  ^hall 
not,  therefore,  in  this  part  of  the  observations 
which  it  is  incumbent  upon  me  in  discharge  of 
my  public  duty  to  adoress  to  you,  sav  any 
thing  in  further  explanation  of  the  law  of  sedi- 
tion, whidi — as  a  crime  calculated  to  unsettle 
the-order  of  society,  and  to  introduce  tumult, 
anarchy^   and  ..bloodshed  into  these  realms, 
which,  for  upwards  of  a  century  have  enjoyed 
the  highest  oegree  of  freedom  that  ever  fell  to 
the  lot  of  any  people-r-is  one  of  the  most  dan- 
.gerous  whicn  can  be  committed  against  the 
state.     Before,  however,  concluding  the  re- 
marks with  which  I  shall  have  .to  trouble  you, 
it  may  be  necessar^r  for  me  to  draw  your  atten- 
tion to  the  application  of  the  law  to  ue  charges 
prefierred  against  the  paneb.    In  ^e  fir?t  in- 
stance, however,  I  shall  confin.e  myself  exclu- 
sively to  the  evidence  which  has  been  adduced, 
in  order  to  establish  that  the  acts  at  least,  a1- 
.  leged  in  the  indictment  to  have  been  committed 
.  by  the  prisoners,  have  been  brought  home  to 
.tibem. 

VOL.  xxxin. 


Tou  will  observe,  then,  that  in  the  minor 
proposition  of  the  iiidietment,  the  prisoileri 
are  charged — McLaren  with  having,  at  a  public 
meeting,  on  the  7th  of  last  December,  held  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  Kilmarnock,  and  attend- 
ed principally  by  the  lower  orders  of  the  peo- 
ple, used- certain  seditious  and  inflammatory 
language,  in  a  speech  which  he  then  deliver- 
ed— a  speech  calculated  to  degrade  and 
bring  into  contempt  thef  goverment  and  legis- 
lature, to  withdraw  therefrom  the  confidence 
and  affections  of  the  people,  and  to  All  the 
realm  with  trouble  and  dissention.  For  the 
precise  expressions  which  he  then  employed,  I 
shall  beg  leave  to  refer  you  at  present  to  the 
copies  of  the  indictment  which  are  before  you, 
in  which  the  passages  of  the  speech  are  detail- 
ed at  length,  and  to  which  I  shall  hereafter 
be  obliged  more  particularly  to  call  your 
attention. 

The  other  panel,  Baird,  is  charged  with 
having  published  his  speecli,  and  with  having 
been  accessary  to  the  printing  and  circulating 
a  seditious  tract  or  statement,  purporting  to  be 
an*'  Account  of  the  proceedings  of  the  public 
meeting  of  the  burgesses  and  inhabitants  of 
the  town  of  Kilmarnock,  held  on  the  7th  of 
December  1816,  for  the  purpose  of  deliberat- 
ing on  the  most  proper  method  of  remedying 
the  present  distresses  of  the  country,  with  a 
full  report  of  the  speeches  on  that  occasion." 
Then  follow  particular  passages  contained  in 
that  publication,  which  are  alleged  generally 
to  be  seditious,  tending  to  inflame  the  minds 
of  the  public  against  the  constitution  of  the 
kingdom,  and  which,  it  is  affirmed,  were  pub- 
lished by  him  with  the  wicked  and  felonious 
purpose  of  exciting  sedition  against  the  Go- 
vernment, and  of  withdrawing"  the  affections 
of  the  people  from  the  established  order  of 
things  in  the  country.  The  publication  has 
been  duly  authenticated,  and  although  I  shall 
afterwards  more  particularly  refer  you  to  some 
of  its  most  striking  passages,  the  whole,  I  trust, 
will  receive  your  full  and  deliberate  considera- 
tion. 

In  the  conclusion  of  the  indictment  both 
prisoners  are  charged  with  being  accessaries 
to  the  crimes  committed  by  each.  From  this 
you  will  understand,  that  if,  from  a  full  consi- 
deration and  investigation  of  the  proof  which 
I  have  laid  before  you,  you  should  be  of  opin- 
ion that  the  prisoner  Baird  was  accessaiy  to 
making  the  seditious  speech  delivered  by 
M'lAren,  or  that  the  other  panel,  M'Laren,  was 
accessary  to  publishing  or  circulating  the  sedi- 
tious libel,  stated  more  particularly  to  have 
been  sent  into  the  world  by  Baird,  then  you 
.  will  have  to  ifind,  supposing  you  are  of  opinion 
that  the  speech  and  publication  are  seditious, 
that  both  are  guilty  art  and  part  of  the  crime 
laid  in  the  indictment. 

.  In  consideriug  this  part  of  the  case  as' a 
question  of  evidence,  I  do  not  think  that  it  is 
necessary  for  me  to  go  very  deeply  into  the 
import  of  the  depositions  of  the  witnesses  \  for 
I  conceive,  that  wh^le  you  are  calleil  upon  to 
E 


513 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  afAUtanitr  M'Laren 


159 


discharge  a  most  important  duty,  in  declaring 
the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  panels  as  to  the 
crimes  libelled,  and  which  may  depend  on 
considerations  altogether  unconnected  with 
the  mere  fact  of  the  deliyeiy  of  the  speech  by 
the  one,  or  the  publication  of  the  libel  by  the 
other,  you  can  have  no  difficulty  in  forming 
an  opinion,  that  both,  and  each  of  them,  at 
least,  did  commit  the  acts  which  are  charged 
against  them  in  this  indictment.  You  can 
have  no  difficulty  in  being  of  opinion,  that  it 
is  proved  that  M'Laren  did  deliver  a  speech  at 
,the  meeting,  and  that  the  speech  did  contain 
the  expressious  which  are  cited  in  thi^  indicts 
roent :  Neither,  in  my  apprehension,  can  you 
doubt,  that  the  publication  in  question  was  the 
work  of  Baird ;  that  he  not  only  superintended 
the  printing,  but  assisted  in  preparing  the 
manuscript  for  the  press;  and  that  he  sold 
and  distributed  this  libel,  prepared  under  his 
own  eye,  with  the  utmost  diligence,  indefati- 
gable zeal,  and  persevering  activity.  In  like 
manner,  I,  at  least,  cannot  see  where  a  doubt 
can  ezisty  that  it  has  been  legally  proved  that 
M'Laren  was  art  and  part  in  the  publication, 
and  that  he  is  now  bound  to  answer  for  that 
publication  which  was  thus  sent  forth  into  the 
world,  be  its  qualities  what  they  may. 

But  though  that  is  the  impression  on  my 
mind,  and  although  I  have  no  doubt  that  the 
same  has  been  made  upon  the  minds  of  all  of 
you,  it  is,  notwithstanding,  my  duty  to  go 
over  th^t  evidence,  and  to  endeavour  to  point 
your  attention  to  its  different  parts,  as  appli- 
cable to  the  charge  against  the  panels  sepa- 
rately,— distinguishing,  as  I  have  said,  the 
bare  facts  of  the  case  from  the  view  which  I 
am  afterwards  to  take  of  the  nature  and  im- 
port of  the  expressions. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  you  will  attend  to 
the  evidence,  by  which  it  is  proved  that  the 
speech  in  question  was  actually  delivered  by 
the  prisoner  M'Laren. 

Upon  this  branch  of  the  case,  I  shall  call 
your  attention  to  the  statement  given  by  the 
prisoner  himself  in  |iis  declaration  emitted  be* 
tore  the  sheriff.  But,  before  doing  so,  it  may 
be  proper  for  me  to  state  to  you  distinctly,  that 
in  considering  this  part  of  the  evidence, 
you  must  remember,  that  nodiing  contained  in 
this  piec^  of  evidence  can  inculpate  the  oCher 
prisoner,  but  can  only  affect  the  party  by 
whom  it  was  emitted.  Neither,  I  will  fidrly 
tell  you,  is  it  to  be  taken  as  conclusive  evidence 
even  against  him.  It  is,  however,  a  very  strong 
circumstance  of  presumption  against  him, 
ioQAde,  as  it  has  been  adnutted  to  have  been  in 
this  case,  voluntarily,  while  the  prisoner  was 
sober  and  in  his  sound  senses,  deliberately 
andseriooaly.  I  shall  submit  to  you,  there* 
fore,  that  when  the  admissions  made  in  this 
declaration  axe  taken  with  the  parole  proof, 
no  doubt  can  be  left  upon  your  mind  of  the 
Mth  of  the  allegations  made  in  the  iodict- 
fnent)  in  point  of  fact^  regarding  the'  prisoner 
H^Laren. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  the  declaration  of 


M'Laren  states, ''that  there  was  apnbUc  meet« 
ing  held  at  the  Dean-park,  near  Kilmarnock, 
on  the  7th  of  December  last :  that  that  meeting 
was  for  the  purpose  of  petitioning  parliament 
for  a  reform  of  grievances.  Declares,  that 
previous  to  that  meeting  there  was  a  commit- 
tee of  certain  individuals  in  Kilmarnock  for 
the  purpose  of  bringing  about  the  said  meet- 
ing: tnat  the  declarant  attended  that  com- 
mittee, and  David  Ramsay  Andrews,  writer 
in  Kihmumock,  Thomas  &ird  and  Andrew 
Finnie,  merchants  there,  also  attended  that 
meeting :  and  the  declarant  has  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  they  were  members  of  it  as  well  as 
himself.  Declares,  that  the  declarant  first  ap- 
peared on  the  hustings,  and  opened  the 
meeting ;  and  being  shown  an  *  Accocnt  of 
the  proceedings  of  the  public  meeting  of  the 
burgesses  and  inhabitants  of  the  town  of 
Kilmarnock,'  and  wherein  is  engrossed  on 
part  of  the  fifth  page,  sixth,  and  part  of  the 
seventh  page,  what  the  declarant  said  at  open- 
ing the  above  meeting,  declares,  that  the  de« 
clarant  has  perased  said  speech,  and  it  is  near 
what  the  dedarant  mad  on  the  obooe  oocoiioii." 
He  next,  no  doubt,  makes  an  exception  as  to 
the  inaccuracy  of  that  speech,  ^  except  what  is 
said  about  toe  middle  of  the  seventh  page 
about  alleffiance,  which  the  declarant  thinks  he 
did  not  deliver  in  the  words  as  expressed  in  the 
publication.'' 

Tikis,  you  will  observe,  is  not  denying  the 
purport  of  the  passage  in  the  libel,  but  onlV 
the  words  in  which  £e  import  was  conveyed 
to  the  multitude,  and  we  shall  see  afterwards 
whether  the  prisoner  be  correct  in  this  part  of 
his  statement.  * 

He  next  declares, "  that  on  the  morning  of 
the  above  meeting,  the  dedarant  put  into  i&rtt- 
ing  what  he  naat  $ay  at  the  cpemn^  of  the  meet- 
ing: that  he  qfterwardt  gaoe  hs  part  of  the 
nuamtcripi  to  thote  who  were  apfomted  (y  the 
committee  to  mferintend  the  printing  of  the  pro^ 
ceesSngt,  that  the  tame  might  he  pMUhed  wmg 
with  the  rett.  Declares,  that  James  Johnstone^ 
muslin-agent  in  the  waterside  of  Kilmarnock 
was  called  to  the  chair,  and  on  that  occasion 
he  made  a  speech,  whidi  was  much  approved 
of  by  those  present.  Declares,  that  the  re$o» 
bitiontj  at  engroued  in  taid  piMcationf  are  the 
tame  that  were  reed  at  the  public  meeting,  end 
the  manmcrift  wot  read  to  the  committee  prevUme 
to  the  meetmgy  by  Tfumat  Baird,  merwmt  hit 
KilmamoAf  one  of  the  membert.  Declares,  that 
Hugh  Crawford,  printer  in  Kilmarnock,  waa 
employed  to  print  the  proceedings  of  the  meet- 
ing, which  were  afterwards  sold  at  fourpenee 
a-piece,  to  enable  the  committee  to  defray  Ate 
expenses.  Declares,  that  the  declarant  attend- _ 
ed  a  meeting  of  the  committee^  when  those' 
who  spoke  gave  ih  their  maauteripts  fSor  print* 
ing;  and  the  declarant  thinks  the  fdfesaid 
Thomas  Baird  vras  present  :^That  a  committee 
was  appointed  to  enperintend  the  printing,* 
and  the  said  Thomas  naird  and  Andrew  Fin- 
nie were  of  that  committee.  And  being  shewn 
the  printed  report  before  mentioned,  dedares 


ana  Thomas  Baird^fir  SedUicM. 


9^1 

^k^  kt  heard  mm  0f  the  mdhonfadfadt  wUh 
«iy  tkm^tlud  it  Aaron  caUmned;  and  tbe  said 

SublicatioD  is  docqueted  and  signed  by  the 
eclazant  aod  sheriff  as  relative  hereto.''  And, 
before  condiiding,  be"  declares^  that  the  words 
9D  the  sixth  page,  'the  fact  is,  we  are  ruled  by 
men  oaly  soUcitbus  for  their  own  agmndize- 
menty  and  they  care  no  farther  for  uie  great 
body  of  the  people  than  they  are  subservient 
to  their  accursea  purposes,  *  were  in  the  manu^ 
xripi  wroU  hy  the  dedanmt,  but  were  not  re- 
pe^ed  by  him  at  the  public  meeting  when  on 
the  busting  as  above." 

Now,  this  is  the  declaration  of  the  panel,  and 
it  must,  as  it  will,  be  supported  by  other  evi- 
dence, before,  as  I  have  told  you,  it  can  have 
full  authority  with  you  as  establishing  the  &ct 
j^ainst  the  prisoner.  You  will,  therefore,  ob- 
serve, that  in  this  declaration  be  admits,  gene- 
rally, that  all  the  parts  of  his  speech  as  given 
in  this  printed  paper,  are  accurate,  with  two 
exceptions. 

Ihe  first  exception  is,  that  there  is  something 
inaccurate  in  the  words  at  the  passage  regard* 
ing  allegiance ;  but  he  does  not  state,  or  allege, 
in  what  particular  these  expressions  are  inac- 
curate ;  neither  does  he  deny  that  they  convey 
the  import  of  what  he  had  delivered.  And,  no 
doubt,  there  is  an  inaccuracy  in  the  printed 
account  of  this  passage ;  because,  you  will  ob- 
serve, that  one  monosyllable,  of  very  great  im- 
port, is  cautiously  omitted,  which,  it  is  proved 
Dy  the  rest  of  the  evidence,  beyond  all  doubt, 
the  prisoner  actually  employed.  The  word 
*'  heu^  is  omitted  altogether ;  and  while  the 
prisoner  refrained  from  stating  what  words 
were  incorrectly  given,  I  shovld  be  entitled  to 
infer  that  it  consuted  in  this  omission ;  and,  if 
so,  it  is  of  no  importance  to  the  general  result. 
Indeed,  itk  enough  for  my  purpose  that  he 
admits  general^  the  accuracy  and  authenticity 
of  tbe  pubUoOion ;  because  I  have  the  means 
of  supporting  the  strong  evidence  afforded  by 
this  general  admission,  by  other  testimony 
which  supplies  whatever  is  wanting  in  his  own 
declaration. 

The  second  exception  which  he  makes  is, 
that  some  words,  which  are  mentioned  at  the 
end  of  ihe  declaration,  are  printed,  which  he 
did  not  deliver  at  the  hustings ;  but  you  wjU 
observe,  that  he  admits  that  those  words  were 
in  the  copy  of  his  speech  which  he  gave  to  be 
printed,  and  that  he  does  not  allege  that  he,  at 
any  time,  ever  objected  to  the  publisher,  or  to 
.  the  committee,  that  his  speech  as  delivered  vras 
not  accurately  given,  but,  on  the  contrary,  that 
he  acquiesced,  down  to  the  hour  of  his  emitting 
this  declaration,  in  its  being  the  true  and 
fiur  account  of  the  speech  he  had  miAe  on  that 
occasion. 

Let  us  now  attend  to  tbe  parole  proof,  by 
which  this  declaration  has  been  amply  con- 
firmed. 

Of  the  two  witnesses  who  were  first  examined, 
jotthaveFinnie.  who  swears  that  the  speech 
'  which  he  heard  McLaren  deliver  on  that  occa- 
sion contained,  these  words  t  ''We  wUl  lay/' 


A.  D.  1817. 


L&4 


or  **  let  us  lay,  our  petitions  at  the  fdot.  of  tbe 
throne,  where  sits  our  august  prince,  whose 
generous  nature  will  incline  his  ear  to  hear  the 
cries  of  his  people,  which  he  is  bound  to  do  by 
the  constitutioiud  laws  of  the  country;  and  we 
are  thereby  bound  to  give  him  our  idlegiance : 
But  if  be  should  be  so  infatuated  as  to  turn  a 
deaf  hear  to  the  eeneral  cries'*  or  ^  voice  of 
bis  people,  to  hell  with  allegiance.*'  That  is 
the  express  statement  given  by  a  person  who 
himself  attended  the  meeting  as  a  party,  who 
cannot  be  supposed  to  be  very  unfavourable  to 
the  prisoners, and  whose  testimony,  indeed,  was 
given  in  a  way  that  must  satisfy  your  minds  he 
did  not  intend  to  press  the  case  mor«  than  it 
would  bear  against  either  of  them. 

Next  we  have  tbe  witness  Merrie,  whT>  ex>- 
pressly  swears  (though  his  memory  is  not  dis- 
tinct as  to  the  whole  passage),  that  McLaren 
made  the  first  speech.  He  remembers  the 
words  **  to  hell  with"  or  "  for  such  alle- 
giance.'' He  says  M'Laren  ''  wished  the 
people  to  address  their .  augnst  sovereign,  and 
he  meant  their  allegiance  to  him.**  Then  he  re- 
members the  words,  '*  if  he  turned  a  deaf  ear 
to  the  voice  of  his  people  ;^'  and  after  that  came 
the  words  **  to  hell  with  allegiance." 

Besides  the  testimonies  I  have  now  referred 
you  to,  I  might,  if  it  were  necessary,  go  over 
the  evidence  of  many  more  of  tbe  witnesses ; 
but  this  must  be  superfluous.  You  will,  how*' 
ever,  keep  in  remembrance  the  evidence  of 
Samson,  who,  when  called  back  and  examined 
for  the  prisoners,  deposed,  that  be  attended  the 
meeting  of  the  committee  when  the  speeches 
were  given  in  for  publieation  'by  the  aifferent 
persons  by  whom  they  had  been  delivered  at 
the  public  meeting ;  that  M'Laren  was  present 
at  tnat  meeting  of  the  committee,  and  that 
when  be  produced  his  manuscript,  there  was  a 
correction  made  on  it  by  Batrd,  which  was 
read  to  the  meeting;  and  that  the  pencils 
marking  made  by  Baird  were  those  Very  words 
I  have  referred  to  which  are  given  in  this 
speech,  and  copied  into  the  indictment  which 
is  l^ng  before  vou.  He  states,  that  the  words 
which  were  added  by  Baird  with  the  pencil 
are,  ^  which  he  is  bound  to  do  by  the  laws  of 
tbe  country :  But  should  be  be  so  infatuated 
as  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  their  just  petition,  he 
has  forfeited  their  allegiance.  Yes,  my  fellow 
countrymen,  in  such  a  case  to  hell  with  our 
allegiance."  These  are  the  words  which  with 
a  pencil  Baird  added  to  M'Laren*s  speech  in 
his  own  presence.  Now  why,  I  will  ask,  ac- 
cording to  the  prisoner^  own  friend  Mr. 
Samson,  were  they  added }  Why,  because  tbe 
committee  wished  to  give  a  true  account  of 
what  took  place  at  tbe  meeting,  or,  to  use  his 
own  words,  **  because  tbe  manuscript  delivered 
in  was  not  complete  according  to  tbe  way  in 
which  the  speech  was  delivered.*'  The  com-' 
mittee  did  not  wish  to  garble  the  proceedings, 
but  to  give  i^minnte,  true  and  accurate  account 
of  what  happened ;  and  the  passage  therefore 
was  inserted.  All  this,  you  will  remember, 
took  place  in  McLaren's  presence ;  and  did  he 


55] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ofAkxander  M*Laren 


LS6- 


object  to  this  .addition  being  made?  No;  on 
the  contraiy,  he  agreed  that  the  passage  should 
remain  there,  because  it  was  an  accurate  account 
of  what  he  had  said*  Some  feeling  of  pro- 
priety, no  doubt^  prevented  the  committee  from 
putting  in  one  word  which  had  been  used  by 
M'Laren,  and  there  is  a  blank  accordingly  in 
the  printed  paper;  but  the  witnesses  who 
were  examined  fill  up  the  word,  and  tell  you 
what  is  wanting.  You  have  McLaren's  ad- 
mission, therefore,  in  his  declaration,  of  the 
general  accuracy  of  the  printed  account  of 
hia  speech;  you  have  the  parole  proof; 
you  have  this  statement  of  Samson's;  and 
you  have  M'Laren*s  virtual  admission  in  the 
committee,  that  these  were  the  expressions  he 
used.  It  does,  therefore,  appear  to  me  to  be 
unnecessary  to  go  further  in  examining  evidence 
on  this  part  of  the  subject.  I  think  it  is  clear 
that  these  words  were  used  by  M'Laren,  and 
that  of  this  it  is  impossible  you  should  doubt. 
I  may  now,  then,  put  the  prisoner  McLaren 
aside  altogether,  in  so  far  as  the  mere  fact  of 
the  speech  having  been  delivered  by  him  is 
concerned ;  and  it  is  exclusively  to  that  I  am 
speaking  at  present; 

As  to  the  prisoner  Baird,  we  must  also  look 
to  the  terms  of  his  declaration.    He  declares, 
*'  ihat  the  7th  of  December  last  was  fixed  for  a 
general  meeting  at  the  Dean-park :    That  ^e 
declarant  attended  that  meeting,  and  Alexander ' 
M'Laren,  weaver  in  Kilmarnock,  mounted  the 
l!iustlnffs,aQd  opened  the  meeting  vrith  a  speech : 
That  James  Johnstone,  muslin-agent  in  Kil- 
marnock, was  called  to  the  chair,  and  read  a 
speech  to  the  meeting  from  a  memorandum- 
book.    And  being  shewn  a  manuscript  con- 
sisting of  nineteen  pa^es,  declares.  That  he  is 
pretty  certain  that  it  is  the  same  that  he  read 
to  the  meeting,  and  which  the  declarant  saw 
some  days  afterwards  in  Walter  Andrew's  ofiibe, 
and  which  is  docqueted  and  signed  as  relative 
hereto.    Declares,    'fhat  the  proceedingi  were 
ordered  to  be  printedy  and  the  dedarant  wot  ap- 
pointed by  the  committee^  along  with  $everal  othen, 
to  gji^permtend  the  printing :     That  the  dedaramt 
atmted  in  correcting  the  grammatical  erron  in  the 
mdnuscriptf  along  with  the  said  Walter  Andrew, 
and  the  declarant  assisted  a  little  at  the  printing 
office  in  correcting  the  proof-copy :    And  being 
shewn  a  half-sheet  of  paper,  titled  on  the  back, 
**  No.  5,  Mr.  Burt's  letter,"  declares,  That  said 
words  are  of  the  decIarant^s  hand-writing,  and 
the  said  half-sheet  of  paper  was  given  in  by 
the  declarant  to  the  printer,  along  with  the  rest 
<>f  the  manuscripts,  and  said  half-sheet  of  paper 
is  docqueted  and  signed  by  the  declarant  and 
sherifl*-substitute  as  relative  hereto.    Declares, 
That  the  proceedings  of  said  meeting  were 
printed  by  Hugh  Crawford,  and  a  great  number 
of  copies  were  tent  to  the  dedarant't  thop,andke 
retaikd  them  at  4d.  a  piepeJ* 

The  result  of  this  declaration  seems  to  be, 
that  the  prisoner  admits  that  he  was  one  of  ^he 
compaittee  appointed  to.  superintend  the  pub- 
lioation  complaioedof— iha^he  assisted  in  cor- 
recting die  manuscript  to'Sft  it  for  going  to  the 


printing-house — that  he  did  superintend  the. 
printing  of  it,  assisting  even  in  correcting  the 
press,  and  that  a  great  number  of  copies 
were  sent  to  his  shop  which  he  retailed  and 
distributed. 

Accordingly  this  admission,  vrhich,  I  hare 
said,  is,  in  point  of  law,  a  strong  circumstance 
of  evidence  against  the  prisoner,  is  amply  con- 
firmed by  the  depositions  of  the  witnesses,  by 
several  of  whom  it  has  been  proved  that  he  at- 
tended the  meeting  upon  the  7th  of  December, 
and  that  he  heard  tne  speeches' contained  in 
this  publication  delivered  or  read  by  the  per- 
sons to  whom  they  are  attributed.  By  others 
it  has  been  proved,  that  he  was  one  of  the  com- 
mittee appointed  to  superintend  the  pubtica^ 
tion ;  and  by  one  of  that  committee  it  is  estab- 
lished, that  m  the  matter  of  publication  he  took 
a  most  active  concern,  perusing  at  least  the 
manuscript  of  some  of  the  speeches  as  they 
wete  given  in  by  the  authors  or  reputed 
authors;  and  tliat  such  was  his  vigilance, 
in  providing  that  none  of  the  precious 
matter  which  had  come  before  the  public 
meeting  should  be  lost,  that  the  passage 
which  is  chiefly  complained  of  in  the  first 
charge  against  M'Laren,  having  been  omitted 
in  the  manuscript,  he  himself  took  his  pencil, 
and,  for  the  edincation  of  the  public,  to  whom 
the  pamphlet  viras  addressed,  actually  wrote  it 
down  on  the  press  copy. 

In  like  manner,  you  have  it  proved  by 
Murray,  Mr.  Crawford's  journeyman,  that 
Baird  attended  at  the  office  during  the  time 
the  publication  was  printing — ^that  he  examined 
the  first  proof,  and  suggested  at  least  one,  it 
not  more  corrections. 

Again,  as  to  the  fact  of  pubUcatioii,  it  is 
proved  by  the  prisoner's  shop-boy,  aikd  by  the 
vritness  who  bought  a  copy  at  his  shop,  as  also 
by  one  of  the  members  of  the  committee 
appointed  to  superintend t  he  publication,  and 
who  delivered  great  numbers  of  the  pamphlet 
for  the  purpose  of  being  sold  and  distributed, 
that  Baird  was  the  principal  hand  by  whom 
this  publication,  be  its  ments  or  demerits  whait 
they  may,  was  sent  out  upon  the  world. 

When  you  consider  this  body  of  evidence, 
therefore,  I  cannot  entertain  a  doubt  that  you 
must  be  clear  that  the  fact  of  the  publication 
by  Baird  is  incontrovertibly  established. 

Upon  this  part  of  the  question,  therefore, 
I  have  only  furlhet  to  remark,  that  there  can 
be  as  little  ground  for  doubting,  that  the  pri- 
soner M'Ls^n,  besides  being  bound  to  answer 
for  delivering  the  speech,  whidi  in  this  indict- 
ment is  charged  with  having  been  seditious, 
must  also  answer  for  being  an  accessary  to 
printing  and  publishing  the  pamphlet  upon  the 
table.  The  facts  of  his  having  given  in  the 
manuscript  copy  of  his  own  roeech  fi)r  the 
purpose  of  being  published,  ana  that  he  was  m 
nember  of  the  committee  of  publicatioQ — facts 
which  are  proved  beyond  all  contradiction  by 
the  witnesses  io  whom  I  have  already  refetree, 
as  virfll  as  by  his  own  admission — can  leave  no 
manner  of  doubt  upon  this  subject. 


5T3 


and  Thmat  Bmrifor  Sediiion. 


JLJX  mi. 


[Aft 


I  Kp^frAaoAf  iher^any  that  yon  mitt  now  t 
concur  with  me  in  bolding  it  to  be  ettablished  [ 
by  the  proof,  1sl»  That  McLaren  detirered  at  I 
the  jmbUc  meetiog  that  speech,  of  which  parts 
are  quoted  in  the  indictment ;  2ndly,  That  the 
puMication  porportinf  to  be  **  Account  of  the 
proeeedings  of  the  public  meeting  of  the  Bur- 
gesses and  Inhabitants  of  the  Town  of  KiU 
maiuock,  held  on  the  7tb  of  December  1816" 
&e.  was  printed  and  published  by  the  prisoner 
l^iidy  who  was  active  in  its  sale  and  aistribn- 
tion ;  and,  drdly.  That  the  prisoner  McLaren 
was  also  an  accessary  to  the  fact  of  pnblica* 
tion. 

Upon  this  part  df  tfie  case,  therefore,  which 
mnst  in  fact  form  the  foundation  of  the  opinion 
which  yon  aie  to  make  up,  and  of  the  verdict 
yon  are  to  retnm,  there  neithercan  be  any  groond 
of  difference  between  my  friends  on  the  oppo* 
site  side  of  the  bar  and  myself,  nor,  I  am  con- 
fident, can  there  be  a  vestige  of  doubt  in  your 
minds. 

But  that  part  of  the  case  which  requires 
yonr  utmost  deliberation  still  remains  to  be 
considered.  In  the  commencement  of  the  trial 
you  heard  an  admission  upon  my  part,  that  it 
would  be  competent  for  the  prisoners,  not  only 
to  dispute  the  truth  of  the  facts  charged  in  the 
indibonent,  but  to  plead  to  you,  that  suppos- 
ing those  &cts  were  brought  home  to  both  of 
them,  the  speech  and  publication  in  question 
did  not  amount  to  the  crime  of  sedition.  To 
that  admissiott  I  still  most  heartily  adhere.  It 
has  always  been  in  this  country,  and  I  trust 
always  will  be,  the  province  of  the  jury,  in 
every  question  of  this  description,  to  6nd  in 
Aeir  verdict,  whetherthere  was  a  criminal  iiiten<» 
tioo  entertained  by  the  prisoneis-^whetber  a 
crime  has  been  committed  or  not—and  whether 
that  crime  amounta  to  sedition. 

In  order  to  enable  you,  therefore,  to  make 
up  your  opinions  upon  this  subject,  had  it  not 
been  for  tne  deliberate  judgments  of  the  Court 
which  you  had  an  opportunity  of  hearing  at  the  | 
commencement  of  the  trial,  it  might  have  been 
expected  of  me  to  enter  into  some  details  of 
the  history  and  of  the  nature  of  this  offence, — 
one  of  the  most  various  and  comprehensive, 
and  at  the  same  time  one  of  the  most  danserous 
and  flagitious  known  to  the  law  of  Scotland.  But 
as  you  heard  the  unanimous  opinion  of  their 
lordships,  that  the  allegations  contained  in  this 
indictment,  if  established  against  the  prisoners, 
would  amount  to  the  crime  of  sedition,  I  shall 
confine  myself  to  such  a  statement  of  ihe  sub- 
ject as  is  barely  requisite  for  enabling  you  to 
Mlow  the  oondusions  which  I  find  it  mj  duty 
to  draw  from  the  particttlar  passages  m  this 
publication  urtuch  1  have  been  called  upon  to 
bring  under  your  eoneidemtion. 

Seditiim,  Gentlemen^  is  a  crime  by  the  com- 
monkw  of  Scotland;  and  it  has  been  laid 
down  by  our  writers,  and  by  Ihe  decisions  ef 
this  court,  that  it  readies- to  practices  ;of  every 
description,  whether  by  deed>  word,  orwiitinR, 
which^tfecaSeulatedand'iBMnded  to  distuA) 
the  Iranquilli^  trf  the  state,  by  exciting  disaf* 


footionlD  the  ttindfrof  the  people  against  the 
established  government  of  the  country,  to  pro- 
duce resistance  to  its  authority,  or  to  lead  to 
its  ultimate  subversioo.  - 

Allow  me,  however,  to  guard  myself  against 
misconstruction  as  to  the  use  of  the  terms, 
**  the  established  Government,''  which  I  have 
now  em]d(^ed.  By  those  terms,  you  will  not 
by  any  means  uhderstand  that  I  refjer  to  that 
which,  in  ordinary  parianoe,  is  commonly  so 
termed,  I  mean  his  majnty's  nunisten.  You 
need  not  be  told  that  it  is  competent  and  law- 
fed  for  the  subjects  of  this  realm  to  canyass  all 
the  measures  of  his  majesty's  ministers,— ^o 
state  that  they  are  contrary  to  law,  and  to  the 
interests  of  the  country ; — ^that  their  prooaed* 
ings  should  be  interrupted,  and  the  autliors  of 
them  dismissed  from  office :  in  talking,  thsire* 
fore,  of  raising  disaffection  to  his  majesty's 
government,  you  will  understand  that  I  do  not 
mean  exciting  disaffection  to  his  majesty's  m^ 
nisters.  Far  be  it  from  me  to  contend  th«t 
this  is  against  law,  or  that  courts  of  law  ought 
to  interfere  to  punish  practices,  words,,  or  writ*^ 
ings,  calculated  to  produce  that  effect.  Bot 
by  the  established  government,  I  mean  the 
constittttion  of  King,  Lords,  and  Commons,  as 
established  at  the  period  of  the  glorious  Revo* 
kition  of  1688 ;  and,  in  this  sense  of  the  term^ 
I  state  to  you,  that  any  thing  which  tmds  to 
produce  public  trouble  or  commotion,*— any 
thing  which  moves  his  msjesty's  snlgects  to  the 
dislike,  subversion,  or  distuibaace  of  hu  ma» 
jesty's  government,  amounts  to  the  crime  of 
sedition.  Any  speech  or  writing  that  is  calott* 
hued,  and  intended  to  vilify  and  traduce  Um 
sovereign  in  his  capacity  of  Head  of  the  State^ 
or  aa  a  branch  of  the  legislature— any  speech  or 
writing  calculated  and  intended  to  vilify  and 
traduce  the  House  of  Peers^^ny  speech  o 
writing  calculated  and  intended  to  vilify  th( 
House  of  Commons,  stating,  for  instanee,  that 
it  is  not  the  House  of  Commons,  that  it  is 
the  mere  nominal  and  pretended  repre^ 
sentative  of  the  people,  and  does  not  repre« 
sent  them, — ^tbat  it  has  become  corrupt;-** 
writings  or  speeches  inculcating  all,  or  any  of 
those  things,  fall  under  the  crime  of  sedinon. 
In  like  manner,  either  a  speech  Or  a  writing 
exhorting  the  people  to  throw  off  their  allegi- 
ance, under  any  particular  contingency  which 
may  arise  from  any  one  branch  of  the  Isgislap- 
ture  either  doing  an  act,  or  refusing  to  do  an 
act,  which  may,  or  may  not  be  within  its  par- 
ticular competency,  will  amount  to  the  crane 
of  sedition. 

Allow  me,  also,  to  observe  to  you,  that  in 
all  cases  of  this  description,  the  time  when  the 
particular  act  complained  of  is  committed,  the 
state  of  public  ofttiiion,  and  the  political  rein* 
tsons  of  the  country,  internal  or  external,  wiU 
often  be  essential  to  the  constitutidn  of  the  of* 
fence.  For  instance,  to  use  am  illustration  that 
I  believe  was  given  by  an  eminent  person,  who, 
in  the  year  1795,  held  t])e  situation  which  my 

I' -honourable  friend  near  me  now  holds.    Had, 
in  the  year  1745,  any  niunberof  iadiriduaa^ 


89] 


57  GEORGE  UI. 


qfAlumiitr.  htJLttttn 


i90 


lKvw^T«r  fewy  with  whke  OM^ato  id  tMr 
faats^  tnd  moflkets  Id  their  huids,  repiired  to 
ili6  Castle-hill,  ahovtiDg  out  the  name  of  the 
Pretender^  they  would  have  heen  guilty  da 
trime  probably  not  fhort  of  the  highest  that 
could  be  committed  against  the  state;  but  were 
the  same  act  to  be  done  new,  they  could  be 
legaided  in  no  other  light  tluun  as  madmen. 
Various  other  illustrations  of  a  similar  nature 
might  be  sUted,  but  I  deem  it  sufficient  for  me 
Co  submit  to  you  generallyy  as  being  dear  law, 
that  if  at  any  time  publications  or  speeches 
are  oompkined  of  as  seditious,  it  will  always 
be  of  im]>ortance  to  consider  the  state  of  ^e 
public  mind  at  the  period  the  act  alleged  tp 
constitute  the  prime  has  been  committed,  in 
Older  duly  to  appreciate  their  nature  and  im* 
port  With  this  view,  and  before  concluding, 
It  will  be  my  province  to  submit  to  you,  in  a 
sinsle  sentence,  that  the  state  of  the  country 
«t  me  time  when  this  publication  issued  from 
the  press,  and  when  the  spcm^  was  dehrerad 
by  McLaren  at  the  public  meeting,  must  enter 
deeply  into  your  consideration  in  forming  your 
veraict  upon  this  indictment. 

Upon  this  subject  I  have  only  farther  to  state 
that  the  crime  of  sedition  is  one  ¥rhidi  tUs 
court,  and  the  law  of  this  country,  has  viewed 
as  one  of  the  hi|^est  and  most  flaoitious  de« 
scription.  Its  object  is  to  introduce  dissention, 
trouVlesy  and  bloodshed  into  the  kingdom, — 
to  subvert  the  laws,  and  to  dissolve  the  bonds 
of  society.  It  is  the  duty  of  government,  therfr- 
fore,  to  resist  and  extinguish  it  in  ihe  veiy  outset ; 
and  if,  in  the  present  instance,  I  have  any 
thing  to  regret,  it  is  that  this,  and  perhaps 
other  cases  of  a  similar  description,  have  not 
been  brought  sooner  before  a  Jury  of  the 
conntry. 

We  come  now  to  consider  whether  the  terms 
of  the  speech,  ts  deliversd  at  the  meeting  by 
McLaren,  or  the  terms  of  that  speech  and  of 
the  other  speeches  in  the  publication  after- 
wards given  to  the  worid  by  the  prisoneis, 
amount  to  the  dme  of  sedition,  according  to  the 
description  of  that  offence  which  I  have  now 
had  the  honour  of  giving  you. 

And  first,  as  to  the  speech.  In  it  you  will 
recollect,  that  McLaren  stated,  **  That  our  su^ 
feringsare  insupportable  is  demonstrated  to 
the  world;  and  tnat  they  are  neither  tempo- 
rary, nor  occasioned  by  a  transition  from ''  war 
to  peace,"  is  palpable  to  all,  though  all  have 
not  the  courage  to  avow  it.  The  &ct  is,  we 
are  mled  by  men  only  solicitous  for  their  own 
aggrandizement,  and  they  care  no  furtiber  for 
the  great  body  of  the  people  than  Uiey  are  sub- 
servient to  tlieir  aceuised  purposes.^ 
•  In  this  passage  the  term  rulers,  you  will  ob- 
serve, is  employed;  and  this,  it  may  be  said, 
applies  to  his  majesty's  ministers,  and  notto  the 
^vemment  in  the  more  comprehensive  mean- 
ing of  the  phrase;  but  it  does  no  such. thing. 
There  is  no  limitation,  you  will  remark,  intro- 
duced by  the  speaker.  Even  taking  the  term 
generally,  and  in  its  extensive  sense,  undoqht- 
,cdly  it  oompieheads  ^e  wliole  order  of  our 


Omremon^  -^King»  Loidi  and  Covunons :  but 
in  an  afiier  part  of  the  speech^  it  is  explained 
that  this  last  is  actuallj^  the  sense  in  which  it 
was  employed,  llie  statement  therefore  is, 
that  the  King,  Lords  and  Commons,  are  cor- 
rupt;—that  they  are  solicitous  only  for  their 
oWn  aggrandizement ;  that  they  care  no  further 
for  the  body  of  the  people,  than  as  th^  are 
subservient  to  their  accursed  purposes.  Now, 
I  ttk,  is  not  this  statement  calcniated  to  bring 
the  government  into  contempt,  and  to  excite 
disaffection  to  the  established  order  of  things  ? 
Does  it  not  tell  the  people,  that  they  have  no 
interest  whatever  in  the  stability  of  the  state; 
and  is  it  not  odculated  immediately  to  lead  to 
disturbance  and  commotion?  It  is  for  you, 
gentlemen,  to  answer  the  question,  and  it  seems 
to  me  impossible  to  doubt  that  that  answer 
must  be  in  the  affiimative. 

But  In  this  passage  allusion  ia  made  to  the 
distresses  of  the  people,  and  these  are  made 
the  instrument  for  giving  greater  effect  to  this 
seditious  libel  upon  the  rulers  of  the  country. 
This^you  cannot  doubt,  enhances  the  crime  of 
the  prisoner,  by  having  employed  that  under 
which  his  hearers  were  suffering,  and  which  ho 
must  have  known  their  rulers  could  not  re- 
move, as  an  engine  for  promoting  the  disaffec* 
tion  he  was  endeavouring  to  excite.  God 
knows,  that  I  by  no  means  wish  to  under-rsite 
the  distresses  .which  the  persons  attending  that 
meeting  were  labouring  under  in  common  with 
their  brethem  in  different  parts  of  the  coun* 
trv*  No  one  who  was  at  that  meeting,  no  one 
who  hears  me  now,  can  be  more  sensible  of 
the  great  distress  which  the  lower  ranks  in  this 
country  have  suffered,  and  none  can  more 
deeply  deplore  it  than  I  do.  While,  however, 
I  folly  appreciate  the  extent  of  those  distresses, 
and  applaud  the  patience  with  which  they 
have  been  endured,  I  can  only  urge  the  use 
which  is  made  of  them  in  the  passage  I  hare 
read,  as  tending  to  prove  the  wicked  and  mar 
lidous  intention  of  the  prisoners,  who  could 
have  had  no  other  object  in  referring  to  them 
tnan  to  excite  disaffection  and  sedition* 

The  prisoner's  speech  then  goes  on  to  states 
''If  you  are  convinced  of  this,  my  country- 
men, I  would  therefore  put  the  question,  Are 
you  degenerate  enough  to  bear  it  t  Shall  we, 
whose  forefiithers  set  limits  to  the  all-grasping 
power  of  Rome ;  Shall  we,  whose  forefathers, 
at  the  never-to-be-forgotten  field  of  BannodL- 
bum,  toki  the  mighty  Edward,  at  the  head  of 
the  most  mighty  army  ever  trode  on  Britain's 
soil,  'Hitherto  shalt  thou  come  and  no  fur^ 
ther;' — Shall  we,  I  say,  whose  forefathers  de« 
fied  the  efforts  of  foreign  tyranny  to  enslave 
our  beloved  countryy  meanly  permit,  in  our 
day,  without  a  murmur,  a  base  Oligarchy  to 
feed  their  filthy  vermin  on  our  vitals,  and  rule 
us  u  they  will  7" 

«  Upon  this  passage  I  shall  merely  say,  that 
you  have  heard  the  only  comment  which  I 
think  it  can  foiriy  admit  o^  put  upon  4t  in  the 
judgment  of  one  of  their  lordships*  in  the 

- ,      -■    - '  -^  ^  .  — « -. 

*  loid  Reston;  ^ds^  mUj  p.  16.  • 


6U 


lui  flkmat  Bamtjor  SeikioM. 


A.  D.  ItlT. 


[ds 


eaily  port  of  this  tml,  *  Ton  most  be  satisfied 
thai  the  object  of  the  orator  here  it,  to  reoom- 
mend  resistance,  and  to  encourage  it  by  calling 
to  the  leootiection  of  his  hearers  the  popular 
allusion  to  the  batde  of  Bannockbum:  Ac- 
cordingly he  goes  on  to  state  that  which  must 
leaTc  Jl  donbt  of  his  intention  in  this  passage 
out  of  the  question,  ^  Let  us  laj  our  petitions 
at  the  foot  of  the  Throne,  where  sits  our  ao- 

r  Prince,  whose  gracious  nature  will  incline 
ear  to  listen  to  the  cries  of  his  people, 
which  he  is  bound  to  do  by  the  laws  of  the 
country.  But  should  he  be  so  infiituated  as 
to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  their  just  petition,  he  has 
forfeited  their  allegiance.  Yes,  my  fellow 
townsmen,  in  such  a  case,  to  hell  with  our 
allegiance.^ 

In  Older  felly  to  understand  the  seditious 
import  of  this  passage,  it  must  be  taken  in 
connection  with  that  which  I  previously  com- 
mented on,  and  a  passage  in  the  resolutions 
of  die  meeting,  which  I  am  fairly  entitled, 
under  all  the  circumstanees  of  the  case,  to 
tabs  as  part  of  McLaren's  speech.    In  page 
36  of  &e  publication,  it  is  stated,   ^Bemg 
therefore  impressed  with  the  truth  of  these  re- 
solutions, the  meeting  resolve  to  present  peti- 
tions to  his  Royal  Hif^ness  the  Pnnoe  Regent, 
and  to  both  Houses  of  Parliament,  requesting 
his  Royal  Highness,  in  particular,  to  assemble 
Pariiament  without  delay ;  to  call  upon  it  im* 
mediatdy  to  adopt  such  measures  as  mav  tend 
to  restore  to  the  people  their  undoubted  right 
in  the  representation ;  to  order,  in  the  name 
of  the  people,  an  immediate  reduction  of  the 
taxes,  and  the  standing  amy,^*  the  abolition  of 
all  unmerited  pensions,  sinecures,  grants,  and 
other  emoluments,  as  the  surest  way  of  esta- 
bfishing,  on  a  firm  and  lasting  basis,  the  rights 
of  the  Crown,  and  the  privileges  of  the  peo- 
ple :    And  that,  in  all  time  coming,  no  person 
who  has  an  office  or  place  of  profit  unaer  the, 
ISiogf  ^  receives  a  pension  from  the  Crown, 
shall  be  capiMe  of  serving  as  a  member  of 
die  House  ca  C<»nmoos." 

Now,  the  meaning  of  all  this  taken  toother 
is,  that  unless  the  Prince  Re^^t  shall  carder 
the  Pariiament  to  reduce  the  taxes  |nd  the 
standing  army,  and  to  do  all  the  tnings 
which  are  there  enumerated,  he  has  forfeited 
our  allegiance,  and  that  the  allegiance  of  the 
meeting  is  to  be  thrown  oif,  and  to  be  sent  to 
hdl.  fiat,  you  are  not  to  be  told  that  the 
Prince  Regent  hasno  such  power  that — 

Mr.  Clerk, — ^That  is  not  the  meaning  of  the 


r.— If  my  interpretation  of  the 
pamage  is  wrong,  my  leamed'ftiends  will  after- 
wards hatve  the  meant  of  correcting  me.  It 
would  be  better  if  at  piesent  th^  would  re- 
frain from  intemipting  me.  In  n^  view,  it 
deariy  impofts  the  meaning  wfaidi  I  have  du% 
upon  it.  The  Prince  Regent  is  to  amemVle 
me  FMament,  and  to  call  upon  it  to  leitora 
fo  the  people  tifcir  n^gbt  of  repnseatation; 
b«t^  in  the  seeond  place,  he  is  to  order  aU  the 


otfier  things  to  be  done  by  the  IMisnen^ 
which  it  is  not  within  his  oooapetence  to  do,  , 
or  he  is  to  order  them  to  be  done  of  his  owik 
authority;  and  if  he  does  not  do  so^  then  what 
is  the  penalty  ?  No  less  than  the  forfeiture  of 
our  allegiance,  and,  as  he  says,  ^in  that  ease, 
to  hell  with  our  allegiance.'^  Here,  then,  Oea- 
tlemen,  the  miseraUe  and  distrMsed  people,  - 
goaded  by  their  privations  and  afilictiona,  who 
were  surrounding  the  prisoner,  were  in  this 
speech  excited  to  make  demmids  upon  the 
Sovereiffu  and  the  Legislature,  iHiich,  if  they 
were  renised,no  less  a  result  was  to  fellow  than 
the  forfeiture  and  throwing  oif  of  their  atte* 
giance. 

Now  all  this  I  state  to  yon  to  infer  the  crime 
of  sedition.    It  was  sedition  to  alienate  the 
afihctions  of  the  people  from  the  Government, 
in  the  manner  which  was /done  in  the  first  part 
of  tho  speedi.    It  was  sedition  to  tell  the 
meeting,  in  the  second  part  of  it,  that  if  the 
diffsrent  reforms  there  called  for  were  net 
granted,  and  if  the  evils  complained  of  were 
not  removed,  their  allegiance  was  forfeited,  and 
to  exhort  them  in  sodk  a  case  to  throw  it  of. 
The  next  point  for  consideration  is  the  pub- 
lieation  itself.    But  here  I  am  saved  repeating 
the  commentary  upon  one  part  of  that  pro- 
duction, the  speech  of  Mlaren;  fer  it  must 
be  manifest  to  you,  that  if  the  speech  when 
delivered  was  seditions,  it  cannot  be  less  so 
when  reduced  into  the  form  of  a  publication ; 
and  every  tfaing^,  with  one  exception,  which 
wu  ddivered  vha  voce,  is  to  be  found  in  the 
printed  report.    There  is  a  blank  before  alle- 
gianeey-~the  word  ^keW  is  left  out.     It  is 
your  province^  however,  to  fill  up  that  blank. 
And,  after  the  evidence  laid  before  you  this  ' 
dajr,  you  oan  have  no  difficultv  upon  this 
point.    You  heard  that  one  of  the  prisoneii, 
in  the  presence  of  the  other,  wrote  out  the 
vrhole-  of  the  passage  upon  the  manuscript 
when  preparing  Uf  or  the  press.    The  propria^ 
of  inserting  the  passage  wu  afterwaids  die- 
cussed,  and  doubts  were  entertained  upon  the 
subject  by  the  committee.    With  the  feet  of 
that  passaae  beingaotnally  in  the  hand-writtns 
of  Baird,  looking  him  in  the  fruie,  my  learned 
finend  (Mr.  Grant),  rather  strangely  in  my  op»- 
nion,  pressed  upon  his  witnesses  to  prove  that 
Baird,  in  particular,  was  awave  of  the  indeoeney 
of  its  character;  for,  under  such  circumslaiices» 
the  fact  of  pubUottion  only  made   his  o^ 
fence  the*  greater.    Aecoffdiai^y,  it  is  proved  , 
to  you^^iat  the  prisoner,  whether  convinced  of 
its  indeoency-or  not,  still  he^  the  publisher  and 
coneotorof  the  press,  sends  it  to  be  printed; 
and  out  it  eomes  with  the  word  only  left  blanky 
affinding,!  should  think.  Id  your  oonvictioB, 
the  fellMt  and  most  complete  evidence  of  his 
guilt 

But  let  us  proceed  Id  ooosider  the  other 
parts  ti  the  publication.  In  pa^e  3,  of  the 
mdietmant  there  is  this  passage :  **  But  let  us 
cone  nearer  home:  look  at  the  year  t79l» 
when  the  debt  amounted  to  two  hundred  and 
fkifm  nHlionB,  and  the  annual  taxation  to 


631 


£7  GEOBQE  m. 


Trid  i^jU$iMmdvr  M'Laam 


m 


abcml  MgbtMii  mUiaiii;  mhea  liberty  began 
to  rear  her  dioopine  head  in  the  eountry ;  when 
asaooiatiooa  were  rormed  from  one  end  of  the 
kingdom  to  another,  oompoeed  of  men  eminent 
for  their  talents  and  virtne,  to  assert  their 
rights;  when  a  neighbouring  nation  had  jost 
tltfown  off  a  yoke  which  was  become  intoler- 
able,— ^What  did  the  wise  ralers  of  this  coun- 
try do?    Why  they  declared  war,  not  only 


been  nnblusbini^jraElftimpied  to  be  justified  Jliy 
reason  ef  its  avowed  fr^ueacy  and  notoriety. 
The  meeting,  therefore,  haTB  no  hesitation 
in  asserting,  the  debt  can  never  be  said  to  be 
national,  nor  the  present  taxation  just^  seeing 
the  fonner  has  been  contracted  by  men  who 
do  not  represent  the  country,  and  the  latter 
raised  'without  consent  of  the  tait-payer ;  and 
it  is  contrary  to  the  laws  and  constitution  cf  ' 


against  tlie  French  nation,  but  also  against  the-  t^iis  and  every  free  country,  that  no  man  can 


-  friends  of  liber^  at  home." 

No¥K,  I  think  it  is  impossible  for  you  to  read 
this  passage,  without  Ming  of  opimon  that  its 
object  was,  to  impress  on  the  minds  of  the  pub- 
lic an  admiration  of  the  proceedings  ox  the 
French  nation  (polluted  lis  it  was  at  the  time 

•  by  treason,  by  blood,  and  by  crime  of  evety 
description  which  it  ever  entered  into  the  mind 
of  man  to  conceive),— and  of  those  who  were 

•termed  "the  Friends  of  Liberty  at  home"  in 
the  year  1793,  its  imitators  and  admirers  >—  to 
hold  out  that  the  sssooiations  of  that  peripd 
were  formed  for  the  purposes  of  promoting 
liberty,,  but  which  all  of  you  know  it  was  de- 
cided by  Jurymen  sitting  in  that  box  where 
you  «r9  now  placed,-^orymen  to  whose  in- 
telligence and  vigour  the  gratitude  of  this 
coniltry  must  be  for  ever  due, — that  they  were 
formed  for  the  purpose  o£  exciting  disaffection 
to  the  government,  of  introducing  turbulence 
and  -commotion,  and  of  overturning  the  Con- 
ttitntion.  In  short,  the  object  of  the  publica- 
tion was  to  call  upon  the  people  to  imitate 
what  was  so  worthy  of  aomiration;  and  it 
would  be  wasting'  time  to  persuade  you,  that 
if  this  was  the  ol^ect,  one  of  a  more  seditious 
description,  when  tsken  in  conjunction  with 
•the  other  passages  in-  the  publicaticm  which  I 
•have:  already  emkI,  or  am  now  to  read,  cannot 
be  conceived. 

The  publication  then  proceeds  in  direct 
terms  to  state,  ^'tfaatthe  House  of  Commons 
is  not  realty  what  it  is  called,— it  it  noi  a 
Boute  ofCammoiu."  And  hem  it  is  necessary 
for  me  to*  read  several  passages  to  you,  in  order 
to  prove  the  seditious  nature  of  the  publica- 
tion, and  which  I  shall  do  wiliiout  commen- 
tary, beekuse  I  am  persuaded,  that  nothing 
ihat  lean  add. could «arry  thejconviction  more 
strongly  to*  your  minds  of  its  pernicious  sud 
^minei  import  tiian  the  very  sentences  them- 
'  selves  which  i  am  to  bring  under  your  oonri- 
deradon. 

In  page  38  of  the  publication  you  will  find 
it  stated,  **  that  the  debt,  now  amounting  to 
nearly  1000  millions,  has  been  contracted  in 
the  prosecution  of  unjust  and  unnecessary 

•  wars,  by  a  corrupt  administration,  uniformly 
'Supported  by  a  llonse  of  Commons^  whicd 

-  cannot  be  said,  with  any  justice,  to  be  a  fiur 
and  equal  representation  of  the  country,  but 
which  for  the  most  part  is  composed  of  men 


means,  have  contrived  to  return  a  majoci^  of 
members  of  that  House  ;<-«  &ct  which  has  not 
only*beeu:a(teitted  on  aU  hands,  but  whtchhas 


be  taxed  but  with  his  own  consent,  or  ^ith 
the  consent  of  his  agent  or  representative.*' 

Again  at  page  35,  there  is  the  following 
passage :  **  We  have  these  twenty-five  years 
been  oondenmed  to  incessant  and  unparalleled 
slavery  by  a  usurped  oligarchy,  who  pretend 
to  be  our  Guardiant  and  RepresaUatwa,  while, 
in  fact,  they  are  nothing  but  our  ir^lejnUe,and 
determined  enemiet.    But  happy,  happy  am  I 
to  thinks  that  you  have  met  this  day  to  declare, 
'  that  you  will  suffer  yourselves  no  longer  to 
'  be  imposed  upc^."   And  a  little  lower  down 
it  is  stated  in  express  terms :    ''  At  present 
we  have    no  rmeientativet ;    they  are   onty 
fiomtno/,  not  reoi;  active  only  in  prosecuting 
their  own  designs,  and  at  the  same  time  telling 
us  that  they  are  agreeable  to  our  wishes." 
And  again,  at  page  38,  ''  A  set  of  pensioned 
seat-buyers  in  the  House  of  Commons  have 
deprived  you  of  all  your  rights  and  privileges. 
They  hold  both  emoluments  and  seats  in  that 
house,  contrary  to  the  express  precept  of  our 
glorious   constitution,  which  says,  *  that  no 
person  holding  any  emolument  can  have  a  seat 
m  the  House  of  Commons.'    Our  constitution 
also  allows  parliaments  only  to  be  of  one  year's 
duration,  and  that  they  are  to  be  chosen  an- 
nually by  the  people ;  but  they  have  elected 
themselves,  and  by  their  own  assumed  and 
arbitrary  juithority  have   made   parliaments, 
first,  of  three  years,  then  of  seven  years  dura- 
tion ;  and  with  the  same  lawless  power  they 
may  make  them  perpetual.    Alarming  to  ref- 
late, they  have  disregarded  our  constitution, 
they  have  scoffed  at  her  equitable  precepts, 
they  have  trampled  her  and  her  sons  under 
their  foet;    I  would  now  ask  you  where  is  your 
freedom  ?    Where  is  your  liberty  ?     When  we 
reflect  on  such  usage,  it  is  enough  to  excite  us 
with  ungovernable  indignation.    They  are,  re- 
cording to  our  glorious  constitution,  culpable 
of  treason,  and  justly  merit  its  reward.    Will 
a  nation  which  has  been  so  long  famed  for  its 
liberty  and  heroism,  suffer  itseV  to  be  duped 
any  longer  by  a  gang  of  impostors?    No,  it 
will  not     The  unanimity  of  our  sentiments 
and  exertions,  agreeably  to  the  constitution, 
will  once  more  dispel  the  doud  which  eclipses 
the  resplendent  and  animating  rays  of  liberty  ; 
and  will  again  make  her  sl^ne  forth  in  this  onoe 
happy  country  with  unimpeded  eflhlgence.'* 

In  order  to  remedy  all  this,  universal  sof- 


put  in  by  a  borough  faction,  who  have  nsofped  ^frageandannual  filaments  are  recommended- 
the  rights  of  •  the  people,  and  who,  by  undue 


Thus  the  publication  states,  (page  10.)-:  *^  The 
House  of  Commans,  in  its  original  compoas* 
tion,  consisted  only  of  commoners,  chosen 
a»mia%  by  tie  umiarial  miffhuge  qf  tie  people. 


M] 


fliMt  i%9mai  Bmdjwt  Smlkiutt. 


A.  }J.  1917 


4» 


1^ 


No '  noUtmiv  no  dtiigmaBy  do   natal  or 
tMlitary  officer^  in  sbort,  none  who  bald  pUoa^ 
or  receiTed  pe9$umtjrcm  govemmaUf  bad  aoj 
rigbt  to  sit  io  that  House.    This  is  what  the 
House  of  Conunons  was,  what  it  ought  to 
be^  and  what  we  wish  it  to  be.    This  is  the 
wanted  change  in  our  form  of  gOTernment,-* 
the  Commons  House  of  Parliament  restored  to 
kM  ofiginal  purity ;  and  this,  beyond  a  doubt, 
wouJd  strike  at  the  root  of  the  greatest  part  of 
the  evils  we  g[foan  under  at  the  present  day.'' 
At  page  34.  it  state%  "  that  the  only  effeotunl 
■Mans  that  can  be  adopted  to  relieve  the  nation 
in  some  measure  from  its  present  distresses^ 
are,  l^  Testoringibeimpreacriptible  rights  of  the 
nauooyby  a  remrm  in  the  representation  of  the 
people  in  the  House  of  Commons,  aod  by  an* 
Bual  partiaments;  imd  until  the$e  tike  pUwej  tk$ 
fteple  ctM  e»i€riam  no  mamuibU  txptiuUum  ^ 
ever    kmiag    tkur    eondUion  mpraoed,     But» 
aiiould  tbeso  salutary  measures  be  adopted, 
they  are  confident  that  such  a  Parliament  would 
always  act  for  the  good  of  the  nation,  and 
ensure  the  leopeot,  eonftdence^  and  support 
ef  Ae  whole  body  of  the  people.    Ana  it  i$ 
not  without  justice  that  the  meeting  ascribe 
to  the  want  of  a  iair  and  equal  representation 
of  the  people  in  Parliament*  all  the  wars^  and 
their  oonse<iueoces,  in  whid)  the  people  has 
been  engaged  for  half  a  century  past;  for  if, 
at  the  commencement  of  the  first  Aroerieaa 
war,  this  eoontry  had  been  blessed  with  a 
Hetiae  ef  Commons  chosen  by  the  free  suf- 
fiage  of  the  tax-payers>  would  they  have  acted 
eooiisteatly  with  the  constitution  of  their  own 
body,  to  have  gone  to  war  with  a  people  of 
the  uuae  origin  and  language,  merely  to  Ibroe 
taxes  upon  them .  without  their  consent  ?    Or 
would  tlicy  have  opposed  4he  straggles  of  tbe 
French  nation,  in  endeavouring  to  obtain  that 
fteadom  which  eve^  Briton  cherishes  as  liis 
birth-eight  ?    And  of  ultimately  forcing  upon 
them  a  haled  Dynasty,  oontrary  to  the  wishes 
of  nine-tenths  of  the  people  ?    The  idea  is 
Inly  preposteRMS."    In  page  26>  they  explain 
whaift  they  mean  by  the  ta>-pa]fen.    "  Consi*- 
dering  that  of  two  millions  of  inhabitants^ 
only  2f700  have  a  rigbt  of  voting  for  Membeia 
ef  FarliasBenC,  the  remaining  1,997,360,  al- 
though tax-payers,  directly,  or  indirectly,  hav- 
ing no  more  right  of  voting,  than  if  thej  were 
an  impertation  of  Slaves  from  Africa." 

After  going  through  all  this  long  detail  of 
giievflaces^  you  will  recolleoty  that  unless  the 
aeiNaia  e^led  for  are  granted,  and  the  evils 
eempleined  of  are  redrmed,  the  people  were 
told  that  theic  allegiance  was  to  bo  thrown  off; 
•■d  If  allegiaaoe  be  thrown  off,  rel^Uion  must 
lettew.  ne  lesult,  therefore,  of  the  whole 
tbat  I  have  lead  ii,  that  .as  the  condition  of 
tbe  pee|>le  never  ecmld  be  improved  till  uni* 
▼esaal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments  were 
obtained,  so  unless  all  this  was  granted,  resist 
■use  must  be  iaade»  and  insurrection  against 
the  Oovemmeot  and  the  laws  must  be  the 
eeneequence.  But  you  know  that  in  this 
coumnr,  to  reaiit,  tBuM  UDSvMd  suffrage  be 

voL  xxxm. 


obtained  iS/  in  pther  words,  to  reaist  until  the 
British  constitution  be  fuudamentally  over* 
thrown. 

I  am  not  now  prepared, — and  it  would  be 
out  of  place  for  me, — to  enter  at  leogth  vpon 
this  important  subject,  on  which  so  many  per^ 
sons  have  been  so  gross^  deluded,  finl  I 
cannot  avoid  pointing  out,  in  a  few  sentences, 
that  at  no  one  period,  either  in  England  or 
Scotland,  did  universal  suffrage  ever  prevail ; 
and  in  Scotland,  in  particular,  from  the  great  sub- 
division of  property,  the  elective  suffrage  was 
never  so  extenaed  as  it  actually  is  at  the  pre- 
sent moment.  It  is  matter  of  notoriety,  that 
the  history  of  the  British  constitution  is  to  be 
found  in  the  feudal  system,  and  that  the  con- 
stitution of  Parliament  in  particular,  while  k 
sprung  out  of  that  system,  has  ever  retained 
features  which  strongly  mark  its  descent.  Tbe 
immediate  vassals  of  the  crown,  the  great 
Barons  who  held  of  the  King  ^*  in  ca^^^  were 
the  first  members  of  Parliament.  Originally 
there  were  no  persons  who  possessed  seats  in 
Pariiament  as  representatives  of  others;  nor 
were  any  such  introduced  into  the  Legislature 
until  the  great  estates,  to  which  tbf  duty  of 
attendance  in  Parliament  was  incident,  having 
been  divided,  and  that  duty  had  actinJly  be# 
come  a  burthen  upon  the  small  proprietors, 
the  foundation  of  the  representative  system 
was  thus  naturally  laid.  The  first  step  in  Uie 
progress  which  seems  to  have  been  made  was 
this,  that  charters  of  exemption  from  Parlia- 
ment were  frequently  solicited  and  obtained, 
but  those  were  declared  to  be  illegal.  Acoord- 
ii^S^y*  it  would  seem  next  to  have  grown  by 
degrees  Into  a  law  to  oblige  the  great  barone 
only  to  attend  in  person,  and  to  permit  the 
lesser  to  attend  by  their  representatives.  This 
is  in  truth  no  mattei  of  conjecture ;  for  by  c 
statute  of  our  Parliament,  passed  in  1427,  the 
smaller  barons  were  excused  fifom  coming  to 
Parliament  piovided  they  sent  oommissioneit 
from  tbe  shires. 

In  like  manner,  it  i#  proved  l^y  the  intro*' 
duction  io  the  laws  of  Robert  III.,  that  those 
burglis  alone  which  held  property  tn  f^^  of 
the  crown,  had  the  right  of  being  represented 
in  Pariiament  It  is,  therefore^  a  delusion  to 
state,  that  universal  suffrage  ever  made  part 
of  our  constitution,  or  indeed  that  the  right  of 
the  elective  suffrage  waa  ever  broader  or  more 
extensive  than  at  present.  In  foot,  I  know  ef 
no  country  in  which  universal  suffrage,  or  any 
thing  hke  it,  ever  existed,  but  one,  and  that 
was  France  in  the  year  1793.  At  that  period, 
no  doubt,  there  was  an  assembly  elected  by 
Bometbing  like  universal  suffrage,  and  what 
was  the  result?  The  degradation  of  the  no- 
bility,— the  dethronement  and  murder  of  the 
Sovereign,— the  overthrow  of  the  chuRh,^and 
the  extinction  of  religion.  Is  it  those  things 
that  these  prisoners  would  recommend!  I 
have  already  told  you,  that  liber^r,  as  it  waa 
practised  in  France  in  1793,  has  been  held  up 
ny  them  as  an  object  of  admiration ;  and  tf 
you  look  to  what  is  sUted  in  the  gdd  page 
F 


iB7l 


57  GEORGB  HI. 


Ttiat  tf  AUxmder  M*Larat 


i^ 


of  their  pubUcatioD^  tott  will  fiod,  that  while 
they  hola  up  to  reprobatioo  the  higher  orders 
of  the  State,  the  revolutionary  &te  of  the 
€hurch  does  not  seem  to  have  been  altogether 
out  of  their  contemplation.  *<  Their  reverend 
hirelings,^*  say  they,  ''would  convince  you  that 
you  are  suffering  under  the  visitation  of  the 
Almighty,  and  therefore  that  you  ougjht  to  be 
submissive  to  the  chastening  stroke.**  This 
allusion  has  a  direct  application  to  the  esta- 
IMisbed  church, — ^its  object  is  not  more  to  dis- 
suade the  people  from  submission  under  their 
distresses  than  to  bring  the  clergy  and  religion 
into  contempt.  It  is  to  tell  the  people,  that 
while  their  rulers  were  corrupt  ana  oppressing 
them,  the  ministers  of  religion  were  not  less 
base  nop  more  worthy  of  consideration'. 

But  while  liie  peophs  are  thus  told  in  plain 
bnguage  to  throw  off  their  allegiance,— while 
they  are  urged  on  to  resistance  to  the  exe- 
cutive government, — ^to  overthrow  the  Legis- 
lature, and  degrade  the  ministers  of  religion, 
the  publication  proceeds  Ho  hold  out  the  most 
direct  encouragement  to  rebellion.  Look  to 
the  passage  about  the  army  in  pace  32. 
''Your  infatuated  oppressors  may  harden 
themselves  against  your  requests;  they  may 
consider  themselves  as  fortified  behind  a 
veteran  army,  which,  they  may  imagine,  will 
be  always  ready  to  support  them,  though  in  an 
unjust  cause^  and  by  wnich  they  may  conceive 
it  possible  to  awe  a  nation  into  silence  and 
submission.  But  let  them  recollect  that  the 
army  is  still  composed  of  men  and  of  BrUom^ 
And  shall  they — though  they  have  exerted 
their  valour  in  the  cause  of  fanaticism, — 
though  they  have  been  led  to  fight  the  battles 
of  oppressors,  and  establish  the  thrones  of 
tyrants ;  shall  they,  in  violation  of  the  privi- 
leges of  freemen^ — forgetful  of  the  glory  [of 
their  country, — ^forgetful  of  all  that  is  dear  to 
themselves,— contemptuous  of  all  that  they 
Ibve,  and  regardless  of  the  fete  of  posterity, 
— shall  they  turn  their  arms  to  destroy  the 
constitution  of  their  cx»untry  ?  What  1  after 
displaying  such  feats  of  valour  that  has  immor* 
talised  them  for  ever,— will  they  stoop  so  low 
as  to  become  instrumental  in  thetuin  of  their 
country,  fot.  the  sake  of  a  faction  which  has 
oast  a  deep  shade  of  disgrace  over  all  the 
splendour  of  their  victorious  achievements? 
I  appeal  to  the  army  itself  for  a  reply.  I  hear 
h  burst  like  thunder  from  man  to  man,  from 
line  to  line,  from  camp  to  camp, — No  I  Never  I 
Never !  We  fight  not  for  the  destruction,  but 
for  the  preservation  of  the  rights  and  privi- 
leges of  our  beloved  country  1*^ 

You  will  please  here  to  remember,  that  you 
are  told,  in  the  outset  of  the  publication,  that 
under  the  eireumstances  stated,  allegiance  has 
become  forfeited,  and  is  to  be  thrown  off;  but 
in  the  passage  I  have  just  read,  as  if  the 
readers  might  have  the  army  in  view  to  restrain 
their  patriotic  fury,  their  fears  are  removed, 
and  they  are  encouraged  with  the  hope^  that 
the  army  will  not  fight  against  them,  but  will 
'^u  ^d  co-operate  with  their  projects  of  in- 


surrection. Can  any  thing  more  insidioiis,^' 
any  thing  more  wicfced, — any  thing  more  sedi-* 
tious  be  conceived  or  imagined  f  I  vrill  fairly 
teMyou,  that,  in  my  opinion,  no  pubticatioa 
has  ever  been^  brought  before  this  court  of  a 
more  vricked  and  pernicious  tendency,  none 
better  calculated  to  produce  turbulence  and 
commotion,  than  that  which  I  have  read  to  you. 

Look  to  the  publication  for  which  Palmer* 
was  tried  at  the  circuit  court  at  Perth  in  the 
year  1793;  and  was  tntosported  to  Boixay 
bay;  and  although  these  times  ai%  not  of  a 
description  to  render  it  necessaiy  to  inflict  the 
same  degree  of  punishment  upon  the  prisoners 
as  was  awarded  in  that  case,  ^ere  is  not  any 
thing  in  it  nearly  so  inflammatory,  so  sedittooa, 
tending  so  much  to  excite  discontent  against 
the  government,  or  to  introduce  turbulence 
and  commotion,  as  there  is  in  the  paper  which 
is  this  day  brought  under  your  consideration. 

That  paper  I  think  it  my  duty  to  read  toyoti 
from  the  records  of  the  court.  It  is  in  these 
terms: 

'•  Friends  and  feIlow-citisen9;^You,  who 
by  your  loyal  and  steady  conduct,  in  these 
days  of  adversity,  have  shown  that  you  are 
worthy  of,  at  least,  some  small  portion  of 
liberty,  unto  you  we  address  oor  language  and 
tell  our  fears. 

^  In  spite  of  the  virulent  scandal,  or  mali* 
cious  efiorts  of  the  people's  enemies,  we  will 
tell  you  whole  truths ;  they  are  of  a  kind  to 
alarm  and  arouse  you  out  of  your  lethargy. 
That  portion  of  liberty  you  once  enjoyed  is  fast 
setting,  we  fear,  in  the  darkness  ot  despotism 
and  tyranny!  Too  soon,  perhaps,  you  who 
were  the  world's  envy,  as  possessed  of  some 
small  portion  of  liberty,  will'  be  sunk  in  the 
deptb  of  slavery  and  misery,  if  yotr  prevent  it 
not  by  your  w^l-timed  efforts. 

**  Is  not  every  new  day  adding  a  new  Unk 
to  our  chains  ?  Is  not  the  executive  branch 
daily  seizing  new,  unprecedented,  and  unwar- 
rantable powers  P  Has  not  the  House  of  Com- 
mons (your  only  security  from  the  evifa  of 
tyranny  and  aristocracy)  joined  the  coalitioa 
against  you?  Is  the  electioti  of  its  members 
either  fair,  free,  or  frequent  ?  Is  not  its  inde- 
pendence gone,  while  it  is  made  up  of  pennons 
and  placemen ! 

**  We  have  done  onr  duty,  and  are  deter- 
mined to  keep  our  posts,  ever  ready  to  assert 
our  just  rights  and  privileges  as  men,  the  chief 
of  which  we  account  the  right  of  ilniversaA 
suffrage  in  the  choice  of  tliose  who  serve  ia  the 
Commons  House  of  Parliament,  and  afirequcnt 
renewal  of  such  power. 

**  We  are  not  deterred  or  disappointed,  by 
the  decision  of  the  House  of  Commons  coa- 
eeming  our  petition.  It  is  a  question  we  did 
not  expect  (though  founded  on  truth  and  rea* 
son)  would  be  supported  by  superior  numbers. 
— Far  from  being  discouragea,  inre  are  more 
and  more  convinced  that  nothiag  can  save  this 
nation  from  ruin,  and  give  to  the  people  that 

•  3  iiow«  Mod.  St.  TV.  237. 


^ 


mMi  namat  Btirdjw  Stdilm. 


A.  D.  1817. 


17« 


Iw^pptneaM  wlud^  tli^  liare  a  right  to  look  for 
vxXex  govenmieBty  tet  a  refonn  in  the  House 
of  Omudods,  fiHiiKied  apon  the  eternal  basis 
of  juatioey  faiz^  fiee,  ana  equal. 

«  Felloir-citiiena; — The  time  is  now  come, 
when  y9m  ammi  either  gather  roond  the  fabric 
of  ]ibcr^4o  •uppori  it,  or,  to  jour  eternal  in- 
iumjt  let  U  &U  to  the  ground,  to  rise  no  more, 
huiiivg  along  with  it  every  thing  that  is  vala- 
aUe  and  dear  to  an  enligbtened  people. 

**  You' are  plunged  into  a  war  bj-a  wicked 
ministrj  and  a  eompliant  pa^iament,  who  seem 
caielesa  and  unconoemed  for  your  interest, 
the  end  and  deaign  of  which  is  almost  too 
horrid  to  lelale,  ue  destruction  of  a  whole 
people  merely  hecanne  th^  will  be  free. 

^  ^  it  your  eoaunerce  is  sore  czan^d  and 
almost  mined.  Thooaands  and  ten  thousands 
ofyow  fellovF-dtizena,  from  being  in  estate 
ef  prasperi^,  are  reduced  to  a  state  of  poverty, 
au8eijr>  and  wretchedness. — A  list  of  bank* 
lupleieiy  ^ineqnalled  in  any  former  times, 
fionns  a  part  in  the  retinue  of  this  Quixotic 
expedition ;  your  taxes,  great  and  burthen- 
some  as  -they  are,  must  soon  be  greatly  aug- 
mented; your  treasure  is  wasting  fast;  the 
blood  of  your  brethren  is  pouring  out,  and  all 
this  to  fonn  chains  for  a  free  people,  and 
eventually  to  rivet  them  £qt  ever  on  yourselves. 
^  To  the  loea  of  the  invaluable  ri^its  and 
privileges  which  our  fstther's  enjoyed,  we  im- 
pute tUs  barbarous  and  calamitous  war,  our 
ruinous  and  still-growing  taxation,  and  all 
the  wyyt"—  and  oppressiops  which  we  labour 
under. 

^  Fellow-eitizens ; — ^The  friends  of  liberty 
call  upon  j<»9  by  all  that  is  dear  and  worthy 
of  possessing  as  men ;  by  your  own  oppres- 
sions; by  the  miseries  and  sorrows  of  your 
suffering  brethren;  by  all  that  you  dread;  1>y 
the  sweet  lemembrance  of  your  patriotic  an- 
eestois;  and  by  all  that  your  posterity  have  a 
ri^t  to  expect  from  yon, — to  join  us  in  our 
exertions  for  the  preservation  of  our  perishinff 
libnty,  and  the  recovery  of  onr  long  lost  rights.^' 
Gentlemen,  this  is  the  publication  which 
was  held  by  a  jury  in  1793  to  be  a  seditious 
libel;   and  1  ask  you,  whether  from  the  be- 
ginning to  the  end  of  it  there  is  anv  thing 
more  offensive,  any  thing  more  calculated  to 
alienate  the  minds  of  his  majesty's  subjects 
fern  the  government  and  constitution  of  the 
country,  any  thing  better  imagined  for  leading 
the  people  to  the  use  of  physical  force  and  to 
open  reoeUion,  than  is  to  be  found  in  almost 
every  passage  of.  the  publication  lying  on  the 
table  f    Sure  I  am,  that  there  is  not  to  be 
found   from   the  beginning  to  tlie    end    of 
Palmei^s  Address,   a  direct  recommendation 
to  the  people  to  thow  off  their  allegiance, — 
that  there  is  no  incitement  to  actual  rebellion 
— that  there  is  no  encouragement  held  out  to 
the  people,. that  if  thejf  rose  to  enforce  the  ac- 
compliAment  of  their  purposes,   the  army 
would  ioin  them.    But  in  the  pamphlet  upon 
your  iMe,  all  this  is  done  in  the  most  plain 
and  direct  texms.    The  House  of  Commons  is 


said  to  be  corrupt,  and  not  to  be  the  represen- 
tative of  the  people :  the  whole  rulers  of  the 
country  are  stated  to  be  corrupt,  and  while 
guihv  of  the  most  gross  oppressions  on  the 
people,  caring  for  nothing  but  their  own  base, 
soroid,  and  tyrannical  purposes.  The  clergy 
are  said  to  be  hirelings,  mlsely  deluding  the 
people  with  the  notion  of  their  distresses  ori- 
ginating with  Providence ;  and  while  the 
people  are  called  upon  to  throw  their  alle- 
giance to  hell,  they  are  encoumged  with  the 
certain  hope  of  Uie  support  of  a  brave  and 
victorious  army. 

It  seems  impossible  in  my  mind,  therefore, 
to  doubt,  that  if  the  publication  in  Palmer's 
case  was  seditious,  that  now  upon  the  table 
can  be  otherwise ;  that  if  the  one  merited 
punishment,  the  other  can  be  innocent.  On 
the  contrary,  I  will  tell  you  foirly,  in  my  view 
of  the  subject,  the  present  is  the  worst  of  the 
two. 

It  is  now  proper  that  I  should  tell  yon,  that 
the  same  course  of  defence  which  has, been 
pursued  to-day,  was  followed  in  the  case  I 
nave  just  been  speaking  of.  In  Palmer's  case 
it  was  said — ana  we  were  told  to-day  that  it 
would  be  proved — ^that  language  similar  to 
that  used  in  this  publication  had  been  em-' 
ployed  in  petitions  to  the  House  of  Commons, 
without  censure  or  animadversion ;  that  lan- 
guage not  less  strong  was  employed  by  Mr; 
Pitt,  and  l^  the  duke  of  Richmond,  and 
various  other  statesmen;  and  the  inference 
which  was  drawn  in  the  year  1793,  and  which, 
I  presume,  will  be  drawn  to-day,  is,  that  it 
was  legal  for  Mr.  Palmer  in  his  case,  and  for 
the  prisoners  in  theirs,  to  employ  the  language 
which  those  statesmen  have  made  use  of.  But 
my  learned  friend  (Mr.  Clerk),  who  was  also 
of  counsel  in  the  case  of  Psdmer/was  told 
then,  and  I  beg  leave  to  repeat  it  to  you  now, 
that  the  ouestion  before  the  jury  and  the  court 
was  not  how  often  the  crime  of  sedition  had 
been  committed,  or  how  often  it  had  been 
committed  with  impunity :  il  was  not  whether 
petitions  containing  seditious  matter  had  been 
presented  to  parliament,  without  the  authors 
being  punished :  it  was  not  whether  parlia- 
ment had  allowed  seditious  words  to  be  used 
in  its  own  presence  without  animadversion.; 
and,  last  of  all,  the  question  was  not  whether 
the  law  officers  of  tlie  Crown  had  allowed 
their  duties  to  sleep,  and  passed  over  sedition 
witjiiout  bringing  prosecutions :  but  the  ques- 
tion simply  was  then,  as  it  is  now,  whether 
the  crime  attributed  to  the  prisoners  at  the  bar 
amounted  in  law  to  sedition,  and  whether,  if 
it  did,  they  were  guilty  of  having  committed 
it.  If  it  were  proved,  that  five  thousand 
petitions  containing  language  eoually  strong 
as  that  found  in  this  publication,  had  been  re- 
ceived by  parliament,  or  that  the  House  of 
Commons  nad  permitted  language  ten  times 
stronger  to  be  used  in  their  own  presence, 
that  can  never  establish  that  the  prisoners  have 
not  been  guilty  of  the  crime  of  sedition  charged 
in  thb  indictment.    The  House  of  Commons 


Tl] 


S7  GfiORGB  III. 


Trial  ofAiuandtr  M'LmrM 


C79 


has  no  power  df  making  or  declaring  law,  or 
of  legalizing  that  which  is  oontrary  to  law.  It 
is  but  one  branch  of  the  legislature,  and  if  it 
permits  language  to  be  used  reflecting  on  it- 
self, on  the  Crown,  or  or  the  House  of  Lords, 
which  erery  lawyer  out  of  it  holds  to  be  sedi- 
tious, which  courts  of  law  have  found  to  be 
seditious,  that  is  no  reason  why  the  same  lan- 
guage, when  employed  out  of  doors  with  a 
view  to  corrupt  me  minds  of  the  king's  aob- 
j'ects,  and  to  excite  disaffection  and  commo- 
tion, shaU  not  be  repressed  with  the  punish- 
ment of  sedition. 

In  the  course  of  the  statement  with  which 
it  has  been  my  duty  to  trouble  you,  and  which 
I  have  put  into  as  plain  language  as  T  could 
employ,  I  had  occasion  to  mention  that  in  all 
^ases  of  sedition  the  state  of  the  times  when 
the  act  complained  of  has  been  committed  is 
to  be  maturely  viewed  and  considered;  that 
what  ma^r  be  innocently  done  at  one  period 
may  be  highly  criminal  at  another ;  and  that : 
under  one  state  of  the  country,  language  may  ' 
be  used,  or  a  ^crriting  published,  with  impunity,  ' 
which,  under  another,  would  render  the  author 
amenable  to  the  arm  of  the  law.    Keeping  this 
in  your  minds,  it  is,  I  apprehend,  impossible 
for  you  to  forget  the  period  when  the  speech 
in  question  was  made,  and  the  libel  before  you  ; 
was  published.    It  has  been  proved,  and  I  j 
freely  admit,  that  at  the  time  when  all  this  took  ' 
place  the'  distresses  of  the  country  were  not 
only  great,  but  that  the  misery  of  the  lower 
classes  of  the  people  had  reached  to  an  extent 
seldom  experienced  in  these  realms.    Those  ' 
calamities,  overwhelming  as  they  were  of  them-  \ 
selves,  were,  however,  aggravated  by  this,  that  | 
at  the  period  in  question  they  were  converted, 
^  all  of  you  must  recollect,  into  an  engine  for 
jexciting  discontent  throughout  the  great  body  ' 
of  the  manufacturing  population,  who  had  then  i 
been  thrown  altogether  out  of  employment.  | 
ITie  most  unprec^ented  exertions  were  then  ' 
cmplojred,  by  the  circulation  of  inflammatory 
and  seditious  tracts,  to  excite  the  minds  of  the 
people  against  the  settled  order  of  things  in  the 
country,  wWle,  with  a  malignity  before  utterly 
unknown  amoiig  us,  and  having  a  precedent 
only  in  the  means  that  were  employed  for  pre- 
paring the  people  of  France  tor  the  direfol 
event  of  the  Revohition,  a  simultaneous  ac- 
tivity ivas  employed  in  the  dissemination  of 
immonfl,  irrehinoitf  and  indecent  works,  to 
subvert  the  religious  principles  and  habits  of 
the  people.    No  doubt  public  conventions,  as 
in  1793,  were  not  held,   because  all   things 
which  had  then  attracted  the  eyes  of  the  police 
and  the  administrators  of  the  laws,  and  were 
repressed  by  the  Judgments  of  this  court,  were 
carefully  avoided.    But  a  system  no  less  dan- 
gerous had  then  been  adopted  hi  their  stead. 
That  system  was,  to  keep  the  whole  population 
of  the  country  in  a  state  of  ferment,  by  con- 
voking meeting  after  meeting  in  the  different 
manufacturing  and  populous  districts,  under 
the  pretence  of  petitioning  parliament  against 
abnses.    At  thesa  nreetingv,  by  the  use  of  in* 


flamm'atory  language  of  oae  4escifpfioa  or 
another,  the  minds  of  the  labouring  dasses  had 
got  into  a  state  so  unsettled,  as  to  have  become 
prepared  for  violence  of  any  kind,  to  which* 
their  leaders  mi^t  direct  them.  In  some 
quarters  the  e(re<Hs  of  thil  system  had  become 
iM.  less  tremendotts  than  those  of  its  prede- 
cessor in  1793.  In  others,  its  eoasequetieea 
were  even  worse.  We  know  the  effects  in 
Glasgow.  You  have  lately  beard  the  fruta  of 
it  in  Manchester. 

This  situation  of  public  aAnrs,  which  ia 
matter  of  noj^riety,  must  entei-  deeply  iofto 
your  consideration  in  weighings  the  views  and 
intentions  of  the  prisoners  in  committing  those 
acts  which  I  have  charged  against  them  aa  in-; 
ferring  the  crime  of  sedition.  But,  indeed,  of 
the  malignity  of  their  intentions  I  think  you 
can  have  no  doubt.  It  is  impossible  for 'm«y  or 
for  you,  to  look  into  the  minds  of  men,  and  to 
discover  what  is  die  purpose  at  the  bottom  of 
their  hearu.  .  Tliat  can  only  be  galfaeied  frosa 
their  actions.  Now,  if  you  consider  the  time 
and  the  situation  of  the  country  when  this 
speech  was  delivered,  and  this  pamphlet  waa 
published ;  and  if  you  weigh  the  terms  of  tint 
speech,  and  the  various  passages  of  that  work, 
the  whole  of  which  will  be  before  yon,  wb4 
which  I  trust  you  wiU  seriously  consider,  it 
seems  to  me  impossible  that  you  should  hesitate 
in  forming  a  decided  and  clear  opinion  that 
the  purpose  of  the  prisoners  was  to  render  the 
people  disaffected  to  the  government,  and  to 
excite  them  to  acts  of  commotion  and  rebellion. 
If  such  is  your  opinion,  it  is  your  duty  to  ftnd 
the  prisoners  guilty.  , 

No  doubt  they  have  been  represented  aa 
persons  of  good  character.  Be  it  so.  Witii 
their  character  in  general  I  have  nothing  todo^ 
and  leave  them  every  advantage  they  may  have 
upon  this  bmnch  of  the  evidence.  To  myself 
it  appears,  that  what  has  been  provfed  of  their 
diaracters,  however  good  in  other  respects,  ia 
against  them  in  this  case.  In  that  point  of 
view^  I  should  state  the  evidence  respecting 
their  characters  to  you,  w;ere  I  to  dwell  upon 
it,which,  however,  I  shall  reftain  from  doing. 
Indeed  I  shall  notice  it  no  further,  dian  merely 
to  mention,  as  matter  of  curiosity,  that  evidence 
of  the  same  sort  was  brought  forward  and  in* 
sisted  upon  in  the  trials  of  1 794  and  1794.  In 
fact,  the  defence  in  the  present  case  seems 
modelled  upon  those  cases  of  a  similar  descrip- 
tion that  have  gone  before  it,  and  will^  I  trust, 
meet  with  the  same  fate. 

Having  thus  detained  you  at  so  great  length, 
I  shall  leave  the  case  to  you,  perfectly  satisned 
with  having  done  my  duty  in  bringing  it  before 
you.  It  appeared  to  me,  after  a  full  consid^ 
ration,  to  oe  a  case  which  could  not  be  passed 
over,  as  it  was  necessary  to  ptit  Kmtts  to  the 
circulation  of  the  dangerous  and  sedttious  pub- 
lications diisseminating  at  present  in  every 
quarter  of  the  country.  It  is  for  you  tK>  say 
upon  the  evidence,  wnether  my  opinion  has 
been  correct  or  not.  I 'am  satisned  myself 
fhMX  my  opinion  is  right,  and  that  A«  expies* 


Jg\  Mi  lUmmu  HtM/W  Btdkm.  A.  Du  1S17.  [74 

MOOS  chMge^  ig  Hit  indicUaept  wn  seftlkwi ;  bo  Wntlon  to  eioite  thsm  lo  NdiUoiiom- 

«iid  I  hare  had  to-day  tbe  Mtufection  to  bear  betlion,  to  any  specMs  ef  viMance,  or  to  asy 

dMrt  the  court  thtaks  90  likewise.    You  will  unlawful  act.    They  bad  i»et  with  the  fair  and 

mtterwaids  learn  their  loidahifn'  opinion  opon  legvU   pnrpoae    of  petitiooiAg   tho   different 

die  endence,  as  you  hare  now  heard  mine,  branehes  of  the  legieiatttre  for  reKef  min^t  the 

That  I  hare  diooght  H  my  dnty  to  fpre  you  grieranees  of  which  they  complained ;  and  in 
plainly  and  witbont  ramish.    Bat  clear  though  !  speaking  of  those  grieranceSy  the  panel  did 

1  he  on  the  whole  case,  I  shall  be  satisfied  with  nothing  more  than  assist  in  the  prerloos  de» 

whatever  rerdict  yon  may  give,  and  I  can  hare  liberations  necessary  to  ascertain   the  riewe 


no  doubc  the  eonntry  will  be  90  likewise. 

Mr.  Clerk. — Gentlemen  of  the  jnry,  in  the 
kmg  «nd  able  argument  which  yon  have  just 
feea.Td,  the  lotd  advocate  has  attempted  to  con* 
Tinoe  yoa  that  both  of  the  prisoners  at  the  bar 


and  wishes  of  the  people  assembled,  as  to  the 
natare  of  the  applications  that  ongbt  to  be 
made.  This  defimce,  so  important  for  the 
panely  was  opened  at  the  beginmng  of  the  trial ; 
tmt  so  far  from  attempting  to  refoteity  the 
lord  advocate  did  not,  in  the  course  of  bis  vety 


bave  been  guilty  of  the  cnmes  laid  to  their  { long  argument,  so  much  as  aHude  to  it :  and 
dMTge.    I  attend  yon  for  one  of  them  only,  |  yon  wiU  see  that  the  indictment,  unfairly  sop* 


Mr.  If ^Laren^  and  shall  leaive  the  defence  of 
the  other,  Mr.  Bain),  to  bis  own  connsd,  Mr. 
JeiVey,  who  is  able  to  do  the  most  ample  justice 
to  Me  client. 

Mr.  McLaren  is  aeeused  of  having  made  a 
•editioQS  harangue  to  thf  people  assembled  at 
«  numerous  meeting  held  in  a  field  near  Kil- 
tnamod^  and  of  having  afterwards  caused  his 
•peedk  to  be  printed,  along  with  other  speeches 
«f  a  like  tendency,  as  a  pamphlet,  which  was 
sold  and  distributed  in  that  neighbourhood. 

That  Mr.  McLaren  was  present,  and  spoke  a 
lew  sentences  a^  the  public  meeting  already 
nentipBed,  is  certainlv  true;  but  I  hope  to 
satisfy  you,  that  considering  Uie  occasion  and 
.meumsunces  under  which  it  was  delivered, 
tihe  speech  (if  speech  it  might  be  called)  con* 
tahied  nothing  seditious  or  otherwise  criminiU. 
As  to  the  pubKcatbn  of  the  pamphlet,  Mr. 
M'Laren  had  no  concern  with  it,  and  knows 
nothioff  of  it.  There  is  no  evidence  that  he 
sosistcd  in  the  printing  or  publication  even  of 
that  speedi  whidi  is  said  to  have  been  spoken 
%y  himself;  and  certainly  there  is  do  pretence 
Sot  saying  that  he  took  a  concern  in  the  pub- 
lication, nle,  or  distribution  of  the  pamphlet. 
X  hope,  theiefbre,  that  I  may  disencumber  my- 
self of  this  branch  of  the  accusation,  as  not  af- 
/ectiog  Mr.  McLaren  at  allj  and  leave  it,  in  so 
fer  as  it  may  be  thought  to  aff^t  the  other 
panel,  to  the  consideration  of  Mr.  Jefi^y,  who 
win  address  you  for  him. 

As  to  the  criminality  of  the  speech  at  the 
public  meeting,  moch  eloquence  nas  been  em- 
ployed, and  some  points,  both  in  £ict  and  in 
law,  have  been  stmined  to  the  utmost  against 
the  panel,  in  declamatory  comments  on  the 
wickedness  of  hissupposed  intention  to  blow  up 
the  flames  of  sedition  In  die  multitude,  as  well  as 
OB  the  supposed  illegal  and  dangerous  tendency 
of  his  words,  as  being  utteriv  subversive  of  the 
Bnrish  constitution  and  of  all  good  goveri^ 
meat  Bat  in  making  these  violent  and  un- 
charitable strictures,  it  wis  forgotten  that  a 
publii;  meeting  having  been  called  for  lawful 
purposes,  tiie  occasion  rendered  it  necessary 
mt  the  oanel  (who  had  been  appointed  to 
open  the  business)  should  make  some  remariis 
on  the  subject  of  public  grievances.  This  is 
Ins  dcKxics*    In  addfcssisg  the  people,  ha  hod 


pressing  the  object  and  purposes  of  the  lawml 
meeting  at  which  the  panel  made  his  speech^ 
represents  it,  as  well  as  the  other  speechet 
there  made,  as  seditious  and  inflammatory 
bamngaes,  uttered  without  the  pretence  of  asy 
fair  or  legal  purpose.  These  cireumstances 
are  not  a  little  eitraordinarr,  if  the  publis 
prosecutor  rsally  bad  hopes  of  being  soccessfU 
m  his  charee.  With  such  hopes  he  should 
have  argued  the  case  as  it  stands  upon  the 
evidence :  he  should  have  attempted  to  answer 
the  defence  on  the  fact,  or  on  the  law,  or  ob 
both ;  whereas,  by  taking  no  notice  of  a  ds> 
fence  tmquestionably  relevant,  he  either  held 
it  to  be  unanswerable,  or  intended  to  rely  upe* 
a  doctrine  (which  can  never  be  admitted,  and 
which,  indeed,  the  lord  advocate  hisuelf  did 
not  directly  maintain),  that  occasion  and  cir* 
cumstances  can  make  no  difl'erenoe  as  to  the 
criminality  of  words — ^thal  the  same  words 
must,  if  they  are  seditious  on  any  ocoasioB, 
be  seditious  on  all  occasions,  without  the  Uaal 
regard  to  the  purpose  or  intent  of  the  speaker. 
But  against  such  an  absurdity  it  is  UBBeecssaxy 
to  reason.  Every  one  must  allow  that  the 
same  words  may  be  highly  criminal,  or  alto- 

S ether  innocent,  nay,  absolutely  rtqaired  by 
uty,  according  to  the  difierent  situations  is 
which  they  may  be  uttered ;  and  on  this  ground 
I  maintain,  that  even  if  the  words  of  the  panel 
could  not  have  been  spoken  without  criminaUty 
in  other  situations,  they  were  justifiable  as 
they  were  spoken  to  men  assembled  in  delibo- 
ration  about  lawfbl  and  dutifbl  petitioBs,  rs^ 
ptesenting  their  grievances  or  complaints  to 
the  different  branches  of  the  legislature-.  Nor 
does  it  appear  of  any  hnpoitanoe  that  Warm  or 
intemperate  expressions,  not  sufikieotly  re- 
spectful to  their  superiors,  oocasiooall^  fell,  in 
the  course  of  their  deUberatioBs,  fVom  people 
in  the  lowest  mnks  of  Hfe,  unable  to  express 
themselves  with  that  decency  which  is  required 
fh>m  men  In  higher  sftoatioos,  if  it  be  certain, 
which  it  is,  that  they  looked  foiward  to  no 
other  result  from  their  meeting,  than  the  exe^. 
cise  of  their  unquestionable  right  to  petitioB, 

Suietlv  and  peaceably,  without  disorder  or 
tstuibaace. 

The  Tight  of  pelkloaiag  has  brionged  to  the 
subjects  of  tins  eouBtry,  and  svBo  to   lihe 


741 


£7  GEORGE  IIL 


Trial  qfJUtmdgrM'lMm 


[70- 


BMBftesi  of  the  peopie»  from  ancient  times* 
Since  the  Revohition  it  has  never  been  questi- 
oned; and  immediaiely  before  that  glorious 
event,  it  was  attacked  onlj  to  enable  a  tyian- 
Bioal  government  to  subvert  the  public  liberty. 
But  the  attack  was  repelled  even  in  the  worst 
of  times ;  and  the  first  act  of  die  government 
of  King  William  and  Queen  Mary  was  to 
confirm  the  right  of  petitioning,  as  a  frand^ise 
•f  which  the  people  could  not  be  deprived. 
It  has  ever  amce  been  considered  as  a  right 
unalterably  fixed  by  the  fundamental  laws  of 
the  state ;  and,  accordingly,  though  the  ezer^ 
mse  of  it  is  suj^sed  to  be  sometimes  unplea- 
sant to  the  government,  yet  no  administration, 
and  neither  House  of  Parliament,  has  hitherto 
thought  proper  even  to  disoourage  the  people 
in  the  exercise  of  their  right  of  petitioning. 
How  many  hundreds,  or  rather  thousands,  of 

Eetitioos  have  been  presented  to  the  difierent 
ranches  of  the  legislature  within  these  few 
years,  representing  as  grievances  thinn  which 
are  not  admowled^red  to  be  such  1  and  yet  the 
petitions,  as  commg  from  the  people  in  the 
exercise  of  their  right,  have  been  graciously 
received  by  tliose  to  whom  they  were  address- 
ed. And  so  important  is  the  right  of  petition* 
lAg,  that  every  other  right  in  the  people  has 
bc^«  supposed  to  depend  upon  it,  inasmuch 
as  the  people,  if  deprived  of  that  right,  would 
be  in  oanger  of  losing  the  protection  necess^ 
to  defend  them  in  their  other  rights. 

It  is  obvious  that  a  fair  communication  from 
the  people  of  their  grievances  and  discontents 
to  the  legislature,  which  has  the  power,  and 
whose  duty  it  is  to  protect  them,  cannot  be 
•edition,  if  they  have  a  right  to  make  such 
communication.  If  the  people  should  petition 
parliament  without  hanng  the  right  by  law 
to  do  so,  these  petitions  might  be,  and  in 
almost  every  case  would  be  seditious  and 
dangerous,  in  raising  or  increasing  discontents 
and  disturbances ;  because  every  complaint  of 
a  public  grievance  has  a  tendency  to  create  a 
public  discontent,  and  this  is  illegal  and  se- 
ditious in  every  case  where  the  law  does  not 
allow  it.  For  the  same  reason,  any  violent 
complaint  of  public  grievances  may  be  sediti- 
ous or  illegal,  where  it  is  not  addressed  to 
persons  having  legal  authority  to  take  it  into 
consideration  and  give  relief.  But  it  would 
be  a  solecism  to  say,  that  a  petition  to  the 
King  or  to  either  House  of  Parliament,  stating 
grievances,  and  praying  for  redress  is  sediti- 
ous, because,  1st,  it  is  allowed  by  law ;  2dly, 
the  persons  addressed  have  an  authority  to 
take  the  complaint  into  consideration  and  give 
relief.  Petitioning  is  indeed  considered  as  a 
means  of  removing  discontents  and  preventing 
disturbances,  not  as  a  means  of  raising  them  ; 
and  this  may  be  true  it  some  cases,  though  it 
is  not  always  so,  and  we  have  frequently  seen 
a  forment  of  discontent  much  increased  by 
numerous  meetings^  of  the  people,  called  for 
the  purpose  of  petitioning.  But  stil)  the  legal 
'right  of  petitioniog  is  unquestionable ;  and  it 
Aust  be:  supposed  that  this  right,  though  it 


cannot  be  used  without  expressing  discontent, 
and  thereby  communicatiag  it  among  the  peo*. 
pie,  and  possibly  raising  it,  where  it  had  pre- 
viously no  existence,  may  be  legally  (and 
without  any  crime,  or  the  fear  of  criminal  pro- 
secutions) used  in  every  case  whatever,  even 
though  the  use  of  it  should  in  some  respects 
have  a  bad  tendency;  the  utility,  and  even  ne» 
cassity  of  presenting  the  right,  counterbalanc- 
ing the  mischieCi  which  may  be  occasioned  by 
the  seditious  or  discontented  spirit  which  may 
he  raised  by  it. 

But  it  must  be  plain,  that  if  the  people  have 
a  right  to  state  the  grievances  in  petitions  for 
redress  of  grievances  to  the  different  branches 
of  the  legislature,  it  follows  as  a  necessary 
consequence  that  they  have  a  right  to  state 
these  grievances  in  the  plainest  language,  and 
even  in  what  is  commonly  considered  to  be 
strong  or  coarse  language  in  the  description 
of  public  abuses,  if  they  do  not  in  their  peti« 
tions  violate  that  respect  that  is  due  to  the 
legislature :  under  that  restriction,  tb^y  may 
assert  in  their  petitions  that  there  are    the 
grossest  abuses,  even  in  the  legislature  itself. 
And  you  need  not  be  told,  that  even  petitions 
of  that  kind  are   occasionally  sent  from  all 
quarters  of  the  country,  when  discontents  pre- 
vail among  the  people.    A  stranger  to  the 
peculiarities  of  the  British  Government  might 
think  it  odd  that  petitions  of  this  class,  con- 
taining inferences  of  a  nature  apparently  so 
irreverent,    not   only  indicating  an  extreme 
degree  of  discontent  in  the  petitioners,  but 
directly  tending  to  raise  and  aisseminate  the 
same  kind  of  discontent  through  the  whole  of 
the  kingdom,  should  be  tolerated,  especially 
where  it  is  plainly  the  opinion,  not  only  of  the 
different  branches  of  the  legislature^  but  ato 
the  opinion  of  the  more  sensible  part  of  the 
community,  that  the  petitions  are  very   ill- 
founded  in  their  representations  of  grievances, 
and  demand,  by  way  of  redress,  new  public 
measures  or  arrangements,  which  would  not 
only  be  useless,  but  dangerous  and  even  cala- 
mitous.   Such  considerations,  however,  have 
no  influence,  or  very  little  inflnence,  in  the 
question,  whether  the  people  have  the  right  to 
present  their  petitions,  and  whether,  when 
offered,  the  petitions  ought  to  be  received. 
On  the  contrary,  it  has  long  been  held  by  the 
legislature,  that,  as  the  people  have  the  right 
to  petition  for  redress  of  grievances,  so  they 
have  the  right  to  state  what  they  consider  to 
be  their  grievances,  whether  they  are  really 

frievances  that  ought  to  be  redrnsed  or  not. 
he  general  rule  is,  that  however  unreasonable, 
or  unfit  to  be  granted  the  prayers  of  the  peo- 
ple in  their  petitions  may  be*  it  is  not  unfit  to 
receive  the  petitions,  and  the  people  have  a 
right  to  present,  them,  a  right  that  .is  unalie- 
nable. 

But  further,  if  the  right  of  petitioning  be- 
longs to  the  people,  they  must  of  necessity 
have  the  right  of  deliberation  upon  the  subject 
of  their  petitions,  to  consult  with  each  other 
at  public  meetings,,  to  be  advised  by  thoae 


n^ 


and  Thomat  Bmrijvr  SediUon. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C78 


vho  are  able  to  advise  (hem,  or  tMnk  them^ 
seWes  able,  upon  the  various  points  which  may 
ooeor  in  considering  what  are  grievances,  and 
what  are  not ;  and  if  there  are  grievances^  what 
are  tiie  remedite  that  ought  to  be  proposed  or 
prayed  for  in  their  petitions.  With  regard  to 
the  important  claims  which  may  be  made  in 
petitions  to  the  legislature^  every  man  neces- 
sarily must  have  a  right  to  meet  with  his 
fellows,  either  in  small  or  in  great  numbers, 
and  to  discuss  the  matter  with  them*  One 
man  may  think  that  annual  parliaments  ^re 
necessary ;  another  tlmt  they  would  be  hurt^ 
ful  or  impracticable.  On  this  trial,  it  is  not 
necessary  for  us  to  consider  whether  annual 
pdliaments  and  universal  sufitage  are  good  or 
CMid  ;  and,  on  this  occasion,  I  have  nothing  to 
do  with  these  questions.  But  I  say  that  it  is 
not  unlawful  to  petition  for  either.  And  ^ 
neraOy,  whatever  the  grievance,  or  fancied 
grievance  is,  it  may  lawmlly  be  the  subject  of 
a  petition  to  the  l^slature  ;  and  for  the  same 
leaaon  it  mav  lawfully  be  the  subject  of  deli- 
beration and  discussion,  even  in  public  meet- 
ings held  for  the  purpose  of  petitioning. 
You  vriU  observe,  that  there  can  be  no  limits 
to  this  right  of  petitioning,  and  previously  de- 
liberating; for  when  itislimitea  the  right  is 
gone.  Tbe  right  is  to  present  unreasonable 
as  well  as  reasonable  petitions.  Or  if  un- 
reasonable petitioningwere  unlawful,  the  leeis- 
latnre  alone  is  the  judge  of  what  is  reasonsmle 
or  unreasonable  in  ^titions.  If  the  right  of 
petitioning  could  be  restrained  by  the  courts 
of  law,  there  would  be  an  end  of  the  right  of 
petitioning,— a  fundamental  law  of  this  mo- 
naichy, — a  law,  the  palladium  of  our  other 
rights. 

On  iht  occasion  of  which  we  have  heard  so 
nndi,  when  the  people  in  and  about  Kilmar- 
nock met  to  consider  whether  they  should  send 
addresses  to  the  legislature  on  the  subject  of 
their  grievances,  various  speeches  were  made, 
and  we  are  told  by  the  prosecutor,  that  these 
speeches,  and  in  particular  the  speech  of 
M^Lareo,  were  seattious.  In  regara  to  the 
<|Destioii,  whether  or  not  his  speech  was  sedi- 
tMNiSy  he  pleads  that  the  right  6f  petitioning 
necessarily  implies  the  right  of  previous  dis- 
cDssion.  If  this  be  true,  apply  it  to  the'  case 
before  yon.  At  such  a  meeting  a  speech  may 
possibly  be  seditious,  where  it  appears  either 
that  the  meetine  was  called,  not  for  its  pro- 
fessed object  of  petitioning  Parliament,  but 
merely  to  aflbrd  opportunities  to  make  sediti- 
w»  speechea; — or  that  though-  the  meeting 
\ttmafidt  assembled  for  petitioning,  the  speech 
went  beyond  its  proper  bounds,  and  was  se- 
ditious in  statements  not  justified  by  the  oc- 
canoo.  As  to  the  first  ofthese  cases,  there  is 
not  even  a  pretence  for  denying  that  the  meet- 
ing in  qaestion  was  6011a  fidt  called  for  the 
purpose  of  framing  petitions  to  Parliament. 
1  refer  to  all  the  evidence  which  von  have 
beard.  It  was  a  meeting  collected  for  that 
purpose,  and  for  no  other,  nor  was  any  further 
purpose  ia  view. 


The  alignment  of  the  public  proseeotor,  said 
the  evidence  adduced,  will  apply  only  to  the 
second  case  supposed,  that  the  speakers  at  a 
meeting  hona  Jidt  assembled  for  petitioning, 
had  gone  beyond  their  bounds,  and  deviated 
into  sedition.  But  has  this  been  made  out 
against  Mr.  McLaren  ?  His  short  speech,  though 
coarse,  was  suitable  to  the  occasion,  as  an  ex« 
hortation  to  petitioning,  and  nothing  else. 

We  were  told,  indeed,  that  this  case  is  simi* 
lar  to  that  of  Fvshe  Palmer,  who  many  year* 
ago,  was  tried  for  sedition,  foond  guilty,  and 
sentenced  to  transportation.     But  ihiM  la  a  , 
total  mistake.    The  case  before  yon  is  Tery 
different  from  that  of  Fyahe  PbIomt,  and  from 
all  the  other  cases  which  have  hitherto  been 
tried  before  the  Court  of  Justidary.    It  has 
been  reserved -for  the  present  Lord  Advocate 
to  bring  jsuch  a  case  as  the  present  to  trial,  in 
which,  if  the  verdict  find  the  panels  guilty  of 
sedition,  the  right  of  petitioning,  hitherto  un- 
challenged, seems  to  be  attacked  almost  ia  di- 
rect terms.    The  case  of  Fyshe  Palmer  was 
that  of  a  seditious   libel,    an   inflammatory 
hand-bill,  containing  seditious  language,  with- 
out any  proposal  to  petition  Parliament.    We 
were  told  that  this   case  of  Fyshe   Palmer 
was  defended  on  the  same  grounds  that  were 
stated  in  defence  at  the 'beginning  of  this  trial ; 
yet  the  lord  advocate  declined  to  meet  thai 
defence  particularly,  and  bear  it  down  by  the 
triumphant  authority  of  Palmer's  case     There 
was  no  resemblance  between  that  case  and 
the  present.    Fyshe  Palmer  recommended  an 
appeal,  on  the  subject  of  grievances,  not  to  the 
legislature,  but  to  a  mob,  the  scum  of  the  earth 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Dundee,-— to  the  so* 
verign  authority  of  the  multitude.    The  de- 
fence in  that  case  was  disregarded, — ^but  what 
was  it  ?  It  was  said,  that  in  this  free  govern- 
ment it  is  necessary  that  the  press  should  be 
free.    It  was  said  that  the  people  must  have 
freedom  to  attack  public  men,  and  must  be  en- 
titled to  publish,  not  treason,  not  sedition,  in 
a  palpable  form,  but  their  thoughts  in  a  free 
and  independent  manner.    It  was  added,  that 
Mr.  Fyshe  Palmer  was.  not  very  sound  in  his 
mind.     These  were  Uie   defences  for  hia. 
You  wiU  perhaps  be  surprised  when  I  tell  yooi 
that  m^  Lord  Abercromby,  who  tried  the  case, 
held,  m  bis  speech  to  the  Jury,  that  if  a  peti- 
tion to  Parliament  had  been  in  view,  the  libei 
of  which  Fyshe  Palmer  was  found  guil^  would 
not  have  been  of  so  aggravated  a  desoriptloD, 
— ^would  perhaps  not  have  beeu  considmd  a 
libel  ataA*    '<Mudi  (be  reinaiked)  has  been 
said  of  the  purity  of  the  intentions  of  the  so- 
ciety ;  it  is  said  they  had  nothing  in  view  bat 
moaerate  .reform.    But,  Gentlemen,  you  .will 
consider  how  (ar  that  is  consistent,  either  vritii 
the  tenor  of  the  address  itself,  or  widi  what  is 
sworn  to  by  Mealmakeri  who  drew  the  first 
draught  of  it,  and  who  swears  expressly,  that 
at  that  time  he  had  no  second  petition  in 
his  contemplation' and  that  what  was  after- 
wards   to    DC   done    would   have  depended 
upon  eircumstanees.    I  much  fear  that  here 


57  6£0BGB  HI. 


791 

)feftl»iker  »  (iriliiig  tfat  tnAp  aad  tWt  if 
Ibegr  had  not  been  altettded  to^  the  conduct 
of  Ihis  lociety  would  not  kave  proved  so  pure 
«•  their  iateotiotis  ai«  said  to  iMtre  been ,"  *  In 
tbat  C«i6t  fott  will  obsfenwy  that  a  seditkNis  li- 
bel wit  diapeised  over  the  couDtir  without 
aiijt  GOnsequeoce  betnf  cdBteMplated  bat  that 
of  inAanuDg  the  ninds  of  the  multitude.  On 
the  other  MtoAf  we  bave  been  at  paiu  to  shew, 
that  the  panels  in  tfaia  ease  were  quiet  oiderly 
persenty  net  eoacemed  witb  any  seditioue  ao- 
oieties;  not  connected  with  any  political  parttet, 
only  feelkg  distress  thinking  they  had  grier* 
anees  to  eemplain  of^  and  that  tbrf  could  bet^ 
tsr  tbefar  ftituaitions  by  petitioning  parliament. 
Xbef  met  together  in  the  moet  orderly  man- 
neiv-^dellbemted  as  it  is  usual  to  do  in  public 
meetings^ — ^prepared  resolnftionSy-^prepared  a 
petitioa,— and  atgned  ity-^and  that  ^tition, 
Ibougb  couched  in  strong  tenna,  was  presented 
In  the  Houses  of  Pariiament,  considered^  re* 
eeivedy  and  laid  on  their  tables.  Is  the  right 
tf  petitiening^tben,  to  be  interrupted  in  this 
entraordina  rymanner,  by  bringing  the  peti- 
tioners into  tbe  Conrt  of  Justiciary  9 

RecoUet  that  this  was  a  meeting  for  consider- 
ing tbe  propriety  of  petitioning  £e  legislature^ 
and  that  the  meeting  would  have  been  allOM 
gather  nugatory  unless  the  persons  tbeu  met 
bad  been  allowed  to  state  thmr  opinions  to  one 
another.    Ih  the  first  pi^  of  this  indictsMnt, 
dm  panel  is  chdoged  with  baring  wickedlv  and 
leWniously  delivered  ^<  a  speech  coutaining  a 
number  of  sedttiens  and  inflamoiatory  remarks 
and  assertions^  eakulated  to  degrade  and  bring 
iota  coatdmpt  the  Oovemment  and  legislature^ 
and  to  witham^  therefrom  the  confidence  and 
aibctiotts  of  the  people,  and  to  fiU  tbe  realm 
witb  trouble  and  disseiitien.''     Gentiomen» 
vheiever  the  people  are  exposed  ts  grievanees 
U»ey  aeeewariJy  must,  when  tbey  meet  to  con- 
sider the  means  of  redrem,  exprem  their  sense 
of  these  grietances ;  and  I  ask  whether  H  be 
possible  10  state  public  grievsinces,  especiaUy 
grievanees  arising  from  sndk^  a  souroe  as  over* 
lantion^  iritboiit  in  soose  w^  or  other  reflect* 
ing  on  the  Government*    In  the  exercise  of 
our  right  of  petilioning  a^sinst  grievances^ 
these  grievances  must  be  fAentionod(  and  U 
isisspomiUe  to  B^ntisn  them^    or  even  to 
allude  to  thein,  without  briuging  tks  Govet»« 
SmM  into  discredit.    For  exam^  let  a  peti* 
lion  be  ptesented  against  ovcr*taxati#n»  What^ 
ever  were  the  causes  of  the  evil^*-wars  just 
«ran)us^ — unavoidable  misfortunes^  or  mis- 
•onduetin  public  afiaits^^^  is  lawful  to  state 
the  grievnnce.    But  can  it  be  steted  withont 
aiElcliBto  mure  or  less^  of  attempting  to  ^iffest 
Ae  public  opinion  su  tathe  mentsor  demerits 
«f  adminietintieQ?    Every   piAHe  stateiaeni 
mspeeting  pufalie  afidis  has  that  tendency. 
Bat  are  the  people  to  be  interrupted  on  soeh 

r lands,  in  tbe  execcise  of  their  just  rights . 
ii  of  the  essence  of  their  right  to  cooBfiain 


Trial  ^Alixanier  McLaren 


[S0 


*  Fysbe  Palmer's  oase  %  How. 
*■     371. 


Mod.  St 


of  grievgnces,  and  therefore  I  approAkend  yo« 
must  disregard  entirely  those  general  expres- 
sions in  the  iodlctment,  charging  McLaren's 
speech  as  tending  to  bring  the  Government 
into  contempt.  Tbe  petitionea  felt  griev-> 
ances ; — tbey  prepared  petitions,  and  it  is  im- 
possible to  state  a  puohc  grievance  without 
throwing  blame  upon  the  Government.  I  do 
not  mean  to  examine  the  question,  whether 
there  really  was  any  blame  attachable  to 
Government ;  for  it  is  the  same  thing  in  thin 
case  whether  the  petitioners  were  right  or  wrong 
in  their  statement.  My  defence  is,  that  the/ 
were  in  the  fair  prosecution  of  legal  views. 
Suppose  no  words  to  have  been  uttered  but 
what  would,  in  other  circumstances,  have  beeis 
considered  seditions,  their  baring  had  a  righC 
object  in  view  is  a  good  de£mce.  But  every 
sort  of  obloquy  has  been  thrown  on  the  petiti-> 
onersy  without  any  notice  of  the  lawful  object 
tbey  bad  in  riew,  as  if  tlieir  object  were  to  be 
kdd  entirely  out  of  consideration. 

The  legality  of  the  object,  and  the  situariom 
in  which  tbe  speeches  were  uttered,  ate  tbe 
most  important  eircumstances  of  the  case. 
Every  thiing  else  is  of  a  trivial  and  subordinate 
nature.  But  let  us  see  what  tbe  panel  is 
alleged  te  have  sai4*  No  positive  evidence 
has  been  adduced  te  prove  any  part  of  hie 
speech,  except  a  few  words  at  the  end  of  the 
passage  quoted  in  the  indictment,  and,  so  for 
as  I  bave  observed,  you  have  only  the  uneer* 
tain  evidence  of  one  person  to  these  words* 
I  shall  remark  upon  the  words  in  the  indiel« 
ment. 

'*  That  our  sufoings  are  insupDorte.blc^  ie 
demonstrated  to  the  world.''  I  ao  not  amy 
whether  Uieir  sufferings  were  insupportable  or 
not ;  but  tbey  appear  to  have  been  sevcfre^  and 
tbe  pec|)le  were  met  for  the  purpose  of  cob* 
sidering  them,  and  to  join  in  petitioning  fmg 
relief.    Here  I  presume  is  no  sedition. 

"  And  that  they  are  neither  temporary,  aer 
occasibned  by  transition  from  war  to  peace,  in 
palpable  to  all,  though  all  have  not  the  courage 
to  avow  it.''  I  do  not  say  that  proposition  in 
palpable  to  eveiy  body.  Some  are  daspeeei 
to  tnink  that  the  calamity  has  been  occasioned 
in  consequence  of  the  sudden  transition  fmna 
war  to  peace,  and  some  dispute  that  propo* 
sition.  Some  are  of  opinion,  that  if  we  bad 
continued  tbe  war,  at  an  expense  of  a  hundred 
millioos  a  year,  we  should  have  infolUbly  se* 
cured  the  national  prosperity  and  greatneas* 
I  shall  not  attempt  to  settle  these  points,  not 
is  that  neeessaiy  to  the  present  argument^  and 
t  beg  leaive  to  protest  against  the  idea  that  I 
give  any  opinion  upon  them  at  all.  Peibnpt 
Mr.  McLaren  may  include  me  in  his  censure 
for  my  went  of  courage  in  not  avowing  m^ 
opinion. 

**  Tbe  fact  is  ire  are  ruled  by  men  only  s<h 
licitous  for  tbeir  own  aggrandisement;  and 
they  care  no  further  for  the  great  body  of  the 
people,,  tban  they  are  subservient  to  their  ovns 
accursed  purposes.  If  you  are  convinced  of 
this,  my  countrymen^  I  would  therefore  pu) 


81] 


and 


Bairdjbr  SedUion. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[83 


Ike  i^itetUoQ,  we  jcn  degeeerate  enough  to 
bear  it  ?    Shall  we,  whose  forefathers  set  limits 
to  the  all  graspisf  power  of  Rome ;  shall  we, 
whose  forefatheiVf  at  the  never-to-be-forgptten 
field  of  fiaanockbuniy  told  the  rotghty  Edward, 
at  the  bead  of  the  most  mighty  army  ever  trod 
•D  Brilaio  s  soil,  ^  Hitherto  shalt  thou  come, 
eod  no  farther  ^  shaH  we,  I  say,  whose  fore> 
fatheis  defied  the  efforts  of  foreign  tyranny  to 
enslare  our  beloved  country,  meanly  permit,  in 
our  day,  without  a  murmur,  a  base  Oligarchy 
to  feed  th^r  filthy  Termin  on  our  vitals,  and 
rule  us  as  th^y  will  ?    No,  my  countrymen/' 
A  commentary  was  made   on  this  passage 
though  it  is  not  proved  that  the  panel  ever 
spoke  it.    The  prosecutor  takes  it  for  granted, 
without  evidence,  that  the  words  were  spoken. 
I  am,  therefore,  not  under  the  necessity  of  de- 
fending these  words.    But  are  they  in  reality 
so  culpable  ?    Are  they  seditious  ?    They  are 
mere  words  of  course,  in  expressing  those  pub- 
lic <  grieTances   to  which  they  refer.     Every 
child  knows  that  they  are  the  common  and 
hackneyed  terms  used  by  petitioners  for  public 
reform,  and  (excepting  one  or  two  allusions*  in 
whidi  there  is  evidently  no  sedition),  if  they 
are  not  tame  and  feeble,  they  are  at  least  neither 
seditious  nor  inflammatory.    Every  word  ap- 
plies to  the  professed  object  of  the  meeting  m 
petitioning,  and  to  no  other  object.    The  pro- 
secutor applies  some  of  the  words  to  the  king, 
but  this  is  a  misconstruction  quite  unworthy  of 
my  lord  advocate.    Ministers,  and  the  pos- 
sessors of  borough  interest*  are  the  vile  Oli- 
garchy, who  are  said  to  feed  their  filthy  vermin 
OQ  our  vitals,  and  rule  us  as  they  will,  and  tliis 
attack  was  justifiable  in  the  way  it  was  made. 
What  would  avail  the  right  of  petitioning,  if 
there  was  no  right  to  petition  against  his  majesty's 
ministers  and  their  partisans  ?    Ministers  may 
be  impeadted  in  parliament  for  their  public  con- 
duct, and  they  may  be  complainea  of  by  the 
people  in  their  petitions.    Are  petitions  to  par- 
liaiDent  against  ministers  to  be  punished  ^a 
sedition  ?    What  hare  we  here  ?    The  opinion 
of  the  panel  that  the  ministers  have  not  acted 
in  an  honest  way,  or  as  ministers  ought  to  do. 
The  opinion  is  expressed  a  little  strongly,  but 
it  does  not  go  beyond  legal  bounds.    The  pe- 
tition was  uterwards  laid  before  parliament, 
and  was  received  with  respect.    Now  the  ques- 
tion before  yon  is  not,  whether  the  ministers 
are  culpable  or  not — not  whether  lord  Castle- 
reagh  or  Mr.  Vansittart  might  bring  an  action 
fcr  a  libel  or  defamation— but  whether  there  is 
any  sedition  in  this  speech.     I   ask    you, 
whether  there  is  any  sedition  in  complaining 
of  these  ministen  ?    Sedition  is  an  attack  on 
the  sovereign  of  the  state— an  attack  on  the 
government,  not  on  the  ministers  of  the  go- 
▼emment.    Yon  may  attack  the  latter  in  any 
way>  without  being  guilty  of  sedition. 

Kit  luther,  as  to  the  passage  about  the 
Oligarchy.  It  is  generally  understood  that  a 
few  penons,  not  exceeding  300,  are  possessed 
of  an  influence  in  the  House  of  Commons  that 
a  very  pernicious  to  the  state.  Thia  is  the 
VOL  XXXUL  I 


Oligarchy,  the  government  of  a  ihw  by  uneoiH 
stitutional  influence,  alluded  to  in  the  paner^ 
speech.  Is  it  sedition  to  take  notice,,  even  by  ' 
allusion, of  such  a  public  grievance?  ]^  this 
sedition?  Against  whom  is  it  sedipon? 
against  d^  Kingl  against  the  Lords?  against 
the  Commons  ?  against  any  branch  of  the  legis- 
lature, or  against  the  legislature  taken  as  a 
whole?  it  is  sedition  against  no  person  or 
legal  authority  whatever.  It  is,  indeed, 
directed  against  the  Oligarchy  itself,  which, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  petitioners,  is  the 
worst  «nemy  of  the  King,  Lords  and 
Commons.  The  King,  Lords  and  Commops 
ought  to  be  independent ;  and,  if  an  uncon- 
stitutional influenoe  rules  over  them,  is  it  se- 
dition to  oomplain  of  that  influence  ?  Every 
friend  to  the  constitution  will  complain  of  it, 
if  he  supposes  it  to  exist.  I  apprehend  there 
is  nothing  in  this  part  of  the  charge ;  and  while 
M'Laren  denies  having  used  these  expressions 
about  our  rulers,  I  say  there  is  no  sedition  in 
them,  i  would  say  so,  even  if  the  words  had 
been  used  where  no  petition  to  the  legislature 
was  in  contemplation.  But,  considering  that 
the  meeting  was  called  for  that  purpose,  * 
nothing  can  be  more  unquestionable  thaa  that 
such  langpuage  was  not  seditious. 

I  come  now  to  the  last  of  the  words  quoted 
in  the  indictment,  and  I  hope  to  satisfy  you 
that  there  is  nothing  seditious  to  be  found  in 
them.     Allow  aoe   here   to  remind   you   of 
McLaren's  situation  when  he  made  (his  speech. 
It  has  been  proved  that  the  task  of  opening  the 
meeting  was  imposed  on  him,  contrary  to  his 
inclination,  and  came  upon  him  rather  unex- 
pected ly .    It  was  indeed  proposed  to  him  eight 
days  before  the  meeting,  but  he  was  unwilling 
to  undertake  it,  and  immediately  before  the 
meeting  he  pressed  Mr.  Samson  to  take  the 
business  off  his  hands.    An  hour  before  the 
meeting  Mr.  M'Laren  was  again  urged  to  open 
the  business;  and   being  in   soma  measure 
compelled  to  it,  he  retired  for  a  very  short  time, 
and  made  some  notes  of  his  short  address  to 
the  meeting.    You  will  see  in  the  whole  pro- 
ceeding t^e  most  evident  marks  of  haste.    It 
is  not  proved  that  the  last  sentence  was  written 
in  his  notes.     On  the  contrary,  it  was  not 
written.    Ue  was  placed  on  what  is  called  the 
hustings,  and  delivered  his  speech  during  a 
storm  of  wind,  rain  and  hail ;  from  the  noise 
of  which,  and  particularly  from  the  rattling  of 
the  hail  on  umorellas,  it  was  almost  impossible 
to  hear  what  he  said.    Besides  the  words  con- 
tained in  his  notes,  part  of  which  he  spoke,  and 
part  of  which  he  omitted,  he  spoke  other  words 
which. were  not  in  his  notes.     What  these 
words  were  is  uocertain,«as  they  could  not  be 
perfectly  heard.    A  single  witness  told  you  be 
heard  and  recollected  them,  though  he  could 
not  recollect  any  other  words  of  the  panel's 
speech.     There  is  no  great  reason  to  rely 
on  the  recollection  of  the  witness,  though 
there  is  much  reason  to  presume  that  the 
words  had  not  the  meaning  given  to  them 
by  the  publie   prosecutor.     The   words   in 
G 


837 


57  GBOROE  til. 


mat  i^AbamUfiKr  M*lMtK 


fM 


the  indictment  tre,  ^  thoald  be  be  to  infatuated 
as  to  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  their  just  petition^  he 
has  forfeited  their  allegiance.  Yes,  ny  feUow- 
townsfnen,  in  such  a  case,  to  heU  with  our 
allegiance."  But  the  passage  is  in  different 
words  according  to  the  etidenee  oJT  Mr.  Finnic, 
whose  recollection  of  words,  deliyered  in  the 
midst  of  hail  and  wind,  and  the  noise  of  um- 
brellas, while  nobody  else  could  hear  what 
McLaren  was  saying,  is  the  only  evidence  for 
the  prosecutor  of  me  sedition.  Aaother  wit- 
ness saijd  there  was  something  in  the  speech 
about  hell  and  allegiance,  but  he  could  gi?e  no 
intelligible  account  of  the  passage. 

Now,  is  it  probable  that  the  panel  should 
have  so  expressed  hfmself,  or  is  it  proTed  that 
he  used  the  words  imputed  to  him  ?  You  see 
the  rest  of  the  speech  does  not  appear  in  the 
same  mutilated  form  with  the  pas«^  given  by 
Mr.  Finnic.  There  is  reason  to  bebeve,  there- 
fore, that  the  passage  so  mutilated  is  not  the 
passage  deliyered  bv  McLaren.  And jret  ^ou 
are  called  upon  tpt  rely  imnlicitly  upon  Finme,  a 
single  witness,  to  the  woras  of  a  speech,  though 
there  was  such  a  noise  when  it  was  detiver^ 
that  persons  near  the  orator  could  not  hear  him : 
And  this  part  of  McLaren's  speech  is  said  to 
have  been  seditious.  Gentlemen^  you  must 
always  bear  in  mind  the  occasion.  No  otiter 
passage  of  the  speech  was  seditious.  McLaren 
was  recommending  a  petition  to  the  Prince 
BegenL  He  was  speaking  of  his  royal  high* 
ness  in  the  most  respectful  way^  and  in  a  warm 
strain  of  ]<mlty.  '^  Let  us  lay  our  petitions  at 
the  foot  of  the  throne,  where  sits  our  august 
prince,  whose  gracious  nature  If  ill  incline  his 
ear  to  listen  to  the  cries  of  his  people."  Here 
is  the  fondest  expectation  of  being  listened  to. 
But  it  is  natural  to  mingle,  with  the  kindest 
and  most  dutiful  sentiments,  the  severity  of 
doctrine  and  reasoning^  and,  on  this  occasion, 
it  is  possible  that  the  rigour  of  our  constitu- 
tional law  for  extreme  cases  may  have  sud- 
denly occurred  to  the  mind  of  the  panel.  We 
all  know  that  our  constitutional  rignts  and  du- 
ties go  hand  in  hand.  This  has  been  stated  in 
everr  possible  form  in  which  a  proposition  of 
the  kind  can  be  staled.  At  the  Revolution, 
the  Ixnds  and  Commons  held  James  to  have 
abdicated  the  throne,  merely  because  he  left 
ib«  country^  and  the  illusthous  house  of 
Hanover  wsi  at  last  established,  because  James 
ha^tailed  in  the  duties  he  owed  to  his  subjects. 
Again,  in  Scotland,  it  was  not  held  that  J  ames 
had  abdicated^  but  that  he  had /MrfeiteJ  the 
throne  in  eonsequence  of  his  proceedings. 
Speculations  on  the  iuliject.  indeed,  aredeticate, 
and  ought  not  to  be  mudi  indulged  in.  But 
what  was  more  natural  than  for  M'Laren  to 
urge  the  propriety  of  petitioning,  by  stating 
thatithe  petition  would  of  course  be  received, 
and  that  if  the  regent  did  not  regard  the  cries 
of  all  liis  people,  he  would  forfeit  their  alle- 
giance ?  M'Diren  did  not  say  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  Prince  Regent  to  listen,  right  or  wrong, 
to  the  petition  then  proposed.  In  thi»  way  the 
whole  passage  is  not  so  unreasonable;  and 


where  there  is  anuoeertainCy  what. the vuif 
words  weN|  the  moat  &v6uiuble  interpretatte» 
must  be  given  to  them. 

But,  in  the  worst  view  of  the  words,  they  im- 
port merely  that  in  an  extreme  case,  whick 
could  not  happen,  allepp  ance  vfonid  not  be  due,, 
and  such  an  alternative  does  not  import  ie*^ 
dition.  If  the  words  were  imprudent,  diey 
were  not  seditious.  They  might  indeed  hav€: 
been  without  a  vindioation,^  if  they  haid'  becnr 
used  at  a  public  meeting  where  no  such  woid» 
were  warranted  bv  the  occasion,  and  where  thA- 
me^nig  was  not  mr  the  purpose' of  petitioniBg' 
paritament.  But  consiaer  the  time  when  the 
vrords  were  used.  The  recommendation  of 
ray  lord  advocate  to  this  effect  was  cratir 
correct,  and  I  desire  you  to  keep  in  mind  tbaft 
Uiere  was  a  petition  at  the  time  under  consider 
ration,  and  that  expressions  might  then  be- 
more  allowable  than  at  another  time.  The^ 
sacred  right  of  petitioning  is  the  bulwark  of  the 
right  of  free  discussion.  Discussion  may  be 
idlowed  preparatory  to  a  petition,  that  would 
npt  be  endured  at  any  other  time.  Discussion 
ia  necessary  on  aU  such  occasions^  Free  words- 
may  on  tb^e  occasions  be  used  when  speaking 
of  ministers,  and  generaHy  of  public  men,  af 
well  as  of  public  measures.  Are  not  these 
propositions  self-evident?  Supposing  it  were 
asked,  whether  any  of  you  have  a  right  to  write 
a  letter  to  a  correspondent,  and  send  it  by  the- 
post.  The  answer  would  be,  you  have  a  risbt 
to  do  so ;  there  is  no  law  against  it  But  what 
if  you  have  no  right  to  use  pen^  ink,  and  paper  ; 
no  right  to  lift  the  pen,  to  put  it  in  the  mk* 
holder,  or  apply  it  to  the  paper  f  These  acts 
have  the  same  relation  to  writing  a  letter,  thaft 
the  right  of  canvas8in|^  what  are  ffrievmicea  has 
to  the  right  of  petitioning,  x  ou  hkve  the 
right  of  petitioning,  which  includes  the  right 
of  meeting  and  canvassing  the  subject  of  your 
petition.  Thus  the  right  of  discussion  is  pre- 
supposed  in  the  right  of  petition. 

-  As  to  the  lan^age  that  is  legal  and  warrant- 
able in  petitioning  and  previously  discussing 
the  mode  of  petition,  it  is  well  known  that 
parliament  may  be  approached  with  language 
as  strong  as  any  part  of  this  pamphlet,  and  cep- 
tainly  stronger  than  any  part  of  the  speech  oT 
the  panel.  As  evidence  of  this,  take  tM  votes 
of  uie  House  of  Commons,  and  yow  wilt 
iind  more  violent  and  bitter  expressions  of 
grievances,  than  any  in  this  publication.  I 
may  read  one  or  two  of  thes^  petitions,  which 
have  been  appointed  by  die  House  to  lie  en 
the  table,  and  which  the  House  would  not 
have  thoi^t  itself  bound  to  receive,  if  they 
had  considered  Uie  language  as  improper  in  a 
petition  to  pariiament*  I  hope  Mr*  Orent  will 
be  allowed  to  read  them  for  me. 

Mr.  Gnm/. — This  is  an  extract  of  a  petition 
from  Bristol,  presented  to  the  House  of  Com- 
mons on  the  29th  January  U317  [JSeoii  from 
the  Vote$1.  ^  That  no  man  of  sincerity  will 
affect  to  believe  that  such  a  squandering  of  the 
resources  of  the  country  for  such  purposes,  and 


tMiBf  It  piM«d  in  th«  negative.**  And  an* 
other  from  the  inhabitants  of  Delph  was  pre* 
sented ;  [fvedi]  "  And  a  motion  oein^  made, 
and  the  question  being  pnt,  that  the  said  peti« 
tion  do  lie  «poa  the  taUe,  it  passed  in  the 
negatiTe.*^ 

On  the  8l8t  Januaiy,  a  petition  from  the 
town  of  Usliiaz  was  presented  and  read,  sett- 
ing forth,  [reocb]  **  It  is  now  notorious  that 
the  people  of  tnis  kingdom  do  experience 
flagrant  wrongs  and  neat  misfortunes^  be- 
cause their  birthnofat  of  making  their  own  laws 
has,  through  the  decaY  of  ancient  boroughs,  at 
well  as  through  fraud  and  usurpation,  been 
taken  from  them ;  for  it  is  ttniversallY  known 
that  the^  nation  are  not  represented  in  the 
House ;  in  this  complication  of  decay,  injustice, 
and  wrong,  in  this  rain  of  the  constitution, 
wheieby  &e  people  have  been  defrauded  of 
the  seif-preserring  power  of  making,  through 
real  cepresentatiTes,  their  own  laws,  the 
House  must  see  the  causes  of  which  all  the 
present  calamities  of  our  country  are  the  ef- 
fects :  here,  and  here  only,  the  cause  of  war, 
here  the  cause  of  public  debt,  here  the  cause 
of  an  intolerable  taxation. — The  law,  through 
ih^  r^tless  power  of  those  who  have  usurped 
the  seats  in  the  House,  assumes  a  severity  re- 
volting to  humanity,  and  is  carried  into  exe- 
cution by  the  bayonet;  wherefore  the  peti- 
tioners feel  it  to  be  their  duty  to  protest  against 
that  corrupt  and  factious  ustirpat^on  of  seats  in 
the  House,  by  which  all  fr^eaom  is  destroyed^ 
and  our  unimppy  country  is  threatened  with 
convulsion,  slavery,  or  subjugation ;  for  in  a 
usurpation  which  inflicts  on  the  whole  com- 
munity taxation  without  representation!  nought 
but  despotism  can  be  discovered.'' 

"  A  petition  of  the  there-undersigned  inha- 
bitants of  the  town  and  neighbourhood  of 
Halifox,  in  Yotkriiire,  was  also  presented  and 
read;  containing  the  same  allegations  and 
praver  as  the  last  preceding  petition. — And  the 
said  petitions  were  orderea  to  lie  upon  the 
table?* 

There  are  many  other  petitions  which  I  may 
read  couched  in  equally  strong  language. 


•ft] 

llMJt  wtA  n  deatlveiifepowcr  in  the  managers 
«f  paper  money,  wonhi  ever  have  existed,  if 
.^e  members  of  the  Hoose  of  Commons  had 
-becD  the  real  repiesentatives  of  the  people, 
instead  of  beings  as  they  notoriously  are,  the 
jnete  coob  of  an  ever-grasping  and  tyrannical 
Ollgaidiyof  boconghmongers ;  that  it  is  in 
'vain  to  hc^  for  any  veal  remedy,  for  anjr  solid 
and  sabstuitial  relief  except  throngh  the  means 
•of  such  a  reform  in  the  Commons  or  people's 
House  of  Pariiament  as  shall  ensure  to  the 
people  Um  speaking  iof  their  will  throng  the 
-menna  of  representatives,  annoaUychosen  by 
all  men  who  have  attained  the  age  of  twenty- 
one  years,  seeing  that  all  men  pay  taaae,  and 
dmi  aU  men  have  fives  and  liberties  to  pro- 
eecti  Ordeted<hat<he  said  petition  do  Ue  <on 
ihetaUe." 

Ob  the  fame  day,  a  petition  from  the  iewn- 
ehip  of  Qoik:k  was  presented  and  read,  but  it 
appears  to  have  ■contained  expiessions  which 
were  deemed  otfensivje,  for  [reaA  from  the 
yaia']  **  a  motion  being  made,  and  the  ques- 
tion being  put,  that  the  said  petition  do  lie 
vpOB  the  table,  it  passed  in  the  negative.** 

On  the  same  dav,  the  address  and  petition 
4if  the  townof  (Xdham  was  presented  and  read, 
in  vrinch are  the foUo wing  expressions:  Ffeodiij 
'^  In  the  midst  of  all  these  calamities,  toe  lofr- 
uisteiB,  m  coinunction  with  an  unconstitntional 
and  corrupt  House  of  Commons,  have  pro- 
geeded  to  vote  away  a  great  part  of  the  puoUc 
■MNiey  to  superfluous  and  unnecessary  pur- 
(poses,  die  whole  of  which  evils  die  petitioners 
ascribe  to  the  want  of  a  real,  unbiassed,  i^, 
lawfril,  and  annual  election  of  the  members  of 
die  Commcms  Hotise  of  Pariiament^  instead 
4if  vrfakfa,  the  petitioners  see,  in  that  House, 

Speets  and  other  boioughmongers,  hundreds 
Its  seats  usurped ;  that  numbm  more  of 
thoee  sealSy  through  the  gross  venality  of  mo- 
AOpoliang  eerporators,  are  notoriously  bought 
and  sold,  and  a  laige  portion  of  the  members 
of  that  House,  who  ought  only  to  sit  there  as 
repfeeenlatives  of  die  people,  are,  nevertheless, 
piaoemen  and  pensioners  cC  the  «rown,  and 
veeeivc^  insrianesand  emoluments,  upwards 
of  t0O,000l.  a^yearout  of  the  taxes;  where- 
fore the  petitioners  feel  it  to  be  thdr  duty  to 
proceat  sigainst  diat  corrupt  and  factious  usurp- 
jrtioit  of  seat*  in  that  House,  by  which  freedom 

fiid  our  once  happy  countnr 
Lh  slavery,  starvation,  codvuW 
and  luia;  for,  in  an  usurpation  which 
iaidiets  on  the  whole  coBsmunity  taxation  witb- 
ooft  repKsentation,  nouaht  but  despotism  can 
he  discovnrad,  nought  but  rain  can  proceed. 
Jkad  the  said  peddo9ft  were  orderea  to  lie 
wpOB  the  fable.*^ 

Immediately  after  ^diich,  it  appears  that 
£rcedi]  '^  A  petition  from  Ashton-under-Iine 
was  presentea  and  read,  containing  the  same 
sJlegations  and  prayer  as  the  petition  of  the 
inhaliitaafs  of  the  township  or  Quick,  which 
was  fbts  di^  presented  to  tne  House.  And  a 
motion  being  made,  and  the  question  being 
XfBtLp  thm  the  laid  petition  do  lie  upon. die 


Mr.  CMb.— I  think  enough  has  been  read, 
and  we  need  not  latignethe  Court  and  the 
jury, 

Mr.  Gr«n^«-Particula»ly  on  die  12th  of 
March  I  see  there  are  several  petitions  received 
in  the  same  terms  with  the  petition  from 
Halifax. 

Mr.  Clerk, — This  is  but  a  specimen  of  the 
petitions  which  have  been  sent  to,  and  received 
oy  parliament.  'Such  axe  not,  indeed,  petitions 
whidi  the  House  of  Commons  is  disposed  to 
grant.  But  the  privilege  to  think  and  talk  on 
diese  matters,  to  take  advice  about  them,  to 
hold  meetings  about  them,  and  to  make  them 
the  subjects  of  speeches,  resolutions,  and  pe- 
titions, unquestionably  belongs  to  the  people 
of  tfair  country.  The  right  ofpetxtioning  is  so 
sacred,  that  Uie  most  overbearing  and  arbi- 


871        57  GEORGE  Hh 


rr»a 


traiy  administrations  hava  never  proposed  to 
restrict  it  altogether.  You  will  pause,  then, 
before  jou  prooooooe  a  verdict,  which,  as  the 
public  prosecutor  demands  it»  wottkl»  in  terms 
almost  direct,  be  a  verdict  against  the  right  of 
petitioning:  for  the  same  argument  that  has 
been  urged  against  the  panel  would  apply 
against  speeches  relative  to  petitions*  conj^ 
plaining  of  any  other  public  abuses,  if  the 
distresses  of  the  people  should  be  never  so 
great — abuses  against  which  ne  i^nnedy  conld 
be  looked  for  but  by  petitioning  the  legislature, 
and  stating  the  grievances  in  the  language  of 
to>utfa.  Were  such  a  pestilence  i0  be  intro- 
duced in  ^is  part  of  the  island,  as  prosecu- 
tions to  subvert  the  right  of  petitioning,  the 
consequences  would  indeed  be  calamitous. 
The  right  of  petitioning,  so  tenaciously  held 
by  our  ancestors,  may  l^  still  more  necessary 
to  our  posterity.  The  present  case  ought  not 
to  have  been  prosecuted,  even  if  the  words 
had  been  more  inflammatory  than  they  are. 
It  has  no  resemblance  to  a  case  of  sedition. 
In  the  case  of  Muir,*  and  a  variety  of  .others, 
in  which  men  were  tried  and  punisHed  for 
sedition,  a  wicked  purpose  was  always  clearly 
established,  and  the  accused  had  no  pretence 
for  saying  that  they  looked  toward  the  legis- 
lature for  the  accomplishment  of  their  objects. 
The  ipoment  that  such  a  bona  fik  purpose  is 
in  view,  the  eubject  has  a  right  to  express  his 
opinion,  and  he  cannot  be  subjected  to  punish- 
ment for  it.  If  he  could  be  punished,  the 
right  of  petition  would  be  at  an  end. 

Gentlemen,  the  panel  is  a  person  of  irre- 
proachable character,  and  his  former  history, 
and  in  particular  the  loyalty  and  public  spirit 
of  his  conduct  on  all  occasions,  leave  no  room 
for  any  presumption  that  he  would  be  inclined 
to  seditious  practices. 

£Mr.  Clerk  then  read  the  following  jcertir 

ficates :] 

Kilmarnock,  2nd  April,  1S17, 
This  is  to  certify,  that  Alexander 
McLaren  has  resided  in  my  house  as  a 
lodger  for  the  space  of  seven  years  against 
May  next,  behaving  himself  soberly  and 
honestly,  free  from  wrangling  or  quarrel- 
ling, and  as  a  loyal  subject,  speaking 
respectfully  of  government,  and  all  other 
rulers  in  their  different  stations,  so  far  a^ 
is  known  to  me. 

John  Stratrern,  wright. 

EHmamock,  2nd  AprU^  1817. 
.This  is  to  certify,  that  Mr.  Alexander 
McLaren  has  resided  in  Kilmarnock  for 
upwards  of  eiffht  ^ears,  and  has  been  se- 
,  veral  years  in  habits  of  intimacy  with  the 
undersigners ;  and  during  that  time,  to 
the  utmost  of  our  knowledge,  has  behaved 
in  a  sober  and  peaceable  manner ;  at  all 
tiroes  has  been  a  loyal  subject,   a  finp 


2  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  ^17. 


fneod  of  order,  and  a  habitiAl  respecter 
of  authority. 

JoBH  Stratheiih,  wiight. 

James  Al£xa3«j)Er,  9tn,  weaver. 

John  Buntin,  weaver. 

Wm.  Howie,  builder. 

Geo.  Smith,  grocer. 

John  Paxton,  brewer. 

James  Craig,  weaver. 

James  Buntin,  shoemaker. 


Mr.  Jeffre^j^^YovL  are  aware,  gentlemen, 
that  it  is  now  my  duty  to  address  you  on  the 
part  of  the  other  panel ;  and,  after  what  yoit 
nave  already  heard,  and  Ihe  ample  opportunity 
you  have  had  to  consider  the  whole  of  the  evi* 
dence  during  the  trial,  I  flatter  myself  I  shall 
be  able  to  discharge  this  duty  without  en* 
croaching  much  longer  on  your  time.  I  wish, 
first,  to  address  a  word  or  two  to  you  on  the 
facts  of  the  case,  and  to  lay  before  you,  in 
a  detached  form,  those  that  relate  to  this 
panel,  Thomas  Baird— >after  which  I  must 
trouble  you  with  a  few  words  on  what  I  ood- 
ceive  to  be  their  reasonable  and  legal  import. 

It  is  one  comfort  in  this  case,  surrounded  as 
it  is  with  discomforts  and  anxieties,  that  with 
regard  to  the  facts,  there  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt  in  your  minds ;  nor  am  I  aware,  indeed, 
that  upon  this  part  of  the  subject  there  is  any 
great  contradiction  between  the  opposite  sides 
of  the  bar.  And,  therefore,  I  shall  give  but  a 
slight  abridgement  of  the  facts,  separating 
those  which  apply  to  this  individual,  tJie  truth 
and  import  ot  which  I  do  not  conceive  liable 
to  any  question. 

You  will  remember,  it  has  been  put  in  evi- 
dence before  you,  that  he  is  a  man  in  a  good 
condition  in  life,  which  is  denoteitl,  indeed,  by 
his  appearance.  He  is  in  reality  a  most  re- 
spectable person,  who  had  long  resided  in  the 
town,  among  whose  citizens  he  had  taken  an 
active  part  on  this  occasion ;  and,  even  in  the 
judgment  of  those  who  differed  from  him  in 
opinion  on  political  subjects,  and  who,  from 
their  official  situation,  had  the  power  and  the 
duty  to  prevent  him  from  committing  any 
wrong,  he  was  universally  esteemed  incapable 
of  harbouring  evil  intentions  against  the  con- 
stitution. He  was  entrusted  with  military  and 
civil  offices,  which  are  only  committed  to 
known  and  tried  hands.  He  is  past  the  early 
period  of  youth,  when  great  imprudence  may 
take^ptace,  notwithstanding  pnncinles  gene- 
rally correct.  He  has  a  young  ramily  de- 
pendent on  him  for  their  subsistence;  and 
earns  his  livelihood  by  a  trade  which  depends 
for  its  success  on  his  good  character  and 
conduct.  It  has  been  proved  that  his  general 
conduct  is  not  only  correct  but  exemplary,  and 
that  he  has  been  in  the  habit  of  communicating 
and  discussing  his  opinions  on  politics  with  a 
variety  of  persons  who  did  not  concur  in  thjose 
opinions ;  and  therefore,  while  the  other  panel, 
from  being  less  known  in  the  town,  could  not 
have  his  character  so  generally*  spoken  to,  we 
wbo  have  been  entniued  with  the  defence  of 


amtilthamai 


hr  SetBtmn. 


Buid,  and  >Ih>  betAg  1«m  dreamscrib^d  in 
^is  rasped,  eoold  affrad  toiMke  a  Mlection 
ioi  oar  witees9^  have  prnpoaely  abstained 
from  taking  ibe  eridence  of  these  who  con* 
.ciured  ih  his  poMtical  sentiments,  or  bringing 
one  Teformer  to  testify  in  larour  of  another, 
and  have  tboaght  it  better  to  take  the  evidence 
of  those  only  who  were  naturally  influenced 
hy  opposite  motives  and  principles. 

You  heard  from  them  that  mis  person  has 
always  been  remarkable  for  the  frankness  with 
wfaidb  he  ddivered  his  opinions;  and  that, 
even  when  expressing  them  with  the  beat  and 
exaggeration  inseparable  from  such  discussions 
among  parties  who  do  not  agree,  they  always 
appeared  to  them  perfectly  innocent  and  fair. 
wowne,  Wyllie,  and  Miller,  from  profession 
and  sitoadon  the  roost  figuring  men  in  the 
town,  and  the  most  notoriously  adverse  to  any- 
change  in  4he  established  order  of  things,  aU 
say  he  «miformly  maintained  such  language  as 
impressed  their  minds  with  a  conviction  Uiat 
he  was  strongly  and  decidedly  attached  to  the 
constitntion  of  this  empire,  though  he  wished 
for  a  reform  in  the  Commons  House  of  Pariia- 
aent :  that  he  was  a  mild  person,  aud  of  a 
cbancter  incapable  of  exciting,  in  any  way, 
any  degree  of  disorder  or  discontent  against 
government. 

f  am  aware,  that  a  good  moral  character  is 
not  in  general  an  answer  to  a  charge  of  crime, 
if  there  is  distinct  proof  of  its  having  been 
committed  on  any  particular  occasion ;  and 
that  an  allegation  by  the  prosecutor  of  a  wrong 
committed  by  a  person  whose  moral  character 
previously  stood  untainted,  will,  if  supported 
Dy  positive  evidence,  lead  to  the  punishment 
of  tnal  person,  notwithstanding  such  previous 
good  character.  But  I  submit  to  ^oa,  that  in 
a  trial  Uke  this,  depending  mainly  on  thie 
question,  whether  the  panel  harboured  a 
mdced,  ielonious,  and  seditious  purpose, — 
or,  if  he  did  not  harbour  such  purpose  in  its 
obvious  aod  naked  form,  whether  he  was 
chargeable  with  that  disregard  of  the  safety  of 
his  neighbour,  or  thalt  recklessness  as  to  con- 
sequences, which,  in  the  eye  of  law,  is  const* 
dered  a  moral  wrong,  and  punished  as  wicked 
and  felonious : — ^I  say,  in  a  case  in  which  every 
thing  depends  on  this ;  where  the  matter  is  in* 
tfinsically  of  a  doubtful  nature ;  where  it  is  a 
qoesticm  whether  a  person  has  gone  beyond  a 
IMidooaUe  vivacity  of  discussion,  and  ven- 
tuied  to  use  language  which  the  law  holdsto 
be  demonstrative  evidence  of  Improper  pur- 
.pose — if,  in  these  drcmnstances,  you.  find  a 
standing  iq  Snch  a  situation  as  the  panel 
teaiftMr«ttii*ea]^0»;himself  to  public 
gifted -with  powe^of  eloquence- 
no  way  accoslomed  or  inditted  to  try  his 
tsieals  in  that  way — carrying  on  a  thriving 
trade,  which  he  has  no  disposition  to  leave — 
and  standing  comparatively  uniojured,  while 
etbers  around  him  were  on  the  verge  of  ruin 
—<>f  peaceable  habits^— of  moderate'pohtical  ^ 
pfinciples — under  such  citcamstances,  I  say, 
foa  are  booad  to  pr^fmne  for  his  iimoceDce; 


A.  D.  1817* 


ro6 


unless  eitmiAat  intention  be  dfariy  and  un* 
answerably  established  against  him.  The  legal 
presumption  of  innocence,*  in  such  a  ease, 
amounts  almost  to  a  moral  certainty. 

In  this  situation,  Mr.  Bahrd,  placed  as  he 
was  hi  the  heart  of  a  manuihcturing  district, 
could  not  hA  to  be  a  spectator  of  rery  general* 
and  very  deplorable  misery.  A  shuer  in  it  he 
must  also  have  been  in  some  degree,  as  all 
persons  must  be  who*  are  connected  with  the 
sale  of  commodities  from  which  purchasers  are 
gradually  withdrawing.  Although  the  causes 
of  the  general  distress  did  nQ>t  so  immediately 
or  directly  affect  him,  yet  he  heard  and  wit* 
nessed  those  clamours  and  complaints,  which- 
certainly,  in  this  part  of  the  island,  have  not 
hitherto  broken  out  into  those  rather  compas- 
sionable  than  criminal  excesses,  to  which-  the 
infirmity  of  human  nature,  rather  than  the  ma- 
lignity of  individuals,  or  of  any  class  of  the 
people,  mav  be  hurried  in  seasons  of  such  un* 
precedented  calamity.  He  could  not  help 
hearing  those  complaints,  and  listening  to  the 
remedies  which  were  proposed  for  those  evils ; 
and  it  appears,  that  he  concurred  in  the  opi- 
nion which  some  persons  have  held  ^  and  he 
confessed  it  to  all  with  whom  he  had  occasion 
to  converse-*- that  a  great  part  of  the  evils  arose 
from  a  defect  in  one  of  the  great  bodies  of  the 
legislature — from  want  of  due  communion  of 
sentiment  between  the  bod^  of  the  people,  and 
those  whose  fonction  it  is  to  express  theilr 
sentiments,  and  watch  over  their  interests. 
That  he  entertained  such  an  opiniou,  there  is 
no  doubt.  Not  going  so  iar,  perhaps,  as  think* 
ing  that  a  ueform  in  the  representation  of  the 
people  would  remove  the  evils  then  existing, 
ne,  in  common  with  many  persons,  was  of 
opinion,  that  it  mivht  tend  at  least  to  prevent 
their  recurrence.  He  certainly  did  favour  the 
professed  object  of  the  meetinfr,  and  in  this, 
if  his  guilt  began,  it  also  ended.  He  undis- 
guisedly  gave  his  countenance  to  a  general 
meeting  for  petitioning  the  thr^e  branches  of 
the  legislature,  for  redress  of  grievances,  and 
reform  of  the  Commons  House  of  Parliament. 
His  conduct  in  this  particular  was  worthy  of 
the  sincerity  with  which  it  was  dictated*  As- 
sociated with  some' others  whom  you  have 
seen,  they  agreed  as  to  the  propriety  or  ex* 
pediency  of  encouraging  this  method  of  pro- 
ceeding; and  at  the  same  time,  they  .deter- 
mined not  to  take  this  step  of  calling  a  meeting 
for  petitioning  the  legislature,  if  it  was  op* 
posed,  or  likeV  to  produce  any  opposition,  m 
an  official  form,  on  the  part  of  the  local  ma^ 
gistrates.  Accordingly  mt,  Baird,  as  one  of 
Uie  most  respectable  of  the  committee  (all  of 
whom  seem  to  have  been  cool  persons  enough 
when  the  heat  of  the  action  was  over,  and  the 
field  deserted),  waited  on  the  provost;  and 
the  provost  told  you,  that  though  be  disap- 
proved of  the  meeting,  he  did  not  think  ne 
nad  power  to  prevent  it,  •  He  seems .  actually 
to  have  gone  out.of  town  when  it-  took  place : 
so  far  'was  he'  from*  thinking  thefe  ^was  any 
daDger  to  be  appfthndad :  and  he  wu  ' 


ni 


iff  QfiOROB.  III. 


JVM  ^Aktmder  tttatfrn 


CM 


ied  in  bit  opfailoD  from  tht  mall— <lifft  wm  | 
no  tendency  tx>  tumult  or  disonler.  | 

At  that  meetiogi  Mr.  Bmidy  no  doubt^  «t- 
ilended.  He  wu  ttiere  wid  heard  the  apexes 
ihat  Jirere  delivered ;  some  of  wbidi,  ondoabt- 
edlj,  ^icontain  Tery  indecorous  and  improper 
'Cqpfettibns — expressions  which  it  may  have 
been  prepoetctous  to  utter  at  a  meeting  con- 
vened for  lawfol  and  oonstitutional  purposes. 
But  if  persons  go  to  such  a  meeting  at  al^  they 
may  expect  that  prepoelerous  expressions  will 
1)0  used,  on  both  sides,  peibafMy  of  the  qnes- 
tion.  But  is  a  man  to  ne  punikied  for  sedi- 
tion, if  he  accidentally  hear  seditious  laoguage 
mnt^oyed  by  aoodier  person?  Not  on^  wet 
the  measure  of  ealliog  a  meeting  for  petitioning 
perfectW  lawful  in  itself,  but  &e  bamnour  of 
those  who  attended  seems  to  haTO  been  ordeily, 
decent  and  exemplary*  I  do  not  know  whether 
Tonr  views  concur  with  those  of  Mr.  Baird, 
but  thinking  as  he  did  on  the  subject,  he  acted 
properly.  It  is  to  be  taken  for  granted, 
that  Ae  petitioners  were  sincere  in  their  opi* 
■km,  and  that  in  taking  those  measures,  tney 
thought  thev  would  be  of  great  eflRsct  in  pro* 
ducing  good* 

At  that  meeting,  then,  Mr.  Baird  did  not 
epeak.  He  heard  the  speeches  in  question^ — 
Mt  as  that  could  not,  or  course,  taint  him  with 
guilt,  I  am  sure  you  will  go  along  wiUi  me  in 
thinking,  that  up  to  this  point  there  was  im- 
thing culpable  in  his  conduct;  and  therefore 
the  veiy  beginning  and  ending  of  the  crimi- 
nality imputed  to  him  consists  in  his  having 
nllefwaids  (I  cannot  say,  concurred,  but)  sub- 
mitted to  a  resolution  forced  on.himbythe 
m^rity  of  those  persons,  with  whom  he  was 
associated,  in  an  application  to  parlmment,  for 
having  these  orations  printed,  in  a  foil,  true 
and  particulat  acoaunt  of  the  whole  proceed- 
ings. This  we  stated  in  the  outset ;  and  it 
hat  been  proved,  without  contradiction,  by 
the  testimony  of  a  variety  of  witnesses.  In 
the  examination  of  the  several  witnesses,  no 
indtcation  ever  appeared,-«no  hint,  even  in 
the  moat  distant  manner,  ever  presented  it-' 
fel(— 4hat  the  publication  of  the  speeches  was 
made  inith  a  view  that  seditious  doctrines 
dmnld  be  piopatated,  or  that  the  contents  of 
the  work  should  be  studied  by  persons  at  a 
distance.  Hie  puUication  is  dearly  proved 
not  to  have  had  any  such  ambitious  object; 
but  to  have  been  made  in  the  humble  view  of 
lecaiing  a  little  paltry  gain,— to  defray  tim 
expense  of  nailing  up  a  fow  boards  for  the  ao- 
coasmodation  6f  the  oraton,  and  providing  a 
ftw  sheets  of  gilt  paper  for  thsee  or  four  peti- 
tions to  be  tnnsmitled  to  the  Prince  Regent 
mid  the  Houses  of  Pariiameat. 

It  occurred  to  the  petitioners,  that  the  only 
means  for  defraying  mis  heavy  expense  was  to 
print  an  aooonnt  of  their  piocoedings^— that 
anums  tiieir  neighbours,  whether  those  who 
agreed  mth  them»  or  weto  opposed  to  them 
in  iwlitkal  oninions,  tbcy  might  sell  as  many 
eopies  as  te^ht  raisie  the  sum  which 


is  not  the  leeit  veetige  of  aoydmbn  m  havn 
the  woik  read  or  admired,  either  for  mischief 
or  glory;  The  only  object  was  to  get  a  small 
number  sold;  and  aeoordrngly  diey  seem  all 
to  have  been  sold — without  so  mndi  as  a 
single  copy  having  been  given  awuv.    Mr. 


Baird,  into  whose  hands,  as  on^ 
mittee  of  the  petitioners^  a  number  of  the 
copies  were  impressed,  got  rid  of  them,  it  is 
true,  vqth  more  fodlity  than  another  man  who 
was  examined  to-day  did  of  Jiis  copies.  But 
this  was  merely  becnnse  he  keeps  a  weU-fro- 
quented  shop,  not  because  he  was  in  any  way 
aealoos  for  their  circulation.  The  natum  of 
Mr.  Baird's  trust  and  management  in  the 
burfnem  were  proved  to  vou  by  his  own  shop- 
man, and  his  own  dedamtion;  and  it  has 
been  proved,  that  if  he  got  rid  of  every  oim 
copy  he  vras  possessed  of,  shopmanlike  1m 
exacted  his  groat  for  every  one  ot  them  urhidt 
he  sold.  Tbe  printer  said  that  about  400 
copies  were  printed.  Some  remained  in  the 
haiids  of  members  of  the  committee  who  did 
not  get  them  sold.  They  were  not  sold  te 
booksdlen ;  becanse  the  petitionen  could  not 
eflbrd  to  pay  booksdlcrs'  commission:  thev 
were  sdd  for  a  paiticnlar  purpose,  which  £ 
have  specified,  and  were  soul  in  the  cheapest 
way.  Some  of  them  were  sold  in  a  grocer's 
sh<^  where  they  mixht  be  ofuse  to  wrap  up 
goods  that  were  purmsed;  other  members  of 
me  committee,  however,  could  not  sell  their 
eopies,  because  they  could  not,  perhaps,  be  of 
sudi  immediate  use  to  the  purchasers. 

You  see  the  nature  of  this  transaction,  then^ 
and  you  must  now  be  aware  that  it  is  con- 
formable U>  the  statement  which  was  given  of 
it  at  the  beginning.  Mr.  Baird  took  no  step 
disconformable  to  his  general  dmracter  of  n 
quiet,  modest,  honest,  wel)-disposed,  good 
man ;  he  made  no  speedies,  but  disapproved 
of  various  speeches  and  passages  in  speedma 
(which  foot  has  been  folly  made  out),  as  hamh 
and  offensive;  and  these  are  considerations 
which  certainly  are  of  importance  in  determtn* 
ing  whether  he  n  guilty  or  not  of  sedition,  an 
diarged  against  htm  in  this  indictment. 

These  are  the  whole  of  the  foctsof  this  case  ; 
and  you  will  be  pleased  to  add  to  these  focta 
what  is  proved  to  you  by  the  evidence,  and 
which  the  dates  and  the  documents  themselves 
instruct,  vix.  Uiatall  this  took  place  publidy. 
It  was  known  to  his  majestv's  advocate,  and 
all  the  lieges,  that  this  was  done  so  long  beck 
as  December  1816;  and  yon  have  seen  that 
400  eopies  of  the  publication  were  all  that 
wevepnnted.  I  do  not  think  yon  will  imagint 
it  is  very  Ifkdy  the  anthon  and  printem  es» 
peeled  a  gtfeat  sale.  None  of  the  authom  were 
mndi  known  inthe  literaiy  woiid,  and  none  of 
them,  I  think,  profossed  themeelves  to  be 
poUttdans.  The  object  was  to  sell  copies  to 
the  eniiotts  cdnntiy  gendemen  and  the  goasipa 
m  the  neighbourhood.  It  was  reasonable  to 
think,  too^  that  some  peofite  mig^  have  tlua 
eariQSity»  who  were  prevented  by  the  weather 
frMB  gm^^mtt  it,  bTtttmidiag  at  thn  meeting ; 


09l  mwf  THaiiifi  fiwrrfjTir  VMmw 

far  ywfi  i*i>  KwMMt,  thai  iIm  ipeedm  i*tM 


A.  D.  1817. 


IM 


•pocMi  IB  dtfiafioe  of  tiM  angxy  biwtf  of 
iMTODy — ifi  tiM  nidtt  of  hafl,  mow,  and  wind^ 
•ad  potwitiwtaiiding  tho  coporitioa  of  the 
•lomeBlt.  PodtwDS  ia  oenumiiity  with  tbese 
gpoechOT  <pero  cngi owod ;  tad  it  it  nol  demod, 
iior  can  there  be  wf  doebt  of  the  feet,  thai 
liwjr  were  oieaentedp  and  tliat  thej  were  re- 
ceived Willi  the  oaoal  cinlities  with  which 
pewons  in  thoee  hig^  qmirleia  are  woat'to 
leeetve  aoch  coimmmifeatioM, 

All  thie  was  dene  montht  ago,  and  ^  a  time 
when  DO  atarm  aboot  seditioa  obtained  here 
or  in  aaiy  oUier  quarter  of  the  kingdom;  and 
Mr.  Beird  was-attowed  lo  idl  his  commodity 
el  pamphletay  and  to  convene  with  his  neiph- 
boiua  aboQt  them^  without  an j  bod^  hmting 
Ihathewaiin  any  danger,  not  fitom'Whathe 
was  doiaff,  bat  from  wluift  he  had  done  weeks 
before.  Bot,  after  that,  some  odiootf  proceed- 
ings took  place  in  another  quarter  of  the 
ishiad.  Certain  mobs  had  eicited  consider- 
aMe  alarm  in  the  mind  of  the  Lq^islatiire,  and 
of  the  inhabitants  of  the  metropolis^  where  a 
larn  asMmbkq^e  of  people  is  easily  convened) 
and  distnrbance  easily  excited.  They  did 
comnit  some  little  ontrage,  and  occasioned 
aome  fear  for  the  peace  of  the  dty,*  This 
Hear  was  propasated  to  the  extremities  of  the 
empirey'-4nd  then  the  Ttgilance  of  the  Pnblic 
Fh»ecntor  in  tlds  country  goes  back  to  a  for- 
BKT  meeting,  in  a  remote  quarter,  which  had 
not  been  attended  with  any  tumult,  and  had 
not  been  followed  up  wifh  any  the  slightest 
criminal  consequences.  A  book,  consisting 
of  foolish,  ridicnkras  specimens  of  rustic  ora* 
torr  is  on  this  occasion  brought  forward,-— 
and  this  quiet,  esteemed  and  trust-worthy 
man  is  brought  to  your  bar,  and  arraigned  for 
having  wittedly  and  fdonioosly  circulated 


We  come  now  to  consider  what  is  the  in^ 
port  of  the  foets  in  this  case,  and  what  is  the 
▼erdict  you  ought  this  night  to  pronounce  on 
the  peison,  wImso  character  through  life,  and 
whose  conduct  upon  one  occasion,  have  been 
detailed  to  yon  in  evidence  to-day:  The 
ouestion  is^  Whether  the  eridence  to  which  I 
have  referred  is  such  as  to  compel  you,  con- 
trary to  that  general  presnmption  of  innocence 
ifl^di  law  establishes  for  every  aoeosed  per- 
aoB,*-coatnry  to  that  special  presumption  of 
Jljnnrnncfl  wluch  the  wbole  tenor  of  the  de- 
llmdaBt's  lifo  and  Aoaduet  morallT  esUblishes 
in  his  favoor,— wheihvr  that  evidenee,  I  say, 
be  each  as  to  constrain  yon  to  pronounce  theft 
kis  eaadact  upon  this  occafion  originated  in 
amligaaal  aad  diabolical  parposes^-— purposes, 
foom  the  snoosis  of  vrido  he  had  Orety  thing 
to  lose  and  nothing  to  gain,  but  was  to  be 
ttorsly  an  inglorioos  stirrer  up  of  sedition  in 
the  fim  instance,  and  a  victim  to  its  guilt  and 
iosaaify  in  the  second. — ^The  question  I  say  is. 
Whether  the  evidence  goes  to  shew  that  such 
Is  Ihe  chaiacter  of  his.  o£fence,— that  such  foUy 


"vw- 


flee  James  WatsonVCeM,  VoL  xzxii.p.  1« 


oMst  be  imputed  to  a  men  of  sense  and 
racter,  and  that  vou  cannot  help-  saying,  on 
your  oaths,  that  ne  disregardea  all  conse- 
quences to  others,  to  his  country,  and  to  him- 
self and  was  detehnined  to  stir  up  seditioa 
and  distaibance. 

The  essence  of  this,  and  of  all  other  Cffimee, 
consists  in  the  moral  defect  by  which  they  are 
engendered;  and  therefore  it  is,  that  eveiy 
criminal  indictmeot  necessarily  charges,  that 
the  offence  for  which  it  threatens  the  iccosed 
person  with  punishment  was  committed  wtclh 

acnd/emioiii/j^ ;  and  I  believe  almost  every 
ctment  for  crimes  of  this  description  con- 
tains in  more  express  words  than  occur  here, 
an  allegation  that  the  acts  set  foitii  and  de- 
scribed were  done  wdA  en  mlotfioa  to  excite 
sedition  and  disturbance.  It  is  the  intention,, 
in  short,  in  which  the  crime  legally  and 
morally  consists.  I  do  not  find  foult  with  the 
omission  of  that  in  the  indictment.  I  rely  oi» 
the  candour,  propriety,  and  vrisdom  of  the 
Bendi,  to  give  you  the  requisite  information 
on  the  subject :  and  I  am  sure  yo^  wiU  be  told 
that  the  words  indispensably  inserted  ^in  tliia 
indictment  are  in  their  own  statement  equiva- 
lent to  a  direct  allegation  of  intention  in  the 
commission  of  the  crime  charged;  aad  that  a 
more  particulsr  charge  of  intention  oould  nol 
have  served  any  purpose. 

When  I  sav  this  is  a  necessary  piH  of  this^ 
and  of  all  other  charges  of  sedition,  yon  win 
ffive  me  so  much  ciedit  as  to  suppoee  that  I 
do  not  mean  to  assert  that  the  Fuolic  Prose- 
cutor is  bound  to  bring  direct  and  positive 
proof  of  a  criminal  intention  having  bee» 
actually  expressed,  or  that  it  is  not  compe^ 
tent  for  him  to  aigne  that  the  nature  of  the- 
acts  themselves, — the  circumstances  in  whick 
thqr  were  committed, — the  situation  of  the- 
party, — ^the  temptations  to  which  he  was  ex- 
posed,^-ids  whole  conduct  before  and  after  tibe- 
time  he  con^mitted  the  acts, — the  general  and 
well-known  complexion  of  the  times  when  the* 
acts  were  done,  are  to  be  taken  into  consider* 
ation,  in  forming  a  judgment  as  to  the  inten* 
tion  with  which  the  acts  were  performed.-— ^ 
Sttdi  considerations  csnnotbntarord  evidence 
of  the  purpose  and  intention  \  and  in  ^ues* 
tions  with  regard  to  almost  dl  other  onmes^ 
^is  inference  is  generally  so  plain  and  neces*- 
sarjr  M  to  make  the  task  of  the  Jury  compa* 
rativdy  easy.  If  a  man  aim  a  blow  at  another; 
and  knock  out  his  brains, — if  a  person  break 
in  at  night  and  rob  a  house,  or  if  he  for^e  a 
bill,  and  draw  money  for  it  from  a  bank,  it  is 
vain  ta  say  there  is  a  necessity  to  bring  evi* 
dence  beyond  the  feet  itself,  to  prove  a  malign 
nant  purpose  in  the  one  case,  or  a  purpose  of 
fraud  in  the  other.  But  observe  me  charao* 
ter  of  sedition  as  defined,  or  attempted  to  be 
defined,  by  my  learned  iiiend,  and,  indeed,  bv 
all  the  lawyers.  I  am  not  finding  fault  with 
my  Lord  Advocate  for  not  properiy  defining 
sedition,  because  it  is  one  of  uie  disadvimtag^ 
attending  such  a  case,  that  a  suificient  ana 
satisfactoiy  definition  is  not  to  be  easily  found) 


751 


S7  GEORGB  IIL 


Trial  ^Mtumbr  M*lMm 


tTtt- 


meattest  of  the  peoples  ^mn  aooient  times. 
Since  the  Revohitioa  it  has  oever  beeo  qaesti- 
oned;  and  immedialely  before  that  glorious 
event,  it  was  attacked  only  to  enable  a  tyran- 
uoal  gOTenunent  to  sabvert  the  public  liberty. 
But  t£e  attack  was  repelled  even  in  the  worst 
of  times ;  and  the  first  act  of  die  go?emment 
of  King  William  and  Queen  Mary  was  to 
eonfirm  the  right  of  petitioning,  as  a  franduse 
of  which  the  people  could  not  be  deprived. 
It  has  ever  ^mce  been  considered  as  a  right 
unalterably  fixed  by  the  fundamental  laws  of 
the  state ;  and^  accordingly,  though  the  exer- 
cise of  it  is  suf^sed  to  be  sometimes  unplear 
aaat  to  the  government,  yet  no  administration, 
and  neither  House  of  Parliament,  has  hitherto 
thought  proper  even  to  disoourage  the  people 
in  the  exercise  of  their  right  of  petitioning. 
How  many  hundreds,  or  rather  thousands,  of 
petitions  have  been  presented  to  the  different 
branches  of  the  kgislatnie  within  these  few 
years,  representing  as  grievances  thinn  which 
are  not  acknowled^  to  be  such  1  and  yet  ihe 
petitions,  as  coming  from  the  people  in  the 
exercise  of  their  right,  have  been  graciously 
received  by  tliose  to  whom  they  were  address- 
ed. And  so  important  is  the  right  of  petition- 
ing, that  every  other  right  in  the  people  has 
been«  supposed  to  depend  upon  it,  inasmuch 
as  the  people,  if  deprived  of  that  right,  would 
be  in  aanger  of  losing  the  protecticm  necessary 
to  defend  them  in  their  other  rights. 

It  is  obvious  that  a  fair  communication  from 
the  people  of  their  grievances  and  discontents 
to  the  legislature,  which  has  the  power,  and 
whose  duty  it  is  to  protect  them,  cannot  be 
•edition,  if  they  have  a  right  to  make  such 
communication .  If  the  people  should  petition 
parliament  without  hanng  the  riffht  oy  law 
to  do  so^  these  petitions  might  be,  and  in 
almost  every  case  would  be  seditious  and 
dangerous,  in  raising  or  increasing  discontents 
and  disturbances ;  because  every  complaint  of 
a  public  grievance  has  a  tendency  to  create  a 
public  discontent,  and  this  is  illegal  and  se- 
ditious in  every  case  where  the  law  does  not 
allow  it.  For  the  same  reason,  any  violent 
complaint  of  public  grievances  may  be  sediti- 
ous or  illegal,  where  it  is  not  addressed  to 
persons  having  legal  authority  to  take  it  into 
consideration  and  give  relief.  But  it  would 
be  a  solecism  to  say,  that  a  petition  to  the 
King  or  to  either  House  of  Parliament,  stating 
grievances,  and  praying  for  redress  is  sediti- 
ous, because,  Ist,  it  is  allowed  by  law ;  2dly, 
the  persons  addressed  have  an  authority  to 
lake  the  complaint  into  consideration  and  give 
•relief.  Petitioning  is  indeed  considered  as  a 
means  of  removing  discontents  and  preventing 
disturbances,  not  as  a  means  of  raising  them  ; 
and  this  may  be  true  i^  some  cases,  though  it 
is  not  always  so,  and  we  have  frequently  seen 
a  forment  of  discontent  much  increased  by 
numerous  meetings  of  the  people,  called  for 
the  purpose  of  petitioning.  But  stiU  the  legal 
'right  of  petitioniog  is  unauestionable ;  and  it 
must  be.  supposed  that  this  right,  though  it 


cannot  be  used  without  expressing  discontent, 
and  thereby  communicating  it  among  the  peo». 
pie,  and  possibly  raising  it,  where  it  had  pre- 
viously no  existence,  may  be  legally  (and 
without  any  crime,  or  the  fear  of  criminal  pro- 
secutions^  used  in  every  case  whatever,  evea 
though  tne  use  of  it  diould  in  some  respects 
have  a  bad  tendency ;  the  utility,  and  even  n^ 
cessity  of  presentins  the  right,  counterbalance 
ing  the  nuschiefr  which  may  be  occasioned  by 
the  seditious  or  discontented  spirit  which  may 
he  raised  by  it. 

But  it  must  be  plain,  that  if  the  people  have 
a  right  to  state  the  grievances  in  petitions  Cor 
redress  of  grievances  to  the  different  branches 
of  the  legislature,  it  follows  as  a  necessary 
consequence  that  they  have  a  right  to  state 
these  ^evances  in  the  plainest  language,  and 
even  m  what  is  commonly  considered  to  be 
strong  or  coarse  language  in  the  descriptioa 
of  public  abuses,  if  they  do  not  in  their  peti- 
tions violate  that  respect  that  is  due  to  the 
legislature:  under  that  restriction,  they  may 
assert  in  their  petitions  that  there  are    the 
grossest  abuses,  even  in  the  legislature  itself. 
And  you  need  not  be  told,  that  even  petitions 
of  that  kind  are  occasionally  sent  from  all 
quarters  of  the  country,  when  discontents  pre-> 
vail  among  the  people.    A  stranger  to   the 
peculiarities  of  tne  British  Government  might 
think  it  odd  that  petitions  of  this  class,  con- 
taining  inferences  of  a  nature  apparently  so 
irreverent,    not   only  indicating  an  extreme 
degree  of  discontent  in  the  petitioners,  but  ■ 
directly  tending  to  raise  and  aisseminate  the 
same  kind  of  discontent  through  the  whole  of 
the  kingdom,  should  be  tolerated,  especially 
where  it  b  plainly  the  opinion,  not  only  of  the 
different  branches  of  the  legislature,  but  also 
the  opinion  of  the  more  sensible  part  of  the 
community,  that  the  petitions  are  very   ill- 
founded  in  their  representations  of  grieyances, 
and  demand,  by  way  of  redress,  new  public 
measures  or  arrangements,  which  would  not 
only  be  useless,  but  dangerous  and  even  cala- 
mitous.   Such  considerations,  however,  have 
no  influence,  or  very  little  influenoe,  in  the 
question,  whether  the  people  have  the  right  to 
present  their  petitions,  and  whether,  when 
offered,  the  petitions  ought  to  be  received. 
On  the  contrary,  it  has  long  been  held  by  the 
legislature,  that,  as  the  people  have  the  right 
to  petition  for  redress  of  grievances,  so  they 
have  the  right  to  state  what  they  consider  to 
be  their  grievances,  whether  they  are  really 
ffrievances  that  ought  to  be  redressed  or  not. 
The  general  rule  is,  that  however  unreasonable, 
or  unfit  to  be  granted  the  prayers  of  the  peo- 
ple in  their  petitions  may  be,  it  is  not  unfit  to 
receive  the  petitions,  and  the  people  have  a 
right  to  present  them,  a  right  that  is  unalie- 
nable. 

But  fiirther,  if  the  right  of  petitioning  be- 
longs to  the  people,  the^  must  of  necessity 
have  the  right  of  deliberatioa  upon  the  subject 
of  their  petitions,  to  consult  with  each  other 
at  public  meetings,,  to  be  adjrised  by  thofe 


m 


and  Tkonuu  Bairdjor  BedUion, 


A.  D.  1817. 


C78 


who  are  able  to  advise  them,  or  think  them- 
sehres  able,  upon  the  Tarious  points  which  may 
occur  in  coosuleiing  what  are  griemncef ,  and 
what  are  doc  ;  end  if  there  are  grieyances^  what 
are  the  remedi^  that  oaght  to  be  proposed  or 
prayed  for  in  their  petitions.    With  regard  to 
the  important  claims  which  may  be  made  in 
petitions  to  the  legislatnret.  every  man  neces- 
sarily most  have  a  right  to  meet  with  his 
/eiiows,  either  in  small  or  in  great  numbers, 
and  to  discuss  the  matter  with  them.    One 
man  may  think  that  annual  parliaments  lare 
Aeccssaiy ;  another  that  they  would  be  hurt- 
fbi  or  impracticable.    On  this  trial,  it  is  not 
necessary  for  us  to  consider  whe^er  annual 
psoiisuttents  and  universal  suffirage  are  eood  or 
CMkd  ;  and,  on  this  occasion,  I  have  nothing  to 
do  with  these  questions.    But  I  say  that  it  is 
DOt  nnlafrful  to  petition  for  either.    And  ge* 
neraOy,  vHiatever  the  grievance,  or  fancied 
grievance  is,  it  may  lawfully  be  the  subject  of 
a  petition  to  the  legislature  ;  and  for  tlue  same 
-season  it  may  lawfully  be  the  subject  of  deli- 
becalioB  and  discussion,  even  in  public  meet- 
ings  held  for  the    purpose  of  petitioning. 
You  will  observe,  that  there  can  be  no  limits 
to  this  right  of  petitioning,  and  previously  de- 
bbeniting;  lor  when  it  is  limited  the  right  is 
gone.    The  right  is  to  present  unreasonable 
as  well  as  reasonable  petitions.    Or   if  un- 
resoonable  petitioningwere  unlawful,  the  legis- 
lature alone  is  the  judge  of  what  is  reasoniu>le 
or  unreasonable  in  ^titions.    If  the  right  of 
petitioning  could  be  restrained  by  the  courts 
of  law,  there  would  be  an  end  of  the  right  of 
petitioning, — a  fundamental  law  of  tliis  mo- 
■aicfay, — a  law,  the  palladium  of  our  other 


On  lihe  occasion  of  which  we  have  heard  so . 
Bwdi,  when  the  people  in  and  about  Kilmar- 
nock met  to  consider  whether  thev  should  send 
addresses  to  the  legislature  on  the  subject  of 
their  grievances,  various  speeches  were  made, 
and  we  are  told  by  the  prosecutor,  that  these 
speeches,  and  in  particular  the  speech  of 
Mliereo,  were  seditious.  In  reganl  to  the 
^piestion,  whether  or  not  his  speech  was  sedi- 
tMNM,  he  pleads  that  the  right  6i  petitioning 
neeeasarily  implies  the  right  of  previous  dis- 
cswsion.  If  this  be  true,  apply  it  to  the*  case 
before  you.  At  such  a  meeting  a  speech  may 
possibly  be  seditious,  where  it  appears  either 
that  the  meetins  was  called,  not  for  its  pro- 
fessed object  of  petitioning  Parliament,  but 
nerely  to  afford  opportunities  to  make  sediti- 
ons speeches; — or  that  thoug^-  the  meeting 
hm^fidt  assembled  for  petitioning,  the  speech 
went  beyond  its  proper  bounds,  and  was  se- 
ditious in  statements  not  justified  by  the  oc- 
casion. As  to  the  first  of  these  cases,  there  is 
not  even  a  pretence  for  denying  that  the  meet- 
ing in  qoestion  was  hcrna  fiie  called  for  the 
rirpose  of  framing  petitions  to  Parliament, 
refer  to  all  the  evidence  which  vou  have 
heard.  It  was  a  meeting  collected  for  that 
purpose,  and  for  no  other,  nor  was  any  further 
purpose  in  view. 


The  argmnent  of  the  public  prosecutor,  aoid 
the  evidence  adduced,  will  apply  only  to  the 
second  case  supposed,  that  the  speakers  at  a 
meeting  hcma  jidt  assembled  for  petitioning, 
had  gone  beyond  their  bounds,  and  deviated 
into  sedition.  But  has  this  been  made  out 
against  Mr.  McLaren  T  His  short  speech,  though 
coarse,  was  suitable  to  the  occasion,  as  an  ex- 
hortation to  petitioning,  and  nothing  else. 

We  were  told,  indeed,  diat  this  case  is  simi- 
lar to  that  of  Pyshe  Palmer,  who  many  years 
ago,  was  tried  ror  sedition,  found  guilty,  and 
sentenced  to  transportation.     But  Ihis  is  a 
total  mistake.    The  case  before  you  is  very 
different  from  that  of  F^sbe  Palmer,  and  firom 
all  the  other  cases  which  have  hitherto  been 
tried  before  the  Court  of  Justiciary.    It  has 
been  reserved  4br  the  present  Lord  Advocate 
to  bring  3uch  a  case  as  the  present  to  trial,  in 
which,  if  the  verdict  find  the  panels  guilty  of 
sedition,  the  right  of  petitioning,  hitherto  un- 
challenged, seems  to  be  attacked  almost  in  di- 
rect terms.    The  case  of  Fyshe  Palmer  was 
that  of  a  seditious   libel,    an    inflammatory 
hand-bill,  containing  seditious  language,  witb-> 
out  any  proposal  to  petition  Parliament.    We 
were  told  that  this   case  of  Fyshe   Palmer 
was  defended  on  the  same  grounds  that  were 
stated  in  defence  at  the  beginning  of  this  trial ; 
yet  the  lord  advocate  declined  to  meet  that 
defence  particularly,  and  bear  it  down  ^  the 
triumphant  authority  of  Palmer's  case     There 
was  no  resemblance  between  that  case  and 
the  present.    Fyshe  Palmer  recommended  an 
appeal,  on  the  subject  of  grievances,  not  to  the 
legislature,  but  to  a  mob,  the  scum  of  the  earth 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Dundee,-— to  the  so* 
verign  authority  of  the  multitude.   -The  de» 
fence  in  that  case  was  disregarded, — ^but  what 
was  it  ?  It  was  said,  that  in  this  free  govern- 
ment it  is  necessary  that  the  press  should  be 
free.    It  was  said  that  the  people  must  hate 
freedom  to  attack  public  men,  and  must  be  en- 
titled to  publish,  not  treason,  not  sedition,  in 
a  palpable  form,  but  their  thoughts  in  a  free 
and  independent  manner.    It  was  added,  thai 
Mr.  Fyshe  Palmer  was.  not  very  sound  in  his 
mind.     These  were  the   defences  for  him. 
You  wiUperhaps  be  surprised  when  I  tell  you, 
that  mv  Lord  Abercromby,  who  tried  the  case, 
held,  in  his  speech  to  the  Jury,  that  if  a  peti- 
tion to  Parliament  had  been  in  view,  the  libel 
of  which  Fyshe  Palmer  was  found  guil^  would 
not  have  been  of  so  aggravated  a  description, 
—would  jaerhaps  not  have  been  considered  a 
libel  atalL    ^flluch  flie  remarked)  has  been 
said  of  the  purity  of  tne  i 


intentions  of  the 
cietv ;  it  is  'said  they  had  nothing  in  view  but 
moderate  reform,  fiut,  Gentlemen,  you  .will 
consider  how  far  that  is  consistent,  either  witii 
the  tenor  of  the  address  itself,  or  with  what  is 
sworn  to  by  Mealmaker,  who  drew  the  first 
draught  of  it,  and  who  swears  exprsssl^^y  that 
at  that  time  he  had  no  second  petition  in 
his  contemplation'' and  that  what  was  after- 
wards to  be  done  would  have  depended 
upon  drcumstanees.    I  much  fear  that  here 


791 


57  GEOaCB  HI. 


Tritd  qfAkfonier  M'Laim 


[se 


HCMliMker  it  kO&ug  tht  fanitliy  aad  tktt  if 
tb^  bad  not  been  attended  to»  tbe  conduct 
of  thit  societjr  wonld  not  bnve  proved  so  pure 
ai  their  iatentioDs  are  said  to  Ikare  been/'  *  lo 
l^t  caiey  xou  will  otenwy  that  a  seditioiis  li- 
bel wna  diaperfeed  over  Uie  coontrr  witbout 
aAjt  consequence  being  cOnteaiplafted  bnt  that 
of  inflamMig  the  nindt  of  die  Multitude.  On 
the  other  hand,  we  have  been  at  pains  to  shew, 
that  the  pa«e]a  in  this  eaae  were  quiet  oiderly 
peraoofy  not  eoncemed  with  any  aeditioua  so^ 
gieliea ;  not  connected  with  any  poUttcal  parties^ 
only  fading  dlstresi^  thinking  they  had  gfier* 
aaces  to  ooaaplain  of,  aad  that  they  conra  betp 
ter  their  sitnations  by  petitioning  parliament. 
The^  BMt  together  in  the  aMat  ovdnrly  man- 
neiv-^delibemted  as  it  is  naual  to  do  in  public 
taaetings^—prepared  rasokidoniiy— 'prepared  a 
petition,— 4M  signed  it, — aad  that  ^tition, 
llongh  condied  in  strong  tecmsy  was  presented 
to  the  Honaes  of  Patiianient,  oonsideredy  re* 
eeivedy  and  laid  on  their  tables.  Is  the  right 
^petitieniagythen,  to  be  interrupted  in  thta 
eatraordina  mnanner^  by  bringing  the  pet»* 
tinners  into  the  Conrt  of  Justiciary^ 

RecoUet  that  this  was  a  neeting  ibr  consideiw 
ing  the  propriety  of  petitioning  the  legislatare^ 
and  that  the  aMeting  wonM  have  been  aHo^* 
gather  nugateiy  unleas  the  persons  then  met 
had  been  allowed  to  state  their  opiaions  t«  one 
another    In  the  first  page  of  this  indictaMnt, 
the  panel  is  ohttigad  with  hairing  wickedly  and 
letooionsly  delivered '<  a  speech  eootaimog  a 
number  of  seditiens  and  inflanmatory  remarks 
WHi  assertions^  eaknlated  to  degrade  and  bring 
im»  Goatanpt  the  Oovemment  and  legislatnre^ 
and  to  withdrew  therefrom  die  oonlklence  and 
aihctiotts  of  the  people,  and  to  fiU  the  raidm 
wilh  treuble  and  diesesitien."     Gentleaaen, 
wherever  (he  peopk  are  exposed  to  griavanees 
they  necessarily  must,  when  they  meet  to  eeik- 
aider  the  means  of  redrem,  espiem  their  sense 
of  these  grietances ;  and  I  ask  wliether  it  be 
possible  to  stato  pnUic  grievances,  especieUy 
grievances  arising  from  sndk  a  sonroe  as  over* 
taxation^  without  in  soaae  way  or  other  reflect- 
ing on  the  Government.    In  the  esereise  of 
onr  right  of  petilioning  against  grievances^ 
these  grievances  mnst  be  aikentioned  (  and  k 
isiBH>omihie  to  mention  tfaem^    or  even  to 
allude  to  them,  witbont  briaginff  the  Ooven^ 
SMUt  into  discredit.    For  ttamirte,  let  a  peti^ 
lien  he  presented  against  ovcr«taiatien»  irhafe- 
ever  were  the  causes  of  the  evtt^-^^wan  jnst 
ern^jusV— voavoidafale  miefortonea^  or  mis- 
eanduetin  pnMic afiairs^-^  is  hiwinl  to  stato 
the  grievwiee.    Bnt  can  it  be  elated  withont 
afffdiag  more  or  leas,  or  attempting  to  afleet 
An  pnMtc  opinaen  as  ta  the  merits  or  demerits 
«f  adminiBtmlseii?    Eveiy   pnbKe  statement 
respetling  puUie  eAus  has  that  tendency. 
Bat  are  the  people  to  be  intemptod  en  sneh 

r rends,  in  the  ezedtcise  of  their  just  rights. 
i:*  of  the  essence  of  their  ri^t  to  complain 
^^■^  •         ■  '        ■  I    I  I      I   II — 

*  Fyshn  Pahner'8  case  %  How.    Mod.  St« 
Tr.  371. 


of  grievgncas,  and  therefore  I  apprehend  yon 
must  disregard  entirely  those  general  expres- 
sions in  the  indiclmentt  charging  M'Laren'a 
speech  as  tending  to  bring  the  Government 
into  contempt.  The  petitioners  felt  griev- 
ances ; — tbey  prepared  petitions,  and  it  is  im- 
possible to  state  a  public  grievance  without 
throwing  blame  upon  the  Government.  I  do 
not  mean  to  examine  the  question,  whether 
there  really  was  any  blame  attachable  ta 
Government ;  for  it  is  the  same  thing  in  thin 
case  whetherthe petitioners  were  right  or  wrong 
in  their  statement.  My  defence  is,  that  they 
were  in  the  fair  prosecution  of  legal  view8« 
Suppose  no  words  to  have  been  uttered  bnl 
what  would,  in  other  circumstances,  have  beesi 
considered  seditious,  their  having  had  a  right 
object  in  view  is  a  good  defence.  But  ^^^ 
sort  of  obloquy  has  been  thrown  on  the  petiti^ 
oners,  without  any  notice  of  the  lawful  object 
thev  bad  in  view,  as  if  their  oliject  were  to  bw 
laia  entirely  out  of  consideration. 

The  legality  of  the  object,  and  the  sitnatioia 
in  which  the  speeches  were  uttered,  are  the 
most  important  eireumstances  of  the  case. 
Every  thuig  else  is  of  a  trivial  and  snbordinatn 
nature.  But  let  us  see  what  the  panel  is 
alleged  to  have  sai4«  No  positive  evidenon 
has  been  adduced  to  prove  any  part  of  bin 
speech,  eacept  a  few  words  at  the  end  of  tbe 
passage  quoted  in  the  indictment,  and,  so  fiir 
as  I  have  observed,  you  have  only  the  unoer* 
tain  evidence  of  one  person  to  there  worda« 
I  shidl  remark  upon  the  words  in  the  indict* 
ment. 

"  That  our  sufferings  are  insupDorteble,  in 
demonstreted  to  the  world."  I  ao  not  sajr 
whether  their  sufferings  were  insupportable  or 
not ;  but  they  appear  to  have  been  sevefre^  and 
the  people  were  met  ibr  the  purpose  of  con* 
sidering  them,  and  to  join  in  petitioning  fiat 
relief.    Here  I  presume  is  no  sedition. 

'*  And  that  they  are  neither  temporary,  wsr 
eccasihned  by  transition  ftom  war  to  peace,  ia 
palpable  to  all,  though  all  have  not  the  courage 
to  avow  it."  I  do  not  say  that  preposition  in 
palnable  to  every  body.  Some  are  dispeeed 
to  toiidi  that  the  calamity  has  been  occasioned 
in  eonseqnence  of  the  sudden  transition  fiwan 
war  to  peace,  and  some  dispute  that  propo* 
sition.  Some  are  of  opinion,  that  if  we  had 
continued  the  war,  at  an  expense  of  a  hundred 
miliions  a  year,  we  should  have  inlalUbly  se* 
cured  the  national  prosperity  and  greatnesa* 
I  shall  not  attempt  to  settle  these  points,  nor 
is  that  neeemary  to  die  present  aignment,  and 
I  beg  lea^Fe  to  protest  against  the  idea  that  1 

S've  any  opinion  ufM>n  them  at  all.  Perimpe 
[r.  M'Lnren  may  include  me  in  his  oenstue 
iir  my  wnnt  of  coorege  in  not  avowing  m$ 
opinion. 

^  The  fact  is  we  are  ruled  by  men  only  ee* 
lioitotts  for  their  own  aggrandisement;  and 
they  care  no  further  for  the  great  body  of  the 
people,,  than  they  are  subservient  to  their  own 
accursed  purposes.  If  you  are  convinced  of 
this,  my  countrymen,  I  would  therefore  puf 


SI] 


and  Thomas  Bairdjbr  Sediiian. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[83 


tile  qifestioiiy  «re  joii  degeaerate  eaoogh  to 
bear  it  ?    Shall  vfe,  whose  forefathers  set  limits 
to  the  all  grasping  power  of  Rome ;  shall  we^ 
whose  fbre&lliiers,  at  the  neTer-to-be-forgotten 
field  of  Bavnockbiun,  told  the  mighty  EdWard, 
at  the  bead  of  the  most  mighty  anny  ever  trod 
eo  Britain's  soiU  ''  Hitherto  shalt  thou  come» 
and  Qo  further  f  ahaH  we,  I  say,  whose  fore- 
lathers  defied  the  efforts  of  foreign  tyranny  to 
enslare  our  beloved  country,  meaiiiy  permit,  in 
our  day,  without  a  murmur,  a  base  Oligarchy 
to  feed  their  filthy  vermin  on  our  vitals^  and 
rale  as  as  tli^y  will?    No,  my  countrymen/' 
A  commentary  was  made   on  this  passage 
though  it  is  not  proved  that  the  panel  ever 
spoke  it.    The  prosecutor  takes  it  for  granted, 
without  evidence,  that  the  words  were  spoken. 
I  am,  therefore,  not  under  the  necessity  of  de- 
fending these  words.    But  are  they  in  reality 
so  culpable  ?    Are  they  seditious  ?    They  are 
mere  words  of  course,  in  expressing  those  pub- 
lic grievances   to  which  they  refer.      Every 
^ild  knows  that  they  are  the  common  and 
hackneyed  terms  used  by  petitioners  for  public 
reform^  and  ^excepting  one  or  two  allusions^  in 
which  there  is  evidently  no  sedition)^  if  they 
are  not  tame  and  feeble,  they  are  at  least  neither 
seditious  nor  in6ammalory.    Every  word  ap- 
plies to  the  professed  object  of  the  meeting  in 
petitioning,  and  to  no  other  object.    The  pro- 
secutor applies  some  of  the  words  to  the  king, 
hut  this  is  a  misconstruction  quite  unworthy  of 
my  lord  advocate.    Ministers,  and  the  pos- 
sessors of  borough  interest,  are  the  vile  Oli- 
garchy, who  are  said  to  feed  their  filthy  vermin 
on  our  vitals,  and  rule  us  as  they  will,  and  this 
attack  was  iustifiable  in  the  way  it  was  made. 
What  would  avail  the  right  of  petitioning,  if 
there  vras  no  right  to  petition  against  his  majesty's 
ministers  and  their  partisans  ?    Ministers  may 
be  impeached  in  parliament  for  their  public  con- 
doct,  and  they  may  be  complained  of  by  the 
people  in  their  petitions.    Are  petitions  to  par- 
lament  against  ministers  to  be  punisbea  ^ 
sedition  ?    What  have  we  here  ?    The  opinion 
of  the  panel  that  the  ministers  have  not  acted 
in  an  honest  way,  or  aa  ministers  ought  to  do. 
The  opinion  b  expressed  a  little  strongly,  but 
it  does  not  go  beyond  legal  bounds.    The  pe- 
tition was  afterwards  laid  before  parliament, 
aad  was  received  with  respect.    Now  the  ques- 
tion before  you  is  not,  whether  the  ministers 
are  culpable  or  not — ^not  whether  lord  Castle- 
leagh  or  Mr.  Vansittart  might  bring  an  actioo 
for  a  libel  or  defamation— but  whether  there  is 
any   sedition   in  this   speech.     I   ask    you, 
whiether  there  is  any  sedition  is  complaining 
of  these  ministers?    Sedition  is  an  attack  on 
the  sovereign  of  the  state— an  attack  on  the 
government^  not  on  the  ministers  of  the  go- 
▼amnent.    You  may  attack  the  latter  in  any 
w^^  withont  bang  guilty  of  sedition. 

fiat  farther,  as  to  thjB  passage  about  the 
OCgatdiy.  It  is  generally  understood  that  a 
few  persons,  ootexoeeding  300,  are  possessed 
of  an  influence  in  the  House  of  Commons  that 
is  very  pernicious  U>  the  state.    Thia  is  the 

VOL.  XXXUL 


Oligarchy,  the  government  of  a  few  by  nneon- 
stitutional  influence,  alluded  to  in  the  panel'^ 


against  tlfteKingl  against  the  Lords  ?  against 
the  Commons  ?  agaiast  any  branch  of  the  legis- 
laturcr  or  against  the  legislature  taken  as  a 
whole?  Jt  is  sedition  against  no  person  or 
legal  authority  whatever.  It  is,  indeed, 
directed  against  the  Oligarchy  itself,  which, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  petitioners,  is  the 
worst  enemy  of  the  King,  Lords  and 
Commons.  The  King,  Lords  and  Commops 
ought  to  be  independent ;  and,  if  an  uncon- 
stitutional influenoe  rules  over  them.  Is  it  se- 
dition to  complain  of  that  influence  ?  Every 
friend  to  the  constitution  will  complain  of  it, 
if  he  supposes  it  to  exist.  I  apprehend  there 
is  nothing  in  this  part  pf  the  charge ;  and  while 
M'Laren  denies  having  used  these  expressions 
about  our  rulers,  I  say  there  is  no  sedition  in 
them.  I  would  say  so,  even  if  the  words  had 
been  used  where  no  petition  to  the  legislature 
was  in  contemplation^  But,  coiasideripg  that 
the  meeting  was  called  for  that  purpose, 
nothing  can  be  more  unquestionable  thaa  that 
such  language  was  not  seditious. 

I  come  now  to  the  last  of  the  words  quoted 
in  the  indictment,  and  I  hope  to  satisfy  you 
that  there  is  nothing  seditious  to  be  found  in 
them.     Allow  me  here   to   remind   you   of 
McLaren's  situation  when  he  made  (his  speech. 
It  has  been  proved  that  the  task  of  opening  the 
meeting  was  imposed  on  him,  contrary  to  his 
inclination,  and  came  upon  him  rather  unex- 
pectedly.   It  was  indeeo  proposed  to  him  eight 
days  before  Uie  meeting,  but  he  was  unwilling 
to  undertake  it,  and  immediately  before  the 
meeting  be  pressed  Mr.  Samson  to  take  the 
business  off  his  hands.    An  hour  before  the 
meeting  Mr.  McLaren  was  again  urged  to  open 
the  business;  and  being   in  soma  measure 
compelled  to  it,  he  retired  for  a  very  short  time, 
and  made  some  notes  of  his  short  address  to 
the  meeting.    You  will  see  in  the  whole  pro- 
ceeding \hfi  most  evident  marks  of  haste.    It 
is  not  proved  that  the  last  sentence  was  written 
in  his  notes.     On  the  contrary,  it  was  not 
written.    He  was  placed  on  what  is  called  the 
hustings,  and  delivered  his  speech  during  a 
storm  of  Mrind,  rain  and  hail  $  from  the  noise 
of  which,  and  particularly  from  the  rattling  of 
the  hail  on  umorellas,  it  was  almost  impossible 
to  hear  what  he  said.    Besides  the  words  con* 
taioed  in  his  notes,  part  of  which  he  spoke,  and 
part  of  which  he  omitted,  he  spoke  other  words 
which. were  not  in  his  notes.     What  these 
words  were  is  uncertain,«as  they  could  not  be 
perfectly  heard.    A  single  witness  told  you  he 
heard  and  recollected  them,  though  he  could 
not  recollect  any  other  words  of  the  paners 
speech.     There  is  no  great  reasoa  to  rely 
on  the  recollection  of  tiae  witness,  though 
there  is  much  reason  to  presume  that  the 
words  had  not  the  meaning  given  to  them 
by   the  public   prosecutor.     The   words   in 
G 


791 


57  G£OaGB  HI. 


Trial  qfAkfonier  M'Laim 


{S0 


]|C««liMker  it  tilling  tht  Irath,  aad  thtt  if 
Ui«gr  had  not  been  attended  to»  the  conduct 
of  Ihit  societjr  wotdd  not  hvr^  proved  so  pure 
•s  their  uileatioiis  are  stid  to  iJAre  been/'  *  lo 
tlMut  etMy  y^  will  obs^nwy  that  a  seditioiis  li- 
bel wna  diipeised  over  Uie  countrr  without 
tn^  consequence  being  cOntmplalea  but  that 
of  inflaming  the  ninds  of  the  multitude.  On 
the  other  handy  we  have  been  it  pains  to  shew, 
that  the  panela  in  thii  eaae  were  quiet  eiderly 
pereonfi  not  concerned  with  any  scditiouB  so^ 
gielies;  not  conneeted  with  any  political  parties, 
only  feeling  distresi^  thinking  they  bad  grier* 
aaces  to  complain  of,  aad  that  tbi^  coukf  betp 
tsr  their  sitnatiotis  by  petitioning  parlianient. 
The^  met  together  in  the  moot  orderly  man« 
neiv-rdelibemted  as  it  is  usual  to  do  in  public 
mneUngs^ — prepared  resolutions,"*  prepared  a 
petitioB,-<--«nd  signed  it, — and  that  ^tition, 
though  couched  in  strong  tecmsy  was  presented 
to  the  Houses  of  Paiiianient,  considered,  re* 
eeived,  and  laid  on  their  Ubies.  Is  the  right 
^petitioning,  then,  to  be  interrupted  in  this 
eatraordina  rvmanner,  by  bringing  the  pet»* 
tinners  into  the  Court  of  Justiciary  I 

RecoUet  that  this  was  a  meeting  ibr  consider* 
iag  the  propiiety  of  petitioning  the  legislature^ 
and  that  the  aMeting  would  have  been  alto« 
gtther  nugatoiy  unlees  the  persons  then  met 
bad  been  allowed  to  state  their  opiaions  t^  one 
anotheiw  In  the  first  page  of  this  indictment, 
the  panel  is  charged  with  baTihg  wickedljr  aad 
leiooiously  delivered '<  a  speech  eootaimng  a 
number  of  seditious  and  inflammatory  remarlm 
WHi  assertions^  eakulated  to  degrade  and  bring 
iiilo  contempt  the  Government  and  legislature, 
and  to  withdraw  thetelrom  die  oonfidence  and 
aibctioas  of  the  people,  andiofiU  the  raidm 
witb  trouble  and  diasention.^'  Gentlemen, 
wherever  tbe  peopk  are  ezpoeed  to  i^evaneos 
they  necewsrUy  moat,  when  they  meet  to  eoik- 
sider  the  aieans  of  redrem,  ezprem  their  sense 
of  theae  giietances ;  and  I  ask  whether  it  be 
possible  to  stato  pubiie  grievances,  especieliy 
grievances  arising  from  sudk  a  source  as  over* 
taxation^  without  in  soase  way  or  other  reflect- 
ing on  the  Government.  In  the  exercise  of 
our  right  of  petilionilig  agsinst  grievancto^ 
these  grievances  must  l^  atentioned ;  and  it 
isimpomibie  to  mention  thei%  nr  even  to 
allude  to  them,  wilbout  briuginff  the  Govern* 
iMtit  into  discredit.  For  ttaaaiMe,  let  a  peti« 
tion  be  presented  against  over*taiatien>  iHmfe- 
ever  were  the  causes  of  the  evtt,^warB  just 
erai[^ustr-ttDa.veidafale  miefortooeo»  or  mis- 
•anduetin  public  afiair^-^  is  lawful  to  stato 
the  grietunee.  But  can  it  be  atated  without 
affKtingnwireorleM,  or  atannpting  to  aflect 
tbe  puUic  opinion  as  ta  the  ments  or  demerits 
«f  adminiBtmtaeo?  Every  pubiie  statemeni 
aaspeeiina  pubiie  aAira  has  that  tendency. 
Bat  are  the  people  to  be  interrupted  en  siMh 

rmnds,  in  the  eieicise  of  their  just  rights . 
is  of  the  esence  of  their  right  to  cooapiain 

*  Fysba  Pahner'a  case  %  How.    Mod.  St« 
Tr,  371. 


of  grievgucas,  and  therefore  I  appr«^nd  yo« 
must  disregard  entirely  those  general  expre** 
sions  in  the  indictment,  charging  McLaren's 
speech  as  tending  to  bring  the  Government 
into  contempt.  The  petitioners  felt  griev*' 
ances ; — they  prepared  petitions,  and  it  is  im- 
possible to  state  a  puolic  grievance  without 
throwing  blame  upon  the  Government.  I  do 
not  mean  to  examine  the  question,  whether 
there  really  was  any  blame  attachable  to 
Government ;  for  it  is  the  same  thing  in  Ihia 
case  whetherthe petitioners  were  right  or  wrong 
in  their  statement.  My  defence  is,  that  they 
were  in  the  fair  prosecution  of  legal  views* 
Suppose  no  words  to  have  been  uttered  but 
what  would,  in  other  circumstances,  have  bean 
considered  seditioust  their  having  had  a  right 
object  in  view  is  a  good  defence.  But  every 
sort  of  obloquy  has  been  thrown  on  the  petiti- 
oners, without  any  notice  of  the  lawful  object 
they  had  in  view,  as  if  their  oliject  were  to  bn 
laid  entirely  out  of  consideration. 

The  legality  of  the  object,  and  the  situatiott 
in  which  the  speeches  were  uttered,  are  die 
most  important  eireumstances  of  the  case. 
Every  thang  else  is  of  a  trivial  and  subordinate 
nature.  But  let  us  see  what  the  panel  ia 
alleged  to  have  sai4.  No  positive  evidenee 
has  been  adduced  to  prove  any  part  of  bia 
speech,  eacept  a  few  words  at  the  end  of  tlier 
passage  quoted  in  the  indictment,  and,  so  for 
as  I  have  observed,  you  have  onlv  the  uncer* 
tain  evidence  of  one  person  to  tnese  words# 
I  shidl  remark  upon  the  words  in  the  indiel« 
ment. 

"  That  our  sufferings  are  insnpDortp.ble»  ie 
demonstrated  to  the  world.**  I  ao  not  any 
whether  their  sufferings  were  insupportable  or 
not ;  but  th^  appear  to  have  been  severe,  and 
the  people  were  met  for  the  purpose  of  com* 
ridering  them,  and  to  join  in  petitioning  for 
relief.    Here  I  presume  is  no  sedition. 

'*  And  that  they  are  neither  te&^Mrary,  nor 
oecasibned  by  transition  fix>m  war  to  peace,  ia 
palpable  to  all|  though  all  have  not  the  coumga 
to  avow  it.''  I  dd  iK>t  say  that  proposition  ia 
palnable  to  every  body.  Some  are  dispeeed 
to  uiidL  that  the  cahunity  has  been  occasioned 
in  eonsecpMnce  of  the  sudden  transition  flnoaa 
war  to  peace,  and  some  dispute  that  propo* 
sition.  Some  are  of  opinion,  that  if  we  had 
continued  the  wgr,  at  an  expense  of  a  hundred 
millions  a  year,  we  should  have  infollibly  so* 
cured  the  national  prosperity  and  greatnem*. 
I  shall  not  attempt  to  settle  these  points,  nor 
is  that  neeaaiafy  to  the  present  argument^  and 
I  beg  leMFC  to  protest  against  the  idea  Aat  1 
give  any  opinion  ufM>n  them  at  all.  Periwpo 
Mr.  McLaren  tnay  include  me  in  his  oensnrti 
for  my  wnnt  of  courage  in  not  avowing  mijp 
opinion. 

''  The  fSaet  is  we  are  ruled  by  men  only  a<>* 
lioitous  for  their  own  aggrandisement;  and 
they  care  no  further  for  the  great  body  of  the 
people,  than  they  are  subservient  to  their  ow« 
accursed  purposes.  If  you  are  convinced  of 
this,  my  countrymen,  I  would  therefore  pu) 


«Il 


and  Thomas  Bairdjbr  SedUion. 


A,  D.  1817. 


[83 


Ike  qifestioii,  «re  jmi  degeaerato  enough  to 
bear  it  ?    Shall  W€^  whose  forefathers  aet  limits 
to  the  all  grasping  power  of  Rome ;  shall  we^ 
iFiiyMe  fore&lheiaj  at  the  never-to-be-forgotten 
field  of  fiaaiKwkhurD^  told  the  mtghty  EdWard, 
at  the  bead  of  the  most  mighty  army  ever  trod 
•n  Britain's  soil,  '*  Hitherto  shalt  thou  come» 
and  no  further  f  shaU  we,  I  say,  whose  fore- 
^thtis  defied  the  efforts  of  foreign  tyranny  to 
eoslave  our  beloved  country,  meanly  permit,  in 
CHir  day*  without  a  murmur,  a  base  Oligarchy 
to  feed  their  filthy  Termin  on  our  vitals^  and 
rale  as  as  tliby  will  ?    No,  my  countrymen." 
A   oommentary  was  made   on  this  passage 
though  it  is  not  proved  that  the  panel  ever 
spoke  it.    The  prosecutor  takes  it  for  granted, 
without  evidence,  that  the  words  were  spoken. 
I  am,  therefore,  not  under  the  necessity  of  de* 
fending  these  words.    But  are  they  in  reality 
so  culpable  ?    Axe  they  seditious  ?    They  are 
mere  words  of  course,  in  expressing  those  pub- 
lic •  grievances   to  which  they  refer.     Every 
child  knows  that  they  are  the  common  and 
hackneyed  terms  used  by  petitioners  for  public 
reform^  and  (excepting  one  or  two  allusions^  in 
which  there  is  evidently  no  sedition),  if  they 
are. not  tame  and  feeble,  they  are  at  least  neither 
seditious  nor  inflammatory.    Every  word  ap- 
plies to  the  professed  object  of  the  meeting  in 
petitioning,  and  to  no  other  object.    The  pro- 
secutor applies  some  of  the  words  to  the  kmg, 
but  this  is  a  misconstruction  quite  unworthy  of 
my  lord  advocate.    Ministers,  and  the  pos- 
sessors of  borough  interest,  are  the  vile  Oli- 
garchy, who  are  said  to  feed  their  filthy  vermin 
OQ  our  vitals,  and  rule  us  as  they  will,  and  this 
attack  was  justifiable  in  the  way  it  was  made. 
What  would  avail  the  right  of  petitioning,  if 
there  was  no  right  to  petition  against  his  majesty's 
ministers  and  their  partisans  ?    Ministers  may 
be  impeached  in  parliament  for  their  public  con^ 
duct,  and  they  may  be  complainea  of  by  the 
people  in  their  petitions.    Are  petitions  to  par- 
mment  against  ministers  to  be  punished  ^ 
sedition  ?    What  have  we  here  ?    The  opinion 
of  the  panel  Chat  the  jninisters  have  not  acted 
in  an  honest  way,  or  as  ministers  ought  to  do. 
The  opinion  is  expressed  a  little  strongly,  but 
it  does  not  go  beyond  legal  bounds.    The  pe- 
tition was  afterwards  laid  before  parliament, 
and  was  received  with  respect.    Now  the  ques- 
tion before  yon  is  not,  whether  the  ministers 
are  culpable  or  not — not  whether  lord  Castle- 
xeagh  or  Mr.  Vansittart  might  bring  an  actioo 
lor  a  libel  or  defamation— >but  whether  there  is 
any  sedition  -  in  this   speech.     I   ask    you, 
imtber  there  is  any  sedition  ip  complaining 
of  these  ministers?    Sedition  is  an  attack  on 
the  sovereign  of  the  state— an  attack  on  the 
government,  not  on  the  ministers  of  the  go- 
▼emment.    You  may  attack  the  latter  in  any 
way,  without  being  guilty  of  sedition. 

jBot  frrther,  as  to  the  passage  about  the 
Ofigaichy.  It  is  generally  understood  that  a 
lew  penonsy  not  .exceeding  300,  are  possessed 
of  an  influence  in  the  House  of  Commons  that 
It  very  pernicious  to  the  state.    This  is  the 

voL  xxxni. 


Oligarchy,  the  government  of  a  fhw  by  uneon- 
stitutional  Influence,  alluded  to  in  the  paner^ 
speech.  Is  it  sedition  to  take  notice,,  even  by  ' 
allusion,  of  such  a  public  grievance  ?  Is  this 
sedition?  Against  whom  is  it  sedipon? 
against  tlfte  King?  against  the  Lords?  against 
the  Commons  ?  agaiast  any  branch  of  the  legist 
latore,  or  against  the  legislature  taken  as  a 
whole?  Jt  is  sedition  against  no  person  or 
legal  authority  whatever.  It  is,  indeed, 
directed  against  the  Oligarchy  itself,  which, 
in  the  opinion  of  the  petitioners,  is  the 
worst  enemy  of  the  King,  Lords  and 
Commons.  The  King,  Lords  and  Commops 
ought  to  be  independent ;  and,  if  an  uncon- 
stitutional infloenoe  rules  over  them,  is  it  se- 
dition to  complain  of  that  influence  P  Every 
friend  to  the  constitution  will  complain  of  it, 
if  he  supposes  it  to  exist.  I  apprehend  there 
is  nothing  in  this  part  of  the  charge;  and  while 
M'Laren  denies  having  used  these  expressions 
about  our  rulers,  I  say  there  is  no  sedition  in 
them.  I  would  say  so,  even  if  the  words  had 
been  used  where  no  petition  to  the  legislature 
was  in  contemplation*  But,  considering  that 
^e  meeting  was  called  for  that  purpose,  * 
nothing  can  be  more  unquestionable  thaa  that 
such  language  was  not  seditious. 

I  come  now  to  the  last  of  the  words  quoted 
in  the  indictment,  and  I  hope  to  satisfy  you 
that  there  is  nothing  seditious  to  be  found  in 
them.     Allow  me   here   to   remind   you   of 
McLaren's  situation  when  he  made  (his  speech. 
It  has  been  proved  that  the  task  of  opening  the 
meeting  was  imposed  on  him,  contrary  to  his 
inclination,  and  came  upon  him  rather  unex- 
pectedly.   It  was  indeeo  proposed  to  him  eight 
days  before  the  meeting,  but  he  was  unwilling 
to  undertidce  it,  and  immediately  before  the 
meeting  be  pressed  Mr.  Samson  to  take  the 
business  off  hb  hands.    An  hour  before  the 
meeting  Mr.  McLaren  was  again  urged  to  open 
the  business;  and   being  in  some  measure 
compelled  to  it,  he  retired  for  a  very  short  time, 
and  made  some  notes  of  his  short  address  to 
the  meeting.    You  will  see  in  tho  whole  pro- 
ceeding tlve  most  evident  marks  of  haste.    It 
is  not  proved  that  the  last  sentence  was  written 
in  his  notes.     On  the  contrary,  it  was  not 
written.    He  was  placed  on  what  is  called  the 
hustings,  and  delivered  his  speech  during  a 
storm  of  wind,  rain  and  hail ;  from  the  noise 
of  which,  and  particularly  from  the  rattling  of 
the  hail  on  umbrellas,  it  was  almost  impossible 
to  hear  what  he  said.    Besides  the  words  con* 
taioed  in  his  notes,  part  of  which  he  spoke,  and 
part  of  which  he  omitted,  he  spoke  other  words 
which. were  not  in  his  notes..     What  these 
words  were  is  uncertaiD,«as  they  could  not  be 
perfectly  heard.    A  single  witness  told  you  be 
heaid  and  recollected  them,  though  he  could 
not  reoollect  any  other  words  of  the  paners 
speech.     There  is  no  great  reason  to  rely 
on  the  recollection  of  tiae  witness,  though 
there  is  much  reason  to  presume  that  the 
words  had  not  the  meaning  given  to  them 
by  the  public   prosecutor.     The  words   in 
G 


1071 


«7  GGOltGfi  til. 


Trial^Attmmdtr  M'Lartn 


(10* 


•rdkr  !•  point  out  from  reotat  «nd  domMit 
aotboiity>  how  tlearly  tbo  doctrine  of  renstance 
it  tecogntsed  among  all  who  hai*e  ttndied  our 
oonttttution,  and  h^w  boldly  it  is  held  foithy 
Ofan  4>y  the  official  adviMvs  of  the  crown,  at 
th^i  ultimate  resource  which  the  eonslittttion 
allbfdt  when  an  extrema  case  shell  aivive. 
flow,  no  nror^  extreme  oase  can  be  soppooed^ 
than  that  of  the  prince  setting  himself  m  op- 
yiosition  to  the  voice  of  bis  whole  people,  and 
lifaat  is  the  onl^  sense  which  cen  be  put  on  tiie 
fMSsage  here  in  craestion.  Resistance  is  a  la- 
mentable and  a  dreadful  remedy ;  but  h  may 
lie  a-  necessary  one :  and  though  we  ought  to 
tsdce  it  for  granted  that  the  necessity  will  never 
decur,  we  cannot  allow  its  existence  or  its 
#ficaey  to  be  qaestioned.  ]t  is  a  tnie,  bat 
awful  maxim,  and  not  fit  to  be  canvassed  irre- 
▼erendy  in  conversation,  publie  speeches,  or 
|pcA>Keations.  But  in  d«0enoe  of  my  client,  I 
ai^  that  it  is  a  tree  maxim, '  and  that  there  is 
oeitber  treason  nor  sedition  in  stating  it,  as  is 
dome  in  this  pamphlet. 

I  shall  notfifttigue  you  by  going  over  all  the 
jfmssages  whit^are  cited  in  the  indictment,1)«(t 
BhaH  only  trouble  yon  with  one  or  two,  in  order 
to  settle  die  sense  and  constraiftioo,  and  do- 
e^rmine  what  was  truly  and  really  the  scope 
of  the  whole  discussion  on  this  occasion.  You 
were  told  that  the  qoestion  lies  here  (and  I 
agree  that  it  does),  Whedier,  upon  the  whole, 
under  ai  pretense  of  petitioning,  it  appears 
ther^  was  a  purpose  ui  die  minds  of  these 
«eople  not  to  obtain  redrem,  but  to  excite  se- 
dition, tumult  and  confusion  from  one  end  of 
tfhe  kingdom  to  the  other.  That  is  the  ques- 
tsob  truly  and  -substantially;  and  yuu  are  not 
V>  dwelt  on  detadied  passages,  without  tahsng 
tnto  view  idl  others  -of  a  hem  ambijguotts  de^- 
•eriptiott : — ^you  are  to  judge  ofthetmportof  the 
whole. 

'  One  of  the  dtations-  in  the  Indictment  is, 
*That  the  House  of  Commons  b  not  really 
what  it  is  called ;  H  is  not  a  House  of  Com- 
mons. At  present  we  have  no  rspresentatives*" 
Now  this  seems  to  me  just  such  a  way  of  stating 
the  thing,  as  when  a  person  nys,  This  is  no 
bouse — this  is  no  dinner — ^this  is  no  speech, 
meaning  it  is  not  what  it  ought  to  be.  The 
mode  of  expressing  the  opinion  is^somewhat 
strong,  but  mat  is  its  roeanrag.  It  is  said  in 
the  pamphlet,  ^And*a  House  of  Commons, 
but  the  latter  is  corrupted ;  it  is  decayed  and 
worn  out ;  it  b  not  really  vrhat  it  is  called ; 
it  is  not  a'  House  of  Commons."  It  is  then 
explained,  '^  The  House  of  Commons  in  its 
original  composition  consisted  only  of  Com- 
mons chosen  annually  by  the  universal  enffrage 
of  die  people.**  Ihete  is  the  difference  be- 
tween what  it  is  and  what*theperson  speaking 
conceives  It  ought  to  ,be.  when  we  wish  to 
say  a  thing  is  not  what  it  ought  to  be,  are 
sometimes  express  our  meaning  by  saying  it 
!s  not  at  all ;  and  when  a  person  means'  td  say 
that  the  representation  or  the  people  is  not 
what  it  ought  to  be,  he  may  naturally  enough 
express  bis  meaning  by  saying  that  (her£  is  no 


representation  at  'all.  Ihe  statement  of  4his 
veiy  opinion  has  ofien  been  given  in  this  way, 
and  has  never  been  challenged.  But  it  is  not 
on  my  authority  that  I  mi&  you  to  take  thia 
explanation^  It  Is  given  in  express  tanss'ife 
the  subsequent  parts  of  die  very  speech  froea 
urhieh  the  expression  is  quoted. — ^The  orator^ 
after  some  ferther  disseitatiun,  goea  on  to  sty, 
''Will  any  man,  then,  possessed  of  commun 
sense,  say  that  this  is  a  House  of  Gommoaa 
agreeabie  to  mtr  CemtUuHony  or  that  it  is  a  FAfft 
representation  of  the  peopled  AH  this,  vo« 
will  observe,  is  in  the  same  speech,  and  it 
must,  by  every  rule  of  construbtioo,  be  taken 
along  with  what  went  before  to  explain  and 
modify  those  more  general  expressions.— f^iWl 
same  explanation  occurs  in  fife  other  passages 
of  the  pamphlet^-and  leave  no  room  wbatevev 
to  doubt,  that  what  the  omton  meant 'wmi 
merely  that  the  Hoase  of  Commm»  was  B«t 
what  they  wanted,  and  was  not  ajakr  md  e^nal 
representation  of  the  people^  Is  it  sedition  to 
say  so  !  I  for  tme  'think  ^e  present  lepwscai" 
ation  a  very  benefieial  one;  uid  though  It 
might  be  made  more  agreeable  to  theory,! 
should  not  expect  great  benefit  from  someeC 
the  change*  which  have  been  proposed.  Btft 
caA  -it  be  cidled  a  &ir  and  equal  repicsentatioti 
of  the  people  in  any  sense  of  the  word? 
There  is  nardly  any  person  in  Kilmarnock  who 
possesses  a  vote. — 1  do  not  say -there  iaany 
disadvantage  attending  the  prmnt  represent- 
.ation,  but  other  persons  may  thiidc  difterentlr; 
and  sure  I  am  tnere  are  plausible  grouaids  for 
any  one  sayingp,  he  womd  like  to  see  the  ffs* 
presentation  reduced-  nearer  to  the  theory  of 
the  Constitution.  Upon  sjrstem  and  prrndpla 
the  representation  ought  to  be  altered  in  somo 
parttcidars,  though,  upon  tike  whole,  I  do  vec 
expect  the  mtgbty  erocts  from  any  aiteiutioii 
which  some  people  do.  The  passage  In  que»-> 
don  is  a  short,  raetorical>  pithy,  foreiMu  way 
of  expressing  the  speaker^s  opinions  ^t  ha 
obviously  meahs-  t&t  the  representation  is 
unequid,  that  it  is  not  sufSeient,  mid  not 
agreeable  to  the  theory  of  410*  Constitution 
That  a  man  should  be  prosecuted  -for  eedition 
for  appealing  upon  such  a  point  to  the  nutlNH 
rrty  or  Parliament  was  never  heard  of  before. 
But  it  has  been  the  ftte  ^  the  panels  to  be 
accused  of  arraigaing  the  Conrtitotion,  wtrile 
contending,  as  they  thought,  for  its  restoration 
to  ptirity  and  vigour. 

I  now  turn  to  flie  definition  of  sedition  in 
onr  laH^  books.  To  commit  sedition,  you 
must,  in  direct  tetms,  or  by  unequivocal  insfn^ 
nations,  excite  discontent  and  disturt^anoe 
against  the  present  state  ahd  cofnstiCuted  atf^ 
thorities  of  the  country.  Mr.  Hume,  «4io  ia 
not  supposed  to  have  looked  upon  aedition 
with*  any  extraordinaTy  lenity,  expresses  him- 
self thus:  ^It  reaches  all  dmse  practices-, 
whedier  by  deed,  word,  or  writings  or  of 
whiitsoever  kind,  which  are  Suited  and  im 
tended  to  disturb  tbe  .tninguillity  of  th^ 
State;— for  diapiirpose-bf  pfodttcing  piA>l§e 
tioi^le  or  commotion^  and  moving  fait  M n« 


100] 


ami  Ikomi  Sairdjbr  S^dUion* 


A.  D.  1817. 


1110 


j«iy!ft  iolfeoU  to  ifaft'diiiti**  mHteac^  or 
rabveni«i  of  tW«taliisht4  Oofenmeiii  and 
lanriy  or  iettled  6mh  and  order  df  duiigt/' 

Ben  MB^  bj  iriMft.iiialiMoeB  and  cpumofdes 
lio  iBaMntrs  «Dd  caplaiot  km  defimlion.-*In 
evoij  oe%  yott  'will  olntrva^  W  Jdikcs.it  an 
indispenttoie  qoalifiaition  that  there  thoidd 
be  "aaMe  dlracr  exhertatinB^to  the  people  to 


if f«.  Hum. ie  leAed  tmoa  as  a  great  advo* 
te  the:  cAwxi   in  'hi*  obeervatiOBa  mi 
Thu  tiMB  ut  wUdi  he  vrole  bii 
mi  thadavoft  thiaiohgeet  aie  tiip^ieeed' 
to  taie.girea  a  btaa- 1»  hii  .'opinBnMv  of  .whiaii 
he  ftraa  piehably  iwiaieihie.    There  iaa  pra* 
g  epiaioB  at  4etea'  to  ihis  effect,  in  the 
.OM  of -thb  ■daad'eepaeiaHgry-^aQBfQBiidcd 
io  all  paebeUilj^'tet  cMnnly  veey  geocndfy' 

('  Utty^  it,  %  ceaneoQ  oaiaiea 

faia-irealiee;  aad  oetlahd^r hia ar*< 

laeanied  aeluraeH 

go;    '  turn  heok  waa  pufaliihed  -leoeaaly 

ei  theieoantiy^ie^ 

*"  r£»r  2SS:; 

impul  'hia/opiBie»oD'theaohjec>j 
Yei^  alriflifar  'ind.  wgeroaely-  aa*  it  iaa«  he 
thrtigii  he ^edowp  th>  iawr^  it  wiii  he^eedt 
ha  gmipiqg!:aBd[i  compKheaMve 
doea-.net  iaehide  the..Ga«  oCbthe 
pMi%»  bet.  tint  eeefT'-ooe  efhia 


otMbe.peefde^iectite  tor  lh«Bieelreieoaie<  pert 
of  thet  pearee  liUeb  beloegs  to^  other  ihanda. 
Bet  ia  -the*  pteaeat  cae^  thaie  are  -oe  waade 

'idee,  te  here  bcea  aeteftaiaed 

iM^aotteef  the 

jopen  aa  oedinatiny 

pnrpeae.     There    are  'word%indned^ 

leeuediet  the'  idea^sf  ae^ 

ilncthe.jpeachoofi  Ma.  JMid« 


^jsaaeiew  $»dgfimf  kkead9% 
mMMhon  Mtfaflnae.verfti/tdrf^ 
IfamthJeipieniiieytathepett  ^Jthanffioiaat 
djnetnaiaphutriat  ee.'aaa<hear  ^  ii  bcmMa: 
Ibeoietor  aeswen  hiinaelfiths%(¥ItgiMrca 
c  ngAii  Al  %.  aoB^Uiti  ^fm^  t*e  Mkig  end 
Mk  JbaBBi  ajT  PMioeraT/iei^  h  riffbt  to  be^ 
bend^eed  febaned  ^■tarwe^ieier.  '  Let  oe 
thi»;dey  "tabiMe  the  pririlegeidf  oelr  f^ 
rioasCooetitvtion^  i^  vt- kiy  mtr  peiiiium  te> 
.^reAe^atod  aeeeit  oii^  figbteat  Men^end  aa 
firitoos;**  If  tera  aflQr  thing  eqemleat'  ia 
aeditioB  here. 

I  sight^pat  the  atafter  abo  to  die  test  eC 
wbet  the  pmionaM:  did»  Did  thej  oroaoise 
eay  sodhtwa  te.eomepoed  iirth?  :  Didahcv 
afflitte  thinlie»tadi  thei  Ufaited  IhshiHBP 
^h  PhUfaai^deeiaie  their ^^e^nirittaes  pam 
aieeet^.er jpmHde^iap  ee^  waj^fbetbeirfetuw 
ptnefts^ingBh-.tlB'-ahertP  arfaet  did  'tfief  do^r 
ThejKdidK:  jest  ullat. they  ytofterad  teido(,«** 
thi]r  pet^oDedPashaneet,  and. having  sent  off 

liouw  quietly-  to  tlnn 
Mo  mrelBig.-  hap  ever 


at  RilAamedi  sieoe  the  eTeeiiation  waa  nade 
in  Dean-Fbrh;  aad  if  that  ia  the  way  in  which 
the  people  are  to  attaviala  their  diatresses,  it  ia 
at  least  aa  inaeeeet  aameniag  npacoiaa  ai  the 
gin-shop.  Bot  we  most  go  berk  to  our  eeatar* 
Ue  prooteda»  '*  let  oe^  tl^etelbraf  (aseerery-eonp 
stiiMtional  aseans  toi  reeeaor  oer  ieat  tightly 
rights  which  oer  ancestors  ci^oyed  aad  eacr^ 
cised;  let  na.bt  finsi  asMi  neaMmons  iaifrnr 
resolres,  that  we  mU  not  hcdsMived  of  oer 
pHvifegea  any  leeger,  that  we  eiaiai.  theei  aa 
oar  bvtfarighty  and  hyowr  qmUmid  .ectttftHm 
tkmol  esedM^  shew  oair  enemies  Umi  we  iUtt 
ommckjf^  r^fffimmn,  mid  eiarpstiee^.and  thai  we 
want  nothing  bet  what  is  lor  the  gsneral  good 
of  the  ceeatfy/'  Bet  tbescv  it  baa  bean  se^ 
are  pteteeces»'  pot  on  to  disguise  the  real 
^okedness  of  their  designs.  1  tbink  yoe  eae 
iw.ne  dengar.  Gentlemen^  of  belieriag  thnh. 
'Whaterer  feutts  these  pdeple  may  have  oooi» 
tniHed^  1  em  eeeddent  yon  wiU  not  find  them 
gmkyefhypeorisy.  My  own  oaeviefion  is^ 
that  they  have  apdcen  nu>ra  rselentlir  than  they 
intended ;  but  I  am-  sure  yen  wtU  give  tha* 
credit  et  least -for  all  the  moderation  they  pro^ 

fees. 

Thcie  is  a  great  deal  more  to  be  said  on  the 
other  parts  of  this  pebhcation.  Mr.  Cmig 
makes  aa  do^ucat  oarengoe;  There  is  a 
great-  deal  of  poetry  in  his  steech.  **  Being 
then,  my  bretmreny  impelled  by  B«tessity»  let 
us  eppraach,  displaying  reesoa  and  resolutaeaa 
like -men  who  know  tWir  duty  tiul  their  ob^ 
Ject.  Yea,  witb  these- and  similar  princinlea 
ma^  we-  nndauntedly  ge  forward^  and  Hk* 
tegitimala  aens-come  to-te  years  of  mejority^ 
let  as  in  the  nacM  of  law  end  justice  demand 
the  inestimehle  end  dearly  pnrohased  beqeeat 
of  our  woithy  progenitors^  "that  we  may  enjoy 
it  oiMBeleps^  and  transoHt-  it  te  a  landing  poa^ 
terity^  And  30  aol,  Aweiting  the  fiat  of  hiak 
who»»agmdicd>  hot  the  pcmona  of  asee»  bvt 
htmndnili^fte  the  cries  of  th4:pecr,  and  ^ndeth 
the  caniaef-4ba  distiiesaad^  nlwaTa^mtingior 
oor  toeonmgemena  Me  $imem"0f  Ms  mpirtm 
ee<»  HtJdsiereeasded  for  our  instmetienyWdelKir 
ket  ineuMt  dtmmA  pteteikd  with  the  uiiust 
judge,  that  althongh,  witiieut  any  regard  to  hie 
high  obligations^  yet  wae  not  totally  destitnte 
of  that  piftnciple  which  aDakea  ell  bttnan  kind 
qnake,  when  reminded  of-  neglected  duty. 
Mny  we  be  actuated  by  the  same  oonrage  te 
eo  aad  do  likewise."  Here^  again^  tou  see 
how  diatinody  their  iriews  were  limited  to  the 
peeodhl  iteratten  of  petitions. 

The  purpose  of  the  Aesolutions,  too,  haa 
been  cntirmy  misnndMetood.  In  the  Mh  it.ia 
saidt  ^  That  the  dibt;  now  amewiting  Co  nearly 
l'jCNK>>milliDna^.ba*bedn^con(racted1mthe  pro»> 
seeetiod-of -onqust  and-nnneceaaiky  watVy^by  h 
odmspt  admihistMieai^  enifeMUr ''supported 
bymrlioeae  .of  ComaMdS)  v4eah  conjidt  be 
said$  <  with' enyt^jnsiaeef)  ft)  tee './fair' eetf  apni 
ft^rCMntalismiof'  ttte^icenhtifyt  buV.irbiidi  4&t 
themmet  part'  is'  cdmpeted'of'^nHir  pet  In  by 
a  berough  fetatiuny  who  hihr^ruanrped'tbevights 
of  the  ^ple^^endwho  bymaiae 


Ill]         £7G£0R6&III. 


Trial  ofAlmmier  M*tAr«n 


inn 


«otttrited  to  retttrn  a  majority  of  niemben  of 
that  House/'  Th^  fiicts  here  stated  are  trite 
and  stale,  but  the  passage  is  worth  noting,  as 
aUbrding,  atfd  that  in  the  most  anthoritative 
and  ofi/v  deliberate  part  of  the  pnblicatton,  the 
most  dear  and  complete  eridence  of  what 
Ibey  meant  when  they  used  ezpresfions  Titu- 
perative  of  the  present  House  ot  Commons. 

llie  9th  Resolution  is,  ^  Being,  therefore, 
impr^sed  with  the  tiwth  of  these  Resolutions, 
tiie  meeting  lesoHre  to  present  petitions  to  his 
Royal  Highness  the  Ftince  Regent,  and  to 
botn  Houses  of  Parliament,  requesting  his 
Royal  Highness  in  particnlar,  to  attemble  Por- 
luuneiU  without  delay;  to  call  upon  it  imme- 
diately to  adopt  such  measures  as  may  tend  to 
restore  to  the  people  their  undoubted  right  in 
the  representation,— to  order,  in  the  name  of 
the  people,  an  immediate  reduction  of  the 
taxes*  ai\d  the  standing  army,  the  abolition  of 
all  unmerited  pensions,  sinecures,  grants,  and 
other  emoluments,  as  the  surest  way  of  esta- 
blishing on  a  firm  and  lasting  basis  the  rights 
of  the  crown,  and  the  privileges  of  the  peo- 
ple ;  and  that  in  all  time  coming,  no  person 
who  has  an  office,  or  place  of  pront  unaer  the 
King,  or  reoeiines  a  pension  from  the  Crown, 
shall  be  capable  or  serving  as  a  member  of 
the  House  of  Commons.  12.  Wm.  III.  c.  2." 
It  is  quite  plain  from  the  context,  that  it  is 
ike  whole  Parliamenif  and  not  the  Prince,  that 
is  called  upon  to  order  an  immediate  reduction 
of  the  taxes,  the  standing  army,  and  so  forth ; 
—so  that  the  eloquent  exposition  of  the  lord 
advocate  upon  this  passage  was  founded  upon 
a  manifest  misconception  of  its  meaning. 

I  have  only  to  cidl  your  attention  to  the  next 
resolution,  which  clearly  shows  the  scope  and 
extent  of  their  views  and  threatenings,  ^  And 
the  meeting  hereby  resolve  to  make  known  to 
his  Royal  Highness  the  Prince  Regent,  and  to 
both  Houses  of  Parliament,  that  thegf  wiU  not 
ctate  tending  t^i  <me  fetOion  efUr  another ^  ami 
ming  every  conttitutiomd  meagare  insured  to 
them  by  the  laws  of  the  country  till  they  obtain 
the  restoration  of  their  rights  auul  privileges  as 
men  and  as  citizens  of  the  stale."  This  is  the 
only  practical  resolution  they  came  to ;  and 
even  this  was  not  acted  upon,  for  it  appears 
that  no  other  meetings  have  been,  held,  or  pe- 
titions transmitted  fVom  that  time  to  this.  In 
the  same  way '  the  meaning  of  the  words, 
**  Shall  we  bear  this,''  or  similar  terms,  is, 
throughout  explained  in  the  dearsst  and  most 
precise  way  to  lie,  Shall  we  bear  our  sufferings 
without  complaint,  vrithout  munnuring,  with- 
out stating  our  g^evances  by  application  to 
the  proper  quarter?  **  So  far  Irom  ceasing  to 
complain,''  they  say  **  the  damour  of  our  cries 
for  ledms  shall  ne#er  cease  to  ring  in  their 
•ars^  till  the  abhorrent  temple  of  oonruptiOB  be 
annihilated,  and  the  banners  of  freedom  vrave 
from  the  heights  of  Dover  to  the  mountains  of 
the  Vorth."  That  is  a  lofty  passage,  and  foil 
of  eloquence  certainly.  But  in  every  one  of 
the  speeches,  in  whidi  it  is  anxiously  stated, 
not  only  that  there  are  grievaaoes,  but  griev- 


ances which  could  not  be  bonie,  ^rhat  do  they 
propose  to  do  ?  Do  they  propose  to  attadc 
the  throne?  No;  they  merely  say.  We  sdaU 
apply,  like  the  importttnate  widow,  and 
reiterate  our  clamour  till  we  waary  you,  or  by 
the  force  of  our  reasoning,  prevail  over  ytmr 
prdndices. 

There  was  one  part  of  my  leanied  friend  ther 
lord  advocate's  speech,  of  vrhich  I  am  really- 
unvrilUng  to  ssy  exactly  what  I  think,  or  ex- 
press the  feelings  it  excited.  I  mean  the  pas^^ 
sage  regarding  the  army,  .vrhen  he  spoke  as  if 
there  had  be«i  a  disposition  entertained  by 
some  of  those  at  the  meeting  to  induce  thr 
army  to  rebel  against  the  government.  The 
only  libel  I  have  heard  to-day  is  the  sup- 
posing, for  a  moment,  that  such  ah  intention 
could  be  entertained,  and  vrith  any  the 
slightest  hope  of  siibceBs.  7[he  policy  of  keep- 
ing up  a  standing  army  was  long  the  subject 
of  discussion  in  parliament,  and  the  dahger  of 
it  to  the  constitution  was  much  insisted  on, 
while,  latteriy,  such  a  danger  has  been  lean 
apprc4iended,  and  the  great  eonsideration  m 
questions  regarding  the  army  has  been  the  ex- 
pense which  it  necessarily  imposes  on  the 
country.  But  whatever  opinion  may  be  en* 
tertained  on  this  subject,  there  was  no  die- 
ciission  at  this  meeting  on  the  expedioicy  of 
a  standing  army;  and  Sie  passage  in  questtoa 
is  most  manifestly  intended  merdy  to  meet 
this  common  and  almost  obsolete  Whig  topicy 
and  to  show  that  it  was  not  from  that  quarter 
that  danger  was  to  be  apprehended.  I  say- 
that  this  was  obviously  its  meaning,  if  indeed 
it  is  not  rsither  to  be  regarded  as  a  piece  of 
mere  dedamation  upon  a  very  popular  and  in-* 
viting  theme.  Nobody  at  present  thinks  iU  of 
the  army:  on  the  contrary,  it'  is  scarcely 
possible  to  speak  on  any  public  subject,  vritfch- 
out  taking  an  opportunity  of  saving  something' 
in  the  praiw  ot  the  army;  and  .to  endeavour 
at  a  piece  of  eloquence  in  its  favour  ie  tlie 
ordinary  style  of  writers  of  all  descriptions. 
The  hope  of  seducing  it  from  its  duty  and 
allegiance,  if  it  were  not  too  wicked,  is  mr  too- 
absurd  to  be  entertained  even  by  the  moat 
desperate  conspirators. 

In  another  speech  it  is  said,  "  It  is  higb 
time,  when  they  have  robbed  us  of  our  money,, 
deprived  us  of  our  friends,  violated  our  rights^ 
and  abused  our  privileges," — it  is  high  time 
for  what  ?  to  take  up  arms  and  overthrow  the 
government  P  no  such  matter— only  ^  To  db- 
numd  redreu  far  such  treatment,*'  The  orator 
then  goes  on,  "  But,  methinks  I  h^ar  theaa 
say,  we  are  determined  to  give  no  redress,  we 
have  huddled  ourselves  intoplaces>  pensione 
and  sinecures,  and  we  are  determined  to  hold 
them.  This  I  think  is  thdr  language."  Wdl, 
wdl,  what  then?  In  ihis  desperate  case, 
proceeds  thia  seditious  orator,  ^  We  must  seek 
redress  from  another  quarter ;  we  wmtt  petiOom 
hiirdyaihighnett  the  Prinu  Rtjgent  to  remove 
our  grievances !  to  give  us  a  psriiament  of  our 
annual  choosing,  yUndk  will  represent  us  tn  a 
form  agreeable  to  our  vrisbes^  and  i^ceahlft 


1191 


(Uid  Thomas  Bairdjbr  Sedition. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[114 


to  the  constitiitioo."  Is  it  said  that  this  is 
hardly  a  coTer  for  professed  rebellion?  In 
answer,  here  is  another  passage,  ^*  The  unani- 
mity of  our  sentiments  and  exertions^  agrtedbU 
io  tke  constUtUion,  will  once  more  dispel  the 
dood  which  eclipses  the  resplendent  and 
animating  rays  of  liberty,  and  will  again  make 
her  shine  forth  in  this  once  happy  country 
with  unimpeded  effulgence.^  The  last  speech 
ia  the  pamphlet  ends  thus :  *'  Permit  me  now 
to  conclude  in  the  inimitable  language  of  our 
celebrated  bard,  and  friend  of  liberty,  Robert 
Boms — May  tyranny  in  the  ruler,  and  licenti" 
manea  m  the  people,  find  in  each  of  us  here  an 
ioexorable  foe.-' 

There  is  another  passage  where  allnsion  is 
made  to  re?erend  hirelings,  upon  which  the 
lord  advocate  bestowed  his  eloquence  as  need- 
lessly, and,  I  am  sure,  with  as  little  effect  as 
on  the  passage  about  the  army.  In  that  quarter 
of    the    country,   a   tendency  to    fanaticism 
rather  than  to  irreligion  might  be  expected ; 
as  it  was  there  that  presbyterianism  first  struck 
root :   and  in  this  very  pamphlet  you  will  find 
passages  similar  to  those  employed  by  the 
CoYenanters  in   the  Tales  of  my  Landlord. 
"^  It  is  there  you  will  see  bow  Egypt  flourished 
under  the  wise  administration  of  Joseph;— 
and  what  the  heard-hearted  and  inquisitorial 
Pbamioh  did  for  the.  sons  of  the  Nile ; — it  is 
there  you  will  see  what    Solomon  did   for 
Israel ; — ^with  what  Jeroboam,  Nebat's  wicked 
son,    and    odiers,  brought  upon    the  (now) 
wandering  sons  of  Jacob.    It  is  there  you  will 
see    what    Nebuchadnezzar,    £vil-Merodach, 
and  fielshazzar,  did  for  the  now  extinct  Baby- 
lonians ; — ^how  Persia  rose  under  Cyrus,  and 
sunk  under  the  bloody  Cambyses,"  &c.  &c.    I 
am  confident,  indeed,  that  you  cannot  look 
into    any  part   of  the   publication,  without 
seeing  great  reverence  for  scripture/— «  calm, 
temperate  reliance  on  the  assistance  of  Provi- 
dence   in   all   good  acts, — ^a  reliance  to  be 
founded  on  good  moral  conduct  and  prayer. 
The  term,  ^  reverend  hirelings,"  employed  by 
tliese  rude  orators,  might  be  considered  per- 
haps as  not  undeserved  by  certain  clergymen 
who  leave  their  proper  duty  for  making  pro- 
selytes in  politics ;   and  persons  who  do  not 
agree  with  them  might  say,- with  any  purpose 
but  an  intention  to  bring  discredit  on  religion, 
that  they  had  been  hirelings  •  in  certain  parts 
of  their  conduct.    Nothing  is  more  innocent. 
The  attack  might  perhaps  have  been  made  in 
a  more  decorous  manner,  but  surely  there  is 
no  pretence  for  saying  here,  that  there  is  any 
design  to  excite  a  spirit  of  irreligion. 

I  have  now  gone  through  the  publication ; 
and  I  leave  it  to  you  to  determine  on  its  na- 
ture,--only  reminding  you  that  it  is  a  funda- 
inental  rule  of  law,  that  a  seditious  intention 
19  necessary  to  constitute  sedition.  You  will 
therefore  consider,  whether  the  object  of  these 
people  was  merely  to  petition  parliatnent,  or 
whether,  under  the  false  and  assumed  pre  text 
^  petitioning,  their  object  was  to  excite  sedi- 
<MB  aiBong  the  peonter*aBd  to  spread  misohief 
VOL.  XXXlfl, 


and  disturbance  ip  the  country*  In  judging  of 
this  you  will  remember  wliat  you  heard  in 
evidence  as  to  Mr.  Baird,  of  whom  you  werjg 
told  that  he  would  be  the  last  man  to  join  ia 
any  treasonable  or  seditious  enterprises,  and 
that  he  was  accustomed  at  all  times  to  check 
the  folly  and  infatuation  of  his  neighbours. 

I  have  already  detained  you,  I  am  afraid, 
unreasonably  long,  but  I  cannot  leave  the  sub- 
ject without  taking  some  notice  of  the  prece-  , 
dents  respecting  trials  and  convictions  for  se- 
dition which  have  taken  place  in  this  Court . 
They  are  all  of  very  recent  date,  having  oc- 
curred within  the  memory  of  most  of  us ;  I 
believe  there  was  no  trial  for  sedition  earlier 
than  the  year  1792.  There  are,  indeed,  some 
ancient  cases  thinly  scattered  in  the  records  of 
the  Court,  but  in  all  these  the  crime  was  ac- 
companied with  other  offences,  by  which  the 
sedition  was  aggravated.  There  is  no  case  of 
mere  sedition,  earlier  than  the  date  I  have 
mentioned.  That  date  must  strike  you  at 
once  as  affecting  the  character  of  all  those  pre- 
cedents. For  it  is  never  to  be  forgotten,  that  . 
they,  one  and  all,  took  place  at  a  time,  when 
the  minds  of  Juries,  and  of  Courts,  and  indeed 
of  all  persons  in  the  country,  were  in  a  state  of 
unprecedented  alarm  for  the  safety  of  the  con- 
stitution ;  at  a  time  when  acts  and  expressions, 
which  undoubtedly  would  not  have  been  taken 
cognizance  of,  in  happier  and  more  serene 
seasons,  were  considered  as  of  the  most  danger- 
ous tendency  ;--at  a  time  when  this  country 
had  recently  engaged  in  an  alarming  war  with 
a  powerful  enemy, — a  war,  not  arising  from 
disputes  about  territory  or  points  of  national 
honour,  but  which,  proceeding  from  enthu- 
siasm and  madness  on  the  one  hand,  and  un- 
defined fear  and  resentment  on  the  other, 
arrayed  every  individual  in  both  countries  in 
personal  hostility  against  every  other:—- a  war, 
indeed,  proclaimed  against  all  established  go- 
vernments, by  a  coyntry  whose  whole  interior 
exhibited  a  phasis  of  confusion  and  crime,  and 
breathed  forth  a  pestilential  air,  which  threaten- 
ed to  spread  the  contamination  through  all 
the  neignbouring  regions.  We  fought  not,  as 
in  former  wars,  with  men  formidable  only  by 
their  numbers,  their  skill,  or  their  courage,  but 
with  men  whom  we  imasined  to  be  armed 
with  a  deadly  poison,  and  zealous  to  spread 
contagion  wherever  they  went.  In  tliese 
times,  not  only  was  there  a  raging  war  with 
that  natjon,  which  was  loudly  threatening  an 
invasion  of  our.  shores, — but  it  is  impossible 
to  deny  that  there  was  an  established  centre 
of  rebellion  at  home,  looking  up  to  France  as 
the  great  redresser  of  wrongs,  asking  its  assisV 
ance  to  rear  up  every  where,  the  cottage  on 
the  ruins  of  the  palace,  and  to  carry  into  exe- 
cution the  most  visionary  and  absurd  plans 
for  the  regeneration  of  society.  Coidmunic»- 
tions  of  a  most  dangerous  nature  were  pasi^ing 
between  the  two  countries,  and  the  crisis 
seemed  as  imminent  as  any  the  world  cve^r 
saw.  Such  was  the  distressing  condition  of 
this  eountty^  tl|at  it  was  impofsible  to  remit 

m 


rr53 


57GEdRGBMlL 


Ttiftl  of  Alexander  M^Lnttn 


CIM 


for'an  instant,  tlie  mo^t  Watcbftil  police  over 
the  bonduct  of  the  disaffected.  And  what  was 
kctually  their  cdndaqt  in  tJbat  season  of  general 
alarm  P  Why,  they  were  found  in  innumerable 
multitudes  holding  'meetings  thronghout  the 
whole  land, — not  going  out  one  da^  under  a 
feelhsg  of  distress  to  petition  the  legisUture, — 
but  forming  themselves  into  permanent  dnd 
affiliated  societies,  corresponding  with  one 
another  throughout  the  whole  kingdom,  and 
Ivith  societies  abroad,  and  smitten  to  such  & 
degree  with  an  ambition  to  imitate  every  thing 
in  France,  as  to  adopt  French  names  and  ibrms 
in  their  associations.  In  short,  an  organised 
system  of  disaffection  was  formed^  calculated 
to  strengthen  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  and  to 
unite  all  the  domestic  desperadoes  that  could 
Be  mustered  against  our  own  established  govern- 
ment. Such  wajs  the  condition  of  the  country 
wben  the  trials  for  sedition  were  first  brought 
on.  In'  the  course  of  ten  months,  societies 
had  been  established,  not  only  in  every  con^ 
siderable  town  ip  Great  Britain,  but  in  every 
Kttle  village,  which,  as  branches  of  the  ffenersu 
society,  appointed  delegates  to  it.  I  tnink  I 
km  not  exaggerating  the  condition  of  the 
oountry  at  that  time,  with  a  view  to  suggest, 
nor  do  I  give  this  as  an  apology  for  some  of 
the  proceedings  which  then  took  place ;  but  I 
state  it  as  it  really  was,  that  you  may  know 
the  true  character  of  those  proceedings. 

The  first  trial  was  that  of  Mr.  Muir.^  It  is 
with  pain  I  recollect  that  case.  With  all  due 
respect  to  the  Court  and  the  jury  that  tried  it, 
]E  cannot  think  it  a  precedent  to  be  commended. 
1  cinnot  but  consider  it  as  an  occurrence  to 
be  lamented — since  unfortunately  it  cannot  be 
Ibrgotten.  Tet,  in  that  case  there  were  many 
circumstances  of  aggravation,  of  which  there 
is  DO  shadow  to  be  found  here.  Mr.  Mnit 
was  a  member  of  the  society  of  the  Fiiends 
of  the  People  in  Kirkintilloch  and  in  Glas- 
gow. He  had  gone  to  France,  where  he 
Tematned  till  aft.er  the  war  was  declared,  fie 
came  back  to  Ireland,  and  assisted  at  several 
Wetings  of  the  United  Irishmen,  and  then 
return^  to  this  country,  when  he  was  arrested 
and  brought  to  trial.^  Ilie  charges  against  him 
were  relevant.  He  was  accused  of  having 
excited  the  jpeople  <o  disaffection  to  the  king 
and  the  established  goTemment  t  he  was  ac- 
cused of  having  industrioiuly  circulated  the 
work  entitled  the  Rights  of  Man,  and  other 
publications  of  a  pernicious  and  seditious  de- 
'tcriptioD.  I  am  old  enough  to  have  attended 
Ibe  trial  f  I  was  not  then  at  the  bar,  but  I  per- 
fectly remember  the  leading  features  of  the 
case.  I  think  the  evidence  was  scanty ;  but 
still  the  charge  was  relevant ;  and  if  the  proof 
bad  been  satisfactory  he  was  guilty  of  sedition, 
and  therefore  liable  to  punishment.  At  that 
tim^  there  was  a  combination  which  seemed 
pregnant  with  danger  to  all  existing  establish- 
ments,— a  combination  formed  by  societies  all 
over  the  country,  who  appointed  deputies  to  a 

•     •.41ldw.MtHi.St.Tt,  tiT. 


gen'etttl  meeting.  The  ciitmlattoii  i>r  ioM 
works  as  Paine's  Rights  of  Man  Was  at  that 
period  likely  to  produce  mncH  evil.  I  believe, 
however,  that  feelings  Of  compassidn  'for  Mr. 
Mnir  were  general.  I  hope  they  are  perfect^ 
consistent  with  ntter  detestation  of  sedhion: 
I  "believie  isentiments  of  regret  fdr  the  neCes^ty 
which  led  to  his  .prosecution  and  conviction 
were  universal;  and  I  say,  Vrift  all  due  snb^ 
mission  to  the  law  and  the  verdict  of  the  Jnrv^ 
that  very  many  loyal  subjects  thought  there 
was  loom  for  a  verdict  of  acquittal^— that  the 
bulk  of  the  nation  regarded  the  sentence  as  ikB^ 
ilecessarily  severe. 

The  next  case  was  that  o?  Fyshr  Plilhier?* 
Re  was  also  connected  with  the  Friends  of 
Freedom,  and  had  circulated  a  political  haaft^ 
bill  in  Dundee  and  in  Edlnburgn  add^ssed  h> 
jthe  Idwest  people.  Hundreds  and  hnndred^ 
of 'these,  addressed  to  all  and  sundry,^had  beeti 
by  him  committed  to  the  winds  of  heilven ;  and 
surely  to  sow  such  doctrines  broadcast  in  ^\$> 
reckless  way,  without  pretence  of  anv'speciiil 
end,  was  criminal  and  punishable.  'Ine  hdtid^ 
bill  contained  much  inflammatory  niatfer,'atiil 
was  proved  to  have  been  circulated  by  him. 
ft  was  addressed' to  alt  and  sundry,  and  at  m 
time  when  the  minds  of  the  people  were  ia'  1 
dangerous  state  of  irritation.  No  direct  Te^ 
medy  was  proposed  for  any  of  the  evils  com- 
plained of,  ana  the  only  obj6ctinvieW  seemed 
to  be  a  dangerous  usurpation  of  j^o^er.  I"S^ 
there  was  real  sedition  in  that  c^e;^d  thkt 
it  had  no  resemblance  to  the  present, 'whiffy 
there  Was  merely  one  meeting,  and  one  set  of 
speeches,  for  the  special  Object  of 'pl^&pafing  {^ 
petition  to  parliament-^wiUi  the  {Trepanttion 
of  which  the-whole  business  actually  cidSed. 

The  next  and  the  onlv  other  cases  WcyeihttsD^ 
of  the  members  of  the  British  Coki^n^6o*^. 
Skirying,t  MargaTot,J  Gerrald,§  and  othet^^ 
and  certainly  the  existence  of  that  tfttradidi-- 
nary  association  gave  a  peculiar  character  ^to 
the  whole  of  these  cases.  That  foi'midalAe 
body,  you  may  remember,  was  composed  of  % 
set  of  persons  acting  as  delegates  from  the  re^ 
motest  parte  of  Great  Britain,  and  who  hadFM 
lawful  cusiness  in  this  place,  -and  no  dtB^ 
visible  purpose  (han  to  excite  disaMe^doii^^ 
who  haa  no  such  thing  in  view  as  petitionitijg 
the  legislature^  but  who  wished  to  organise  a. 
power  independent  of  it,  unknown  *to  3ie  con- 
stitution, and  incompatible  with  the  existence 
of  its  great  institutions.  They  bad  priv)Eite 
meetings,  and  committees  of  emergehcy,  isotoe 
of  which  were  only  to  act  in  the  event  bf  a& 
invasion  by  a  hostile  force.  £ven  taking  th6 
statement  which .  was  made  b^  those  pe)rspns 
in  their  6wu  defence,  and  looking  to  tiie'si&ai> 
'tion  of  the  times  abivad  ahd  at  home,*  it  i» 
impossible  to  doubt  that  it  was  ne<^esstir^  to 
put  down  the  Convention,  and  to  inflict  ^  ' 

: \ f  f 

•  2  How.  Mod.  St.Tr.  237. 
+  2  How.  Mod,  St,  Tr.  391. 
t  2  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  603. 
\  2  How*  Mod.  St.  Tr.  8d3. 


nn 


and  Tk9m<u  Baird/or  SedUUn. 


A.  D.  1S17. 


jwhmQnt  on  SQch  as  Skirripe.  I  need  |o  no  ; 
mithier  kd^Q  4«taib,  bu(  shaU  loerelj  mention 
that  tbeie  ipia  real,  actual^  and  palpable  seji- 
tipu  u^  that  case.  Mj  burpos^  ln,^lluding  ^9 
them,  is  to  cbntnat  them  with  the  pr,esent 
m^;  ^  e^  in  thosija  tiiq^y  and  under  all 
j^^  deplppiblf  ^itciunstajices  ^liichl  haye 
ni^jpiKta,  tkis  c^fi  voutd  bare  t>^en  Tiewed 
▼eiy  did^i^tly  fyom^  ti^e  cases  then  tried. 

The  tpalof  l^bert^n  aqd  Berry*  tool^  place 
jU  a  \^v^  tu  more  critjioal  than  th^  present. 
Zlier  wm  tri^  for  luinting  and  publishing  a 
bpok  entitled  Tfi6  Pojitiq^l  Progress  of  Scpt- 
Imj^,  whldtif  9^X0  hurt^  tejidency,  went  far 
l»^ond  ik^  pauppblet  now  in  question.  $uc1^ 
fpa  such  t^e|  were  said  to  have  been  illegally 
mposed,  and  the  copstitutiop  held  out  as  ^ 
foere  con:g)irac7  of  the  rich  aghast  tlt^e  poor : 
]r?t  tne  punisrument  infllcte4  was  thref  mooter 
ipamisoxunent  to  one  ^f  th^ip,  an^  six  moiitlif 
to  the  otli^er.  There  lyere  ^^orse  cf|^es  in  1793. 
|n  one,  I  pean  t|i^t  of  Norton  a^xd  Anderspn,^ 
^t  jm  proved  that  persons  who  were  pieinbers 
at  the  society  of  tl^  Friends  of  the  People 
bad  gone  iRto  the  cs^f — insisted  that  several 
ipf  the  ^oldieri  should  j[oin  the  society — and 
giveuyaf  a  tqast,  George  the  third  ^n4  lastf 
gnd  aap)^a^ou  to  a)l  crqwped  heads  ^  yet, 
ifpan  ^cl^  Verdict  qfcpnyiction,  nine  months' 
imprisonment,  oi^Iy,  ^aj  in£icted«  Twp  qa^es 
occi|rrie^  in  1802.  In  oue  of  them,  under  very 
gfpss  ciicumstaJDces,  for  the  man  y[as  a  soldier, 
4i|d  had  said  he  was  sorry  the  king  was  not 
k|iot,  and  tha^  l^fi  could  sc^  his  neart^s  l>Iop4 
|)fi^*^aybnet|  th^  punishpient  intficted  was 
<^  ino^t)^*s' itQpnsQppp^ot^  and  banishineni 
nim  ^cojtUnd  for  two  years.  The  fi^er  ^M 
^  c^  q(  jpi^  J^firjey  (I  m  sorry  that  should 
batf^  Imn  tiie  naine^  who,  for  wishing  de- 
Hfractipi^  to  ^ipg,  que^n,  and  royal  family, 
^ffttef^  fhx^  jpontKs'  imptisdQment. 

'  I  liave  gttoted  these  casef  to  show,  that  ^ven 
il^'tifQ^  ffjien  gfpa(  rlgojir  ^vas  jfiecesaary, 
fl^^f  fipch  wor^  than  th^  present  werf 
^tmieptiy  vieif  ^ j  j^^  ^  say^  considering  that 
we  fiaod  ppw  iQ  ▼ery  difierent  times,  and 
||ij^  ^  P^PJQ  jf  ^[ppainocV  ha4  confessedly 
no  miction  of  holding  ponventipnf  composed 
0f«e!e^(e^irofiiirariops  quarters,  or  of  pro- 
Ip^ljpiiiig  s^diiioii  in  apy  w;^y,  but  were  hungry 
aiiimtf,  Vho  Qi^Iy  m^t  op  one  occasion  to  pe- 
titioQ  for  something,  they  knew  not  what,  which 
th^  tho^pl^t  ^ap)^  i^ord  them  relief,  and 
Bpver  ^ar^9nred  any  purpose  of  exciti;ig  or 
fjmf  m  ^ebeUioo,  but  continued  to  prosecute 
lAfsir  yi^f^  by  ^ onstUutioA^  pieans ;  can  you 
itmic^^  that  if  the  paoiie  ^riot^s  cases  which 
{'hay^  bpfD  con^djeriug  i]5ceived  such  sjigjit 
m^ce,  thii  present  case  ^buld,  eveji  then, 
iaf  e  been  ^shongbt  worthy  of  anv  punishpaent 
a  9^  pr  th^  ^jiy  iJ^e^^irtber  shou)d  p/p^  oe 
j^m^  than  ^^mg'.tfe  ^2^^\s  Ifoipe  a  jiftle 

M«w^l?i*h^, '  9fff  Tj^'^T  %^*fned,'  to  hp 
jn<>fe  cautib^  on  jspy  Ifilur^  occa^oin  T 

t  ?low.  ^.  ^.  tf,  f. 


L119 


In  urging  this  to  you,  I  think  I  may  refef 
to  an  authority  wlach  cannot  be  either  de- 
spised or  avoided — I  mean  the  authority  of 
the  wfaol/e  kingdom,  of  the  whole  law,  of  the 
whole  Q^jesty  and  power  of  the  king,  ministers, 
judges,  and  legislature  6(^  England— of  that 
country  which  has  had  the  longest  experience 
of  freedom,  and  has  learned  most  thorough])^ 
by  that  happy  experience  now  little  real  dange^ 
there  is  in  the  aisconteiits,  or  even  the  occa« 
liohal  violence  of  a  free  people.  There,  it 
would  appear,  (hey  are  not  so  easily  alarmeq 
—not  so  easily  frightened  at  words,  or  so  apt 
to  suppose  that  the  constitution  can  be  brougui 
into  hazai'd  by  a  fi^w  intemperate  expressions. 
I  4^0)^^  therefore,  the  example  of  England  as 
it  stapos  at  this  presept  moment.  Will  anv 
one  say,  that  what  passed  at  Kilmarnock  win 
bear  any  comparison,'  fn  point  of  indec^iig[ 
and  indecorum,  to  what  is  notoriously  passing 
in  England  ^very  hour,  and  under  the  imme- 
diate observation  of  the  judges  and  of  parlia^ 
meot.  The  orations  of  Bunt — the  publication! 
of  pobbett  and  oth^s— the  meetings  ip  Spa^ 
(elds  and  Palace-yard,  are  all,  up  to  tnis 
hour,  unchecked  and  unpunished — aod  are 
met  only  by  ridicule  and  precaution.  Ip  the 
Eovf  1  Kxcoange,  at  the  doors  of  the  l>ouses  0^ 

{)arliament,  at  the  gates  of  the  psdace,  pub- 
ications  are  opeply  sold — ^oot  400  copies  of 
dull  speeches,  out  hundreds  of  thousands  of 
^aily  and  weekly  effusions,  containing,  every 
one  of  the(p,  mutter  far  wors^  than  what  is 
found  in'tljis  publication.  I  am  sure  no  006 
can  look  into  them,  without  being  satisfied 
that  they  contain  strong  excitements  to  dis- 
content, and  (l^at  their  authors  are  fKontioually 
^f^orking  upon  the  feelings  of  the  country ;  yef 
they  are  still  holding  forUk  their  doc^inef 
without  danger  of  interfereirce.' 

See,  then,  what  is  the  course,  that  all  the  wis- 
dom in  council,  and  policy  of  government,  i^ 
that  land  of  freedom  have  held?  What  is  the 
course  they  htfve  pursued  with  regard  to  thct 
portion  of  the  people  with  whom  originated 
apy  disorder  that  exists  in  the  country,  and  the 
people  to  whom  indeed  the  disorders  are  stiu 
connned  ?  Notwithis^nding '  the  situation  of 
England  for  the  last  six  months,  this  is  (hejir^ 
and  the  only  trial  which  the  present  aisturbed 
state  of  the  countiy  has  produced.  Really,  t 
should  not  have  expected  to  find  the  first  trial 
in  this  country/  They  that  are  whole  need  not 
a  physician,  'fhere  has  been  breaking  of  frames 
in  many  counties  in  England  for  eighteeti 
months ;  and  y^t  his  majesty's  governmisnt  have 
a  merciful  reluctance,  and  ^re  slow  to  call  the 
people  to  account  even  for  those  great  excess^ 
while  there  is  any  reason  to  t^ink  that  they 
tave  been'  pix)duced  chiefly  by  tpeir  misery. 
^p^  If ith  regard  tp  fiip  pplijtical  commotions  ip 
th,9  j(netrop6li^,  they  kno^  that  a  check  to  ihe 
'jpint  of  freedom  oughj'  pof  lo  be  giv^p 
wit^<?yl  ;ie;ces^ityiTr-jtTift  the  presp^  tuipults 


tavp  jyqt  fgrj^^j^'qpjijnucli  from  wickedpess  <Jf 
^eart,  a^  frpjp  the  'p^essuVe  of  ipise,ry ;— an4 
j^itj^  >  ga^xpal  ijolic^tuge,  t^ey  J^opjt  watchftilly 


ii9l 


57  GEORGE  III. 


■'Trial  ofAUxander  McLaren 


C120 


and  corapassionalely  upon  tlie  people  as  if  they  ;  gemm  of  their  countrymen  is  so  apt  to  hurry 


.■were  in  the  delirium  of  a  fever ; — and  they  spare 
them  as  deluded  and  mistaken  only  for  a  season. 
That  is  the  tone  and  temper  in  which  the  equal 
justice  of  England  is  dealt,  and  sure  I  am  it  is 
admirable,  when  compared  with  that  which 
would  lay  every  newspaper  open  to  prosecution^ 
and  stifle  the  voice  of  freedom.  Nothing  but 
extreme  necessity  and  immediate  danger  can 
justify  the  rearing  up  state  prosecutions..  Ac- 
cording to  the  example  of  England,  we  should 
be  slow  to  punish  the  people.  In  England, 
much  more  has  taken  place  to  justify  prosecu- 
tions than  has  yet  occurred  in  Scotland.  Looking 
at  home  where  no  riots,  and  no  rebellion  exist, 
andwhere  a  great  mass  of  misery  has  been  more 
quietly^and  more  soberly  borne  than  in  the  sis- 
terkingdom,  ^e  should  not  be  rash  or  hasty  to 
stretch  out  the  hand  of  vengeance  against  those 
^  whose  case  calls  rather  for  compassion  than  pu- 
nishment. Believe  roe,  gentlemen,  it  will  be 
no  honour,  and  no  glory  to  us,  to  set  the  exam- 
ple of  severity  on  such  an  occasion ;  nor  will 
It  redound  in  any  way  to  the  credit  of  our  law 
or  our  juries,'that  we  were  more  sharp-sighted 
and  jealous  than  our  neighbours  in  weighing 
ihe  rash  words  of  our  fellow  citizens,  at  a  time 
when  they  were  suffering  the  extremity  of  dis- 
tress.' At  such  a  season,  expressions  t&i// be 
.used  which  it  is  impossible  to  justify;  and 
offences  will  be' committed,  which  will  again 
disappear  in  seasons  of  prosperity.  A  vigilant 
police,  in  such  a  case,  is  all  that  is  wanted. 
Absurd  and  impr6per  expressions  at  meetings 
for  petitioning  parliament  hardly  deserve  no- 
tice ;  and  a  facility  of  obtaining  convictions  for 
government  on  trials  for  such  offences  is  uni- 
rersally  recognised  as  a  mark  of  public  servi- 
lity and  degradation.  It  is  always  most  easy 
for  the  worst  governments  to  obtain  such  con- 
victions,— and  from  the  basest  people.  Affec- 
tion to  the  constitution  is  planted  substantially 
in  the  hearts  of  the  subjects  of  Great  Britain ; 
and  it  is  only  those  governments  which  are 
doubtiiil  of  their  own  popularity,  that  are  given 
to  torture  and  catch  at  words,  and  to  aggravate 
slips  of  temper  or  of  tongues  into  the  crimes  of 
sedition  and  treason.  If,  on  account  of  some 
rash  or  careless  expression  at  public  meetings, 
people  are  to  be  punished  as  guilty  of  sedition, 
there  is  an  end  to  all  freedom  in  examining  the 
measures  of  government.  The  public  expecta- 
tion is  alive  to  the  result  of  tne  first  of  these 
trials;  and  I  say  it  will  be  no  honour,  and  no 
glory  to  you,  in  such  a  case,  to  set  the  first  ex- 
'umple  of  finding  a  verdict  which  would  subject 


ihem,— especially  when  they  find  that  far  worse 
excesses  are  pardoned  in  England  to  the  phleg- 
matic English, — in  whom  they  have  far  less  a- 
pology.  *    ' 

I  have  exhausted  you  and  myelf, — but  I  have 
one  word  more  to  say.    This  is  a  case  above 
all  other  cases  fit  for  the  decision  of  a  jury, 
— a  case  in  which  you  can  expect  but  little  as- 
sistance from  the  Court,  and  in  which,  I  will 
venture  to  say,  you  ought  to  receive  no  iroprea* 
sionfrom  that  quarter,  but  judge  and  determine 
for  yourselves.    The  great  use  of  a  jury  is,  not 
to  determine  questions  of  evidence,  and  to 
weigh  opposite  probabilities  in  a  complicated 
proof.    Its  high  and  its  main  use  is,  to  enter 
into  the  feelings  of  the  party  accused,  and 
instead  of  entertaining  the  stern    notions  of 
fixed  and  inflexible  duty  which  must  adhere  to 
the  minds  of  judges  who  administer  inflexible 
law,  to  be  moved  by  the  particular  circumstances 
of  every  particular  case — to  be  touched  with 
a  nearer  sense  of  human  infirmities,  and  to 
temper  and  soften  the  law  itself  in  its  applica- 
tion to  individuals.  It  is  on  this  account  alone, 
I  believe,  tliat  in  foreign  lands  the  privilege 
of  jury-trial  as  existing  in  this  country  is  regar- 
ded as  so  valuable.    And  certainly  its  vuue 
has  always  been  held  chiefly  apparent  in  trials 
for  alleged  political  offences, — with  regard  to 
which  it  is  the  presumption  of  the  law  itself^ 
that  judges  might  be  apt  to  identify  themselves 
with  the  crown,  as  they  belong  to  the  aristocra- 
tical  part  of  society,  and  to  those  great  establish- 
ments  which  appear  to  be  peculiarly  threatened 
when  sedition  and  public  disturbance  are  ex- 
cited.   Whether  there  is  any  reason  for  this 
distrust  is  not  now  the  question;  and  in  this 
Court  I  am  perfectly  assured  that  we  have  no 
reason  whatever,  to  doubt  the  impartiality  of 
the  Bench.  But  it  is  not  to  them  that  the  coun- 
try looks, — that  all  Britons,  and  all  Foreigners 
look,  in  questions  with  the  crown,  when  as  head 
of  the  state,  it  demands  punishment  on  any  of 
its  subjects  for  allecced  want  of  obedience. — In 
all  such  cases,  the  friends  of  liberty  and  justice 
look  with  pride  and  with  confidence  to  the 
right  that  a  man  has  to  be  tried  by  hjs  peers. 

If  this  question,  then,  is  left  to  you,  and  to 
you  only,  I  am  sure  you  will  not  easily  take  it 
for  granted  that  the  panels  at  the  bar  were 
actuated  by  seditious  motives;  You  will  judge^ 
whether  in  the  publication  of  this  fooli^,  in- 
temperate and  absurd  book,  there  was  an 
intention  to  excite  disorder  and  commotion  in 
the  country,  and  that  in  this  conduct  my  client 


people  to  punishment  in  the  circumstances  of  \  was  blind  to  his  own  interest,  and  to  the  evil 


these  panels.  Even  if  you  think  that  the  crime 
is  doubtful,  I  trust  you  will  not  be  disposed 
'  lo  lend  yourselves  to  the  over-zeal  of  his  ma- 
iesty's  professional  advisei*s  in  this  part  of  the 
kingdom.  I  say,  I  trustyou will  not  shew  a 
'  disposition  to  follow,  where  the  keen  and  jea- 
lous eyes  of  persons  in  authority  may  spy  out 
matters  of  offence';  and  that  Scotsmen  will  not 
be  forward  to  construe  into  guilt  those  excesses 
of  speech  into  which  they  know  that  the/emif 


consequences  to  his  country.  The  essence  of 
the  crime,  I  can  never  too  often  repeat,  con- 
sists in  the  intention;  and  in  judging  of  this 
you  will  take  all  the  cii^umstances  and  eM  the 
acts  of  the  parties  into  your  view.  In  a  sea- 
son of  great  distress,  one  single  meeting  was 
held  for  petitioning  the  Legislature, — a  pur- 
pose which  redeems  every  thing  that  might 
nave  been  amiss  in  their  proceedings.  No- 
thing but  a  petition  to  Pariiament  was,  in  fact. 


121J 


Stid  fkomat  Bairdfor  Sedition. 


A.D.  mi. 


tids 


the  result  of  the  meetingj-^anil  400  copies 
t>aly  of  these  foolish  speeches  vere  printed. 
No  steps  were  taken  to  promote  disorder,  but 
the  most  entire  tranquillity  then  and  after- 
'wards  prevailed. 

When  I  think  of  these  things,  I  can  have 

BO  doubt  at  all  of  the  issue  of  this  trial.    Yon 

cannot  but  perceive  that  the  panels  have  not 

been  proved  guilty  of  sedition ;  for  they  have 

oot  been  proved  to  have  said  or  done  any  thing 

wrickedly  and  felotuousfy,  or  for  the  purpote  of 

exciting  tumult  and  disorder  in  the  country. 

Their  general  conduct  and  character  render 

such  an  imputation  in  the  highest  degree  im« 

-probable;  and  the  particular  facts  Which  have 

been  proved  are  so  far  from  supporting  it, 

that,  when  taken  all  together,  they  are  obviously 

inconsistent  with  its  truth. 

SUVMING-UP. 

Lord  Justice  C2erft.~Gentlemen  of  the  Jury; 
Although  you  have  heard  from  the  learned 
Omnselwho  has  just  now  addressed  you, 
.  with  infinite  ability,  on  the  part  of  one  of  the 
panels,  that  this  is  a  case  more  fitted  for  the 
-particular  consideration  and  final  decision  of 
a  Jury  than  of  the  Court,  and  that  here  the 
-Court  has  less  concern,  and  less  to  do,  than  in 
any  other  species  of  trial ;  I  am,  much  afraid 
-that,  in  the  view  which  I  entertain  of  the  duty 
incumbent  on  me  on  this  occasion,  I  shall  be 
under  the  indispensable  necessity  of  still  de- 
-taining  you  for  some  portion  of  time,  notwith- 
standing the  fatiguing  duty  you  have  had  to 
'  perform. 

In  consequencerof  the  alteration  of  the' law 
'  relative  to  proceedings  in  this  Court,  it  is  no 
longer  neeessary  to  take  down  the  evidence  in 
*  writing,*  but  it  is  still  the  duly  of  the  pre- 
siding' Judge  to  sum  up  that  evidence  to  the 
Jury  who  are  to  decide  upon  it;  and  notwith- 
'  standing  what  the  learned   gentleman  said, 
'(and' I 'am  not  disposed  to  find  fault  with  his 
remark),  I  shall  state  for  your  consideration, 
the  nature  of  the  charge  and  the  evidence  ex- 
hibited against  the  prisoners  at  the  bar.    But 
even  if  I  were  not  enjoined  by  the  pbsitivc 
authority  of  statute  to  do  so,  I  should  not 
*  have  hesitated,  in  such  a  case  as  the  present, 
to  state  to  you  my  view  of  the  evidence  and 
of  'the  law  applicable  to  it.     It  is  your  pro- 
vincej,  indeed,  to  judge  of  the  whole  of  the 
case;  but  sitting  here  as  a  guardian  of  the 
rights  and  privileges  of  the  people,  and  bound 
as  I  am  to  administer  the  law  according  to 
the  best  of  my  judgment,  I  have  to  state  to 
you,  clearly  and  distinctly,  my  view  of  the. 
law  of  this  case,  and  then  to  leave  it  to  you  to 
do  your  duty,  as  I  shall  now  endeavour  to  do 
nrae. 

The  Indictment  exhibited  against  the  pri- 
soners at'  the  bar,  contains  in  the  major  pro- 
position, a  general  chairge  of  sedition,  and  in 
the  minor  you  have  the  narrative  of  the  fietcty 


•  Vide  Stat.  23  Geo.  III.  c.  45,  made  per- 
petual by  Stat.  27  Geo.  III.  c.  18. 


I  in  reference  to  whic%  the  public  prosecutor 
subsumes,  that  they  are  both,  or  one  or  other 
of  them,  guilty  of  the  crime  of  seditidn,  actors 
or  actor,  or  art  and  part. 

You  will  have  observed,  that  the  evidence 
which  has  been  laid  before  you  is  of  a 
different  nature  as  it  affects  the  different 
prisoners.  One  of  them  is  charged  with 
having  delivered,  at  a  meeting  held  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  the  town  of  Kilmamock« 
a  speech,  which  the  public  prosecutor  states  to 
have  been  of  a  seditious  nature,  containing 
a  number  of  inflammatory  remarks  and  asseiv- 
tions,  calculated  to  degrade  and  bring  into 
contempt  the  Government  and  Legislature, 
and  to  withdraw  therefrom  the  confidence  and 
affections  of  the  people,  and  fill  the  realm 
with  trouble  and  dissention;  the  manuscript 
of  which  speech  he  is  charged  with  having 
afterwards  delivered  to  a  printer,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  its  being  printed.  And  with  regard 
to  the  other  prisoner,  it  is  stated,  that  he  pre- 
pared for  the  press  an  account  of  the  proceed* 
mgs  at  the  meeting,  which  account  containt 
the  speech  above  referred  to,  and  others  also 
alleged  to  be  of  a  seditious  and  inflammatory 
nature,  and  that  he  assisted  afterwards  in  its 
circulation,  by  exposing  and  actually  selling  it 
in  his  own  shop. 

It  will  be  necessary  for  you  first  to  consider 
what  is  the  evidence  of  the  facts  as  it  applies 
to  both  and  each  of  these  prisoners.  After* 
calling  your  attention  to  the  facts,  I  shall  make 
some  observations  on  the  law  of  the  case; 
and  I  shall  then  desire  vou,  upob  these  facts 
and  that  law,  to  consider  whether  there  is 
ground  for  the  conclusion  of  the  public  pro- 
secutor. 

It  ma^  save  you  trouble,  to  state  to  you  at 
the  beginning  the  definition  of  the  crime  of 
sedition,  as  given  to  us  by  an  authority,  which 
is  one  of  the  most  respectable  with  regard  to 
the  law,  'that  can  exist  in  any  country  what* 
ever.  I  do  not  know  that  there  is  any  founda- 
tion, in  point  of  fact,  for  the  supposition  which 
was  mentioned,  that  the  author  I  allude  to 
had  ever  been  suspected  of  having  any  par- 
ticular bias  in  giving  a  view  of  this  depart- 
ment of  the  law.  I  never  before  heard  that 
such  a  notion  existed  in  the  minds  of  the  peo- 
ple. Bnt  sure  1  am,  if  they  who  read  his 
book  look  to  the  authorities  and  decisions  to 
whicli  he  refers,  they  will  be  most  decidedly 
of  opinion,  that  he  has  expounded  the  law  ia 
the  most  clear,  able,  and  satisfactory  manner. 
Mr.  Hume,  the  author  to  whom  I  allude,  gives 
this  general  description  of  the  crime  of  sedi- 
tion*:' **  I  had  formerly^  in  drawing  the  line 
between  sedition  and  leasing-making,  a  proper 
occasion  to  explain  the  general  notion  of  uiis 
offence,  and  I  shall  not  now  attempt  any  fnr^ 
ther  to  describe  it  (being  of  so  various  and 
comprehensive  a  nature),  than  by  saying  that 
it  reaches  all  those  practices,  whether  by  deed, 
word,  or  writing,  or  of  whatsoever  kind,  which 


•9^ 


•  Vol.  ii.  p.  484. 


193]        ^  GiORQE  HI. 


TrSfitqf4hevi4er  M'^tarm 


ClH 


ve  suited  vdA  ioteo^eA:  to  dwtiiri)  die  tra^r ,  eottposHiaD  is,  ipeseralljrff  that  it  is  of  an  iof 


•iiiltity  of  (h«  sjtaCs,  for  tlie  paFpo9«  of  pro* 
jttoing:  piilHie  Uooble  or  oommotipq,  aad 
moTiDg  his  Majesty's  sitbje«|0  to  tfa^  4i<liK9b 
i«Mitan«Q»  Of  subvanioft  of  tibte  ealabUshed 
goaaniiaent  and  Uws^  of  sattlod  temo  and 
flfdorof  tW0gi, 

>^U»dot  ^s  deseripdoift  woald  fall  a  woilf: 
^mcb  a«  it  haft  boon  i^esarvod  finr  tba  ifiicked* 
nass.  of  tha  fireseot  age  to  produae)*  whicb 
finQM.  teatoli  tJbai  all  aftonaro^y  and  hereditary 
iiiilk»  or  all  dancal  dig)ailie«  and  astablisl^ 
flMBts  of  r^fioB)  are  an  abuse  aad  mwrp- 
ationi  eootrary  to  reason  and  jnstieei  and 
VAftt  to  b^  aoyloQgef  saifered  or  contintied. 
Or»  tbougb  ilie  pieoa  abouW  not  set  out  upoa 
ia  bfoad  a  principle  at  tbis»  if  it  argue  (ia 
ttOOMMMi  vilb  the  manv  oomposilions  which 
baiFo  lately  been  pressed  upon  the  world)  that 
1km  po^er  of  the  king  is  oTeiYrown,  and 
tn^il^  (d  miff  k$$ard,  to  be  retrenched ;  or  that 
iba  CMUIK>ns  are  a  more  nominal  and  pre- 
landed  rapresentative  of  the  people,  whose 
laws  are  entitled  to  no  manner  of  regard;  or 
that  the  whole  state  is  MX  of  corruption,  and 
tbai  the  people  ought  to  take  tba  office  of  re- 
imaiaf  it  upon  ihentselyes.  All  axhortations 
of  this  l|ind,  whetbar  any  eommotiop  follow  on 
them  or  not  (for  if  any  do  fpUow,  then  it  wiU 
d^and  on  tbedegveOf  fashion, and  immediate 
ooeaston  of  that  dtsoirbanca.  whether  it  is  not 
treason  in  those  who  partake  of  it),  are  un- 
dottbtad  acts  of  aeditioay  beiag  oaloulated  and 
employed  for  iba  direct  purpose  of  loosening 
$b»  hold  whicb  thaOovemman^  has  of  the  opi?- 
siions  and  alfesiioaa  of  thfi  people,  and  Ibua 
pveparing  tbam  for  aeto  of  rasistftooo  or 

aggression.*' 

.  SoTeflal  of  the  jostaooes  wbi«h  ba  i^vep  of 
Ibii  «nme  vvwe  alraady  read  to  you,  and  I 
*aed  not  repeat  tbi&m.  Bat  J  refer  to  anotbar 
■assage  further  oa,  in  whish  tha  fmthor  ooi^ 
knH  and  ilkiatftiat  bis  opinion.  ^'Tbf  lai^ 
aon  ia  aU  these  eases  is  the  aaiae*  The  oriana 
#f  aadiiian,  tbensfore,  Has  ia  tba  stirrifig  of 
anob  hnvoiirs  mt  naturally  tend  to  ohange  apd 
eaasmelios  in  iha  stale.  $o  pear,  indaed,  is 
Hia  alUanoe  betwaan  sediiioa  aad  treason^  that 
i£f  instead  of  sowing  the  seed^  of  a  hostile  dis- 
position lia  the  GoTemiaent,  or  preparing  e^ 
materials  m  in  tkne  may  kindle  into  a  A^me, 
She  offender  abatt  seek  the  aame  object  jpaore 
faBSBgdwaely,  by  a  direct  end  dtifioite  exb^- 
atian  to  aha  fe»ple  to  rise  at  ibat  particular 
jeaaoo  ^asid  f oniyaActvre,  as  ad^ant^ao^s  for 
^Mwogtbairiends;  this  measure  in  like  ipan- 
«K,  aa  a  oaosidtafeioa  to  hvf  war>  -seems  tp 
liatiaitiivf  kH  than  mo  aot  for  ^o«ipaBsiiig  M^e 
4eash  of  tiie  ktiw,  beiagadofidad  and  laa- 
MM  sftep  ilolvaiidM  the  doing  of  <that  fvbiph 
^siinotrbe  id^ne  witbqnt  tba  plai9  d^oftor  of 
iba  Soaaaetgn'a  Mie^"** 

Agftta^sn  ftpeabing  of  a  dialiaotitw  Vrhioh 
Jhaabtvdayibatti'gfauiead.-a^botaiieaa  aeiM  a«ji 
Mid^edi&^a;'  Mr.  fiama  eiipiiBSMS  bimself  Jin 
tfwsewoidsl:  ^i[  idl-lhat  can  be  «ttddf  -the 

♦  Vol.  ii,  p.  4d4.       t  Ibid.^p.  4W. 


jSammatory  kind ;  such  as  by  the  principles  it 
inculcates,  and  the  obloquy  it  throws  out  oa 
tbe  mamagepi^  pf  public  ^airs,  ^nds  t|0  thf 
infusion  of  jealousy  and  discontent  among  tb^ 
inultitude;   but  without  -  prgiceedi^g   to  any 
petrosal  of  a  plan,  or  set  of  active^  ope^on^ 
as  grounded  upon  these  p^ciples,  and  fit  19 
be  follow^  in  the  exis^ng  state  of  thiosa; 
this  may  with  propriety  be  referi;ad  to  too 
head  o(  verbal  sedition.    It  was  for  a  co^npOr 
sitioa  qf  this,  character  that  Robertson  and 
3erry*  were  convicted,  as  has  been  meatione^l 
and  William  Stewartf  was  outlawed  upon  a 
charge  of  the  like  nature,  on  the  11th  March, 
1793.*'    So  that  you  see  it  most  distinctly 
Stated,  tbat  words,  if  of  an  inflamqiatoqr  nv 
ture,  though  not  followed  by  active  operauoo^ 
will  amount  to  verbal  sedition. 
1^  I  shall  content  myself  with  reading  to  yon  one 
other  passage,  without  offering  a  word  of  my 
own  upon  the  subject.    Thijf  passage  refers  to 
the  distinction  between  the  crime  of  ^editiop 
and  that  of  leasing-making,  which  is  still  recog- 
nised in  our  law,    ''  Bi^t  sedition  is  a  crime  of 
afar  wider  and  more  various  de^cripiivn,  aa 
wqll  as  of  adeepercbaraoter,  which  may  aq^a^ 
ly  ba  oommitted  in  relation  to  any  of  ta^  oth^ 
powers,  orders,  or  parts  pf  the  public  consti- 
tution of  the  land,  or  to  any  class  or  division 
of  the  society  of  its  inhabitants,  and  withooA 
the  use  of  special  calumnies  or  slanders  against 
the  king,  or  any  other  individual ;  as  by  the 
forming  of  combinations,  the  taking  of  reso- 
lutions, the  circulation  of  doctrines  and  opiu* 
tops,  or,  in  general,  the  pursuit  of  any  coarse 
qfmetffwra  and^vf^ioa^  such  as  dirfietbr  tap4* 
to  r^stan^e  of  the  legis^atvira  or  estfiblisbafl 
govemmant,  or  to  the  aew-modeUiag  fif  tba 
st^te.  without  the  ai|tbority  of  lav*    |fo  inaee- 
tiv^,  therefore,  bow  violent  soever,   og^dnal 
avooaicby  ipraieral,— np  abuse,  the  n^oft  oat- 
rageoos,  of  the  Bri^b  oonstitution^-r-iio  pr^ 
ceediogs,  though  ever  w^  plainly  tenoiag  to 
abolish  tNt  vanerable  sy8teD^  ^d  set  up  a 
pair  form  of  government  in  its  room,  wonld 
jOftify  a  charge  of  leasingrmaking,    Becsuisf i 
iboi^  all  iovolving  the  state  and  office  0^  tbe 
]pfi%  «s  part  of  the  constitution,  such  pr^ 
jai[^  are  ^veiled  against  the  yho)e  svstea, 
^d  are  pot  amoved  out  of  special  groove  ^ 
tbe  pria^  upon  the  throne,  but  spring  frojpa  a 
d^p^  ^d  more  roalignai?it  prii^ciple,  as  wa}l 
jss  empk^  pnore  direct  and  afore  extensive 
speans  ihifk  that  of  mere  scolder  of  tbe  per^o^ 
and  condyM^t  of  tjve  king.    Thu^  ^edition  if  ^ 
prppsr  orine  against  the  atate,  and  balds  the 
^a^pj^p  aftar  tr^asott,  to  which  )^  fS  p^y 
9Ali^,  s^  ivbich  it  an  ofWn  but  ]^  ji 
interval,  precede.    The  other  is  a  persca^l 
J^fe^mt  ^^  'l^bfd  injury  o&ned  \t>  *tt]ie  fiing 
^4  ?9rhieh  ^f  laff  i<msi<l«»  W  »?  W^^ 
IPQ^serioitts  Mrtt  -tMm  pijber  ^jiyiesof  V^ 
riiis,  partly  by  .xpayon  ^i  ^be  j"*^  r^ggg^  it  t^ 

♦^JHow,bIod.St..Tf...79^     '   * 
t.?.Il9W.J«p4.fit.'Sr,?i5- 


1051 


and  Thomat  Snirifor  Sedition* 


A.D.  1817. 


MSB 


to  iliB't^ifife  *^  triliqwllfy  of  Ui9  imA  of 
the  state,  ilie  nodt  vti^a^atp^mm  in  the  Imvd ; 
luid  perthr  hy  reason  of  the  poMible  evil  m- 
floence  of  sach  an  example  on  the  affections 
ted  di^[MMitions  of  his  sahjeets." 

HRfing  tbnsexplainedy  frdm  what  I  oertainfy 
ttketo  be  nndoaMed  aQthority,  what  oonsti- 
totes  sedition,  I  have  to  stete  to  you  what  is 
eqaa^'  dear  in  point  of  law,  and  what  it  is  of 
essen&l  importanee  you  sboaUl  keep  hi  f  iew, 
and  upon  which  iMth  sides  of  the  bar  aie 
agieed, — that  it  must  be  held  as  the  landa- 
mental  fnle  of  your  conduct  in  4eeiditt|^  this 
ease,  thst^by  the  hew  of  ScoUatHl  your  duty  is 
not  limited  to  a  tonsidetation  of  the  iaots 
Inefelr,  but  Unt  it  is-  your  protince  to  take 
info  view  the  naOrre  ef  die  sj^eecbes  and  wn- 
tittgeomplBined  of,  as  well  as  the hAi  of  poh- 
lis&^^aUd  I  state  to  you  in  the  words  used 
hy*a  dj!ifhi|liished  Jvkdge  m-a  former  ease  of 
a&ilioB,  though  not  etfadtly  parallel  to  the 
fMesenl,  that  it  is  not  only  yimr  right  and  pri- 
vilege, lUit  Jfour  unquestionable  duty,  to  say 
^Mietfier  seditioa  has  biete  committed  or  not.* 

Hiving  paved  the  iray 'to  ttie  cottsideration  -of 
tile  qo^s&n  before  us,  Weare  first  to  consider 
fvhat  is  the  evidence  irhieh  fte  prbseontor^itt 
i^aced  astoM'Lartmhaviagdehvcffedmspcaah 
Itetainhi^  passai^  suchas  these  set  forth  in- the 
MdEtaoent.  You-vrill  teooHBOt^tiiatyoa  had 
BMBght  before  yeu  Mr.  Andftw  Finnte,  k 
iMhiess  on  the  part  of  the  'Cr##n,  blit  who, 
In  reAMncetb  «e  whole  of  the  transactions 
indter  ^saasW^iatidn,  w«as  MiBBetf,  ^toweeitain 
exteMy  a  pikty  concerned.  He  was  a  menp> 
1»er  of  the  coiMnittee  ttiat  -prepared  mttjltan  for 
the  ttiBefingy^as  himself  pnteent-at'  the  •  mfsofr- 
fagy-atfd  was-hfterwardsfselected^ij  take  a«  lead 
in  the  si£boeq«eDt  pMeeedings.  '¥ett'«ie  se 
judge  eflfis  ^^tidenGe,*^hkh  he  ^Kj^pcafod  lo 
give  hi  m-fiUr,  open,  ted 'Mndidmanaier.  I 
kee  no  «hfll6tion  to^fhe  wai|;ht  of  his  etiteMe. 
Iieaays,flifttheiswot«hle  to  iptek  diMMRitly 
is  tolhe^w%ole  of  lil^fiiveii^epeeoh,  bnt  4bait 
to4he  litter  pen  of  it  he  did  pay  piiaieilir 
Mtea^ioii.  'lie  ii«m«  (balhtf 'heardhhttdiAHer 
lhese-^M>iiAs:  «We>WiU  ftr^^'^^^'let  ns  lay, 
eurpetici0br^lfthe1hM:^f-lh#«hrMa,  who»e 
«ts  tfor  angttsrptinee,  whoM<9enetous  mme 
irin  ifi^lhse  his  ear  to  the  eriesof-Ms  people, 
which  he-is  botmd  to  do  by  the  eoliftimtioflal 
iiws  ef  Iris  eountiy ;  and  we  are  thereby  boofid 
to  give  him  our  allegiance :  but  if  he  shoidd  be 
so  infotdated  as  to  torn  a  deaf  ear  to  the  gene- 
ral cries,"  or,"  voice  of  his  people,  to  hell- with 
eur  attef^anGe."  This  is  the  whole  of  the 
passage  as  -for  as  the  'witness  reeolleots.  It 
was  ^  the  close  of"  the  speech  these  words 
ivere  used.  He  stafe^,  that  the'Svoids^  **  And 
we  aie  ihenhy  boond  to  give  him-eur  aMegi- 
aifeee ;  bat  if  he  should  beeo  infos«aied'«s  to 
turn  a'deaf  ear  to  the  geneMd  eries  ^'  ot  ^voioe 
V9  h^^jMOple^'^and  not  '^jSiifeMeo,"  »being 
tt|i  #oitis  soi«««pieDyy  melted  in  theiidieiment. 


•*HM>>*«*^i>ip> 


'^  See  Lord  Ahetvwmby's  sanmimg^p  in 
«he  ease  of  Fyshe  Pahie^«a^e  VoU  9.  p.  31^7. 


preeeded  these  words''  to  ImU  «dtb  mr  afl^ 
anoe."  He  is  positive  ^and  was  equally  so 
upon  hb  cross  oaanrination)  with  legasd  to 
what  be  heard  McLaren  say.  tie  states^  that 
the  words,"  to  hell  wadi  onr  allegiance^'* 
struck  him  as  strong,  and  that  thouffh  be  did 
ix)t  take  any  noees  of  them,  he  consMMred  tlMan 
so  strong  that  he  can  swear  to  diem.  Xon 
will  therefore  coasider  as  far  as  this  witneas 
'goes,  whether  you  have  not  a  deposition.  tQ>the 
very  words.  It  vriil  be  for  vou  to  jndge 
"whether  the  exact  words  cbaigta-An  Iheindiai- 
ioaent  have  been  proved  er  not,  or  whether,  te 
essential  parts  of  the  passage  ham  boan 
proved.  When  a  very  elase  affiniSy  is.  ■»• 
sCnictedy  it  is  for  lyou  la  coBsiisr-whatis.eiia 
foir  import. 

Another  vritnessvras  eaUedon  the  pact  ieff 
the  proseeulion,  iwho,  tbongb  he.givBs  ibat  an 
imperfodt  aecovnt  of  the  apaech  in  ganaral, 
does  swear  to  what  is  desersiag  of  attanliesi. 
He  remembers.partof  the  spea^  towaads  .the 
end, "  to  hell  vnth,"  or  "  for.  ailegsance."  .Ha 
said,  the  words,  "if  lie  tamed < aideaf  Mr-^ia 
the  voice  of  his  people,''  wwefallewiBd  bylhe 
«spieesions  I  have  just  cited  about  aUegianee, 
This  as  the  evideace.  of  Meina,  and  you  mall 
consider  wiMther  it  dees  not  coBrobonato. Urn 
special  aecmint  srhich  lir.  Fassiieigises  ctf 
the.  speech  he  bemd  :M<La(en  delivet.  tfiiet 
attempt  waj  made  io  examine  .f  Innie  as  e^ 
the  eitnatioo  where  he  stood,  at  the. 
or  whether  -^se  avas  any  jiosse  or 
ef  hearing. 

The  question  ^as-to  theepaeeh  avtuaUljKidi^ 
livesad  doesnot  seat  here,.beaaB0e  -yen  will 
•find  it  was  admitted  by  M'Laaen  haBisBlf,sta 
his-deahiration  bsfose  the  sheriff,  that  he  dsA 
give  in  a  naaaseaipt  contaamnghis  speaeh  Jia 
the  .oammittee  to  he.pcioled,  aiid.rthBi  the 
prmtedaeconnt^^  iaiieas>ahontwhatahejda4d»> 
naaaaadmi  dmtabore oneaaiia,>;e insfH wil  ia 
said  abaitt'the  middieof  ihe  seaaMi:wage.ns. 
to  ai|egianoe,:whiah  the  derUwn»i:thmhs;he 
dadsatdehseritDithe  naoadsias.  smamsaJ  in 
ihepahiication.*'  Yea  have,  beeidas  thiai^Mtlm 
aeiiwsce .  of  '4aihar .  fwitnasses.  In  paslieulaK,. 
temsonswean,' that  the  apneahms  raad^oecr 
in  *iiM4Bett's  preenoa,  and  that  Mr«  Baacd^ 
•the  other  prisoner,  made  an  aHeraftion  onit:ui 
penial;  Ohat  he  inserted  words,. makingrthe 
speech. oonfotronble  to  the  piinSed  aceonnt  lof 
it  hare  before-  us.  So  that  this  ehroamatanee 
of  the  MS.  having  been  prodnced,  read  over 
-and  levised,  in  .the  presence  of  these  men,  and 
en'  alteration  being  made  by  Baird,  withofSfc 
any  objection,  as  Samson  swears,  having  been 
made  by  M'Laren,.  ahews  that>  M'Laren  ap- 
-proeed.ofohe  akamtk>D,«rat  least  4hat  he  did 
'ttotoppose it;  andthis, withiheothetwviiam:% 
rgoeswto  'Shew  'what'-was^the  tmejsMiitnie  .of 
ithe  spaeeb/deisvemdjuponrthat  eeaasiqn. 

You  have  i  to  cempare .  the  -  paimad  f^mpoiA 
•vittth^  tbaeeei  jiHSOBlsimdiaard  by  EinniatwUch 
eameiavit  of^ihffLaren'ai-  month.  tU  jmvu  thiak 
it  your  duty  ta^ake  the  prinied  etateBMiit  as 
the  true  account  of  what  was  said,"  But  should 


1*7] 


£7  GEORGE  IIL 


Trial <}f  AletaHder  M'haten, 


[138 


he  be  80  infatuated  as  to  turn  a  dekf  ear  to 
their  just  petition,  he  has  forfeited  that  allegi- 
ance; yes,  my  fellow  townsmen,  in  such  a 
case,  to— —with •  their  allegiance;"  you  y^ill 
keep  in  viewj  that  McLaren  gave  in  the 
manuscript  of  his  speech  to  be  printed,  and 
vras  present  when  Baird  inserted  these  words ; 
and  you  will  decide  for  yourselves^  whether 
there  -is  any  doubt  that  he  permitted  that, 
which  he  took  no  steps  to  prevent.  But  again 
if  you  take  into  view  the  words  as  given  by  a 
-respectable  witness,  and  confirmed,  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  by  another  witness,  and  admitted 
by  the  prisoner  himself  to  Mr.  Johnstone,  yon 
will  consider  whether  there  is  any  rational 
ground,  for. doubt. as  to  the  import  of  the 
passage  of  the  speech  which  M'l^ren  delivered 
■aitng  beieea  sufficiently  established. 

Next,  with  regard  to  Mr.  Baird,  the  case  is 
of  a  different  description  as  to  the  .facts,  for 
lie  is  not  alleged  to  nave  made  any  speech  9X 
all.  The  charge  against  him  is,  that  he .  was 
one  of  those  who  printed  and  published  a 
statement  of  those  proceedings,  containing  not 
<iBly  McLaren's, speech,  but  those  of  others 
^fiiich  are  founded  on  as  being  of  a  seditious 
and  inflammatory  nature..  It  does  appear  in 
«v^deDoe  that  Mr.  Baird  was  at  meetings  of  the 
eonimittee,  bodi  before  and  after  the  public 
meeting ;  and  when  the  decision  was  taken  as 
4»  printing  and  publishing  the  proceedings  he 
was  present.  It  has  no  doubt  been  proved, 
<Mi  ills  part,  that  he  was  one  of  those  whb  did 
oppose  in  the  committee  the  printing  of  the 
|iatsage  in  McLaren's  speech,  but  that  his 
olgection  was  overruled ;  and  had  Mr.  Baird's 
case  rested  here,  and  had  the  public  prosecu- 
tor endeavoured  to  implicate  him  in  the  pub- 
lication, by  his  merely  being  present  at  the 
public  meeting,  it  would  have  been  difficult 
indeed  to  have  persuaded  any  jury  to  have 
found  a  verdict  affainst  him.  But  his  conduct 
was  different ;  for,  after  his  objection  had 
been  overruled,  he  superintended  the  publi- 
cation ;  .and  it  is  folly  proved*  that  he  went 
twice  or  three  times  to  the  printingK>ffice  with 
Mr.  Andrew,  who  was  employed  in  revising 
the  p'roof  sheets,  and  that,  upon  one ,  of  these 
occasions  he  suggested  the  correction  of  i  a 
grammatical  error.  This  evidence  will  pro- 
bably be  sufficient  to  satisfy  you  that  Mr.  Baird 
did  take  a  concern  in  the  printing  and  pub- 
lishing of  what  is  complained  of,  even  after  he 
stated  objections  to  one  passage.  His  con- 
duct, therefore,  at  tliis  penod,  makes. him  re- 
sponsible, even  if  the  evidence .  stopt  there ; 
Imt  has  it  not  also  appeared  in  evidence,  that 
Crawford  holds  him  responsible  for  the  payment 
of  the  printer's  account?  and  were  not  many  co- 
pies of  the  pamphlet  sold  at  his  shop  ?  Mr.  Finnie 
swore  that  Mr.  Baird  got  some  copies  from.him, 
and  expressed  surprise  that  the  witness  had 
not  got  quit  of  all  his  copies.  Mr.  Baird  is  not 
a  bookseller,  but  a  grocer,  and  disposed  of. the 
copies  in  hiflr  shop ;  one  of  which  copies,  it 
has  bean  proVed  was^  thef  ^  bought  by  Htigh 
Wilson.  .     .      -w 


.  Having  stated  to  you  what  appears  to  me  to 
be  the.  result  of  the  eYidence  in  these  particulars 
as  to  the*  facts  of  delivering  and  publishing  the 
speeches  complained  of  in>  this  indictmentj 
there  still  remains  a  much  more  important 
question  for  your  decision,  which  it  is  your 
entire  province  to  decide  on,  but  with  respect 
to  which,  it  b  my  duty  to  submit  a  few  obser-* 
vations  to  you.  You  have  already  had  an  op- 
portunity of  hearing,  that  on  the  face  of  this  in- 
dictment, as  the  matters  are  there  disclosed 
•and  undertaken  to  be  proved,  the  court  con- 
sidered the  charge  relevant,  and  fit  to  be  sub- 
mitted to  a  jury ;  and  now  that,  the  evideoca 
has  been  led,  .and  we  have  the  whole  circum- 
stances investigated,  I  have  no  difficulty  in 
stating,  that  notwithstanding  all  that  I  have 
listened. to  in  the  very  learned,  able,  and  in- 
genious criticisms,  both  on  M'l^ren's  speech 
and  on  the  passages,  of  the  publication  which 
have  been  rounded  on,  I  am  still  of  opinion 
that  there  is  matter  of  a  seditious  description. 
It  wouljl  be.  most  improper,  however,  on  my 
part  to.  hold  out  to  you  that  I  think  this  a  case 
of  sedition  of  a  most  atrocious  or  aggravated 
description.  That  would  be  an  erroneous  im-^ 
pression.  I  have  to  observe,  also,  that  I  am 
far  from  thinking  it  proper,  in  the  case  you  are 
now  trying,  to  refer  to  other  cases  which  are 
notpanUlelto  it  in  the  focts. .  But  in  reference 
to  the  prisoners  at  the  bar,  it  does  appear  to 
me,  ana  to  the  rest  of  the  judges,  to  be  clear, 
that  there  is  on  .the  face  of  the  speech  of 
McLaren,  and  in  the  different  passages  which 
have.been  referred  to,  as  well  as  in  the  context 
of  the  publication,  matter  of  a  seditious  nature. 
How  far  that  seditious  matter  has  existence  ia 
point  of  fact,  or  is  affected  by  the  circumstances 
in  evidence,  or  the  remarks  made  on  it,  you, 
however  are  to  decide.  In  judging  of  this, 
you  are  called  upon  to  look  to  the  intentioQ 
imputed  to  the  parties ;  and  I  concur  with  the 
learned  gentleman  in  thinking,  that  it  is  the 
part  of  the  public  prosecutor  to  establish  the 
criminal  tendency  of  this  alleged  seditious 
publication.  Criminal  intention,  or  Uiat  the 
facts  were  committed  wickedly  and  feloniously 
as  charged,  constitutes  the  very  essence  of  the 
crime.  You  must  be  satisfied,  that  the  pro- 
ceeding was  not  only  seditious  in  itself,  but 
that  there  was  the  criminal  purpose  in  the 
speeches  and  publication  which  is  charged  ia 
the  indictment.  I  do  apprehend,  that  when  a 
jury,  is  called  upon  to  decide  upon  tlie  import 
of  a  speech  or  of  a  publication,  ,it  is  their 
bounden  duty  to  put  upon  that  speech  and 
publication  a  fair  and  even  a  mild  interpre- 
tation. They  are  not  called  upon  to  stretch 
matters,  or  to  endeavour  to  find  out  a  far- 
fetched meaning  in  words.  If  words  are  of 
4m. ambiguous  nature,  the  mildest  construction 
of  them,  is  to  be  adopted;  but,  on  the  other 
^hand,  reason,  requires  that  a  sound,  plain,  hpr 
'nest  meaning  be.  given  to  language. .  It  Is  niot 
disputed  by  the  public  prosecutor  (for  he  him- 
.self,  in  some  me^ui^  followed  such  a  course), 
that  it  »  Qe.osQ^ary  to  Ipok  to  the^  context,^  ami 


H0I 


mud  fhMm  Bmrdjbr  SMOtn^ 


A.  a.  isir. 


[1S» 


BolV>  laitt  Mtf  »  ieBCenoa  of  t  spenb  4it  y«b- 
liealion,  bvi  to  give  fiur  play  to  the  aconsed, 
bf  rofimijBg  to  what  pioccdaf  and  4o  wfaal 
IdHois.  It  ii  yov  Inmness  4o  take  Ihe.docii* 
aeots  into  jour  own  handsy'and  looking  to  the 
wkfi^  coDtcst  to  draar  the  eftochifion  iHiether 
tlpeve  is  aeditioa  er  not. 

It  if  laMy  poiwiWe  al  ftis  late  bow  to  go 
tiiroofb  every  erne  of  Aa  passages  whidi  are 
tended  oA»  Mid  fiu  less  through  the  wbole 
nohlieation ;  Wt  I  beg  leare  to  say,  in  re- 
ivence  fo  the  speech  of  M'lAien,  that  there  do 
sppear  to  ne  a  asost  improper  atyle  end  tone 
inte^boleof  ii.  He  refeit  to  tiansacUoas 
si  »  wmj  distaol  period,  of  whioh  no  sober- 
SSinrded  n^n  ironld  wish  to  revire  or  obtwde 
ft^  recoUestiae,  as  affording  any  nde  of  eon- 
duet  fisr  the  people  of  this  country^  in  reference 
|o  their  piesootsiiyition.  From  th^  beginning 
^f  the  speechy  in  vpbich  complaints  axe  made 
of  the  oppressions  under  which  the  country  iM 
iabo^iingy  to  the  conclusion,  in  which  reference 
is  nade  to  the  Pdnce  B«geat,  there  is  a  ce- 
mr^  style  of  inflammatory  dedamation.  Nor 
was  this  effusion  unpremeditated,  for  notes  of 
fhe  speech  were  inepared  by  .him  at  an  earlier 
or  later  penod  oewire  the  meeting.  Without 
going  into  particulars,  Im  there  is  a  lone  and 
tagwsge  in  this  speech  which  are  strongly  in* 
IbMnm^tCiy,  and  tending  to  eidte  in  the  people 
disconrgtf  and  disaffection  agiinst  4ie  gwexn* 
pnau  md  legjMatnie.  tX  this  it  is,  however, 
Youjr  iMtovittce  to  judge.  I  have  no  difficulty 
91  saying  that  liie  lai^guage  appears  .to  me  not 
to  be  of  a  desenption  whsch  can  be  ssfionciled 
10  the  single  oloect  of  petitioning. 

The  passage  uppa  woich  the  most  ipipoetant 
oomnsents.  hiore  teen  made  is  thai  with  regard 
to  tho  petition  to  Ihe  Pkince  Begent,  end  the 
Mseqjaenos  of  his  not  Ustoning.to  the  just  pe-^ 
titioiBs  ol  the  people.  The  passage  is  in  these 
epofde :  ^Lat  us  lay  .our  petitions  at  the  foot 
of  the  throne*  where  sits  oor  angust  prince, 
jvhoio  gfaoions  natooe  snli  incline  his  eir  to 
liaten  tp  die  cries  of  bis  j>eople,  vfiuoh  he  is 
iMomad  to  .do  by  the  laws  of  the  oountry :  But, 
ebooldhe  besoinfatuatedastotom  a  deaf  ear  to 
fbAr  just  petitiqp»  he  has  fosf^ited  their  alio* 
^ance.  Yes,  «j  ieUow-townsmen,  in  ^uch  a 
case,  to  hell  wijth.oor  -aUegiance."  Take  the 
cxpnessions  as  given  either  in  the  pahlication, 
er  as  in  ari^eace  by  4he  witnesses,  and  say 
is  yonr  oplnicn  as  fo  this  part  of  the 


A  great  deal  of  most  able  and  ingenious 
criticism  lias  been  bestowed  upon  this  passage, 
fmd  mA  it  :the  oeoastol  for  the  panel  giappied 
to  abettttmoat,  pcsceiving  at  of  v^al  iippoitaaoe 
ee4»eia*eiestofhis€li«Dt.  '  He jvas  bordering 
«pon  wmf  diiieafir  gronnd,  indeed,  in  ihe  de- 
mice  fdach  hsimainlaiiied.  But,  after  all  yen 
fcsraie  boad^on  thesnlQeot,  yon  eie  to  oonsider, 
^ihethtf,  nQtorithstanding  she  forouiable  »- 
marira  maile  in  jnlssia  re  ito  ahe  Priaee  Eqpsnt, 
wawifk  1.  adapt  doapyaar  in  Aei^wt  partjofthe 
wsafa  ipqneetiwi,.the  langua^m  the fol- 
bw^Mioe  instifiablai^  u  Mmpfxefoaence 


to  the  fAtitioas  of  dhtf  people  at  laige,  or  to  the 
petition  of  these  particnlar  pecsoas.  Tbe-term^- 
jnst  petition,  no  doubt,  is  employed.  Baft 
who  M  to  judge  of  the  justice  ot  the  petition  1 
It  would  appear  from  all  that  passed  that  tho 
petitioners  tnemselves  were  the  judges.  Whalf 
was  said  to  be  the  alternative  u  this  petition* 
:#as  refused  ?—<"  To  hell  with  aUegiance,"  or  ' 
**  our  allegiance.^  I  aak  of  you,  as  sensible  and 
reasoaable  men,  whether  this  language  does- 
liot  indicate  that  the  Speaker  had  tomtd  a 
purpose  of  throwing  off  bis  allegiance,  in  the 
event  contemplated  of  a  rejection  of  the  per 
titions  in  question  f  He  was  to  arnur  himself 
against  fais  sovereiga,  not  in  the  ludioroiie' 
manner  that  Mr.  JdFrey  suggested,  but  in  a 
venr  different  and  much  more' serious  manner; 
and  I  boldly  affirm,  that  if  a  single  step  had 
been  taken,  by  following  up  the  language  ibim- 
employed  by  any  overt  act,  it  would  not  liaife 
been  sedition,  but  plain  and  palpsifaie  treaao& 
Whether  the  languafps  thai  was  here  usei^ 
which.  It  has  been  said,  only  ^presses  a  Tesy 
delicate  principle  in  the  ceostitutional  law  cif 
this  country,  was  calculated  to  excite  discon^ 
tent,  disunion,  and  public  disturbance,  is  Ihe 
question  for  jFonr  deeision.  You  vrill  judge 
whether  the  words  were  uttered ;  ]rou  will  jpva 
them  fair  pli^  in  judging  of  their  meaainff*; 
and  in  the  interpretation  df  them  you  will  senr 
io  the  other  parts  of  the  speech.  Inthatvfay, 
yoa  will  satefy  your  minds  as  to  the  grouads  of 
the  canclosion  you  a&ay  come  to,  and  decide  se 
to  the  intention  of  the  speaker,  and  ihe  import 
of  the  passage. 

Yon  will  judae^  else,  of  the  meaning  of  the 
term  **  Gti^mchyf"  which  oocuri  in  the^peecb, 
and  in  different  parts  of  this  publication :  yoa 
will  consider' whether  it  alluaes  to  any  of  the 
brandies  of  the  legislature,  or  must  be  limited 
to  the  persons  forming  the  actual  administr»* 
tioo.  I  coincide  with  the  opinion  which  was 
lifted  at  bymybrodier  on  my  right-hand ^ 
partieularly  vrhea  I  oonsider  the  way  and 
■lanner  in  vfhich  4he  term  is  explained  by 
another  speech  founded  on  in  the  mdiotmenl. 
^*  We  have  these  twenty-Ave  yeats  been  oo»- 
demned  to  incessant  and  unparalleled  slavery 
by  a  usurped  Oligarbhy,  who  pretend  to  be  oar 
guardians  and  repvesenutives,  while,  in  foot, 
they  are  nothing  nut  our  inflesible  end  detei^ 
mined  enemies.'*  I  think  it  is  impossible,  by 
any  interpretation,  to  suppose  that  this  has  re- 
ierenee  to  ministen.  It  obviously  has  ^eio- 
rence  to  the  House  of  Commons,  one  of  the 
branches  of  the  legislature.  When  they  com- 
platn  of  the  oppression  under  which  the  ooaa 
tiy  labours,  Ib^  have  reference  to  the  Com^ 
moas  House  of'  Parliament.  I  think  the  same 
iatespretation  is  applicable  to  M'Laren^s 
apeecb.  You  are  to  consider,  then,  whether 
the  House  of  Commons,  as  now  constituted,  is 
meant  to  be  designated  by  the  ^  usuiped  Oli- 
aardiy,  who  pretend  to  be  oar  guardians  and 
Wpiesentatiyes,  while  in  fact,  they  are  nothing 


-5--* 


•  Le^aestoar«id»p.  W. 


ISlJ       ^7  GGORGlB  in. 


Trial  qfAi$mm(ler  M^LofW 


CHS 


but  our  ioflezibte  and  .determined  enemies^" 
nlid  who  have  these  twenty-five  years  con- 
demned the  country  to  incessant  and  unpa- 
ralleled slavery;  and  you  are  to  determine, 
whether  9  by  propagating  such  opinions  in  a 
speech  to  an  assemblage  of  4000  persons,  and 
afterwards  introducing  them  in  a  pamphlet 
which  was  sold  and  circulated  in  the  country, 
the  paneb  were  not  guilty  of  sedition.  1 
tubmit  to  you,  that  if  there  is  any  meaning  in 
words,  this  was  degrading  the  House  of  Com* 
motts^— casting  on  them  the  imputation  of 
having  enslaved-  the  country  for  the  twenty- 
five  preceding  years,  and  attributing  to  them 
all  the  misery  which  the  coufttiy  is  represented 
as  suffering. 

:  There  is  another  passage  in  the  publication 
to  which  I  think  it  necessary  to  call  your  at- 
tention. I  mean  that  general  statement  which 
.'which  was  made  as  to  the  proceedings  which 
iook  place  in  the  year  1793.  You  wiU  find  the 
passage  in  page  2,  of  the  indictment.  *'  But 
let  lis  come  nearer  home.  Look  at  the  year 
1703,  when  the  debt  amounted  to  two  hundred 
«nd  eleven  ipillions,  and  the  annual  taxation 
io  about  eighteen  millions ;  when  liberty  began 
4o  rear  her  drooping  head  in  the  country; 
when  associations  were  framed  from  one  end 
.of  the  kingdom  to  another,  composed  of  men 
eminent  for  their  talents  and  virtue,  to  assert 
ibeir  rights;  when  a  neighbouring  nation  had 

i'ust  thrown  off  a  yoke  wluch  had  become  into- 
erable,.— what  did  the  wise  rulers  of  this 
jcountry  do?  Why,  tiiey  declared  war,  not 
only  against  the  French  nation,  but  also  against 
«he  fiiends  of  liberty  at  home."  It  has  been 
;urgued,  that  the  term,  **  wise  rulers,"  means 
the  ministers  for  the  time,  and  that  their  con- 
•duct  may  be  discussed  without  blame.  I  con- 
jcnr  in  the  observation,  that  there  is  no  sedition 
in  the  oensure  of  administration  merely  as 
iservants  of  the  crown*  But  the  passage  clearly 
applies,  not  only  to  the  government  of  the  day, 
Imt  to  the  mtem  of  govemment,^ — to  the  legis- 
lature'itself  How  can  that  be  doubted,  when 
.you  observe  the  concluding  words:  "Why, 
4hey  declared  war  not  only  against  the 
French  nation,  but  also  against  the  friends 

'  of  liberty  at  home.'*  Look;  also,  at  the  context. 
.The  clear  import  of  it  is,  that  when  the  coun- 
try was  in  the  awful  situation  described  by  the 
learned  counsel,  the  government  declared  war 
4kgainst  the  liberties  of  the  country.  What 
4ook  place  at  that  time  is  matter  of  notoriety. 
,New  measures  were  then  necessarily  resorted 
.10  for  the  salvation  of  this  country  against  the 
attacks  of  foreign  and  domestic  foes.  King, 
.Lords  and  Commons,  united  for  the  purpose  of 
'Securing  the  liberties  of  the  country,  and  their 
measures  are  here  manifestly  represented  under 
these  words:  /* They de<;^red  war  not  only 
.against  the  French  nation,  but  also  against  the 
•friends  of  liberty  at  hpme.?    You  will  say,  in 

^  point  of  fact,  whether  t]^e  fainistry  or  Ui)9.  whole 
legislature  .were  referred  to  in  this  passage,  and 
whether  to  cirealate  it  was  not  to  psopagate 

^    sedition  tbrau^ottt  the  Miatiyt  . 


-  Th0re  are  other  passages,  faflio  the  ooiiBtda». 
tion  of  which  I  cannot  now  enter.  I  shall 
just  refer  to  one  which  has  been  commented 
on  at  great  length.  The  passage  is,  *'  And  a 
House  of  Commons;  but  the  latter  is  cofw 
rupted ;  it  is  decayed  and  worn  out ;  it  is  not 
really  what  it  is  called, — ^it  is  not  a  House  of 
Commons,"  &c.  It  is  said  that  there  has  been 
language  used  in  parliament,  and  passages  in 
petitions  presented  to  parliament,  stronger  and 
more  offensive  in  their  nature,  than  thi« 
founded  on  by  the  public  prosecutor ;  and  thai 
such  petitions  were  received  and  hod  upon  the 
table  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Passages 
were  read  to  you  to  prove  this.  Upon  Uiis 
part  of  the  subject  I  must  observe,  that  what 
IS,  or  is  not,  tolerated  by  the  Houses  of  Par- 
liament, must  be  foreign  to  our  present  discus- 
sion. They  are  the  best  judges  of  what  is 
a  violation  of  their  privileges ;  but  this  much  i 
state  to  you,  that  if  seditious  language  be  used 
out  of  doors  by  persons  in  preparing  a  petition 
for  parliament,  even  if  that  petition  should 
embody  the  seditious  words  themselves,  it 
cannot  be  pleaded  against  a  charge  of  sedition 
that  the  petition  has  been  received  by  parlia- 
ment. We  are  bound  to  judge  of  the  language 
employed  by  the  .test  of  law  aiyd  common 
sense,  and  by  that  test  to  determine  wbetjier 
it  is  seditious  or  not.  It  has '  been  held,  again 
and  again,  to  be  no  justification,  in  a  charge 
of  sedition,  that  language  even  of  a  more 
seditious  tendency  had  been  used  in  or  out  of 
parliament  without  being  followed  by  any 
punishment — ^It  is  stated  for  these  paneliB,  that 
stronger  language  has  been  used  in«.  other 

anarters ;  but  the  answer  is,  that  is  nothing  to 
le  question  under  consideration.  If  the 
language  here  be  seditious,  iV  is  no  matter 
whether  such  abuses  have  been  passed  over  on 
other  occasions.  If  such  petitions  as  thoee 
referred  to  had  been  particularly  brought  under 
the  view  of  the  House  of  Commons,  I  shouki 
think  they  must  have  been  rejected;  and  it 
would,  be  matter  of  astonishment  to  roe,  indeed, 
if  petitions  couched  in  language  far  short  of 
what  is  now  before  us  were  received.  •  But  in 
the  multiplicity'of  petitions  presented  to  that 
House,  some  may  pass  without  due  attention. 
Perlmps  very  objectionable  petitions  do  lie 
there.  But  if  the  public  prosecutor  proves  in 
this  Court  the  utterance  and  publicatien  of 
seditious  language,  it  is  of  no  consequence 
that  petition^  containing  such  language  have 
even  been  received  unchallenged  by  the  House 
of  Commons. 

There  is  a  part  of  the  defence,  however, 
deserving  of  your  serious  attention.  It  was 
abl^  argued  by  Mr.  Clerk,  that  the  language 
which  is  here  complained  of,  havipg  been  used 
in  connection  with  the  exercise  of  the  legal 
right  of  petitioning  the  lerislature,  cannot  be 
considered  as  seditious.  Uod  forbid  that  any 
thing  should  be  said  by  me  hostile  to  the  right 
of  petitioning  the 'House  of  Commons,  the 
House  o£  Lords,. or  the' Sovereign,  if  the  peo- 
ple are  ceqiectfulin  their  language;  for  to 


133] 


mi  1%»fhm  BtMJof  MMte. 


A.  O.  1817. 


1134 


lUte  grier^Boes,  aad  apply  fbr  ledrtft,  is  the 
uodoobled  aad  miafieiiable  rigbt  of  the  salgects 
of  this  realm.    Bat  I  have  no  difficulty  in 
sayniff,  that  i^  under  the  pretence  of  petition* 
ing^,  laogiiage  of  a  seditious  nature  oe  used, 
those  using  or  publishing  it  must  answer  fbr 
the  conseauences.     The   sacredness  of   the 
right  which  is  to  be  canied  into  effect,  will 
not  sanction  the  use  of  unlawful  means  in  the 
accomplishment  of  it;  and  those  who  come 
forwara  upon  such   occasions   must  abstain 
fWmi  inflammatory,  seditious,  or  treasonable 
expressions.    It  would  be  a  gross  abuse  of 
tite  inviolable  right  of  petitioning,  if  it  afforded 
an  opp6rtunity  for  every  kind  of  language 
being  uttered,  however  improper  or  reprehen- 
sible.   Such  never  can  be  the  result  of  what 
ii  due  to  the  sacred  right  of  petitioning;  and 
therefore  the  learned  gentleman  admitted  that 
he  did  not  cany  his  argument  so  &r  as  to  say, 
that  a  petition  mav  sanction  anv  thing  of  an 
improper  nature ;  but  he  argued,  that  if  you 
be  satisfied  that  die  object  was,  to  petition  the 
legislature,  you  will  be  disposed  to  make  due 
alfowance  for  the  language  which  may  be  used 
lb  caning  attention  to  grievances.    To  this 
extent  the  observation  is  well  founded.    His 
good  sense  must  have  made  him  perceive  that 
both  the   law  and  constitution  would  sink 
under  any  other  doctrine.    That  is  the  test  to 
which  you  are  to  bring  the  matter  now  under 
your  consideration.    You  are  to  look  to' the 
whole  fttcts  and  whold  publication ;  and  you 
win  judge  whether,  when  the  people  assembled 
to  prepare  this  petition,  there  was  or  was  not 
a  biameable  excess  in  the  language  employed 
by  them,  and  whether  this  was  not  greatly 
ag|;ravated  by  the  proceedings  of  the  meeting 
"being  embodied  in  a  publication,  and  circu- 
lated over  the  country.      I  have  no  wish, 
sentlemen,  to  press  this  case  further  tiian  the 
mcts  appear  to  warrant.    It  is  your  bounden 
dntr  to  weigh  all  those  expressions  which  are 
ftirly  admitted  to  be  too  strong,  and  even 
jndeeent;   and  it  ik*  jour  province  to  say, 
wiiether  these  expressions  do  amount  to  sedi- 
tion, have  a  tenaency  to  bring  into  contempt 
tfie  government  and  legislature,  and  to  stir 
«p  the  people  to  disaffection  and  reheHion. 

I  (certainly  do  most  sincerely  lament  that 
«ar  attention  has  been  caUed  to  tliis  case. 
This  is  the  first  trial  for  sedition  that  has 
occurred  for  a  considerable  length  of  time; 
aid  1  can  assure  the  learned  ffenttemen  that  I 
had  fondly  flattered  myself,  that  even  at  my 
rime  of  hfe  I  should  not  have .  again  had 
occasion  to  apply  my  mind  to  the  study  of  this 
part  of  the  law.  I  hoped  and  trusted,  tiiat 
after  the  dear  exposition  of  the  law  in  1793, 
1794,  and  1795,  in  the  different  prosecutions 
wha^  were  then  found  necessary,  sanctioned 
smd  approved  of  by  the  unanimous  voice  of 
Jfae  .country,  I  should  not  have  been  obliged 
tb  consider  cases  of  this  description.  But 
no  it  is,  tibat  although  the  situation  of  this 
oonntiyis  so  highlT  prosperous  and  enviable 
t^ben  cMiq«r«d  with  the  rest  of  Euiope,  it  is 


in  Britaita  in  18t7  that  we  live  eidtod  on  to 
consider  such,  cases.  An  allusion  was  made 
to  the  state  of  the  country  at  the  former  period, 
as  accounting  for,  and  justifying  the  prosecu* 
rions  which  then  took  place,  as  well  as  their 
result.  But  the  learned  counsel  was  afterwards 
under  a  necessity  of  alluding,  also,  to  what  has 
recently  happened  throughout  the  empire  at 
large.  *  Extraordinary  and  strong  measures 
have  been  adopted,  and  the  enactment  of  neir 
laws  has  been  rendered  necessary  by  the  state  of 
the  times.  But  you  are  not  to  be  affected  by 
such  considerations,  and  I  would  not  even 
have  alluded  to  them  had  they  not  been  al- 
luded to  by  the  counsel.  You  must  lay  aU 
considerations  of  this  kind  out  of  yonr  view  { 
and,  considering  this  indictment  as  brought 
by  his  majesty's  advocate  in  the  discharge  of 
his  duty,  you  are  to  determine  on  the  facts^ 
and  say  whether  the  panels  are  guilty  or  not 
of  sedition. 

I  resret  extremely,  in  a  different  point  of 
view,  that  this  should  be  the  first  case  brought 
before  this  Court,  and  from  a  county  with 
which  I  am  connected  by  so  many  ties.  It 
apoears  to  me  that  both  of  the  prisoners 
haa  been  men  of  exemplary  conduct  and 
ffood  character.  According  to  the  evidence, 
Sf'Laren's  private  character  had  been  veiy 
respectable.  Nothing  but  what  was  right  had 
ever  been  observed  in  his  conduct.  He  had 
never  demonstrated  any  thing  like  a  disposition 
to  tumult  or  disturbance,  but  was  a  volunteer, 
and  had  served  as  such  with  reputation.  The 
testimony  to  his  seneral  character  well  de- 
serves your  consideration,  in  judging  of  the 
criminal  intentions  of  the  parties,  and  deciding 
whether  their  purposes  were  seditious.  With 
regard  to  Mr.  Baird,  again,  you  will  concur 
with  me  in  deeply  lamenting  the  exhibition  of 
this  charge  against  him,  atandiuf;  as  he  has 
done  in  so  fair  a  situation  in  society.  Many 
of  the  witnesses,  even  for  the  crown,  have 
given  him  a  high  diaracter.  The  inhabitants 
of  Kilmarnock  had  some  time  ago  appointed 
him  one  of  their  police  commissioners,  thus 
showing  their  good  opinion  of  him.  It  ap- 
pears, Uiat  he  was  a  man  of  respectable  moial 
character,  and,  in  the  opinion  or  the  witnesses, 
attached  to  the  eovernment  and  to  the  con- 
stitution, though  he  had  a  strong  opinion  of 
the  propriety  and^necessity  of  a  reform  in  pai^ 
liament.  It  has  been  strongly  affirmed  for 
him,  that  he  never  had  any  thing  further  in 
contemplation  upon  this  or  any  other  occasion. 
With  regard  to  both  the  prisoners,  they  were 
not  known  to  have  been  ever  connected  with 
any  other  political  societies. 

These  are  points  important  for  your  con- 
sideration in  judging  of  the  essential  question 
which  you  are  to  determine  as  to  the  guilt  of 
the  pristaers.  If,  upon  a  careful  consideratibn 
of  the  whole  facts  in  tlie  publication,  and  the 
evidence  which  has  been  adduced,  you  shall 
b6  of  opinion  that  no  sedition  or  seditious 
intention  has  been  proved  against  the  prisoners, 
you  wiU  find  by  your  verdict  .that  th^  are  Jiot 


ld<i       57  GEORGE  III. 

guilty  of  the  ehmge.  If,  Ob  die  otter  faindy 
YOU  are  of  opinion  that  these  ib  seditious  matter 
in  the  speech  and  publication,  and  that  the 
^arge  or  criminal  intention  imputed  to  them 
in  the  indictment  has  not  been  done  away  by 
the  general  conduct  of  the  prisoners,  you  will 
not,  I  am  confident,  shrink  from  your  duty, 
but  will  find  them  guilty  of  the  crime  of  sedi- 
jdon  libelled  in  the  indictment.  And,  if  you 
Ihink  that  the  scales  hang  doubtful,  and  that  it 
U  difficult  to  say  whether  the  prisoners  were 
guilty  or  not,  the  former  good  character  and 
conduct  of  these  men  are  entitled  to  fuTouiable 
consideration.  I  leaye  the  case  in  your  hands, 
being  co'Ufident  that  you  hare  paid  most  par- 
ticulaar  attention  to  all  that  has  passed,  and 
can  bare  no  object  in  tiew  but  to  return  a 
eonsdentiOtts  verdict.  Whatever  you  may  do, 
I  trust  your  Yerdict  will  be  satisfactoir  to  your 
4wn  minds,  and  equally. so  to  die  public. 


Wrmt  qfJk/Mmim  M^^mm 


I 


J^itU  7th,  1817. 

Lord  Jtutice  Clerk. — Gentlemen  of  the  jury^ 
who  is  your  chancellor  ? 

Jwy, — ^Mr.  M'Kinlay. 

[Mr*  M'Kinlay  ga?e  the  verdict  into  court.J 

Lord  JvUiee  derft. — Alexander  McLaren 
and  Thomas  Baird,  attend  to  the  verdict  of 
the  juiy  on  your  case. 

*  At  EdMurgh,  the  6th  of  April,  IBiTyeart. 
The  above  assize  ha?ing  inclosed,  made 
choice  of  the  said  Archibald  Mackinlay 
to  be  their  chancellor,  and  of  the  said 
John  Baxter  to  be  their  clerk ;  and  haring 
considered  the  criminal  Indictment,  raised 
at  the  instance  of  his  majesty's  advocate 
for  his  majesty's  interest  against  Alex- 
,  ander  McLaren  and  Thomas  Baird,  panels, 
the  interlocutor  of  relevancy  pronounced 
thereon  by  the  Court,  the  evidence  ad- 
duced in  proof  of  the  indictment,  and  the 
e?idence  adduced  in  exculpation,  they, 

Sa  plurality  of  voices,  find  Alexander 
lAren  guilty  of  the  crimes  libelled  in 
the  indictment;  and  Thomas  Baird,  ail 
in  one  voice  find  him  guilty  of  the  crimes 
libelled  in  the  indictment.  But,  in  con- 
sideration of  their  former  good  character, 
unanimously  recommend  them  both  to 
*  die  clemency  of  the  Court.  In  witness 
whereof,  their  Said  chancellor  and  clerk 
have  subscribed  these  presents,  consist- 
ing  of  this  and  the  preceding  two  pages, 
'  in  their  names  and  by  their  appointment, 
place  and  date  aforesaid. 

(Signed)    A.  Mackivlay,  chancellor. 
J.  Baxteb,  clerk. 


Juitke  Gfar^— OendeiAenof  the  jury, 
you  are  now  disdiarged  from  the  very  fiitiguing 
and  painful  dunr  irhich  you  have  hud  to  per- 
form ;  and  I  feel  it  incuBbent'on  me  to  state 
to  you,  that  the  verdict  which  yon  have  f^ 
tioMd^  it^  in  iu  geacnd  nealt,  such  ai  I  was 


10  expect  vcni  a  iuiy,oi  yuUrivspcciaoBii^^ 
after  the  unwearied  attention  you  have  be* 
stowed  upon  the  whole  of  the  trial.  I  am 
confident  that  this  verdict,  while  it  is  satia* 
fiictory  to  your  own  minds,  will  be  of  gceai 
service  to  vour  country ;  and  I  have  only  to 
add,  that  the  recommendation  with  which  jwi 
have  accompanied  the  verdict,  and  whiel^ 
under  all  the  circumstanoes  of  the  case,  is  ao 
proper,  .will  aieet  from  the  X3ourt  with  all  tha 
attention  it  deserves. 

Lord  A&focate, — It  jonly  tooains  for  me  how 
to  crave  the  judgment  of  the  Courf . 


Lord  Jmtke  Gferi:.— Have  the  counsel 
the  prisoners  any  thing  to  say  on  this  verdict  f 

Mr.  Jeffrey. — In  stating  to  your  lordships 
in  one  or  two  wOrds^  what  has  occurred  to  us 
on  the  verdict,  I  hope  I  am  not  doing  more 
ihan  my  duty.  It  appears  to  us,  that  though 
its  general  meaning  is  impossible  to  be  mis- 
taken, there  is  an  inaccuracy  in  one  point, 
which  is  worthy  of  consideration.  Botn  the 
prisoners  fue  charged  with  iedUion  and  wUk  ne 
other  erimef  and  the  verdict  has  found  them 
both  guihy  of  the  erima  libelled,  usi^g  the 
plural  and  not  the  singular  number.  There 
may  be  many  facts  charged  in  the  minor  pro* 
position  of  the  indictment,  but  there  is  only 
one  crime  charged  in  the  major  proposition  ii^ 
this  case ;  and  you  are  aware  that  the  verdict 
is  an  answer  to  the  major,  and  not  to  the 
minor  proposition.  Logical  accuracv  is  alwaya 
requirM  on  these  occasions,  and  this,  there-: 
fore,  is  not  a  verdict  on  which  the  Court 
should  proceed  to  inflict  punishment.  There 
is  only  one  crime  charged  in  the  major  propo^ 
sition,  and  the  minor  contains  different  acta 
libelled  on  in  proof  of  the  crime  stated  in  the. 
major  proposition,  and  yet  the  verdict  finda 
the  panels  guilty  of  the  crimen  libelled  on.  I 
am  now  arguing  to  a  court  of  law,  and  not  to 
a  court  of  equity.    The  verdict,  in  finding  the 

S-isoners  guiltv  of  the  crknet  libelled,  has  found, 
em  guilty  of  something  not  charged  against 
them. 

There  is  another  circumstance  which  it  is. 
my  dtttv  to  mention,  that  this  verdict  appearal 
to  be  dated  on  Sunday.  I  believe  this  ob- 
jection has  occurred  in  other  cases,  but  haa. 
never  hitherto  been  seriously  argued. 

Lord  Jmtice  Clerk.-^Mr.  Jeflfrey  is  only 
dotiig  his  duty  in  stating  any  objections  that 
occurred  to  him.  But  I  apprehend  there  is 
nothing  in  the  objections  which  have  been 
ofiered.  The  mere  slip  of  a  letter  cannot  be. 
considered  as  a  substantial  objection  in  this' 
case.  Uttpo  crimee  had  been  charged  indie 
major  nropoeition,  and  the  ve'Mict  had  oaW 
found  die  prisoners  euilly  of  die  enme  libelled, 
it  might  have  been  difficult  to  say  which  bf  the 
crimes  was  meant.  But  here  thcfre  can  be  no 
doubt  of  the  meaning  of  the  verdicL 

Lord  E^rmnd.^1  temefnfanr  in  i  fHii  fli 
Ayr,  of  fNW  I«\f»ri9»  o*  a  «M^  « j(MMM 


Mtl 


■■rf  Tl  IiimW  flii'iU  Jill  fclBTiiii 


A.  D.  in7« 


Ciat 


^*^4ia*^**^'^ 


^tsdiei  WW  Toidy  as  bwiM  moottun^  wk  toaat 
thtt  dK  jMfir  mw  ihooli  beiitSicted.  LmA 
Clerk  Miller  adcuiited  the  latt^  altera 
aari  hnpcaed  an  tMttnf  puaishm^nt. 
A  riMflarawtnaitanre  oeqmeA  ai  acpiesticHi 
Mte«  the  Govt  of  Admixalty^  abcmt  a  wreok 
.aii  tta  oaast  ov  OiluKy. 
-  la  Aia  cave  Ihe  word  cfiniatis  ikot  iiBfpit>pcif * 
§Mim  k  the  general  diaraet^  of  the  cliche; 
tat  thete  are  two  apecieB  4if  tedition  UboUod^ 
.one  tiie  makiaif  a  lywoh,  aaotlMBr  the  ^Uiih^ 
jagabook. 


liOfd  filnaaadr— I  ooBcar  in  Ae  observetioai 
^wki^  yoar  toiMap  addreoied  to  the  J^.  I 
Ibiak  this  joiy  dOMrvea  tiie  thtuks  of  tite 
Court ;  and,  wku  is  mora,  tke  Aanks  of  Ike 
ipoanCiy.  I  think  they  deseire  the  thanks  of 
anofher  ciaas  of  men^  of  whom  I  know  little 
^t  hj  report — of  those  who  are  coaaidering 
j^ow  rax  they  msnr  go  in  opposition  to  the  con- 
adintlon  with  safety  to  their  lives. 

It  was  said  by  ooansel,  that  the  present  was 

hn  from  bein^  an  aggravated  speaes  of  sedi^ 

^on.  _  I  like  it  the  better  for  that.    It  is  more 

4gTeea!Ue  to  my  feelin^ps — to  the  feelings  of 

every  jnry,  and  of  every  iudge— to  have  mere 

moderate  crimes  to  try^  man  to  be  obliged  to 

•jofiict  transportation,  or  death. 

'   f  am  the  more  impressed  with  a  sense  of  the 

jnerits  of  this  verdict,  that  when  in  ffroping 

4apf  way  about  11  o'clock  a^  night,  in  ue  dark 

•treeta  of  this  city,  and  leflectmg  with  myself 

wbat  verdict  I  iftkonld  have  given,  had  I  been 

m  jnrfBian  in  this  case,  sncb  was  die  ^fklti  of 

a  bfaoe  <Mf  ekMfnenee,  ibat  I  eanaei  say  wlielhe# 

I  wooild  bate  said  yes  ortto,  if  I  had  been  at 

fbsft  t&ne  bbfiged  to  give  iSi  efpAnlOiii  whethef 

^er  not  the  jpfisbn^n  were  gtiilt)r«    Ltfee  iM 

j«i7 1  diooldfairfe  wished  to  h*ve  betts inolosed 

§tst  oonsideraiion.    But,  lyrrtet  beMin^  It^ 

jtty  doMbt  dteafypeariBd,  and  I  came  to  lh« 

eipmoa,  that  the  reletraney  sC  the  bidi^Mient 

as  deaf  aM  the  fbcfs  completely  pNfred. 

%mff  wortl--HSvef7  kttef  of  this  indiotmetit 

18  now  been  ftu^  proved,  fftie  JeYy  hh^' 
fiwnd  It  iMived,  thiit  afltei^  siifeal^ite  of  the 
B^ctel  with  d«e  iespeet'(Wli«aeir  s«Holilly  m 
atft  I  do'ndi  know),  they  |049n  toeftt^  '« BM 
MMbld  he  be  so  inlhtaated  m  to  tiM  a  tfcMf 
iiar  to  tfaeir  j«M  pedtiMu  h«  \M  IMriMd'AMir 
allegiance;  yes,  my  fellow-countljMte^  iri 
.flMlbacasey  Ift As0 kptf4 oii^ ettjj^dMee.*' 

It  is  net  the  lime  new  to  iii^tolfe  ki(»  iM 
jCfMcnee  $  thou|^,  wave  that  OMttj^feM,  I 
Awdd  be  lAcahr  thit  MA  «#y  eij^hMm  U 
ntoved  aoafayt  the  pMets.  AMI  it  hai  tiM 
tmfpMsi,  iieoftett  o^kusm^  thni  Oiei  8fibii|^ 
#lititnuiiafceei  ee*ie  otftHi  tte^^HMide  ^IR^ 
JOtitOtrndtf  iHtnMte.  Wftkt  I  'afittde  io  f#, 
llte4epOiitiiAibf  finrv^  Who  tetl  th«%  Wis 
a  ¥Me  fM  in  Ihe  OMnMM  wkhf  ^ilHM  ^ 
fifiMlf  tte  «b6^)i8Safl^ ;  ttiif  tome  eifecM^ 
tofit  HiirijIfAflMs  ilni  «ra!<  tffitililer  mi  II 

■m  le  »rtiiii>t  iM  ffti^  iMt4M  m^ 


MrtefsboaUHilbegvbM.    Istet  iiatrirH^ 
Aence  that  theee  were  tlsB  wmds  atiered  m  the 

ridi  f  B«t  tt  is  nnnecessaiy  to  gs  ihsongll 
endentoi  It  sppeaia  to  me^  thnt  it  wai 
not  the  ainistars  or  the  dnr,  bnt  the  oonMta^ 
tiott  tet  Was  attacked.  Bnt  I  «m1  not  gO 
buo  thetb  All  that  Remains  for  as  is»  to  eon** 
sider  tiie  amonat  of  the  punisknent  to  be  il» 
tteted  eA  the  prisonen. 

The  milder  the  pnnislwnent  enn  be  made,  if 
it  be  inch  ai  mey  deter  ethers  from  cotnmildng 
the  like  crimes  in  time  ooSding^  thht  is  thi 
pnnishnient  that  will  aaeet  ssy  wish  and  that 
of  yonr  lordshipi.  This  eate  is  different  tosi 
those  tried  in  1703  and  1794.  I  looked  inte 
them  last  night.  They  are  ektieintlty  diftrent 
from  the  pf^ent  case.  Ibere  the  pnaishmeut 
twatded  trm  tfansport«ion«  NoHe  of  yo«t 
lotdshipscnn  hoof  opinion  wo  oan  here  gn 
that  lengthy  and>  eonsideiriag  Ae  reooea* 
teendation  of  the  jurjr,  I  think  w^  shall  ssdistr 
•at  own  oooseieae^  and  the  Jnstlte  of  tbe  easoi 
by  inilitting  sit  months'  jniprisonriient  o*  iM 
paAelft.  At  the  same  tm^  tiiey  sheuM  b6 
obliged  to  ted  secarity  to  ke«p  ^e  peaoO  fo# 
the  period  of  tlnree  yeais^  Mr.  Bsird,  n^ 
appears  to  be  k  man  of  opulence^  under  thd 
penalty  of  tO(R.,  and  the  other  nnder  that  Of 
401^^  wMcih  I  Aink  is  not  vAieasiiinaMe. 

lord  6dlMs.^^fiothof  the  apfortanatejnanels 
at  the  bar  stand  accused  of  sedition.  Of  that 
crime,  after  a  long  trial,  conducted  with  inft< 
nite  ability  on  bou  sides,  the  unhappy  persona 
hav6  been  found  guilty  by  a  jurjr.  Under 
tibese  circumstances,  nothina  remains  for  us 
but  to  give  effect  to  the  verdict  by  indicting 
sooh  punishment  as  it  appeaii  to  us  thek  cam 
deserves.  Taking  atl  the  circumstances  into 
consideration,  aiM  among  otheft  the  reoom^ 
mendation  of  the  jury,  t  concur  in  opinion  aa 
to  the  punishment  which  has  been  proposed-^ 
that  thoF  should  be  impritoned  lior  six  monthsg^ 
and  find  secntity  lor  good  behaviour^ 

lord  JHM(ja^.^In^onsideiingthejad^:aieii« 
Whi«h  &x6M  vb  pMaMmcOd  on  this  occa^on^ 
we  iMiitnrally  look  to  ihe  judgmeM  which  h«^ 
be<^  pronOttfteed  in  shnilar  tMepi  ahd  peM^ 
didarly  to  fhose  wbhft  have  beeti  referred  ttf 
by  lord  dermand.  For,  in  every  br^cb  or 
judicial  ptoeedtfre^  aiiil  in  nolhin^  fnorO  than' 
m  pronouncing  judgment  op  a  verdict  infetiteg*' 
aai  arbitraty  pnnithxnelltft,  it  is  desinble  to  be 
gnfided  m  ptecedents.  If  this  ease  bad  i^ 
iftmbled  &e  cas«  of  I^sbe  Palnker,*  to  viAiicIt 
it  has  been  assimilated  by  counsel,  I  thonld 
hayetH^it  asniy  orphiion  that  thepuniHh*^ 
lai^t  itionid  be  the  state  fts  in  thitt  casO.  And 
if,  utiliippil)r  ib^  this  €«>ntttty,  Mch  eates  of 
mi  ttid  agisted  tedition  fHaB  oome  before 
tm  CtthM^'-'Htei^  Utfle  to  be  distittgnlsftedl 
ft^lh  U^etMi-*^  wfll  be  my  tq^inion,  sM*  * 
ilifl  tiolieid«Hct)6n  Of  Ifte  biw,  kdd  Of  the  WMlW 
d^m  fttttej^Hyoi,  thuttransp^hrttic^  ii^fie 
pftyMr'ptiuilnttfeitf;   Bttt  X^kgree  w  tiMroplnoa 

•  S  How.  Mod;tk.  IV.  Mn 


1991 


57  6E0R0EUIL 


THAtfAUs^Mer  »Uhb 


[1«0 


which  hat  beeh 'eipMsMd^  tbitthSt  Uaouit 
very  different  from  the  others  alladed  to,  end 
that  it  has  a  nearer  resemblanoe  to  that  of  Ro- 
bertson and  Berry,*  than  to  any  others  whidi 
ocenrred  at  that  time  ^  and  I  therefore  thio|L 
that  iaporiaonment  is  the  appropriate  popish* 
meat-  in.  this  case,  and  that  wludi  is  pointed 
out  by  precedent.  As  to  the  duration  of  the 
confinement,  I  am  always  averse  to  long  im- 
prisonment'; and  considering  the  recommend- 
ation of  the  jury,  I  concur  in  the  limited  time 
proposed  in  this  case. 

Having  said  thus  much,  I  must  express  my 
hopes,  that  this  verdict  will  put  down  the 
crime  of  sedition  at  the  present  juncture  in 
this  countiy.  It  was  urged  in  defence  of  the 
prisoners,  that  the.  culpable  expressions  were 
employed  when  the  per^ns  were  met,  in  a 
season  of  distress,  to  petition  the  Kins  and 
both  Houses  of  Parliament.  But  surely  the 
right  of  petitioning  may  be  exercised  without 
making  the  speeches  and  resolutions,  at  such 
meetings^  vehicles  for  sedition  and  treason. 
What  was  said  in  a  former  case  as  to  the 
liberty  of  the  press  and  of  speech,  may  be 
applied  to  the  right' of  petitioning.  As  every 
nan  may  print  or  may  speak  what  he  pleases, 
so  mi^  he  use  what  language  he  thinks  fit  in 
his  petition,  or  in  the  speeches  and  resolutions 
accompanying  the  petition:  But  under  this 
condition,  that  if  in  his  petition,  or  in  the 
speeches  and  resolutions  accompanying  it,  he 
is  guilty  of  treason,  sedition  or  scandal,  he 
must  be  answerable  for  th^  consequences,  just 
as  he  would  be^ai&s^erabl^  for  those  crimes  if 
committed  by  him  in  eiercising  the  liber^  of 
the  press,  or  the  liberty  of  speech.  Why 
should  it  be  otherwise  P  I  cannot  believe  that 
this  necessary  restraint  on  the  right  of  peti« 
tioning  will  be  any  obstruction'  to  the  right 
itself.  If  the  real  object  of  the  petition  be  to 
6btain  its  prt^er,  why  should  it  be  couched  in 
offensive  termd  ?  Is  that  the  way  to  attain  its 
object?  It  is  the  very  reverse.  It  is  the  way 
to  get  it  refused.  *  Such  a  course  can  be  fol- 
lowed only  for  the  purpose  of  getting  a  refusal, 
and  at  the  same  time  spreading  alarm  through 
the  country*  To  checx  such  conduct,  as  the 
verdict  of  tlie  jury  tends  to  do,  instead  of 
iniuring  the  right  of  petitioning,  is  the  method 
of  securing  it,  and  rendering  it  truly  valuable 
to  the  oountnr. 

I  have  read  the  whole  of  the  pamphlet  from 
which  extracts  are  made  in  tne  indictment, 
and  I  am  sorry  to  sa^  I  have  formed  a  much 
worse  opinion  of  the  intentions  of  all  the  par- 
ties than  I  had  by  readipg  the  indictment,  or 
by  any  thing  that  passed  Qn  the  trial.  It  may 
iMve  done  little  injury,  fox  the  range  of  its 
circulation  was  limited ;  but  let  any  intelligent 
man  consider  what  would  have  been  the  con- 
sequences, if  t^is  pamphlet  had  passed  un- 
noticed, and  if  similar  publications  had  been 
circulated  in  every  village  and  populous  town 
in  the  country.    No  man  who  reads  this  pam- 

*  3  How.  Mod.  St  Tr.  79. 


phlet  dm  hesitate  to  say,  thal'hi'tiidl  a  case 
the  country  would  have  been  filled  vrith  the 
most  combustible  materials,  and  that  a  slight 
spaik  would  have  lighted  up  rebellion  from 
one  end  of  the  inland  to  the  other. 

I  shall  only  add,  that  if  the  prisoners  and 
their  associates  will  not  learn  wisdom  from  tiie 
verdict,  and  the  opinion  of  the  Court,  I  trust 
thejr  vrill  learn  it  from  what  was  uttered  by 
their  own  counsel,  with  a  force  of  eloquence 
which,  I  trust,  has  made  a  lasting  impressiokl 
on  them.  Mr.  Jeffrey  told  them  that  they 
were  treading  on  deUcate  ground,  that  the 
expressions  they  used  were  roost,  improper, 
inaecorous,  and  absurd,  and  that  what  they 
said  only  l^trayed  an  ignotantse  of  the  bubject 
on  whidi  they  spoke.  I. trust  they  will  re- 
member this  lesson,  and  that  all  others  will 
learn  to  profit  by  their  exajnple. 

JiOrd  Beiton. — I  am  of  the  same  opinioii 
with  the  judges  who  have  spoken  regarding 
this  verdict,  and  I  particularly  agree  with  the 
words  which'  have  fallen  fifom  the  last  judce 
who  delivered  his  sentiments.  I  shall -only 
fnrth^  observe,  that  while  I  concur  most  cor- 
dially as  to  the  punishment  proposed  to  be 
avrarded  in  this  case,  I  have  no  doubt  either 
of  the  right  or  the  duty  of  the  Court  to  inflict 
a  higher  punishment  when  required;  and  es- 
pecially to  award  the  punishment  of  trans- 
pprtation  in  a  case  of  aggravated  sedition; 
In  the  present  case,  the  short  period  of  im- 
prisonment which  has  been  suggested,  is,  I 
think,  sufficient,  all  circumstances  being  coi^ 
sidered. 


Lord  Jtatke  Clerk. — I  am  extremely  hapmr, 
that,  under  the  whole  circumstances,  of  tnu 
case,  and  particularly  the  recommendation 
whidi  has  been  given  to  your  lordships  by  the 
veiy  respectable  jury  who  had  to  try  it,  I  am 
eiud>led,  in  the  discharge  of  my  duty,  to  oon*> 
cnr  in  the  proposition  now  made  as  to  the 
punishment  which  ^should  follow  upon  this 
verdict.  For  I  have,  upon  the  most  mature 
reflection,  and  the  most  deliberate,  consider- 
ation I  have  been  able  to  bestow  upon  the  law 
of  the  case,  formed  a  clear  and  unalterable' 
opinion,  thiU,  for  cases  of  aggravated  sedition, 
such  as  those  which  have  been  aUoded  to  by 
some  of  your  lordships,  the  proper,  the  legi* 
timate,  the  necessary  punishment  for  this 
Court  to  award,  is,  the  highest  short  of  a 
capital  one. 

I  take  this  opportunity,  however,  of  stating 
as  I  before  did  to  the  jury,  that,  notwithstand- 
ing, the  particular  circumstances  and  aspects 
of  this  case,  it  does  not  appear  to  be  one  of 
that  highly  affgravated  class.  But  I  should  be 
guilty  of  a  dereliction  of  my  duty  if  I  did 
not  take  this  opportunity  of  distinctly  stating,, 
that,  though  not  one  in  the  highest  class  of 
sedition,  the  ofi)snce  of  which  these  prisoners- 
have  been  convicted,  upon  evidence,  dear, 
satisfactory,  and  convincing,  is  a  spledes  of 
sedition  attended  with  drcumstances  of  oon- 
8idend>le  aggravation. .  IallQde|injparticnlari> 


1411 


bnd  t%omai  Bnrd/or  IMiikm. 


A.  D.  1617. 


cua 


to  tlM»  cMe  of  the  fntener,  Tfaoims  Boirdi 
For,  though  I  did  not  think  it  neceAary  or 
proper  in  me  to  dwell  on  that  circomstance  in 
niy  obsenrations  to  the  jury  when  I  summed 
up  t6e  evidence  to  them,  I  do  now  think  it 
mj  duty  to  slate/  that  the  Situation  in  which 
that  gentleman  stood, — ^tbe  rank  of  life  in 
which  he  formerly  moved, — the  character  he 
poaiessed, — the  influence  he  had, — and,  above 
ally  the  commission  which  he  had  lately  held 
aa  an  officer,  do^  in  relation  to  this  offence, 
and  to  the  circumstances  in  which  it  was  com- 
mitted, render  his  case  of  greater  aggravation 
than  that  of  the  other  prisoner. 
*  This  gentleman,  although  moving  in  an 
elevated  sphere  in  the  town  of  Kilmarnock, 
and  seleeted  by  its  inhabitants  to  be  a  com- 
missioner of  p<riice,  is  proved,  by  incootro- 
▼ertibie  evidence,  to  have  associated  for  days 
witlrpetsons,  some  of  them  of  the  very  lowest 
laak  (for  McLaren  is  only  an  operative  wea- 
ver), temuBg  a  deliberate  plan  for  the  meeting 
wlikh  has  bioaghtp  him  into  his  nnfortuaato 
■itnatioo.  I  shmild  have  conceived  Mr.  Baird 
waifid  have  much  better  dischifr^  his  dotr 
to  his  country, — would  have  shown  a  nracn 
better  attention  to  the  general  distress, 
0br  which  I  greattv  fiBel,'biit  trust  it  is  now 
ttt  a. way  to  be  alleviated),  had  he  confined 
liis  exotions  to  contributing,  acoording  to  his 
means,  for  the  mitigation  of  that  distress, 
instead  of  taking  those  active  measures  which 
it  is  proved  he  did  take,  in  preparing  the 
business, — ^in  meetings, — ^in  concocting  the 
measures  of  the  day,— and,  above'  all,  in 
actually  putting  in  the  mouth  of  the  automaton 
who  api)eared  in  that  box,  a  speech,  which, 
when  It  is  examined,  will  be  found  to  contain 
the  most  scandalous  and  seditious  matter* 
For  the  contents  of  that  speech^  whether  Burt 
was  the  real  or  pretended  author  of  it,  Mr. 
Baird  rendered  himself  responsible.  .  I  must 
therefore  say,  that,  considering  Mr.  Baird  had 
filled  the  honourable  situation  of  Captain  in  a 
volunteer  corps,  he  had  altogether  forgotten 
his  duty  in  ever  lending  himself  as  a  party  to 
any  Buch  proceedings,  the  guilt  of  which  is 
nov  attadied  to  him  by  the  verdict  of  the 


1th  regard  to  Alexander  McLaren,  I  have 
only  to  say,  that  he  has  been  found  guilty  of 
ddveHng  ^a  :speech :  which  answer^  for  itself, 
and  I  shall  ada  nothing  more  on  the  subject. 

But  there  is  one  observation  which,  in  my 
former  remarks,  I  omitted  to  state  to  the  Jury, 
and  therefore  now  think  it  my  duty  to  make, 
Qpon  the  passage  in  the  indictment  taken 
mn  one  ot  the  speeches,  in  reference  to  the 
conduct  of  the  clergy  of  Scotland.  Your 
lordships  know  well  to  what  I  allude.  The 
passage  is^  **  Their  Beveretai  hirelings  would 
oonvince  yon  that  you  are  suffering  under  the 
visitation  of  the  Almighty,  apd  thexefore  ought 
to  be  submissife  imder  tne  chastening  stroke." 
I  have  asked  myself  thb  question,  after  pay- 
hig  ererv  attention  to  the  ingenious  and  elo- 
^oeat  observatioxa  piade  ia  order  to  give  the 


i 


go-1(y  W  tUe  pttssage;  what-ebuid  be  the  true 
meaning:  of  those  who  were  accessory  to  this 
most  seandalous  libel  on  the  clergy  of  Scot* 
land.  I  have  asked  myself,  whedier  it  was 
meant  to  be  applied  to  the  E^blished  Clergy, 
who  are  thus  oranded  with  being  *'  Reverend 
Hirelings,  who  would  convince  the  people  that 
they  are  suffering  under  the  visitation  of  the 
Almightv,  and  therefore  ought  t6  be  submis- 
sive under  the  chastening  stroke.''  IsUiere 
any  thing  in  their  character  to  warrant  such 
imputations  against  them  ?  Did  not  all  those 
who  attended  that  meeting  know,  that  there  is 
not  one  of  the  Established  Clergy  who  ia  not 
eompletelv  independent  of  the  crown  itself, 
and  that  they  hold  their  situations  as  securely 
as  any  perBOns  whatever  do  their  property  r 
What  is  there  then  in  the  conduct  and  darac* 
ter  of  the  Established  Clergy  which  could 
render  them  liable  to  the  shamefol  imputation, 
that,  as  hirelings,  they'oould  be  guilty  of 
incidcating  any  particular  doctrines?  And 
what  is  the  founaation  of  this  charge?  It  is, 
that  they  are  guilty  of  having  endeavoured  to 
impress  on  their  heareis,  that  the  distress  of 
the  country  is  to  be  viewed  as  the  dispensatioii 
of  Providence.  Is  there  any  man,  with  the 
slightest  impression  of  religion  on  his  mind, 
who  wiU  deny,  that  the  severity  of  a  bad 
season,  the  pressure  of  a  bad  harvelt,  proceeds 
from  we  will  of  Providence?  '  Or  was  it 
meant  to  be  impressed  on  the  deluded  and 
ignorant  hearers  at  that  meeting,  that  the 
Government,  or  any  portion  of  the  people^ 
were  responsible  for  the  distress  prevalent  in 
the  country,  which  had  been  occasioned  by  a 
bad  harvest,  that  had  doubled  the  price  of  the 
necessaries  of  life }  And  yet  because  resign- 
ation to  the  Divine  Will  had  been  recom- 
mended by  the  Qergyi  they  are  branded  as 
hirelings. 

On  the  other  hand,  I  have  asked  myself 
whether  this  charge  was  meant  to  be  imputed 
to  the  respectable  body  of  dissenting  clergy- 
men, who,  almost  without  a  solitary  exception, 
have  shown  themselves  to  be  attached  to  the 
best  interests  of  Ae  country,  and  have  been 
distinguidied  for  Uieir  loyalty  and  steady 
allegiance  ?  Is  it  this  dass  that  was  meant  to 
be  so  branded?  If  so,  they  have  to  tiiank 
those  of  their  flodLS  who.  could  gite  countenance 
to-  the  publication  of  such  sdtodal  against 
them*  This  passage  appears. to  me  to  desig- 
nate the  true  character  of  the  publication  as 
most  objectionable  and  inflammatory.  It  was 
intended  to  weaken  the  affections  of  the  peo- 
ple to  the  government  and  established  constitu« 
tion  of  the  countrjr,  while  the  character  of  the 
ministers  of  relision  was  likewise  to  be  de- 
Ipraded.  I  ask,  what  would  be  the  consequences 
,  if  such  ]^roceedings  were  unchecked  ? 

Notwithstanding  this  circumstance,  however, 
whidi  it  was  my  duty  not  to  omit  to  notice,  I 
am  happy,  that  in  reference  to  the  strong 
testimony  borne  to  their  good  characters  in 
timea  patf^  bached  by  the  recommendation  of 
the  Jury,  we  are  juimfied  in  the  discharge  of 


149J       «7  Q^QftQIi  (II. 


fruf  ^4hmitF  M*f<vw 


IM 


our  liMirad  4ttlr4"'te  OMMonncifla.  jdbA  flM 

pImII  be  impri^^ned  ^  f^  roi^iiftf  withip  jkhf 
T«i|b#Qai  pt  the  Caii«^«r«^  of  ];4MNmh  ((hia# 
ipfkkii^  the  pimialM^iit  ^f  kygnMP^^Anl  id 

(ihfkU  6^4  WMurity  0  |beep  the  pi^^fs^  for  thirfif 
Ittfwf  «q4fer  the  p^^^r  ^  SJOMJut.;  dad  Aat 
^ijdpaiider  M'l4ureo»  19  i«foen^  to  his  jof^ 
fnmfit%TWf§,  ihaV  «9ly  4ii4  ifcwrito  |;i^  jUk^ 
Hipfi  peruid  undfir  tf]#  pcM^y  of  40^ 

JU(99(ao4er  WLui^n  apd  ThiMB^  Bs4rd< 
p^r  fi  iag#t  oMofyl  9*4  Mtt»n(ive  ^  wdcucfLlpojil 
pf  Ae  ««M^  ciicnwitanofn  «if  4hft  ^^ie  tita^ 
fvw  ^ihihitad  wmst  f qu,  t  mr  of  your 
fOWItigr  has  foand  b^h  lod  ewihiQf  ^«l»  the 

to(Bf|B*q^^  gdiUypf  ihf  orwa  of  8edjltioi^ 
9»  ^Pktffc^  Ml  th#  iodfctpiaiNt.  b  ii^  I  pwi 
yipmni  )iK»th'9f  yw^  a  fviinCal  dufr  for  #a«  If 
Ijlippunpelo  yoiib  v>  pafareiice  ia  tVJ# ^^eidial, 
the  tudgi^^  ^ch  tho  CoDijt  ihM  fou^^  ii 
g^MfjWiy  to  inlaid  against  yw.    {  say,  I  do 

il  JvM»  a iaof TO  nag^  vi^m  i  pM^  m 

Ifal  lalPOilg  MPtimooy  iUw4  ^wai  b^iff*  lO  r9«r 
fpaw  go9d  ch^uEftctpai,    I  laiaopt  thai  yoia 

M  fcunaittad  yomatnia  Ao  haouilM  on  tWa 
wrfo^kaaiate  day  of  M^a  TKh  lof  De$ea»lbary  tba 
m#4oimt^,attd  tt#<otheiir  atoi"va»M  to  gUro 
fprfalatifo  toiirl^at  a  iiiiir  has  prfmowcad  Aa 
ba  stditio^  {  ^  tniat  and  L^  th«t  tha 
aaaul^  ^  t^l  wms^cX,  apd  ^t  Ahift  .opin^ony  yia^ 
^wm  )ip9fd'  pvoQouaoe^  Jby  tha  whaW  Court, 
paVtoro  kf  dnaoffaci^ipl^th  of  ypu;  Aat  it 
prMl  taaah  y/o^i,  thai  ho^ay^  ^pa,iqaDtfy  ippo*- 
ceat  four  fwcydioga  aow^  w^  .bee.a»  th^ 
di4iaai|to  uijcruaay  Mid  na^fht  taye  beafb  if 
the  asaiaiple  1^  :heea^eiieii%  foU9W€)d»  pror 
duaftiya  of  wAf^Ml  to  the  iataraMa  .of  your 
country.  I  trust  also,  the  salutary  chacfc  |^an 
0  ^aacaadinga  of  tips  description,  iirill  have 
an  Mpfpitaol  affect  on  the  pwblio  mind,  by 
ahofaiiig,  that/mioted  af  tha  >isht  of  patitiop  is, 
jmUtJIfBd  as  tha  peofiW  lOf  l&a  free  eovwtnr 
aia  tip  s(Ma  thair  tgnajvoicaa  lU)  government  and 
Ihvs  dagislatM^  ^  i^>  fwapt  .ou(t  vhat  nay 
^paar  to  Aem  as  rpmsdies,  that  ijght  afforda 
vpaoiiaan  or.wolaotioa  i/>  tho«^  ^ho^  in  ijba 
pmoMcmiou  ai  t^atjagafal  pbjeat»  toe  sight  of 
Ihak  4ui|[9  a«4  in>  swt^y  /of  Aa  oina  /af 

laditian. 


WWla  |bi  a ut^iaaM  of  tWt  oonfttif  an  ear 
^ad  iia  atala  their  gijavaaoea  to  the  I^^islatui^ 
^hey  awai  be  canifu)^  that  oaiUiar  in  the  pr»* 
^us  proaeediii|p,4ha  speeches  and  reaaluLioua* 
«or  ip  the  peutipu*  Otemaelves,  they  inseit 
natter  vhicn  is  cleariy  of  a  criaiaal  naloiu, 
^aditious  in  Us  tendency,  and  likely  to  pvodaoa 
Uistiog  mischief  to  their  ^pualiy*  It  inII  taadi 
thep,  thai  a)thoagfa  emiflad  W  exeacisa  Ihaf 
righlt,  t)tey  miast  not.  In  its  vMefmdp  be  guil^ 
ofj^  Tiolatioii  of  law.  I  t^te^oia  trust  that 
the  reoik  pf  this  trial  will  ha  of  importani 
banA  ^  yM^  in  the  aouma  of  ycnar  latnn 
liyes,  and  that  this  Court  shaU  sot,  with  negaai 
tp  j9ia  ofptbais,  hara  aoop  nmasio^  again  to 
$ini«Md?avtiou  tha  Clime  ojF  saditioa.  lUli^ 
wifSP  timat,  >that  coiuidaring  ithp  raaomBsandftr 
tipuiaf  Aha  jury,  and  the  knicpt  pnwahmaad 
whiah,  uadar  ab  ^be  ciraumat^mcAi,  is  about  4» 
be  awud^d  agajinst  you,  jmi  witt  &mkf  la^ 
>olva,  ahi^  i^eu  you  agiMwi  ratwa  taaooatg^ 
in  wluiifpu  fonwarly aoT/ed  in  ^  iMpact^falo 
fooy  iMmiaill  lie  iinoeialy  byslinyaar  heaits^ 
md  #maohiad  u>  the  !^9  aatarasts  of  ynar 
90iMitiy  md  the  canstiaation  ja^dea  which  you 
haiia4ha  ha^pinaia  lia 


^e  Lord  Justice  Cleit  and  Lords  Ctmr 
missioners  of  Justiciary  having  cpnsidered- 
l^e  verdict  above  recorded^  in  result  ^ereot 
decern  and  adjudge  tke  said  Alez^mper  Id^Lareji 
and  Thomas  Baira  to  be  carried  ftom  the  bar 
to  tl^e  Tolboodi  5>f  Caaongate  of  Edtnbui^b^ 
therein  to  be  detained  for  six  mpntfaf  from 
diisdate,  and  thereafter  unt^l  ihey  shall  fin4 
sufficient  caution  ^d  s^yrety,  acted  in  the 
books  of  Adjournal^  tot  'their  good  bdiaviour 
lor  the  space  of  three  years  from  and  i^er  the 
ezpiTalipn  of  the  s^  period  of  imprisonineny 
and  t^  under  the  respective  penalties  foU 
towing:  viz.  The  s^d Thomas  Baird  under 
the  penalty  of  200^  sterling,  and  the  said 
Alezandpr  McLaren  upder  t)ie  penalty  of  401.  f 
and  upon  the  lapse  of  the  spiid  period  .of  im» 
prisonment,  and  finding  caption  as  aibresaid, 
grant  warr^t  to  and  oraain  the  magistrates  of 
Canongate  and  keepers  of  their  l^lbooth  t^ 
set  fkt  said  .Thomas  Baird  .and  Ale^^ai^er 
M^uven  ^  liberty. 


(fSiSDtd) 


D.B^i^][.P.IX 


1451 


Trid  of  miUam  Edgar. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C146 


699.    ProceediDgs  in  the  Bigh  Court  of  Justiciary  at  Edinburgh, 

on  two  successive  Indictments,    raised  by  his  Majesty's 

Advocate,   against  William    Edgar,  for  administering 

unlawful  Oaths,  April  9th,  May  S6th :  57  Geobge  III. 
A.  D.  1817. 


COUBT  OF  JUSTICIARY- 
Apml  9y  1817. 


I 


lit.  Hon.  DaM  Boyle,  Lord  Justice  Cierk. 
.    hold  Bemand* 
LordGiOa. 
LoidJPata%. 
Lord  HaloR. 

Cowuelfot  the  Croitn* 

lEU.  Hon.  Akttmder  Maemiockie,  Lord  Advo- 
cate [afterwards  a  lord  of  Session  and  Jufiti- 
daij,  with  the  title  of  Lord  Meadowbank.J 

Jhma  Wedderhmjif  Esq.  Solicitor-General. 

H.  Warratier,  W.  S.  Ag^ent. 

Camudfor  William  Egfgm-. 

Mm,  Oarkj  Esq. 
Geo.  Crmrntotoif  Esq. 
Tko$»  2%0MMOii,  Esq« 
Jbnef  Momcrieff  Esq. 
Frtmd$  Jeffrtjf^  Esq. 
J.  F.  GrmU,  Esq. 
Hemy  Coddmmf  Esq« 
J»  A.MiBrrmf,  Esq. 

G.  W.  Boyd,  W.  8.  Agent. 

William  Edgar  and  John  Keith  w6re  placed 
«t  die  bar. 

Lord  J^iUce  Cferft.— William  Edgar  and 
John  Keith,  paj  attention  to  the  itioictment 
against  yoii^  which  is  now  to  be  read. 

<<  William  Edgar  and  John  Keith,  both 
present  prisoners  in  the  Castle  of  £din- 
boigfa,  yon  are  indicted  and  accused^  at 
the  instance  of  Alexander  Maconochie  of 
Meadowbanky  his  majesty's  advocate,  for 
his  mijesty's  interest :'  Ihat  albeit,  bv  an 
act  passed  in  the  fifty-second  year  of  his 
present  mi^esty's  reign,  intitaled,  *  An 
act  to  render  more  effectual  an  act  passed 
in  the  thirtynKventh  year  of  his  present 
majesty,  for  preventing  the  administer- 
ing or  taking  aniawfiil  oaths,'  it  is  mler 

'  oUa  enacted,  *  That  every  person  who 
shsil,  in  any  manner  or  form  whatsoever, 
adminiBler,  or  c^use  to  be  administered, 
or  be  aiding  or  assisting  at  the  adminis- 
tering, of  any  oath,  or  enpsement,  pnr- 
porting  or  inteading  to  bina  the  person 
taking  tiie-same  to  commit  any  treason  or 

VOLXSKOL  I 


murder,  or  any  fekmy  poniAahle  by  law 
with  death,  shall,  on  conviction  thereof 
by  doe  course  of  law,  be  adjndged  ffuilty 
of  felony,  and  suffer  death  as  a  ielon, 
without  benefit  of  clergy.'    Andfuither, 
by  section  fourth  of  the  said  act,  it  is  en* 
acted,  ^  That  persons  aiding  and  assist- 
ing at  the  administering  of  any  such  oath 
and  engagement,  as  aforesaid,  and  per^ 
sons  causing  any  such  oath  or  engagement 
to  be  administered,  thoogh  not  present  at 
the  administering  thereof  shall  be  deemed 
principal  offenders,  and  shall  be  tried  as 
such ;  and  on  conviction  thereof  by  due 
course  of  law,  shall  be  adkidced  guilty  of 
felony,  and  shaH  soffiBr  deam  as  felons, 
without  benefit  of  clergy ;  although  the 
persons  or  person  who  actually  aikiinis- 
tered  such  oath  or  engMement,  if  any 
such  there  shall  be,  slmlf  not  have  been 
tried  or  convicted,'    And  farther,  by  sec- 
tion sixth,  of  the  said  act,  it  is,  enacted, 
'That    any  engagement   or    oUigation 
whatsoever,  in  the  nature  of  an  oath,  pur- 
porting or  intending  to  bind  the  person 
taking  the  same  to  commit  any  treason  or 
murder,  or  any  fdony  punishable  by  law 
with  death,  shall  be  deemed  an  oath  within 
the  intent  and  meaning  of  this  act,  in 
whatever  form  or  manner  the  same  shall 
be  administered  or  taken,  and  whether 
the  same  shall  be  actually  adminisCer^ 
by  any  person  or  perscms  to  any  other 
person  or  persons,  or  taken  by  anv  other 
person  or  persons,  without  any  admini»* 
tration  thereof  by  any  other  person  or  per- 
sons:'   Yvt  Tnvs  IT  IS  AHn^orvaniTT, 
that  vou,  the  said  William  Edgar  and  John 
Keith,  are  both  and  each,  or  one  or  other 
of  you,  guilty  of  the  said  crimes,  or  of  one 
or  more  of  them,  actors,  or  actor,  or  art 
and  part :    In  a»  far  a$  you,  the'  said 
William  Edgar  and  John  Keitli,  having, 
at  Gclasgow,  and  in  the  vicini^  thereof,  in 
the  course  of  the  months  of  NovembcHr 
and  December  1816,  and  of  January  and 
Febnuuy,   1817,  wickedly,  maliciously, 
and  traitoroudy  conspired   and   i^reed 
with  other  evil-disposed  persons  to  break 
and  disturb  the  piu>lic  peaoe,  to  change, 
subvert,  and  overthrow  the  government, 
and  to  excite,  move,  and  raise  insurrec- 
tion and  rebdlion,  and  espedallyto  hold 
and  attend  secret  meetings,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  obtaiiMDg  annual  parliaments^  and 


1471 


57  GEORGE  til. 


Trml  of.  WObwm  E^ar 


iu& 


universal  suffrage,  by  unlawful  and  tio^ 
lent  meansy  did  then  and  there,  both  and 
eacb,  or  one  or  other  of  you,  wickedly, 
maliciously,  and  traitorously  administer, 
€t  cause  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid 
or  assist  at  the  administering,  to  a  gr^at 
number  of  persons,  an  oath  or  engage- 
ment,  or  an  obligation  in  the  nature  of  an 
oath,  in  the  following  terms,  or  to  the* 
following  purport : — *  In  awful  presence 
of  God;  I,  A  B,  do  voluntaiily  swear,. 
That  I  will  persevere  in  my  endeavour- 
ing 'to>  fbim  a  brbiheihood  of  affection 
amongst  Britons  of  every  description,  who 
are  considered  worthy  of  confidence;  and 
lltat  I  will  persevere  in  my  endeavours  to 
obtain  for  all  the  people  in  Great  Britain 
and  Ireland,  not  disqualified  by  crimes  or 
insanity,  the  elective  franchise,  at  the  age 
•f  twenty-one,  with  free  and  equal  repre- 
sentation, and  annual  parliaments ;  and 
that  I  will  support  the  same  to  the  utmost 
of  my  power,  either  by  moral  or  physical 
strength  as  the  case  may  require :   And  I 
do  further  swear,  that  neither  hopes,  fears, 
rewards,  or  punishments  shall  induce  me 
to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence  against  any 
member  or  members,  collectively  or  iodi- 
Tidoally,  for  any  act  or  expression  done 
or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  so- 
cieties, under  the  punishment  of  death,  to* 
be  inflicted  on  me  by  any  member  or 
members  of  such  societies.    So  help  me 
C^od,  and   keep  me  steadfast.'    Which 
oath  or  obliaation  dhl  thus  purport  or  in- 
tend to  bind  the  persons  taking  the  same 
to  commit  treason,  by  effecting  by  physi- 
cal force  the  subversion  of  the  established 
government,  laws,   and   constitution  'of 
diis  kingdom.    And,  more  particularly, 
you,  the  said  William  Edgar  and  John 
Aeitb,  did,  upon  the  1st  day  of  January 
181 7»  or  on  one  or  other  of  the  days  of 
thai  month,  or  of  December  immediately 
precedittg,   or  of  February  immediately 
following,  at  a  secret  meeting  held  for 
that  and  other  unlawful  purposes,  in  the 
House  of  WiUiam  Leggat,  change^keeper 
in  King-street,  Tradeston,  in  the  vicinity 
of  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or 
in  the  immediate  vicinity  thereof,  both 
and  each,  or  one  or  other  of  you,  widcedly,. 
maliciously,  and  traitorously  administer, 
or  cause  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid  or 
assist  at'the  administering  an  oath  or  ob- 
ligation in  the  terms  above  set  forth,  or  to 
tiie  same  purport,  to  Peter  Gibson,  John 
M^Lauchuune,  Jcihn  Campbell,  atid  Hugh 
DieksQo^  all  presept   prisoners   in  the 
Castle  of  Edinbofgh ;  as  also  to  James 
M'£wAn,  now  or  lately.  caTding-^naster  at 
Hamphiies  Mill,  Gqrhals  of  Glasgow^  and 
ll*Dowal  Pale  or  Poat,  bow  or  lately 
weaver  in  PiacadAUf  Mtreet,  Anderston,  in 
the  vimnilgrofiGlaMcrw,  wfai»,  oonsvious 
of  tbdr  j^t-iia ne 'pettBMS,  lune  ab- 
fmmA&km^  ladL:ib«n4iWfi» ;  aa  abo  to 


John  Connelton,  now  or  lately  cotton- 
spinner  in  Calton  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one 
or  other  of  them,  and  to  other  persons,, 
whose  names  are  to  the  prosecutor  un- 
knojvD,  the  said  oath  or  ooligation,  thus 
binding,  or  purporting  to  bind  the  per- 
sons tsStiog  the  same  to  commit  treason,, 
as  said  is.    (2.)  And  further  you,  the  said 
Wifliam  £dgar  and  John  Keith,  did,  upon 
the  4th  day  of  January,  1817,  or  on  one 
or  other  of  the  days  of  that  mouth,  or  of 
December  immediately  preceding,  or  of 
February  immediately,  follpwing,  at  the 
house    of  Neill    Munn,  innkeeper  and 
stabler,    in  Ingram-street,    Glasgow,  or 
elsewhere  at  QlasgAw,  or  in  ihe  imme- 
diate vicinity  thereof,  both  and  each,  or 
one  or  other  of  you,  wickedly,   malici- 
ously, and  traitorously  administer,  or  cause 
to  be  administered,  or  did  aid  or  assist  at 
the  administering  an  oath  or  obligation  in 
the  terms  above  set  forth,  or  to  the  iaroe 
purport,  to  the  said  Peter  Gibson,  John 
M'Lauchlane,  John  Campbell,  Hugh  Dick- 
son, M'Dowal  Pate,,  or  Peat,  and  James 
M'Ewan ;   as  also  to  James  Hood,  An- 
drew Somerville,^  John,  Buchannan,  an^ 
James  Robertson,  all  present  prisoners  ill 
the  Tolbooth  of  Glasgow,,  or  to  one  w 
other  of  them,  and  to  olber  persons,  whose 
names  are  to  the  prosecutor,  unknown^ 
the  said  oath  or  obligation  thus  binding,, 
or  purporting  to  bind,  the  persons  taking 
the  same  to  commit  treason,  as  said  is. 
And  you  the  said  WiUiam  Edgar  having 
been    apprehended    and    t^ken.  before 
Daniel  Hamilton,  esquire,  one  of  the 
sheriffs-substitute  of  Laaaikshire^  did,  in 
his  presence  at  Glasgow,  on  the  6th  day 
.  of  March,  1817,  emit  and  subscribe  a  de- 
claration ;  and  having  been  taken  before 
Robert  Hamilton,  esquire.  Sheriff-depute 
of  Lanarkahirsy  you  did,  in  his  presence^ 
at  Glasgow,  upon  the  7th  and  8lh  days  «f 
March,  1817,  emit  and  subscribe  two  se- 
veral   declarations :    And  you   the  sai^ 
John  Keith  having  been  apprehended,  and 
taken  before  the  said  Robert  Hamilton, 
esquire,  did,  in  his  presence,  at  Glasgow, 
on  the  6th  and  7th  days  of  Biareh^  1817,. 
emit  and  subscribe  two  seveiral  declara- 
tions :  All  which  declaratioas,  beipg  to 
be  used  in  evidence  against  each  of  ^<m 
respectively,  will  be  lodged  in  due  Ume 
in  the  hands  of  the  Clerk  of  the  High 
Court  of   Justiciary,   before  which  yon 
are   to  be  tried,   that   you    nay^have 
an  opportunity^  seeins  the.samt*    At 
least,  times,  and  places  foke^aid,  the  said 
oath  or  aogagement,  or  au  oath  or  en* 
gagement    to  the   saoie   nnipost^  was 
wickedly,  malicionly,  4m  traitoaoualy 
admiaiateied,  or  caused  to  be  atoiiiia-> 
tend;    and  aoae  pmene  did  -M    or 
assist  at  the  admiaistexkig  theraof^  and 
you  the  said  William  E^^pnr  and, Jolm 
"ntilii '  ttfc./kfltfi  and:satrfi-  ei  '4Hie    %^ 


ItfM 


fir  AAmmttniiig  unbmfiil  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


CISO 


trther  off  jfOQj  piiKy  dMrao^  ^tdrs  or 
aetoiv  or  art  «nd  part.  All  which  or 
paft  thereof,  being  fouod  proren  by  the 
venKct  of  an  assize,  before  the  Lord  Jas- 
taco  Geaeia],  the  Lord  Justice  Clerk,  and 
Lords  Commissioiiers  of  Justiciary,  yon 
the  raid  WiHiam  Edgar  and  John  Keidi 
ongkt  to  be  punished  widi  the  pains  of 
lair,  to  deter  others  from  committing  the 
iifce  Climes  in  all  time  coming." 

<'  H.  Hon  Deummovh,  A.  D." 

UST  OF  WITNESS£8. 

t.  lUerf  EamiUonf  Esq.  aheriff-depute  ^f 

«.  Doaiel  BmuitoH,  Esq.  one  of  the  sherifb- 

substitute  of  Lanarkriiire. 
:3.  Darnel  M'Catium,  clerk  ta  John  Dl?ysdale, 

dienff-clerk  of  LanaikAire. 
4k  Maifkem  Bunu^  derk  to  George  Salmond, 

pracorator-fiseal  of  Lanarkshire. 
5.  Joim  LbMcj  eleik  to  the  said  John  Diys- 

dak. 
«.  Jatipk  Rod,  writer  in  Gkisgow. 

7.  Mtmtkr  Caldtry  6bjeriff>offioer  in  Glas* 

gow. 

8.  Jama  Thornton,  clerk  to  the  eaid  John 

Drysdale. 

9.  Jkrmmkr    £baUa%    cfaange^eepery    Old 

Wynd'Of  Glasgow. 

10.  Marion  MPLarmj  or  M'LaohHm,  now  or 

lately  servant  te  die  said  Alexander 
Honter. 

11.  Jokn  Robartumj  innkeeper  and  stabler.  Gal. 

lowgate  Glasgow. 
18.  Jgne9  CampbeU,  wi£»  of  Thomas  Dow, 
steam-boiler  maker  and  smith  at  Gird- 
wood  and  Company's  foundry  in  Hutch- 
eaontown,  in  the  vicinity  of  Glasgow. 

13.  Jamet  Bentcid,  now  or  lately  servant  to 

lieill  Munn,  innkeeper  and  stabler  iu 
ingiam-street,  Glasgow. 

14.  Atium  Wiliom,  now  or  lately  servant  to  the 

said  Neill  Munn. 

15.  Mattkem  Fnfe,  spirit-dealer  in  Wilson- 

street,  Gfasgoif . 
1«.  Jem  Boyd,  wife  of  the  said  Matthew  Fyfe. 

17.  WilMvm  Li^gn^,  change-keeper^  in  King- 

street,  comer  of  Centre-street,  Trades- 
ton,  in  the  vicinity  of  Glasgow. 

18.  -EBtfA  Dichony  present  prisoner  in   the 

Castle  of  Edinburgh. 

19.  PUer  GtUon^  present  prisoner  there. 

^30.  Join  M^Limcklanef  present  prisoner  there. 
m.  WUtiam  Simmon^  present  prisoner  there. 
33.  ioiMef  Bttody  present  prisoner  in  the  Tol- 

booth  of  Glasgow. 
33.  Jofai  CampheU^  present  prisoner  in  the 

castle  of  Edinmirgli. 
M.  ThmoM  AidoiTy  present  prisoner  there. 
H.  HoM£  Druicmovd^  a.  D. 


UST  OP   ASSIZE. 

County  cf  Edmburgk. 
Ctttmet  Sbott,  of  Ballemo. 


Bidtard  WooU^  of  WUf^use. 


Wkiie,  tobacconist  in  Dalkeith. 
Bobert  lAftt,  baker  there. 
Joftft  Woody  merchant  there. 
John  Brawny  farmer,  Carrington. 
Andrew  Johrutou,  farmer,  Primrose-barns. 

Counfy  of  Haddington, 

William  ilicAeson,  junior,  of  Drummore« 
John  Sonunervdl  of  Moreham. 
WUliam  Hcq/,  farmer,  Ilowden. 
John  Brodiey  farmer.  West  Fenton. 
Bobert  Uopey  farmer,  Feuton. 

County  of  UnUlhgow, 
WUliam  Gien  of  Mains. 
William  Dawion,  younger,  Bonnytoun. 
John  Trotter y  farmer  at  Stacks. 
^bert  Taylor,  residing  at  Blackness. 
George  TumbuU,  farmer  at  Northbank. 

Cify  of  Edinburgh. 

Robert  FraseTy  jeweller  in  Edinbuigb. 
lliomas  Bichardton,  merchant^tailor  there. 
IXivt^  Whitelawy  watdi^maker  there. 
Peter  Feddie,  trunk-maker  there. 
William  Trottery  upholsterer  there. 
Alexander  BuueUy  coach- maker  there. 
John  Inverarity,  upholstcret  there. 
George  Yule,  mercha**  there. 
Alexander  Aintlie,  saddler  there* 
John  Steel,  confectioner  there. 
James  Innet,  gunsmith  there. 
Daniel  Forrest,  hosier  there.  , 

Peter  SawerSy  saddler  there. 
Creorge  Hunter,  merchant  there, 
William  Boss,  tailor  there. 
Charles  McLean,  draper  there. 
John  Laing,  saddler  there. 
John  Mcpherson,  tailor  there. 
Francis  Davutson,  confectioner  there. 
William  Cooper,  boot-maker  there. 
William  Dumbrecky  hotel-keeper  there. 

ToumqfLeith, 

John  3iPKemiey  merchant  in  Leith.  ^ 

Archibald  Cleghom,  corn-merchant  there. 
Thomas  Mortouy  ship-builder  there. 
Robertson  Paterson,  painter  there. 
Charles  Bobertson,  merchant  tliere. 
John  Sanders,  agent  there. 
JoAit  Glover,  wright  there. 

An.  Gillies. 

d.  montpevvt. 

David  Douglas* 
L»rd  Advocate, — From  certain  circumstan- 
ces, I  find  it  proper  to  move  the  Court  to 
desert  the  diet  against  John  Keith  pro  loco  et 
tempore.  He  will  therefore  be  committed  to 
prison  upon  a  new  warrant. 

[This  motion  was  accordingly  agreed  to.] 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — ^William  Edgar,  what 
do  you  say  to  this  indictment? — ^Are  you 
^uilt^  or  not  guilty  of  the  charges  contained 
in  it^ 

WiUiam  Edgar, — ^Not  guilty,  my  I/>rd. 

Mr.  CSra»i^(Wfi« — ^I  am  of  Qounsel  in  this  caae 


1511       ^  GEORGE  III. 

for  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  Hie  indictmeot, 
which  your  Lordships  have  jtiBt  heard  read, 
charges  the  prisoner  with  a  capital  offence, 
that  of  administering  an  oath  purporting  or 
intending  to  bind  the  takers  to  oommit  the 
crime  of  treason. 

My  lords,  this  is  not  a  point  of  dittay  re- 
cognized by  the  ancient  and  common  law  of 
Scotland;  neither  the  nature  of  the  offence 
itself,  nor  the  manner  in  which  it  is  to  be 
charged,  is  pointed  out  by  any  precedents  or 
authorities  familiar  to  your  Lordships.  It  is 
an  offence  recently  introdnced  by  a  special 
jBtatute ;  and,  so  far  as  I  know,  no  trials  havft 
taken  plape  hitherto  upon  that  statute  in  Scot-- 
land,  acdordinir  to  your  forms. 

It  will  bjB  admitted,  that  this  crime  is  of  a 
nature  peculiarly  deUcate.  The  life  of  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar  may  depend  on  Che  con- 
struction to  be  put  on  words  alone,  without 
reference  jto  overt  acts  by  which  they  may 
receive  a  clear  and  unambiguous  interpretation. 
To  administer  an  oath  without  judicial  authority 
is  perhaps  riot  a  very  commendable  prajctice,* 
and  in  a  moral  point  of  view  it  may  sometimes 
be  improper,  as  tending  to  lessen  the  obligation 
4>f  an  oath,  when  thus  applied  to  frivolous 
or  improper  subjects,  o^on  frivolous  and  im- 
proper occasions^  But,  my  loids,  at  the  same 
time,  it  h  not  in  itself  an  illegal  thingf  it 
is  prohibited  by  no  law;  and  I  understand, 
jand  am  well  informed,  that  it  is  a  common 

*  Lord  Coke  says  (3  Inst.  165)  ^  Oaths  that 
have  no  warrant  by  law,  are  rather  nooa  tor- 
nienta  guam  tacramenta;  and  it  is  an  high  con^ 
tempt  to  minister  an  oath  without  warrant  of 
law,  to  be  punished  by  fine  and  imprisonment." 

The  cour^  of  King^  Bench  has  often  repre- 
hended, and  discouraged  as  much  as  possible, 
the  taking  of  voluntary  aflSdavits  by  justices  of 
the  peace,  in  extrajudicial  matters.  In  the 
case  of  Bramah  v.  The — '—Fire  Insurance  Com- 
parui,  Mich,T.  1800,  in  B.  R.  Lord  Kenyoa 
C,  J.  said  ^*  He  did  not  know  but  tliat  a  magis- 
trate subjects  himself  to  a  criminal  information 
for  taking  a  voluntary  extrajudicial  affidavit,** 
3  Chetwymtt  Bwm^  529. 

''It  is  much  to  be  questioned,"  says  Mr. 
JuUiee  Bbdatom^  ^  how  far  any  ''  magistrate  is 
justifiable  in  taking  a  voiluntary  affidavit  in 
any  eztn^judicial  matter,  as  is  now  too  frequent 
upon  every  petty  occasion  :  since  it  is  more 
than  possible,  that  hj  such  idle  oaths  a  man 
may  frequently  in  Jiro  contckntut  incur  the 
guilt,  and  at  the  same  time  evade  the  tem- 
poral penalties,  x>f  periuiy."  4  Qmm.  137. 

It  must  be  regretted  that  the  highly  improper 
practice  of  administering  what  the  learned 
commentator  terms''  idle  oaths,*'  should  be  still 
continued  by  any  magiatrates,  notwithstanding 
the  reprehensions  contained  in  those  books 
with  which  ihey  are  generally  8iq>poaed  to  be 
acquainted. 

t  Seethe  preceding  note,  and  the  observa- 
tions of  Le  Blanc  J.  in  EaMi  case,  ant^  Vol. 
10,  p.  1609;. 


Trial  of  WUUamBdgm^ 


[15S 


and  daily  piactice.  It  is  practised  in  many 
associations  and  Maternities;  for  example,  in 
masonic  meetings,  when  there  is  not  the  least 
intention  on  the  part,  either  of  the  persons  who 
administer,  or  of  the  persons  who  taae  the  oaths, 
on  the  one  part  to  impose,  or  on  the  other  to 
undertake  an  unlawful  obligation.  To  make  a 
common  pralctice  of  this  nature  the  ground  of 
a  capital  punishment,  when  the  guilt  or  inno- 
cence of  the  act  depends  on  the  interpretation 
of  the  mere  words  used,  may  appear  not  per^- 
haps  altogether  in  unison  with  the  mild  and 
equitable  spirit  of  British  jurisprudence.  Your 
lordsbqis  are  well  acquainted  with  tbe  statnte 
1.  M^ry,  chap.  Ist,  which  swept  away  ficom 
the  law  that  mass  of  constructive  treasons  by 
which  it  had  been  previously  polluted— a  stai 
tnte  hdd  by  the  natu>n  at  die  time  it  was  en- 
acted, as  one  of  the  greatest  blessings  ever 
conierred  by  the  legislature,  and  still  looked 
up  to  by  their  posterity  vrith  admiration  and 
gralitade.  Though  constnietive  treason  was 
tnus  abolished,  yet  the  statute  upon  whidi  the 

Sresent  indictment  is  founded  tends  to  intro- 
mee  a  capital  felony,  wbiah,  though  not  pi^ 
nished  as  treason,  is  yet  punished  with  death, 
the  n^ifliiMi  sifpJidMn  of  the  law. 

This  statute  was  no  doubt  passed  at  a  time 
when  banda  of  armed  men  were  committing 
evey  species  of  atrocity,   when    they  were 
buminr,   robbing,  and    murdering,   and   in 
particular  when  they  were.compellii^  persons 
by  force  to  swear  oaths,  unquestionably  and 
clearly  imposing   an    oblisation   to   oommit 
felonies.*    In  this  state  of  things,  a  speedy 
and  efficacious  remedy  was  necessary ;   and 
no  doubt  this  statute  was  passed  with  Uie  best 
intentions,  and  may  have  been  productive  of  the 
most  salutary  consequences.    All  &is  being 
avowed,  yet.considmd  as  a  standing  rale, 
incorporated  in  the  criminal  law  of  Scotland, 
and  applied  to  other  occasions  than  those 
contemplated  by  the  legislature,  it  was  not  per** 
haps  penned  with  all  .the  caution  requisite, 
and  may  involve  principles  which  it  vroiild  not 
be  very  safe  to  admit  permanently  into  our 
system  of  jurisprudence.    But  it  is  not  your 
lordships  province  to  judge  of  the  merits  of 
the  enactment,  and  far  less  am  I  entitled  to 
pronounce  an  opinion  upon  diat  subject.  -  It 
makes  part  of  the  statute  law  of  Scotland,  and 
that  is  enough.    But  althou|^  I  am  not  enti- 
tled to  inquire  into  the  expediency  of  the  law, 
it  is  my  right,  and  it  is  my  duty,  to  inquire  in 
what  manner  the  words  of  it  stnU  be  constni-r 
ed — ^in  what  manner,  being  part  of  the  erimi* 
nal  law  of  Scotland,  it  shall  be  applied  and 
accommodated  to  our  form  of  juoidal  pro* 
ceedings.     And,   after  folly  considering  the 
subject  in  this  more  limited  view,   I  trust 
I  shall  be  able  to  satisfy  your  lordships  that 
the  libel  in  this  case  is  not  relevant,  according 
to  the  principles  of  the  criminal  law  of  Scot- 

*  See  the  debate  in  the  House  of  Commons 
on  the  motion  for  the  introduction  of  thia  ata^ 
tute  33  Hans,  Farl.  Ctfb.  31. 


1531 


^  AMmtkring  utJtu^Oalki. 


iLD.  1817. 


tia4 


land.  This  is  a  subject  of  the  nlDMNit  impor- 
taoce,  and  tot  iririch  the  attention  of  your 
lordships  is  now  most  earnestly  requested. 

In  tliis  indictment  the  mijor  proposition 
sets  fiHtfa,  that,  **  Albeit,  by  an  act  passed  in  the 
fifty-second  year  of  his  present  Majesty's  reign 
intimled,  'An  act  to  render  more  effectual  an 
act  pused  in  the  tbirty-seTenth  year  of  his 
present  Msjes^,  for  prerentinff  the  administer- 
mg  or  taking  unlawml  oaths,^  it  is,  inUr  aUOf 
enacted,  l^at  every  person  who  shall,  in 
any  aaaoier  or  form  whatsoever,  administer, 
or  canse  to  be  administered,  or  be  aiding  or 
MSisling  at  the  administering  of  any  oath  or 
engagesBcnt,  pmrporting  er  iotendiog  to  bind 
the  peiaoo  tBiting  the  same  to  ooo&mit  any 
treason  -or  murder,  or  any  felony  punishable 
hj  law  with  death,  shall,  on  oonviction  thereof 
by  doe-  eonrse  of  law,  be  adjudged  guilty  of 
tdofo^j  and  sufief  death  as  a  felon,  witbout 
benefit  of  dergy/"  There  are  then  other 
Manses  of  the  statute  recited  in  this  major  pro- 
poaitioD. 

1  have  no  objections  to  make  to  the  migor 
|NopQsition  of  this  indictment.  It  is  oorrect 
SB  ledtiBg  the  elanse  of  the  act  eonstituting 
the  crime  sriiieh  is  now  to  be  tried;  and, 
theiefofe,  in  oonsideiing  this  proposition,  the 
«iily  thii^  to  be  attended  to  is,  toe  nature  of 
the  crime  which'  is  here  stated  to  be  punish- 
able with  death.  It  is  the  administering  an 
«ath,  **  purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the 
penon  taking  the  same  to  commit  treason  or 
WBider,  or  any  folonjr  punishable  with  death.'' 

Upon  readmg  this  clause,  your  Lordships 
wiU  be  satisfied,  that  it  is  not  sufficient  to  con- 
stitnCe  this  crime  that  an  oatb  was  adminis- 
teredr— it  is  not  suflBdent  that  the  person 
administering  that  oath  had  criminal  intentions 
at  the  time— or  that  he  was  engaged  at  the 
time  in  criminal  practices — ^it  is  not  enough 
that  the  person  who  takes  the  oath  intends  to 
eommit,  or  is  in  the  eourM  of  committing 
tfiminal  practices.  All  that  is  insufficient  to 
constitute  the  crime  here  set  forth.  It  is  ne- 
cessary,—it  is  the  essence  of  the  crime, — ^that 
the  oiik  administered  shall  itself  purport 
or  intend  to  bind  the  taker  to  commit  the 
crimes  specified  in  the  statute*  It  is  quite 
possible  that  two  persons  may  be  actually  en- 
gaged in  committing  the  crime  of  treason,  and 
wlule  thus  occupied,  that  one  of  them,  with  a 
view  of  practisiiig  a  deceit  on  those  who  were 
present^  and  of  ensnaring  them  into  the  traitor- 
ous conspiracy,  should  administer  an  oath  to 
his  aaaocmte,  under  the  pretence  of  binding 
him  lo  commit  the  treason.  But  if  that  oath 
did  not  in  ftct  impose  the  obligation,  it  could 
not  wanrnnt  a  oonvictioii  under  this  statute. 
It  mt^t  be  an  orert  act  of  treason,  and  all 
lhe.persons  present,  be  who  administered  the 
eath,  he  who  took  the  oath,  and  the  spectators, 
might  be  punishable  as  traitors,  yet  still  an 
indictment  under  thepresent  statute  could  reach 
■oue  of  them  ;  for  to  make  the  statute  apply, 
it  is  efssntial  dmt  the  oath  administered  pur- 
ports or  iateiKU  to  bind  the  patty  taking  it  io 


commit  treason  or  feloOT.  An  oath  not  con* 
taining  that  obligation,  however  nefarious  and 
detestable  in-  itself,  may  be  the  ground  of  a 
different  prosecution,  but  it  cannot  be  the 
ground  of  the  charge  now  before  your  lord- 
ships. All  this  is  too  dear  to  require  any 
illustration ;  it  must  be  manifest  to  every  one 
who  reads  Uie  words  of  the  statute. 

Having  said  thus  much  on  the  major  pro- 
position of  the  indictment,  we  now  come  to 
consider  the  minor  proposition.  Here,  as  in 
other  cases,  there  axe  two  subjects  of  inquiry ; 
1st,  Whether  the  fiicts  set  forth  in  the  minor 
amount  to  the  charge  in  the  major?  and,  2nd, 
Supposing  that  they  do,  whether  they  are  spe- 
dned  with  that  precision  and  minuteness  whidi 
are  required,  by  the  law  of  Scotland,  to  oonsti- 
tttte  a  relevant  indictment  ? 

The  minor  begins  in  these  terms:  '^Yet 
true  it  is  and  of  verity,  that  you,  the  said 
William  Edgar  and  John  Kdtb,  are  boUi  and 
each,  or  one  or  other  of  you,  guilty  of  the  said 
crimes,  or  of  one  or  more  of  them,  actors  or 
actor,  or  art  and  part :  In  so  far  as  yon,  the 
said  William  Edgar  and  John  Kdth,  having, 
at  Glasgow,  and  in  the  vidnity  thereof,  in  the 
course  of  Uie  months  of  November  and  De* 
cember  1616,  and  of  January  and  February 
1817,  wickedly,  malidously,  and  traitorous^ 
conspired  and  agreed,  with  other  evil-disposed 
persons,  to  break  and  disturb  the  public  peace, 
to  change,  subvert,  and  overthrow  the  govern- 
ment, uul  to  ezdte,  move,  and  raise  insur- 
rection and  rebdlion,  and  espedally  to  hold 
and  attend  secret  meetings  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  annual  iiarliaments  and  universal 
sufirage,  by  unlawnd  and  vident  means,  did, 
then  and  there,  both  and  each,  or  one  or  other 
of  you,  wickedly,  matidously,  and  traitorously, 
administer,  or  cause  to  be  administered,  or 
did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administeiin|^  to  a 
great  number  of  persons,  an  oath'  or  engage- 
ment, or  an  obbgation  in  the  nature  of  an 
oath,  in  the  following  terms,  or  to  the  follow- 
ing purport." — And  then  the  words  of  the  oath 
are  recited. — *^  In  awfol  presence  of  God,  I, 
A  B,  do  vduntarily  swear,  That  I  will  per- 
severe in  my  endeavouring  to  form  a  brotner- 
hood  of  affection  amongst  Britons  of  every  de- 
scription, who  are  considered  worthy  of  con- 
fidence ;  and  that  I  will  persevere  in  my  en* 
deavours  to  obtain  for  all  the  people  in  Great 
^tain  and  Ireland,  not  disqualified  by  crimes 
or  insanity,  the  dective  franchise,  at  the  age 
of  twenty-one,  with  free  and  eqinU  represen- 
tation, and  annud  pariiaments;  and  that  I 
will  support  the  same  to  the  utmost  of  mv 
power,  either  by  moral  or  physical  strength 
as  the  case  may  require:  AndJL  do  further 
swear,  that  ndtber  hopes,  foars,*  rewards,  or 
punishments,  shall  induce  me  to  inform  on, 
or  give  evidence  against,  anv  member  or  mem- 
ben,  collectively  or  individudlyy  for  any  act 
or  expression  done  or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this 
•or  simikr  societies,  under  the  punislunent  of 
deadi,  to  be  inflicted  on  me  by  any  member 
or  members  of  such  societies.    So  bdp  me 


16S) 


57  CBOBOE  IIL 


Im  theiiidiolmeBt»  thai  tids  oath,  «r  bI  ^mm 
mn  '••Al  af  tli«  8MI16  farpofl^  i«u  ftdiiiiiri»* 
4«re4. 

li  is  here  Mt  fitrtby  thattW  prinMr  at  the 
bar  WW  is  the  couie  of  coomiiCtia^  certain 
Mnoastriaie^  ISraBecrhaa^  your  lovAsMj^ 
will  obserra^  an  aot  kid  aa  a  aabatantiva 
chagga  a^ui  tha  piiaaatr;  and  it  it  tiapos- 
aiUa  tittt  tkay  ihouid  ba  to  laid  in  this  indict, 
■leal,  kft  a  prisMiar  oaa  ba  chirged  with  no- 
ikiBf  Ml  die  ntmay  but  wiuit  anounta  to  the 
ariaat  laid  in  tha  aaajor  prapoiition«  I(  is 
aaid,  that  tba  mitosiar  lunriaf  cositDilted  tbota 
•ananaty  did  adamitter  Ihe  oath.  But  thote 
cnnes  are  noH  hiid  with  a  view  to  iniict  pa* 
«iahBftettt  fla  bin  fof  then,  though  peibapt 
they  are  stated  in  motkm  probtiihm  of  another 
critne.  it  is  inooaspetent  in  the  minor  propo- 
rtion of  the  iodietmeBt  to  say  that  the  ptisoner 
at  gnilty  of  a  felony  aot  charged  in  the  nftjoty 
ia  Older  to  pnnish  him  for  that  felony.  Tha 
^haiye  in  thn  indictmeBt  is  for  administering 
ma  nnlawfol  oath ;  and  wbateTer  facts  comiect- 
jed  with  a  eeparate  criase  are  set  forth  in  the 
aainor  only,  they  make  no  part  of  the  charge 
•against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar. 

I  trust  I  shaH  aftarwaids  show,  thbugh  it  is 
fiat  at  preaent  the  time  to  make  inqoiry  into 
IhiSy  that  however  atroctoos  the  crimes  here 
Jiffirmed  to  have  been  committed  by  the  pri^ 
•aoner  may  be,  as  they  are  in  UicmselTCs  totally 
iffeloTant  to  infer  the  crime  with  which  he  is 
vaaHy  charged,  so  at  the  same  time  it  is  in- 
coaspelenty  according  to  the  law  of  Scotland, 
4o  bring  any  pioaf  of  those  crimes.  This  I 
jhall  postpone  for  after«oensideralioa,  pro- 
«aeding,  in  the  mean  tinie,  to  consider  the 
oath  wideh  was  administered,  which  is  said  to 
purport  an  oUigalion  on  tha  taker  to  ootnnit 
treason. 

Tha  oath  is  ta  tbese  words  >^*  In  awfol 
oreaenae  of  God,  I,  A  B,  doToluatarify  ^wear, 
That  I  will  persevere  in  my  endcaTouriag  to 
form  a  brotherhood  of  afihction  amongst  Britons 
.of  every  daaeriptiom,  who  are  considered 
•worthy  of  confidence;  and  that  I  will  per- 
aevare  in  my  endeavonrt  to  obtain  for  all  the 
people  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  not  dis- 
anaiified  by  Crimea  or  insaai^,  the  cibeotive 
vancbise,  at  the  age  of  tweatr^one,  with  free 
and  equal  representation,  and  annnal  pariia* 
manls ;  and  that  I  wiH  support  the  same  to 
te  atmest  of  my  power,  hither  by  moral  or 
physical  strength^  as  die  caae  mar  reqaiiv: 
And  I  do  further  swear,  that  neither  hopes, 
foata,  lawanfc,  or  punishments,  shall  induoe 
me  to  inform  on,  or  give  andenoe  against,  an^ 
momber  ot  mcftiben,  coHeotively  or  iiMli«». 
dually,  for  any  aet  or  evpression  done  or  made, 
.ia  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  societies,  nnde^ 
-the  panishauiat  of  deaith,  to  be  iniioted  on  nne 
by  any  member  or  members  of  aueh  societies. 
So  help  me  G«d,  and  ke«p  me  stedfast/'«M. 
Then  it  is  tfl|id,  ^  Which  oath  or  oiligatioa 
did  thnapwpart  w  iadend  to  band  the  persona 
tafcitg  iio^ma  m  aottmit  maton^  by  mctiag 


TfUffmOminSdg^ 


Lisa 


by  phjnieal  force  flie  sulM<Mion  of  the  estaA>- 
Kshod  igov9mmm%,  laws,  and  oonstitation  of 
this  kingdom." 

Bert  the  prosecutor  recites  the  oath,  atad 
aajia  that  it  purports  an  <Mgation  on  die  pter- 
son  takiag  it  to  commit  treason,  by  effecting 
by  physical  fotoe  the  snbvorsion  of  the  estab- 
lished goremment,  laws,  and  conslituftioa  of 
this  kiagdom*  Bnt  it  is  not  enough  that  the 
piosecutor  says  it  has  that  purport.  If,  on 
eondidering  the  oath  itself,  your  lordshipa  are 
of  opinion  that  it  does  not  imply  what  tho 
prosecutor  alleges,  his  tnere  avermeat  that  it 
ia  an  oadi  of  a  certain  purport  will  not  mako 
it  so ;  and  he  is  wot  entitled  to  have  that 
question  sent  to  the  jury,  for  that  would  bo 
taking  from  the  Court  the  question  as  to  tho 
reloTancy  of  the  indictment. 

Suppose  in  an  indictment  for  perjury,  tha 
prosecutor,  after  allegibg  in  general  terms  that 
this  spedftc  offeiice  has  beeb  committed,  pro- 
eeeds  ix^  the  minor  proposition  to  give  the  do* 
position  of  the  prisoner  in  detail,  and  aAer« 
wards  to  contrast  it  with  what  be  alleges  to  be 
the  troth,  asserting  that  there  is  such  a  manifest 
discrepancy  as  necessarily  implies  the'  com^ 
missioa  of  the  crime  chai^g^ — still  his  mem 
assertion  on  this  snUect  will  not  be  sufficient ; 
and  if  the  Court  nail  be  satisfied,  on  com- 
paring the  alleged  truth  with  the  alleged  felse* 
nood,  that  there  is  not  an  absolute  contra^ 
diction  between  them;  in  other  words,  that 
what  the  prisoner  has  sworn  may  be  recon- 
ciled with  what  the  posecutor  says  he  ought 
to  have  sworn,  you  will  not  hold  the  indict- 
ment to  be  relevant,  nor  send  the  charge  to  a 
jnry  to  be  tried.  That  being  the  case,  if  your 
lordships,  on  reading  thb  oath,  be  of  opinion^ 
that  it  does  not  purport  what  the  public  pro* 
seeutor  says  it.parpoiu^  then  I  say  this  ia  an 
irrelevant  libel. 

It  is  true  that,  besidet  the  word  ^  purport^ 
iBg,**  there  is  aaetber  word  used  here,  **  in<* 
tending.'^  What  is  the  signification  of  tho 
word  iniendiMg  I  ^hall  afterwards  consider,  and 
it  is  of  material  importance  to  this  case ;  bnt 
let  us  see,  in  the  &rst  place,  what  is  the  signi^ 
fication  of  the  term  purport.  This  term,  aa 
every  body  knows,  is  applied  to  deaote  the 
meaning  of  words  as  gathered  irom  the  word9 
themselvea — ^the  meaning  as  eipreued  in  eon-« 
tradistinotion  to  the  meaning  which  may  bo 
mmfechutd  from  extrinsic  feels  or  circam- 
siances.  Look  then  at  the  words  of  the  bath, 
and  see  if  it  purports  what  the  prosecutor  saya 
it  does.  No  man  who  reads  it  can  say  so. 
The  words  of  the  oath  are,  **  1  wiH  parsevero 
in  my  endeavouring  to  form  a  brocherhood  of 
aCBOtion  amongst  Britons  of  every  description, 
vfho  are  consuiered  worthy  of'  confidence.** 
Nobody  will  pretend  to  say  that  there  iaan 
obUaation  to  commit  treason  here.  There  ia 
aa  obligation  to  form  a  brotherhood  of  affeo- 
tioa.  AH  the  subjects  of  this  ookmtry  are 
btotfaers ;  and  it  is  boooming  that  they  shoaM 
dwell  together  in  unity.  Inis  cannot  pwrpoit 
any  thing  to  b»  fimi  thaiA  ia  iaipt^r.'  Th^ 


457-1 


Jor  AJmmUtsriMg  vmUi^^A  Oaths* 


A.  D.  1617. 


LIM 


o^  then  gpM  on,  "  That  I  will  perstv«ra  in 
my  end^^iTcmn  to  obuia  for  «U  the  [^opl«  oif 
Orest  BitMa  tnd  Ireland,  not  disqiu^ed  by 
criiaes  or  iosaat^^  tlie  elective  firamchise^  et 
the  age  of  twentT-ODe,  with  free  and  equal  le- 
pfBfentalioD,  and  aoaual  padiaBMita."  There 
are  few  penons  at  preient,  who  are  qua^ified^ 
^iiher  horn  their  natural  paUg  or  inforMMOioOy 
tp  jodge  of  subjecli  of  this  kind,  who  witt  b» 
of  opiaioii  that  either  anaoal  pariiamenti  or 
VDwersal  saffrage  would  be  of  adrvaotage  tp  the 
ipbabitaQfa  of  this  countiy,  or  would  ooaduoa 
tio  aay  thing  else  than  anarchy  in  the  fi^  in- 
stance, and  deapotism  in  the  eod*  9ulr 
although  this  be  true,,  it  ia  well  known  to 
your  lordships,  that  it  ia  the  piivilege  of  every 
inbject  in  this  oountiy,  to  fonn  hia  own  opinioo 
on  aobjects  of  a  poUtieal  nature;  and.haviiig 
formed  his  opiaion,  he  may  make  u^e  of  law* 
fol  means  to  have  such  dianges  produeed  in 
the  ooostitntion  or  goveranent  of  the  cooqtry 
%sbe  may  think  expedient.  The  lagi^Utare 
Ipi^at  diment  tiqses  alleied  th(»  duration  of 
padiament  and  the.  mode  of  suffrage ;  and  if 
ai^  pmoQ  believes  that  annual  parUaments 
and  universal  txifftt^  would  be  of  benefit  to 
the  countiy,  it  ia  no  crime  to  use  lawful  en- 
d«.vours  to  obtain  these  object^  which  can 
only  be  obtained  lawfully  by  ap  act  of  thi» 
British  parliament  itself:;  and  you  know»  tha^ 
petitioos  ibr  such  objecls  ve  daily  presented 
la.pvliam^ot,  and  daily  received. 

It  is  said  in  the  oath,  "  I  will  penevere"  in 
^lese  endeavours.  If  the  endeavours  are  law*- 
&1,  the  perseveriog  in:  them  is  np  orime.at  all« 
It.  is  not  said  iu  the  oath^  or  in  a^y  part  of  th^ 
indictaBent,  that  the  prisoner  was  engaged  in 
ualawfiil  prqeots  for  these,  purposes.  It  is 
ssid,  indeed^  iu  the  indictment,,  that  the  peD* 
sons  who  administered  the  oatfi  were  engaged 
in  a  tMflsonaible  cpaipiraqr;  hut  there  is^no 
^>ecificatioii.  of  circjamstaneas  to  evinee  tha 
potoiMf^s  a^ession  to  this.  conspi'acj> .  Df>r  if 
t^  effence  of  oonspin^y  apy  part  of  the  sub- 
stantive charge  made  a^^nst  him  in  the  in* 
dielBsant.  That  being  th^  case,  tbeoa^i  or 
obligation  to  endeaivour  to  obtain  annual  paiv 
Kanaants  and  univeisel  suirage,  is:an  o)>Hg%> 
tioo  in  itself  perfectly  inooeePlt.  Your  lei4r 
ships  will  notsav  that  these  eodaavouts  ata 
vnkvwfiU,  nor  witl  you  impute  iniptoper  moy 
tives  to  the  pa^  inproseeutiii^  them,  for  yen 
are  not  antkorised  to  make  such  an  in^dr 
Bient.  yfbm  arpqtsenjpromisos  to  use  eriN^ 
eadeaflroof  to  aoeen^ish  Vk  objeet,  the  gene- 
ality  of  this  ezpinssion  vnll  oeivar  ciotend  it 
to  uola^«f«l  endeavouvs-^it  west  he  .construed 
with  the  comaan  and  necassaiy  limsiatian^ 
Ihat  he  wiUiose  evaiy  endfnvewr.wbieh  tefnay 
hmUOfVH*  Ifthis,pi»nciple.of4)QBStinctiaD 
ware  n9t«dQp4ed#  the  onh  of  jal^wmlion  itsalf 
auglit  bnem^arted  intn  wa  ohiigalian  to 
MnmittmesaA.  "•  I  do  Mhft%  .proaiiM,  it 
fJb»  nii^oaief  mjfpovNBT^  u^/mppoit,  wMnnytain^ 
^M-tSntod^MiisiimMiontof Aa Oa^^  fnup 

it  by  lawfid  mmm    l»if«itjVri 


The  oath  in  the  indietmeat  then  goon  on  tfl 
sqy,  ''  that  I  will  support  ik^taam  to.the  ^tmcil 
of  my  power,  either  by  moral  or  physicfyi 
strength,  as  the  case  may  aai|niBe/*    Support 
wbatr    UereisanainbifguitymtheoMth;  audi 
an  ambiguUy  which  shews  how  hamgrUms  it  in 
to  admit  constructive  treasons  reared  14ms 
words  uttered  by  persona  not  critically  an* 
quaiated  with  the  imperfect  infltmment  «f 
language.    Interpret  this  passage  any  wi^  yon 
ehusa»  i^  will  not  anUHUit  to  any  thing  criminaU 
Even  supposing  that  it  binds  the  party  takiM 
the  oath  to*obtain  the  olyects  which:aie  apedted 
ipMtrbymoralioQphvsicalibro^whatisthe  isMltl 
it  is,  that  lasrliil  omaou  am  to  be  ohtainsd  ^ 
lawful  measures.    No  person  cnn  he  hUmen 
£or  exerting  his    utmost!  effoKs  undnr  tel 
limitation^    Or  take  the  only  other  oonstnao* 
tion  which  can  be  putiupon  this  clawa<of  tiki 
oath,  and  auf)pofin;tha  party  to  jwenr^  that  tag 
will  siipport  annual  parliamems  and  unmemal 
suffuge  tp  the  utnumt  of  his  pownr,  mknaMnii 
0^$  ihall  W  2ncn  aklmmdi  that  he  wiU  wm 
his  best endeaivoum  tp^continua  and.  perpetuata 
these  iroaginaiy.  bl^mipgp,  when  Aaiy  ahatt  onon 
have  been  psoonred  for  theceuntiy;    lathm 
an  unkwiful  obligation?    licevtmnlyia  imt4 
If  lawfol  d^cla  are  obtained  in  a  lawfnl 
mnnner,  then,  it  is  the  dnty  of  gnod  mbjanli 
to  support  and  continue  them*    So  ihn  whaii» 
ever  construction  you  put  upon  this  clauat<of 
the  <mii>  whether  ^mt  snfipeae  it  tn  relet  to 
anteiiprises  for  obtaining  what  does  not  afarandy 
exists  or  for  suppoiting  imptoremania  alW 
th^  shall  ba  .established  bylaw,  H  is  in  eithei 
case  perleotty  jfrioeentt^-With  segflird  to  thn 
Uims  ''  motel  aed.physimi  atmngth,''  Imay 
remark,  a  man  may  support  what  is  lamM 
either  by  the.one«oa  the  othet^  and  yet  baAree 
Irem  blame.    The  indindnala  attempting  tn 
piQcam  annnaliparliamanls  and-nnifamid Jttfc 
hagft,  mlc^i  emplnr  their  mond.sMngth  for 
that  pnrp0f e  by  usinf.  trgumentSi;  or  thaif 
phynioal  atrangili,  for  instanne^  by  being  dam 
patched  with  lettem  m>d.mssaagis,.or  goinjg 
about  to seboit  ammbemof  pasUmnent  for  thait 
snppettrf    Ajmrsen  may  eieot  bnalingi,  e*d 
may  keep  on  the  rabble-4ie  amy  employ. hii 
phynsal  Ibsae  in  twenty  dtfismnt'ways  withmH 
doing  any  4hing4lmt  ia  unlawfol. 

The  oath  eondades,  "M4^  I.  doi  fnsthnr 
swnas,  that  naithnr  fasfiei,  foam,  raiwmdi».off 
punishments,  shall  induce  me  tO'infom^.on,  ni 
grie^videnaa  against,  anymmnber.  or  mmm 
bem,  eoUnitivaly  or  inditadnally,  foe  anymda 

^^w  **^^^n^vn^n^p^^^^^w  a^^^^an^a?  ^^*   ana^n^^^^n  earn  jnna  ^n^^^m^   ^^n»   nnamm 

or.svmte  aacietins,  under  tha.pnnishnwnt^ 
death,  toube  iuAlclad  *on  Jmi  hy  nny,  mmBhar.or 
membaw.  «f.  anoh.  saeielics*.  SDhelpiiitn 
God^  and  Imep  mnetedfitfl*''  Itadmitnicnm^ 
itiaimpro|ierjfor  any  person  .to  Andmlnkni  an 
bbligatmnnait  fto.giTe midmse^  B«it4hni.ia 
notaooUigationrlnnanmntlraan>ns  itinnnty 
it  mjnisdflnmmnr  miHiimliishi  wmtew 


*Npt»one  nl 


laCsiihn'nB^hiaan 


not  by  folony,  aiuder,  or  treason. 


1501        ^7  GEORGE  tit. 

Read  the  oath  from  beginiung  to  end,  and  say, 
does  it  impose  any  obligation  to  commit 
treason  T  Itead  the  words  a  hundred  times 
oyer,  and  still  it  will  be  imposdble  to  say  that 
such  is  its  purport.  For  it  may  be  explained 
to  mean  an  obligation  to  endeavour  to  obtain 
lawful  objects,  and  cannot  fairly  be  explained 
to  mean  any  thing  else.  I  am  speaking  of  the 
purport  of  the  oath,  and  not  of  what  might  be 
the  intention  of  the  parties  at  the  time ;  and 
if  that  oath  does  not  purport  treason,  there  is 
an  end  of  the  present  indictment. 

The  public  prosecutor  immediately  adds, 
^  Which  oath  or  obligation  did  thus  purport 
ot  intend  to  bind  the  persons  taking  the  same 
to  ooramit  treason,  by  effecting  by  physical 
tooe  the  subfersion  of  the  estaUished  govem- 
menty  laws,  and  constitution  of  this  kingdom.*^ 
No  doubt  Uie  prosecutor  makes  that  averment. 
But  I  say  the  averment  is  utterly  unfounded, 
and  that  the  oath  does  not  purport  the  obliga* 
tion  vdiich  he  says  it  purports.  It  is  for  your 
lordships  to  judge  whether  it  does  so  or  not ; 
and  if  you  are  of  opinion  that  it  does  not,  then 
nodiing  that  the  prosecutor  affirms  on  the  sub- 
ject can  have  the  smallest  influence,  as  he  is 
not  entitled  to  go  to  the  jury,  and  leave  it  to 
thAsm  to  determine  what  is  the  purport  of  the 
oath;  for  that  would  be  to  take  the  relevancy 
of  the  indictment  out  of  your  hands  into  his 
own. 

The  prosecutor  has  given  you  a  ffloss  or 
comment  on  the  oath,  and  you  will  judge  if  it 
be  coirect.  The  civilians  nuTe  a  nickname,  I 
forget  what  it  is,  for  a  gloss  which  extracts  a 
meaning  from  the  text  exactly  the  reverse  of 
what  it  naturally  bears.  Ibis  gloss  is  precisely 
of  that  nature. 

In  the  oath  there  are  the  words, '^  I  will 
support  the  same  to  the  utdiost  of  my  power, 
eimer  by  moral  or  physical  wtrmgtK"  in  the 
prosecutor's  comment  the  word  force  is  substi- 
tuted for  strtngjth,  Tliat  may  be  thought  im- 
material, and  to  have  proceeded  from  inatten- 
tion, but  it  is  not  so.  It  has  been  introduced 
in  order  to  insinuate  something  different  from 
what  the  oath  purports.  Strength  in  common 
language  applies  to  bodily  exertion.  Force 
applies  to  an  assemblage  of  armed  persons. 
Although  you  can  speak  of  an  aimed  force, 
you  cannotspeak  of  an  armed  strength;  acircum- 
stance  which  shows  that  the  meaning  of  the  words 
is  not  the  same.  The  prosecutor  by  this  clause 
means  to  insinuate,  that  the  parties  were  to  en- 
deaTour  by  an  armed  force  toootain  their  objects ; 
a  purpose  which  cannot  be  inferred  from  the 
woMs  of  the  oath  at  all.  It  is  further  said, 
that  the  oath  was  to  bind  to  the  ^'  subTcrsion 
of  the  established  goremment,  laws,  and  con- 
stitution of  this  "kingdom,"  but  there  is  nothinff 
flrom  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the  oath 
about  eHtdimg'  any  thing.  The  parties  'bound 
themselves  to  use  endeuTouis  to  ^  obtain 
ananal  parliaments  and  universal  suffrage; 
and  these,  if  obtained  in  a  lawful  manner,  are 
not  a  subTe'isibn  of  the  government,  laws,  and 

The  gUMS|  tliexe- 


Tritd  of  WUtiam  tdg^ 


[tea 


fore,  has  extracted  a  meanine  from  the  text 
exactly  the  reverse  of  what  uie  words  bear.. 
The  public  prosecutor  cannot  be  allowed  to' 
do  this ;  ana  Uie  libel  on  that  account  is  irre- 
levant. 

But  I  go  forlher,  and  I  request  you  to  ob- 
serve what  may  not  at  first  sight  be  apparent, 
but  which,  on  full  consideration  of  the  law, 
vfill  immediate^  occur  to  all  of  vou,  that  even 
on  the  supposition  that  this  oath  did  purport 
what  the  public  prosecutor  says  it  does,  yet  it 
would  not  purport  an  obligation  to  commit 
treason.  For  I  maintain,  that  persons  bound 
to  effect  by  physical  force  the  subversion  of 
the  established  government,  laws,  and  consti- 
tution of  the  kingdom,  are  not  necessarily 
bound  to  commit  treason.  It  b  well  known 
to  your  lordflihips  that  there  are  two  great 
species  of  treason  in  law.  We  shall  dismiss 
from  our  consideration  at  present  a  great  many 
treasons,  such  as  debasing  the  coin,  murdering^ 
judges,  Ibc.  with  which  the  public  prosecutor 
does  not  and  cannot  pretend  that  this  oafli 
could  have  any  connexion  whatever.  There' 
are  just  tvro  kinds  of  treason  specified  in  the* 
statute  of  Edvrard  Srd,  to  which  it  could  pos-^' 
sibly  refer;  Ist,  compassing  the  kinff^s  death  i 
2nd,  levying  war  against  him.  I  shall  after-^ 
wards  speak  of  a  third  treason,  established  by' 
a  snbseauent  act,  the  36th  of  the  king. 

In  order  to  make  an  indictment  for  ei^erof 
these  two  kinds  of  treason  relevant,  it  is  not 
enough  to  say  that  the  party  intended  to  effect, 
or  has  effected  by  force,  the  snbversi<Mi  of  the 
government,  for  that  b  not  necessarily  com- 
passing the  death  of  the  king,  or  levying  war 
against  him.  Though  some  of  the  acts  pei^ 
formed  in  subverting  the  government  might  be 
overt  acts  of  treason,  they  are  not  necenarily 
so. 

In  order  to  establish  the  first  kind  of  treason^ 
two  things  are  necessaiy.  You  must  have  at 
wicked  imagination  in  the  mind,  namely,  tha 
compassing  of  the  king's  death ;  and  you  must 
have  overt  acts,  which  the  law  considers  as 
nroof  sufficient  to  establish  that  imagination. 
But  it  is  not  laid  here  that  the  oath  bound  those 
who  took  it  to  compass  or  imagine  the  death 
of  the  king.  I  cannot  illustrate  my  argtimoBt 
as  it  applies  to  the  case  before  you,  better  thanr 
by  appealing  to  an  extreme  case,  with  which  yoa 
are  aliwellacquainted-^die  trials  of theregiodes 
in  the  1 7th  century.  Yon  will  recollect  1km  the 
indictments  were  there  laid  ^*  for  compaldng 
and  imagining  the  death  of  the  king  f*  and  the 
overt  act  of  Siat  treason  was  cutting  off  the 
head  of  the  king.  It  would  not  Imve  been 
relevant  to  have  merely  charged  the  act  of 
putting  the  king  to  de^tb,  as  the  crime  of 
treason— the  crime  consisted  in  the  imagiiMtion 
of  the  heart ;  the  death  of  the  king  was  the 
evidence  that  that  imagination  existed.  In  the 
same  manner,  the  subversion  of  tilie  laws  and 
constitution  of  the  kingdom  is  not  treason^ 
tfiougfa  it  is  probable  in  effecting  that  subvert 
non  overt  acts  maybe  coBUQittod|irhidk  iihid 
evidtnoeoftieasoab 


fir  AJmHuUrimg  mdiHofii  Oatkt' 


1611 

TIm  oUier  tpeciat  of  treason  which  I 

tkmed,  was  levying  wv  againit  the  king.    To 

ooDstitale  that  ciimey  the  use  of  phytic^  force 

in  the  snhvenioo  of  the  laws  or  ooDStitutioo  of 

the  kiagdoiD  is  not  sufficient.     Ohe  of  two 

things  is  neoessaiy;  either,  on  theone  hand,  the 

perMOS  vsing  th^  force  most  be  assembled  in 

we  gnise  of  wajy   as  it  is  expressed  in  the 

Nonnan  jargon  of  the  law,  mrkUi  mgdtrgmrrmo ; 

they  most  proceed  sub  speck  beUiy  amie4  with 

warlike  engines,  with  ooloots  displayed,  and 

to  the  sonnd  of  tnunpets  and  drums :  or,  on 

Ihe  other  hand,  there  anst  be  so  great  a  mul^ 

titnde  assembled,  that  their  nnmben  may  €on»- 

pcnsate  for  the  want  oC  the  pride,  pomp,  and 

dicnastanceofwar.  Certain  pmons  assembling 

together  and  proeecoting  an  illegal  oljeotby 

mo^ does  not  nfecessazily  oonstitutealevyingof 

war  agahist  the  king, — unless  it  have  the  chano- 

teristics  •  I  ha:Te  mentioned,  it  is  not  treason. 

I  am  unwilling  to  detain  you  in  k  case  of  this 

kind  by  quoting  authorities  on  the  subject.    I 

coold  quote  a  great  many,  but  I  shall  content 

myself  with  referring  you  to  Hale  and  Foster, 

in  their  dmpteis  on  Uiis  subject. 

There  is  a  third  treason,  that  of  conspiring 
to  levy  war  in  order  to  accomplish  certain  ob- 
jectsy  as  to  put  the  king  under  restraint,  to  in- 
timidate partiament,  or  force  the  pariiament  te 
enact  certaia  laws.  This  treason  was  intro* 
dnoed  hj  the  d6th  of  the  king,  e.  7.* 

I  ask,  then,  whether  this  oath,  gmating  that 


A.  D.  1817. 


Il6ft 


TOfriott  aceompUshed  by  foree ;  yet  no  lawyer 
will  maintain  that  this  is  a  case  of  high  trea- 
son ,  that  it  is  a  case  of  compassing  the  king's 
death,  or  of  levying  war  against  him,  or  of 
conspiring  to  levy  war. 
1  repeat,  then,  that  although  this  oath  did 

Surport  what  the  pubhc  prosecutor  says  it 
oes,  but  which  most  ceruiuly  it  does  not, 
still  it  would  not  support  the  charge  in  the 
major  proposition.  If  the  prisoner  was  ac- 
cused of  having  subverted  the  constitution  by 
force,  could  that  charge  go  to  trial  as  a  charge  of 
high  treason?  assursdly  it  could  not;  and  for  the 
same  reason  a  charge  of  having  administered 
an  oath  purporting  to  bind  the  taker  to  sub- 
vert the  constitution  by  force,  is  not  a  charge 
of  having  administered  an  oath  binding  him  to 
commit  treason. 

I  haTenow^Bonsideredthe  oath  as  ** purport 
tag"  to  bind.  That  word,  as  I  have  endea- 
Toured  to  explain  it,  and  I  trust  I  have 
sonndiv  explained  it,  implies  nothing  more 
than  the  meaning  of  the  oath  as  it  may  be 
gathered  from  the  words  set  forth.  But  then 
the  public  prosecutor  says  that  this  oath  pur- 
ported, or  mUmkd;  and  the  question  comes  to 
oe.  Does  the  use  of  the  word  itUend  make  any 
differenced  I  apprehend  it  does  not;  for  the 
mtembnesii  of  a  writing  or  speech  in  the  or- 
dinary case  is  just  the  same  thing  as  its  pur- 
port.  You  will  observe  the  Act  of  Parliament 
does  not  say,  if  the  person  administering  the 


it  pwpovta  what  the  prosecutor  affirms  it  pur^^  "baUi  intends  to  bind  to  the  commission  of 


poffta^  iwposet  an  obligation  to  oemmlt  any 
one  «f  these  three  distinct  species  of  treason? 
I  have  sdfcady  stated  the  reasons,  by  which 
jom  lordships  mast  be  convinced  diat  it  does 
not  bind  the  taker  to  compass  or  imagine  the 
death  of  the  king.  Just  as  little  does  it  bind 
him  to  levy  war  against  the  king,  or  to  con- 
spise  to  levy  war  against  htm. 

I  have  said  'that  force  may  be  used,  nay, 
saeeessMly  used,  to  subvert  the  constitution, 
and  yet  no  war  be  levied  against  the  king. 
I  shall  give  an  instance  of  this,  which  appears 
to  me  dedri^e  on  the  merits  of  the  present 
qneetioiK  Suppose  dmt  the  House  of  Lords 
(which  of  course  they  never  will  do)  should 
pass  a  IhU  to  abolish  the  House  of  Commons, 
or  their  own  House,  as  a  branch  of  the  XjOgisla- 
ture  (and  if  ouch  bill  passed  into  a  law,  it 
would  eflhet  the  complete  sabversion  of  the 
coMstitution);  Suppose,  in  the  next  place, 
that  this  bill,  vrhen  carried  to  the  House  of 
Comnront,  ^ould  diyide  the  House  equally, 
and  of  eonsequence  its  fete  shoald  depend  on 
the  easting  vote  of  the  Speaker.  In  those 
cntuBslaiices,  if  twenty  or  thirty  individuals, 
not  armed  modoguerrmOf  but  widi  stidu  in 
their  hands,  shoald  go  down  and  compel  the 
Sjpedcer  by  threats  or  violence  to  vote  tor  this 
fadl, — ^dbe  bill  having  afterwards  received  the 
rmT  assent,  would  operate  as  the  subversion 
of  the  constitution,  and  it  vMmld  be  a  snb- 


*  Hade  perpetual 
c.  6. 

VOL.  xxxni. 


by  Stet.  57  Cieo.  3rd 


treason,  that  his  intention  shall  infer  the  crime. 
This  is  not  the  meaning  of  the  statute;  for  it 
requires,  that  there  shall  be  on  oath  or  engage" 
useiU  '< intending"  to  bmdf  &c.  It  is  the 
intendment  of  me  oath,  not  of  the  peraon, 
whidi  the  statute  mentions;  and,  thererore, 
though  it  were  perfectly  dear  that  the  prisoner 
administered  this  oath,  and  that  it  was  his 
intention  to  bind  the  party  taking  it  to  com- 
mit treason,  yet  that  is  not  enough,  if  the  oath 
itself  do  not  bind  to  that  effect.  Now,  that 
oamot  be  inferred  from  the  words  of  the  oath  ; 
for  if  you  interpret  them  fairly,  thev  mean 
nothing  but  what  i%  or  at  least  may  be,  per 
feetly  innocent 

But  then,  peihaps,  vre  shall  be  told  that  the 
public  prosecutor  vrill  prove,  by  facts  and  dr- 
cumstanees,  that  the  intendment  of  the  oath  is 
dillhrsat  from  the  purport;  and  it  occurred  to 
me,  that  he  has  some  such  idea>  from  tlie  dr- 
cumstance  that  he  has  dravm  the  narrative  of 
his  minor  proposition  in  the  way  in  which  he 
has.  I  have  various  objections  to  this  view  of 
the  subject,  to  which  I  must  call  your  parti- 
cular attention. 

in  the  Arst  plaOe  yon  will  observe,  that  in 
the  libel  itself  the  prosecutor  gives  up  the 
diar^  of  M/aid^g,  and  relies  on  that  of  ovr- 
portmg  altogether ;  for  in  the  clotw  of  the  libel 
(where,  though  the  same  detail  is  not  necessary, 
yet  the  efine  must  be  set  forth  with  the  same 
criticd  accuracy)  he  says,  '*At  least,  times  and 
pllices  foresaid,  the  said  oath  or  engagement^ 
or  an  oa^  or  engagement  to  the  eame  purport^ 

M 


1681 


57  GEORGE  IIL 


TriiU  of  WUiiam  Edgar 


was-  wickedly^  mBlickNuily,  and  trntofoarij 
admimsieredy  or  caused  to  be  adnunistered/' 
<cc.  He  does  not  say  it  was  an  oath  to  .the 
aanoe  intent;  and  Iherefovai  unleas  he  esta- 
blishes that  an  oath  of  this  purport  was  admi<- 
nistetedy  he  does  nothing  at  all.  But  this  is 
not  the  objection  on  mrhich  I  chiefly  rely. 

It  is  an  established  principle  in  the  law  of 
Scotland,  that  the  minor  proposition  shall  be 
laid  specifically^  and  that  every  materiid  cir- 
cumstance shall  there  be  stated  which  is  to  be 
made  the  subject  of  proof  against  the  pri- 
soner. The  prosecutor  is  not  at  liberty  to 
make  out  the  intendment  of  this  oath  m>m 
fects^and  circumstances  to  which  he  only 
alludes,  in  a  vague  manner  ;  the  libel  is  defec- 
tive unkss  these  facts  and  circmnstances  are 
distinctly  specified.  Would  it  be  sufficient  in 
an  indictment  under  this  statute  to  say,  that 
the  prisoner,  at  the  times  and  places  mentionedi 
administered  the  oath  of  allegiance,  but  under 
cover  of  that  oath  he  intended  to  bind  the 
party  to  commit  certain  crimes  ?  No.  It 
would  be  necessary  for  the  prosecutor  to  set 
forth  what  were  the  focts  and  circumstances 
which  established  the  criminal  quality.  In  a 
trial  for  a  calumnious  or  seditious  libel«  would 
it  be  enough  to  specify  that  the  prisoner  re;- 
peated  the  first  stanza  of  Chevy  Chase,  without 
specifying  bow  it  happened  that  words  having 
a  natural,  obvious,  and  innocent  meaning, 
were  in  reality  directed  to  a  totally  different 
and  criminal  object?  The  prosecutor  must 
set  forth  the  facts  and  circumstances  from 
which  he  draws  his  inference,  otherwise  the 
indictment  is  not  laid  with  that  minuteness 
which  the  law  requires.  But  your  lordships 
win  observe,  that  no  fact  is  here  specified 
from  which  such  an  inference  can  be  deduced. 
It  is  stated  in  the  narrative,  that  the  prisoner 
''having  wickedly,  maliciously,  and  traitor- 
ously conspired  and  agreed  with  other  evil 
disposed  persons  to  break  and  dbturb  the 
public  peace,  to  change,  subvert,  and  over- 
throw tne  government,  and  to  excite,  move, 
and  raise  insurrection  and  rebellion,  and  espe- 
cially to  hold  and  attend  secret  meetings^  for 
the  purpose  of  obtaining  annual  Parliaments 
and  universal  suffrage,  did  then  and  there 
wickedly,  maliciously,  and  traitorously  admi- 
nister, or  cause  to  be  administered,  or  did 
aid  and  assist  in  4he  administering,  to  a  great 
number  of  persons,  an  oath  or  engagement, 
or  an  obligation  in  the  form  of  an  oadi,''  &c. 
In  the  first  place  I  say,  that  supposing  the 
prisoner  committed  all  these  crimes,  it  is  no 
necessary  inference  from  that  hypothesis  that 
be  intended  to  administer  an  umawful  oath. 
Thev  do  not  create  the  smallest  presumption 
to  that  effect ;  for  a  man  may  be  engaged  in 
treason  himself,  and  yet  have  no  intention  to 
impose  an  oath  binding  his  associate  to  commit 
treason. 

But  there  is  another  view  of  the  case.  Sup- 
posing it  competent  from  facts  and  circum- 
stances to  prove  that  an  oath  which  does  not 
purport  any  obligation  of  the  nature  libelled, 


(164 

was  nevertheless  intendad  by  the  parties  to 
impose  that  obligation,  yet.  the  tacjts  an4 
ciicumstanoes  hero  resorted  to  are  of  a  kind 
which  precludes  the  prosecutor  from  making 
use  of  them  for  that  purpose.  .  If  the  nana* 
tive  of  this  indictment  were  to  be  proved,  it 
would  infer  that  the  prisoner  had  commilied 
treason;  but. will  your  lordshfps  permit  the 
lord  advocate  to  prove  that  a.  man  has  been 
guilty  of  treason  in  order  to  convict  him  of 
a  felony.  I  submit  that  this  is  manifestly  in- 
competent. It  is  a  general  role  in  criminal 
law,  and  ia  so  laid  down  by  Mr.  Bumet  in  his 
work  upon  that  subject  (p.  611).  His  lath 
canon  u})on  evidence  is  in  these  wocds: 
"One  cnme  cannot  be  proved  by  evid«n^  as 
to  another.  |  If  A  be  charged  with  three  .acts 
of  theft,  a  proof  of  tvro  of  them  cannot  be 
offered  in  evidence  of  his  guilt  as  to  the 
third.''  Your  lordships  will  see  at  once  the 
principle  upon  whi^h  this  rule  is  founded,  and 
indeea  it  is  afterwards  stated  by  the  learned 
author  whom  I  have  just  quoted.  He  say^ 
^Mt  is  to  avoid  the  risk  of  a  jury  being  influ- 
enced by  the  proof  of  one  crime  in  judging  of 
the  proof  of  another."  It  would  be  most  £m* 
gerous  to  the  subjects  of  this  country  were  it 
held,  that  because  a  man  had  perpetrated  one 
crime  of  which  he  was  not  accused,  the  jury 
might  conclude  that  he  had  perpetrated  ano* 
ther  of  which  he  was  accused.  This  may 
perhaps  be  a  moral,  but  it  is  no  legal  ground 
of  interence.  If  I  know  that  my  servant  has 
stolen  an  article  from  me  on  one  day, 'and  if 
another  is  missed  the  day  following,  I  ^  may 
very  naturally  conclude  that  he  who  stole  the 
first  stole  the  second  also.  But  if  the  servant 
was  tried  for  the  second  theft  aloncr  your 
lordships  assuredly  would  not  allow  the  pra^* 
secutor  to  go  into  evidence  of  the  first.  It 
could  answer  no  purpose,  but  the  improper 
purpose  of  creating  a  pr^udica  in  the  mind 
of  the  jury.  It  is  therefore  a  salutary  and 
expedient  rule,  and  a  rule  which  I  trust  will 
always  be  receiv^,  that  one  crime  cannot  be 
proved  in  order  to  establish  another.  As  the 
prisoner  therefore  is  charged  with  having  ad« 
ministered  an  unlawful  oath,  and  as  for  that 
crime  and  for  no  other  a  conviction  is  de- 
manded, the  prosecutor  cannot  be  allowed  to 
prove  in.  support  of  that  charge,  that  he  cgm- 
mitted  another  crime,  namely  that  of  treason. 
Nothing  could  be  more  unmir  or  more  con- 
trary to  the  principles  of  criminal  law. 

Inaccurate  opinions  have  sometimes  been 
received  on  this  subject.  I  have  used  the  ar-« 
gument  myself,  that  every  thing  is  evidence 
which  tends  to  produce  belief  in  the  minds  of 
the  jury.  That  is  not  the  law  of  Scotland  or 
of  any  civilised  'country.  The  law  judges 
what  should  be  allowed  to  produce  belief  in 
the  jury,  and,  for  the  reasons  which  have  just 
been  assigned,  it  will  not  allow  evidence  of 
one  crime  to  be  used  as  evidence  of  another. 
Though  the  prisoner  was  convicted  of  being  a 
traitor,  the  highest  crime  which  can  be  com- 
mitted in  any  state,  that  circumstance  could 


jesi 


Jor  AdmbmUrtHg  uiiiawfkt  Oaths. 


A.  D.  I&17. 


Ll6d 


not  hm  penutted  to  have  the  towdlest  influ- 
ence  in  convicting  him  of  a  lesser '  offence 
not  supported  by  evidence  applicable  to  itself. 

There  is  another  leason  why  the  narratiTe  of 
die  minor  proposition  cannot  be  competently 
sent  to  proof,  k  is  there  stated  that*  the  pri- 
soner vras  engaged  in  a  treasonable  conspiracy, 
hot  it  is  not  stated  with  whom  he  was  engaged 
in  that  oODspiracy.  Nay,  it  is  not  sUted  that 
the  other  conspiiators  were  persons  to  the  pro« 
secQtor  unknown*  Even  upon  the  suppositiooi 
therelbrey  liiat  this  charge  nad  been  laid  in  the 
major,  vriiich  it  is  not,  it  could  not  be  sent  to 
proo^  because  the  prosecutor  has  not  given  that 
nfecmstion  with  regard  to  it,  which  according 
to  the  forms  of  die  law  of  Scotland  he  was  bound 
lo  give,  that  the  prisoner  might  be  enabled  to 
prepare  his  defcnace.  Where  a  conspiracy  is 
chaiged  against  an  individual,  the  other  persons 
€onspirii%  'most  be  specified,  or  at  least  it 
most  be  stated^  that  those  persons  are  unknovm 
to  dw  prosecutor;  if  eren  that  is  sufficient. 

If  that  remark  is  applicable  to  the  charge  of 
coDSptTUcy,  how  mucn  more  so  is  it  to  that  of 
treason  T  To  oonvict.a  person  of  treason,  many 
requisites  most  occur  which  are  not  found  here. 
No  man  can  be  put  upon  trial  for  that  crime 
unless  a  bill  is  found  against  him  by  a  Grand 
jury ;  and  after  the  bill  is  foond,  man^  forms 
must  be  observed  unknown  to  the  criminal  law 
of  Scotland  in  other  cases.  For  example,  the 
prisoner  is  entitled  to  challenge  a  certain  num* 
ber  of  his  jury  peremptorily,  and  without  cause 
Aevm.  He  has  various  other  privileges  unne* 
cessaryie  be'  stated.  -  But  none  of  these  pri- 
vileges have  been  allowed  to  the  prisoner  here, 
because  he  is  put  upon  bis  trial  for  a  felony.  It 
is  impossible  that  your  Lordships  will  allovr 
lum  to  be  tried  for  treason  by  our  forms  of 
procedure,  when  it  is  enacted,  by  special 
statute^  that  treason  can  only  be  tried  by  the 
IbrmS  of  the  law  of  £ngland. 

It  is  no  answer  to  this  argument,  for  the  pro- 
secutor to  say,  we  are  going  to  try  the  prisoner 
for  treason,  bat  we  are  not  to  punish  him  for 
treason.  We'Ssk  for  no  other  punishment  but 
that  which  is  applicable  to  the  crime  laid  in  the 
mgor  propositMu  of  the  indictment.  If  the  ju- 
ry find  the  prisoner  guilty  of  treason,  though 
lie  escape  the  punishment,  his  character  is  blast- 
ed, be  is  a  convicted  traitor,  and  he  suffers  an 
injury  vrfaich  the  prosecutor  is  not  entitled  to 
inflict.  On  the  other  hand,  suppose  him  to  be 
acquitted  under  this  indictment,  the  acquittal 
is  of  no*  benefit  to  him,  for  not  only  might  his 
diaracter  be  ruined,  but  he  may  be  again 
btoufht  to  trial  for  treason  in  a  regular  way. 

I4>rd  Advocate, — ^He  cannot  be  again  brought 
totiial* 

Mr.  €>fmn$tam. — ^The  lord  advocate  thinks 
diflbentiv  from  me^  but  be  is  wrong.  '  If  the 
pfisoiier  be  acquitted  of  administering  the  un- 
lawful oalh,  that  act  cannot  be  laid  as  an  overt 
act  of  tseaeott  in  an  indictment  for  that  crime. 
Bsi^'ltefie  tnasbnable  practices  are  stated  for 
dir{Pttrpofe4>f  prons^^that  the  oath  admini- 


stered imposed  an  obligation  to  commit  treason. 
Now  the 'lord  advocate  cannot  be  prevented 
from  trying  the  prisoner  for  thesie  practices  as 
treason,  dthough  the  prisoner  shouM  be  ac- 
quitted of  the  present  charge.  The  words  of 
die  act  are  '^rronded  also,  and  it  is  hereby 
declared,  that  any  person  who  shall  be  tried 
and  acquitted,  or  convicted  of  any  offence 
against  this  act,  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  indict- 
ed, prosecuted,  or  tried  again  for  the  $ame  offence 
or  fid  as  hig^  treason  or  misprision  of  high  trea- 
son." 

From  these  words  it  appears,  that  after  a 
trial  on  this  indictment  die  prisoner  cannot  be 
tried  for  treason  on  the  ground  of  having  admi- 
nistered this  oath,  but  1^  may  notwithstanding 
be  tried  for  treason  on  account  of  any  one  of 
the  acts  which  his  lordship  narrates  in  the  mi- 
nor proposition,  as  evidence  that  the  prisoner 
and  nis  associates  were  engaged  in  treasonable 
practices. 

This  being  the  case,  what  would  be  the  result 
of  a  trial  under  this  indictment,  supposing 
that  the  prisoner  is  acquitted  P  It  would  be 
just  a  precognition,  and'what  is  more,  a  public 
precognition  taken,  for  the  purpose  of  convict- 
ing him  afterwards  of  high  treason.  And  as 
he  might  be  tried  twenty  times  for  administer- 
ing unlawful  oaths,  all  these  trials  might  be 
vrith  no  other  view  than  that  of  trying  lum  for 
hi^  treason  at  last.  I  put  it  to  your  lord- 
ships,^ if  o'ppression  of  this  kind  could  be 
endured  in  this  country,— if  there  would  not  be 
an  end  of  all  liberty  and  all  security? 

I  lay  it  downltherefore  as  dear  law,  that  one 
crime  cannot  be  used  as  proof  of  another. 
There  is  nothing  set  forth  in  this  libel  in  order 
to  prove  the  wtent  of  the  oath  as  contradistin- 
suished  from  itsptirporl,  except  facts  which  in- 
fer other  crimes,  and  which,  on  that  account, 
cannot  be  admitted  to  proof.  The  whole  nar- 
rative of  the  minor  proposition  must  be  blotted 
out  as  incompetent,  and  that  being  done  thera 
is  notfaingleft  but  the  words  of  the  oath,  and  these 
words  do  not  purport  any  obligation  to  commit 
treason.  The  prosecutor  may  aver  the  contrary  ' 
— he  may  say,  that  whatever  may  be  the  appa- 
rent purport,  thereat  intendment  was  an  unlaw- 
ful ooUgation :  but  if  he  makes  this  averment 
something  further  is  necessary ;  he  must  state 
specifically  the  facts  and  circumstances  by 
which  he  is  to  prove,  that  words,  innocent  ia 
themselves,  were  used  with  a  guilty  intent ; 
and  these  fiicts  and  circumstances  must  be 
relevant  to  ground  that-  inference,  and  com- 
petent in  themselves  to  be  proved.  Further, 
as  already  said,  it  is  not  the  intention  of  the 
parties,  but  the  intendment  of  the  words  which 
must  be  criminal. 

But  if  the  nanradve  of  the  minor  proposi- 
tion be  strode  out,  and  I  have  shovni  that  it 
must  be  so,  then  there  is  no  specification  of 
&cts  vvhatever  to  establish  an  intendment 
different  from  the  purport  (^  the  oath.  What 
s^ificadon  is  necessary  in  the  minor  proposi- 
tion of  a  criminal  indictment  according  to  the 
law  of  Scodand?    AU  our  authoriUes  say  that 


167] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  fViitiam  Edgar 


[168 


the  minor  pnmositioa  must  set  forth  a  AiU  and 
accurate  detail  of  all  the  dicumstances  matetial 
to  the  case.  But  if  the  lord  advocate  atten^pts 
to  extract  and  elicit  from  innocent  words  a 
different  meaning  from  that  which  ^y  obvi- 
ously bear,  and  does  not  specifytbe  cutnun- 
stances  from  which  he  infers  that  hidden 
meaning,  then  the  minor  proposition  b  im- 
perfect for  want  of  specification,  and  the  Ubei 
u  irrelevant. 

I  had  formerly  occasion  to  refer  yonr  lord** 
ships  to  the  practice  in  trials  for  perjury :  and 
it  appears  to  me  that  there  is  a  great  affinity 
between  trials  for  that  crime,  and  the  present. 
Perjury  consists  in  taking  an  oath  which  pnr^ 
ports  falsehood :  the  present  eritnie  consists  in 
administering  one  which  purports  an  unlawful 
obligation.  In  both  there  is  the  use  of  an  or- 
dinary solemnity,  with  the  criminal  intention 
in  the  one  case  to  deceive,  and  in  the  other 
case  to  bind  to  the  commission  of  a  crime. 
The  crimes  are  analogous.  In  a  caae  like  the 
present,  which  is  new,  it  is  most  desirable  to 
refer  to  analogous  cases,  in  order  to  gather 
'  what  are  the  rvdes  of  proceeding.  Let  us  con- 
sider then  what  is  your  proceeding  when  vou  try 
a  person  on  a  libel  lor  perjury.  Mr.  Hume, 
in  stating  what  are  the  specifications  necessary 
in  a  libel  for  peijury,  observes,  that  **  it  is 
more  especially  requisite,  that  in  all  process 
for  perjury  the  prosecutor  be  not  allowed  to 
lay  his  libel  generally,  or  in  ambiguous  tenns; 
since  otherwise  he  would  take  the  cognisance 
of  the  relevancy  of  the  charge  to  himself,  out 
of  the  hands  of  the  Court^  to  whom  of  right  it 
belongs.  He  has  to  explain,  therefore,  wherein 
it  is  that  the  falsehood  lies,  and  must  support 
(or  as  we  say,  qtu^)  his  charge  with  such  a 
statement  of  the  circumstances  of  the  £&ct,  as 
justifies  his  averment  of  a  fidse  oath  having 
been  taken,  and  shall  ground  a  clear  inference 
(if  they  be  proved)  concerning  the  situation  of 
the  panel's  conscience  on  the  occasion."  It 
thus  appears,  that  in  a  charge  of  perjury,  in 
order  to  make  the  libel  relevant,  it  is  not 
enough  to  assert  that  the  prisoner  has  sworn  a 
false  oatlu  The  prosecutor  must  point  out  in 
detail  the  circumstances  on  which  he  rests  his 
averment,  that  what  was  sworn  is  £dse.  If  that 
be  the  case  in  a  trial  for  perjury, — in  the  analo- 
gous crime  now  in  question,  if  the  prosecutor 
libels  words  in  themselves  innocent,  he  must 
specify  facts  relevant  and  competent  to  be 
proved,  in  order  to  make  out  the  proposition 
that  these  words  were  used  with  a  guilty  in- 
tendment— an  intendment  understood  by  both 
parties.  Therefore  unless  you  require  a  speci- 
fication of  facts,  which  I  apprehend  is  essenti- 
ally necessary  to  extract  a  guilty  intendment 
from  the  words  of  this  oath,  in  themselves  in- 
nocenlj  you  depart  from  one  of  the  best  es- 
tablished rules  of  the  law  of  Scotland.  What 
is  said  by  Mr.  Hume  as  to  trials  for  |>eijury, 
is  equally  applicable  to  a  trial  under  this  act. 

I  have  sJready  taken  occasion  .to  observe^ 
that  one  of  the  most  vaiuablb  statutes  in  our 
code  is  the  statute  of  Ut  Maxy,  cap.  1.    It  is 


in  our  code,  for  it  b  a  law  regaidmg  treesoo, 
and  of  consequence  introduce  along  with  all 
the  other  laws  of  England  upon  that  subject 
by  the  7th  Anne,  cap.  21.  i  prsY  your  lord- 
ships to  attend  to  the  preamMe  of  tliat  statute 
of  the  1st  Maiy.  **  Forasmuch  as  the  state  ni 
every  king,  nJer,  and  governor  of  any  realm, 
dominion,  or  commonalty,  standeth  and  con- 
sbteth  more  assured  by  the  love  and  frvour  of 
tiie  subjects  toward  their  sovereign  ruler  and 
governor,  than  in  the  dread  and  fear  of  laws 
made  with  rigorous  pains  and  extreme  pnnisb- 
ment  for  not  obeying  of  their  sovereign  ruler 
and  governor :  And  laws  also  justly  made  lor 
the  preservation  of  the  commonweal,  without 
extreme  punbhment  or  great  penalty,  are  more 
often  for  the  most  part  obeyed  and  kept,  than 
laws  and  statutes  made  witii  great  and  ex- 
treme punishments  and  in  special  such  lawa 
and  statutes  so  made,  whereby  not  only 
the  ignorant  and  rude  unlearned  peofde,  bnt 
also  learned  and  expert  people,  mindinK 
honesty,  are  often  and  many  times  tnpped  and 
snared,  yea,  many  times  lor  words  only,  with* 
out  oUier  fiict  or  deed  done  or  perpetrated : 
The  queen's  most  excellent  majesty,  calling  to 
remembrance,  that  many,  as  wdl  hononralile 
and  noble  persons  as  otherof  good  rep«tation» 
within  this  her  grace's  realm  of  England,  have 
of  late  (for  words  only,  withovt  other  opinion, 
foot,  or  deed)  suffered  shameful  death  not  ao* 
customed  to  nobles ;  Her  highness,  therefore, 
of  her  accustomed  clemency  and  mercy,  mind* 
ing  to  avoid  and  put  away  die  occasion  and 
cause  of  like  chances  hereafter  to  ensoe,  trust- 
ing her  loving  subjects  will,  for  her  deniency 
to  them  shewed,  love,  serve,  and  obey  h^ 
grace  the  more  heartily  and  futhfully,  than  for 
dread  or  fear  of  pains  of  body,  b  contented 
and  pleased  that  tne  severity 'Of  such  like  ex- 
treme, dangerous,  and  painful  laws,  shall  be 
abolished,  annulled  and  made  fhistrate  and 
void."  This  preamble  explains  the  extreme 
danger  and  mischief  arising  from  laws  inflict- 
ing the  pains  of  treason  on  offences  whidi  are 
not  accurately  defined^  and  more  particolarij 
for  words  spoken,  and  accordingly  the  whole 
body  of  constructive  treasons  were  swept 
away  by  that  act. 

Now,  the  statute  upon  which  the  present  in- 
dictment b  founded  introduced  a  constructive 
felony,  on  which  it  inflicts  the  same  punish- 
ment as  that  which  is  inflicted  in  treason,  at 
least  in  all  material  respects  the  same.  I  did 
not  read  the  preamble  of  the  act  of  queen 
Mary,  to  throw  blame  on  the  statute  now 
under  consideration,  bnt  to  show  the  difficulty 
and  danger  attending  the  application  of  every 
law  of  this  description,  as  tne  legislature  itself 
has  clearly  expressed  in  that  preamble'.  But 
the  statute  having  been  enacted,  what  b  the 
proper  correcdve  for  the  evib  to  whidk  I 
allude  f  I  do  not  know  what  b  the  prac- 
tice on  the  other  side  the  Tweed;  tot  I 
do.  not  know  the  detaib  of  ciisninal  pn>- 
eedure  there,  bnt  I  know  that  in  Scotland 
the  corrective  is  to  be  fbmid  iaeur  foons  of 


1691 


far  AduuKhUriKg  taUmfiil  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1617. 


iiio 


crunnnlpiooedim;  and  wlatererdefiKti  there 
may- be  in  the  law  of  Scotland^  there  are  aome 
exceUcnciefy  and  one  of  them  is  that  minnte- 
Beaa  of  ^iceification  which  the  public  proeeco- 
toris  boond  to  obeerre  in  his  indictment.  Hie 
nroper  piecaation  for  preventing  this  statute 
Kom  being  made  a  source  of  oppression  and 
iiyostioe^  is  to  observe  oar  forms  of  criminal 
proeedore;  and  I  maintain  that  one  of  our  best 
£mns  will  be  neglected^  if  yon  allow  a  proof  of 
the  minor  proposition  here  to  go  to  a  juiy^ 
when  there  is  no  specification  in  the  hbel  to 
show  tlwt  the  wofds  ef  the  oath  were  nsed  in 
n  sense  different  from  their  ordioary  sense. 
Their  ordiniT  sense  as  I  have  endeavoured  to 
prove,  or  rather  as  I  think  must  be  manifest 
aft  first  sight,  is  perfectly  innocent ;  at  least  it 
is  not  an  obligation  to  comnut  treason.  If  this 
libel  be  allowed  to  go  to  trial  under  other ' 
jndgesy  the  administration  oi  any  oath*  of  the 
oath  of  allegiance  itself  might  be  made  the 
mund  of  a  prosecution  under  this  statute. 
Tbe  author  whom  I  have  already  bad  occasion 
to  qnoce,  says,  that  the  nile  of  the  minor  pro- 
position containing  a  specification  of  all  the 
nets   on  which  the   charge  rests,  was  at- 
tended to  anziooslyy  even  in  the  worst  times. 
We  know  well  whai  are  the  times  to  which  he 
anodes,  indeed  they  are  pointed  out  by  the 
defisinns  to  which  he  refers ;  namely,  the  pe- 
riod between  1679  and  1668,  when  your  books 
of  adioamal  are  stained  with  tbe  most  atroci* 
one  murders  perpetrated  under  the  colosorof 
law-^y  judges  the  most  unprincipled   that 
ever  sat  upon  that  bench.    If  in  that  period, 
and  jnndet  these  judges,  the  rule  in  question 
was  not  departed  from  even  in  the  trial  of 
slate  criuMM^  it  will  not  be  departed  from 
in   these  liberal  and  enligfatenea  days,   and 
while -yonr  lordships  preside  in  tliia  Court. 
On  these  grounds,   I  relate  to  your  lord- 
ships with  confidedce  what  is  the  genuine 
eoBvictJon  of  my  own  mind,  that  this  is  not  a 
relevant  indictment,  and  that  if  it  be  sent  to  a 
jury,  a  precedent  will  be  established  fraught 
with  the  greatest  danger, 

[Mr.  Cranstoun  made  an  apology  for  occu- 
pying the  Court  so  long.] 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — ^I  express  the  opinion 
of  the  Court,  that  there  Is  no  reason  for  such 
an  apology.  We  have  all  heard  the  very  able, 
eloquent,  and  argumentative  pleading  for  the 
panel,  with  the  most  perfect  satisfaction. 

.  Mr.  Dtmumnd. — ^A  very  difficult  task  has 
devolved  itself  upon  me^  thiat  of  answering  one 
of  the  ablest  arguments  which  I  ever  had  oc- 
casion to  hear ;  and  I  have  this  impression 
so  stronglv  on  m^  mind,  that  unless  I  had 
some-  confidence  m  the  merits  of  the  cause 
whidh  I  am  to  support,  I  should  feel  the 
greatest  diffidence  in  attempting  to  answer  the 
speech  of  the  learned  gentleman.  I  trust, 
however,  that  the  ease  will-  speak  pretty 
Strongly  for  itself;  and  my  learned  friend  who- 
i#.io  foitow  me,  will,  aaich  More  ably  than  I 


can  do,  supply  what  I  may  happen  to  omit. 

The  charge  against  the  panel  at  the  bar  is 
for  a  statutory  offence.  He  is  charged  with 
administering  an  oath  of  a  particular  descrip- 
tion. The  rules  of  law  are  clear  with  regard 
to  the  manner  of  describing  a  criminal  act.  The 
words  of  Mr.  Hume  are,  **  That  a  libel  is  not 
good,  unless  it  give  such  an  account  of  the 
criminal  deed  as  may  distinguish  this  particu- 
lar charge  from  all  other  instances  of  the  same 
sort  of  crime,  and  thus  briuff  the  panel  tb  the 
bar  sufficiently  informed  of  that  whereof  he  is 
accused.^ 

If  this  description  of  the  duty  of  the  prose- 
cutor be  correct,  I  apprehend  this  indictment 
must  dearly  ffo  to  trial;  for  it  sets  forUi  the 
crime  charged  in  a  manner  to  distinguish  it 
from  ev«ry  other  instance  of  the  same  sort  of 
crime.  'Die  criminal  deed  is  the  administer- 
ing ef  the  oath,  and  the  oath  itself  is  set  forth 
in  the  indictment.  £ven  if  it  had  not  been  in 
the  power  of  the  prosecutor  to  obtain  the  terms 
of  the  oath,  yet,  by  this  statute,  it  was  compe- 
tent to  him  to  charge  its  purport.  But  the 
prosecutor  has  fortunately  had  more  in  his 
power,  for  he  has  obtained  the  oath  itself,  and 
he  has  recited  it  at  length  in  the  indictmeqt. 

Mr.  Hume  proceeds  afterwards  to  describe 
the  manner  in  which  the  criminal  deed  should 
be  set  forth ;  and  as  the  learned  gentleman 
who  went  before  me  dwelt  some  time  on  this 
subject,  I  shall  be  under   the   necessity  of 

Suoting  at  length  Jdr.  Hume's  views  of  the 
uty  of  the  prosecutor.  {Mr.  Drummond  here 
read  from  vol.  3,  j[).  325,  and  subsequent  pas- 
sages, and  maintained  that  the  description  of 
the  offence  in  this  indictment  was  sufficiently 
specific] 

I  apprehend  that  the  prosecutor  is  correct 
as  to  the  times  and  places,  and  the  individuals 
to  whom  the  oath  was  administered,  as  no  ob- 
jection has  been  stated  to  the  indictment  with 
regard  to  these  points.  And,  considering  the 
particular  character  of  this  crime  charged,  and 
that  it  is  of  a  secret  nature,  and  extremely 
difficult  to  detect,  I  think  your  lordships  must 
be  satisfied,  that  the  prosecutor  has  given  aa 
foil  and  particular  a  description  of  it  as  the 
panel  could  expect. 

This  is  a  crime,  in  many  respects,  of  a  yery 
peculiar  character.  It  is  necessary,  indeed, 
as  was  correctly  stated  by  the  learned  gentle- 
roan,  that  the  oath  itself  should  bind  to  the 
commission  of  treason,  or  of  some  capital 
felony.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  the  party  ad- 
n^inistering  the  oath,  or  the  party  taking  it, 
should  have  treasonable,  or  other  criminal  in- 
tentions ;  but  it  is  necessary  that  the  oath  itself 
should  b4nd  to  the  commission  of  treason,  or 
some  other  crime.  This  was  most  correctly  laid 
down  by  the  learned  genQeman,  and  any  infer- 
ence which  the  prosecutor  may  think  himself  en- 
titled to  draw  from  the  oath  willnotbe  sufficient, 
i£it  do  not  clearly  appear  that  the  oath  itself  is 
of  the  precise  purport  necessary  to  inculpate  the 

*  3  Comm.  310^ 


171  j         27  GEORGE  III. 

nanel  on  the  lUttute'  fouiKled  upon  in  th^  iih' 
dictment.  On  this  pari  of  die  cate  I  am  ready 
lo  meet  the  learned  eentleman ;  for  it  appean 
to  me  very  clearly  tnat  this  oath  does  contain 
an  obligation  to  commit  treason,  and  that, 
upon  a  rair  construction  of  it,  no  man  of  good 
tense  can  firil  to  be'  of  this  opinion.  The  oath 
fliysy  **  I  win  penefere'  in  my  endeavours  to 
obtain  for  all  the  people  in  Ciieat  Britain  and 
Ireland,  not  disqualified  by  crimes  or  insanity, 
the  elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of  twenty-one, 
with  free  and  equal  representation  and  annual 
pariiaments;  and  that  X  ^Q  support  the  same 
to  the  utmost  of  my  power  either  by  moral  or 

Sysical  strength,  as  the  case  may  require.'' 
le  learned  gentlem'an  stated,  that  the  oath 
binds  the  person '  taking  it  to  support  the  en- 
deavours made  to  obtam  annual  parliaments 
and  universal  suffrage,  and  he  stated  so  cor- 
rectly. He  observe«i  tiiat  the  oeih  could  not 
bind  them  to  support  what  was  not  in  exist- 
ence, and  that  therefore  it  was  to  obtain,  not 
lo  support,  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
suffrage,  things  not  in  existence,  that  the 
oath  had  been  administered  and  taken.  It  re- 
mains for  you  to  consider,  whether  the  oath  to 
support  with  moral  and  physical  strength 
endeavours  made  to  obtain  annual  parfia- 
ments  and  universal  sufVaaiB,  is  an  oath  which 
eobjeets  those  administering  or  taking  it  to 
the  charge  of  administering  or  taking  an 
oath  purporting  to  bind  those  taking  the  same 
to  commit  treason  ?  and  upon  that  narrowed' 
construction  of  the  oath  I  join  issue  with  the 
opposite  counsel. 

It  was  said  verjr  ingeniously,  that  physical 
strength  may  be  mnocently  employed  m  many' 
wavs  for  the  support  of  endeavours  to  obtain 
vnhrersal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments^- 
that  it  may  be  employed  in  the  erecting  of 
hustings  for  meetings  to  petition  parliament  on 
the  sulnect-— that  it  may  oe  employed  in  run- 
ning about  and  soliciting  members  of  the 
legislature  to  give  their  support  to  such  peti* 
lions.  These  are  certainly  exercises  of  physi- 
cal strength,  but  not  of  the  kind  referred  to  in 
the  oath.  The  oath  binds  the  persons  taking 
it  to  use  aU  their  i^jsical  strength,  as  the  case 
may  require.  The  instances  which  have  been 
mentioned  of  the  application  of  physical 
strength  are  not  the  only  ways  in  which  physical 
strength  may  be  employed  in  order  to  obtain  the 
objects  spoken  of;  yet,  by  the  terms  of  the  oath, 
there  is  no  limitation  as  to  the  kind  of  physical 
strength  which  the  parties  were  to  use.  •  Tliey 
were  to  use  the  whole  of  their  moral  and 
physical  strength;  and  the  terms  force  and 
strength  have  beretlie  same  meaning.  If  an 
innocent  purpose  only  had  been  in  the  view 
of  these  persons,  then  why  were  they  anxious 
for  concealment  ? — What  follows  in  the  oath  ? 
**  And  I  do  further  swear,  that  neither  hopes, 
fears,  rewards,  or  punishments,  diall  induce 
me  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence  against, 
anv  member  or  members,  collectively  or  indi- 
viaually,  for  any  act  or  expression  done  or 
nude,  in  or  out^  in  (his  or -similar  societies. 


Trial  of  fVWmmEJgar 


cna 


under  the  punishment  of  death,  to  be  inflicted* 
on  me  by  any  member  or  members  of  such 
societies.  So  help  me  God,  and  keep  me 
stedfest.*'  This  is  a  remarkable  part  of  the 
oath,  and  surely  such  concealment  was  not 
necessary  in  erecting  hustings,  or  doing  aAy 
of  the  things  which  were  suggested  by_tbe 
learned  counsel  in  his  illustrations.  There 
can  be  no  use  for  such  concealment,  where 
lawful  means  are  to  be  employed  for  the  attain- 
ment of  lawful  objects.  Every  person  vrfao 
reads  the  oath  must  see  that  it  proves  in  the 
strongest  manner,  that  illegal  objects  were  in 
ti)e  view  of  the  parties.  This  is  obvious,  with- 
out travelling  beyond  the  four  comers  of  the 
oath  itseUl  It  is  so  obvious,  that  no  argument 
can  prevent  the  indictment  from  going  to  trial. 
The  oath  alone,  without  going  to  any  other 
article  of  evidence,  is  directly  crimtoal,  and 
implies  that  the  purpose  for  which  the  meeting 
was  assembled  was  an  illegal  purpose,  and  the 
association  ah  illegal  association. 

It  was  said  by  Uie  learned  gentleman,  that 
the  word  '<  force*'  had  been  ^  artfiiify*'  subeti- 
luted  in  the  indictment  for  the  word  **•  strength.*^ 
Bnt  according  to  my  construction,  they  have 
no  different  meanin^-<-they  are  synonymous.- 
But  I  may  answer  his  statement  bv  a'  remark 
of  his  own  which  is  well  founded,  that  any 
inference  from  the  oath  adjected  in  the  indict- 
ment does  not  signify,  unless  the  oath  itself 
neeemarily  imply  that  inference.  The  artifice, 
therefore,  if  there  bad  been  any  (and  there 
was  assuredly  none),  could  have  no  effect,  as 
your  lordships  are  to  judge  of  the  oath  itself, 
and  not  of  the  oondusionsHlrawn  from  it  by 
the  prosecutor. 

It  is  also  libelled  in  the  indictment  (and  to 
the  proof  of  that  no  objection  has  been  stated), 
that  this  oath  was  administered  at  secret  meet- 
ings. To  a  proof  of  this  averment,  no  object 
tion  has  or  can  be  made ;  and  if  it  shall  be 
proved  that  this  oath  was  administered  at  a 
secret  meeting,  this  is  an  additional  circum- 
stance of  evidence  whidi  must  go  to  the  assise, 
to  show  that  the  purpose  of  the  oath'  was 
illegal  and  criminal.  That  the  oath  was  ad- 
ministered at  a  secret  meeting  is  charged,  I 
observe,  with  regard  to  the  meeting  first 
libelled  on  in  the  indictment. 

It  is  argued,  that  the  narrative  of  the  indict- 
mentr— the  general  statement  of  treasonable 
conduct  which  precedes  the  statement  of  the 
particulars  founded  on^is  not  relevant  to  be 
proved.  I  apprehend,  however,  that  many 
examples  mint  be  given  from  the  daily  prac- 
tice of  the  uourt'of  such  narratives  as  this 
going  to  a  jury.  One  example  that  occurs  to 
me--H(I  am  sorry  that  I  am  under  the  necessity 
of  speaking  from  memory  alone,  as  I  am  cer- 
tain that  it  I '  had  had  timeto  make  an  investi- 
gation, I  could  have  produced  many  examples 
on  the  point)— an  example,  I  say,  occurs  to 
me,*  which  is  probably  in  your  recoHection. 
The  cise  I  allude  to  vras  that  of  a  charge  for 
uttering  ^rged  notes.  The  forgery  bad  been 
committed  ia  Englebd  ;-^that  qrifli^  therefoie. 


173  J 


Jar  Aimimleri»g  vAt^  OaOs. 


A.  D.  1817. 


1174 


tbe  Court  had  no  joiisdlction  to  tiy.    Yet  yon 
tilmitted  the  statement  of  the  forgery  in  the 
narrative  of  the  indictment  m  modam  proialiom$ 
oCthe  dine. of  uttering  the  forged  notes  in 
Scotland,  and  as  relevant  to  infer  the  know- 
ledge of  the  forgery  in  the  ntterer.    This  is 
setUad  lair;  and  the  oath  here  charged  is  at 
least  as  intimately  connected  with  the .  state- 
ment of  treasonable  practices  mentioned  in  the 
narrattye^  as  the  crime  of  nttering  forged  notes 
was  with  the  perpetration  of  the  forgery!    I 
am  not  going  too  far  in  saying  that  the  oath 
is  nothing  ebe  than  an  OTert  act  of  a  general 
treasrmable    conspiracy,    opt  now  charged 
against  the  parties.    The  whole  import  and 
constraction  of  the  present  charge^  indeed,  in- 
volves the  existence  of  another  crime.    The 
administration  of  the  oath  is  a  criminal  act, 
binding  the  takers  to  ciu9»iC  .aoptl^ar  cdme ; 
and  how  is  it  possible  to  separate,  the  two? 
How  can  any  circomstanceii  regarding  the  one 
be  eKplained  without  mentioning  the  other  P 
We  are  bound  to  show  that  there  was  treason 
which  would  have  been  speedily  matured,  if 
the  purposes  of  the  persons  who  administmd 
and  who  took  the  oath  had  been  carried  into 
effect.     We  are  to  prove  what  they   were 
hatdiiiig— what  they  intended— nand  it  is  im- 
possible  to  lay  out  of  .view  the  preparations 
they  were  making  for.  committing  treason,  in 
^caking,  of  what  they  bound  themselves  to 
aocompUsh.    Thus  the  rule  of  not  admitting 
proof  of  one  crime  in  evidence  of  another, 
must  be  received  with  some  qualification,  .and 
it  btf  always  been  so  in  practice.    [Mr .  Drum- 
nond  here  referred  to  Hume's  Com.  vol.  3. 
p.  411,  and. to  the  case  of  Thomas  Somerville, 
who  ^as  tried  for  perjury  in  1813,  as  men- 
tioned in  the  corresponding  part  of  the  supple- 
ment, p.  2^6.]    There,  you  have  (evidence  of 
one  crime  admitted  to.prove  another,  although 
the  one  was  quite  different  from. Uie  other. 
But  here  the  crimes  are  intimately  and  almoet 
ittseinrably  connected.    It  is  an  established 
rale  in  the  English  law  books,  in  cases  of  trea- 
son, not  only  that  one  overt  act  not  laid  as  a 
charge,  may  be  adduced  as  proof  of  one  that 
is  laid,  but  that  a  general  proof  of  rebellion  or 
conspiracy  is  allowed  before  proceeding  to  the 
particular  acts  charged ;  and  the  well  known 
case  of  Strafford*  was  quoted  and  received  as 
an  authority  on  this  point  in  the  trials  of  Wattf 
and  Downle,t — ^in  which  the  existence  of  a 
treasonable  plot  was  allowed  to  be  proved  be- 
fore the  overt  acts  charged.    Hie  principal 
3uestion  is,  whether,  the  matter  offered  in  evi- 
ence.be  pertinent  to  the  point  in  issue  f 
It  was  said  that  we  are  not  entitled  to  try 
a.  man  for  treason  in  this  form,  and  that  there- 
fore we  cannot  indirectly  try  the  treason  as 
pioo(oCaift>ther  crime.  *  I  appeal,  in  answer 
to  this,-  to  the  act  of  parlian^nt  under  which 
we  are  now  proceeding.    The  whole  act,  and 


<   »■ 


♦  3  How.  St.  Tr.  1381. 

t  2  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  1167. 

I  8How.  Mod.  StTr.  1. 


particttlaily  the  last  daose,.  piooteds  on  the 
understanaing  that  we  are  entitled  to  go  on  as 
we  are  doing  in  this  trial,  althoogh  the  crime 
tried  be  treason.  .      < 

^  Provided  also^  and  it  is  hereby  dedared, 
that  any  person  who  shall  be  tried  and  ao- 
quitted,  or  convicted  of  any  offence  against 
tfiis  act,  shall  not  be  •  liable  to  be  indicted 
prosecuted,  or  tried  again  for.  the  same  offence 
or  fact,  as  high  treason,  or ,  misprision  of  high 
treason ;  and  that  nothing  in  this  act  contained 
i  shall  be  construed  to  extend  to  prohibit  any 
'  person  guilty  of  any  offence  against  this  act, 
and  who  shall  not  be  tried  for  tiie  same  as  an 
offence  against  this  act,  from  being  tried  for 
the  same  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of  high 
treason,  in  sudi  manner  as  if  this  act  had  not 
beeu  ntadeh" 

Even  iflhiseet  had  aever  existad,  I  shonid 
have  been  prepared  to  maintain,  on  the  or- 
dinary rule^  of  law,  the  competency  of  trying 
under  a  lower  denomination  of  crime :  what 
might  have  been  tried  as  treason  but  the  dause 
now  quoted  is  quite  conclusive.  There  is, 
therefore,  nothing  in  the  ciroumstanoe  that  the 
criminal  proceedings  set  forth  in  the-  iiarrative 
of  the  indictment  happen  to  be  of  a  treasonable 
nature,  that  can  make  any  difference  in  the 
case ;  and  I  submit,  that  as  they  form  part  of 
the  res  gata  at  the  time  of  administering  the 
oath,  and,  naturally  enter  into  the  history  of 
the  transaction,  they  ought  to  be  admitted  to 

{>roof,  and  found  relevant  with  the  rest  of  the 
ibel.  The^  are  intimately  and  inseparablT 
coi^iected  with  the  proof  of  the  crime  cnar|;ed, 
and  afford  the  clearest  and  most  relevant  mii» 
da  than  can  be  imagined  of  the  guilty  purpose 
of  the  panel.  It  seems  unnecessary  to  add 
that  if  it  be  relevant  to  introduce  this  statement 
narraiivif  the  same  specification  is  not  requisite 
as  if  it  had  been  made  the  "subject  of  a  sub- 
stantive charge ;  and  I  should  not  have  made 
this  remark  at  all,  unless  there  had  appeared  a 
disposition  to  argue  upon  this  narrative,  as  if 
the  relevancy  of  it  were  to  be  tried  by  the 
same  rules  as  a  charge  in  the  indictment.  .  . 
It  was  said  by  the  learned  gentleman,  that, 
the  particulars  charged  as  what  the  parties 
bound  themselves  to  commit,  would  not  have 
amounted  to  high  treason  even  if  they  had 
been  carried  into  effect.  But  how  it  can  be 
maintained  that  the  employment  of  force  to 
accomplish  public  measures  of  this  description 
is  not  treason,  I  cannot  conceive.  It  appears 
to  me  to  be  beyond  the  ingenuity  of  even  the 
learned  gentleman  himself,  to  persuade  any 
person,  that,  a  public  measure  of  any  sort  may 
DO  accomplished,  not  to  say  the  fundamental 
principles  of  the  constitution  subverted  by 
force,  by  a  number  of  persons  conspiring  to« 
getherfor  that  purpose  without  levying  war 
agaist  the  king.  According  to  my  view  of. 
the  law,  I  might  have  been  entitled  to  charge 
the  administration  of  the  oath  itself  as  h«h^ 
treason.  The  wor^s.of  the  statute  36  G.  ifl^ 
c.  7.  seem  completely  in  point,  as  tq  the  trea-; 
sonable  nature  of  the  association  and  the  oath.. 


174] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  WaUam  E^ar 


1176 


^  tf  asy  person  or  penonn,  fcc.  shall  obmpttsSy 
,  imagine,  meat,  dernse,  or  intend  deam  or 
destraottbnj^  See.  kc*  or  to  deprive  or  depose 
him,  &c.  or  to  levy  war  against  his  Majestj, 
in  order,  by  force  or  constraint,  to  compel  him 
to  change  his  measures  or  counsels,  or  in  order 
fo  put  any  force  or  constraint  upon,  or  to  in- 
timidate or  overawe  both  Houses,  or  either 
House  of  Pariiament-«--4UDd  suoh  compas* 
sings,  imaginations,  tnTentions,  devices  or  in^ 
tentions,  or  any  of  them  shall  express,  titter,  or 
declare,  by  publishing  any  printmg  or  wnting, 
or  by  any  overt'  act  or  deed^"-  £vea  under 
the  first  head  of  the  statute  of  Sdward  III. 
it  might  have  been  maintained  to  be  treason 
to  conspire  for  the  <cttainment  of  universal 
anffirage  and  annual  Parliaments  by  foroe;  and 
the  oath  and  secret  meeting  might  have  been 
given  in  evidence  as  overt  acts. 

But  it  is  unnecessary  to  enter  upon  the 
question,  whether  the  acts  libelled  as  having 
been  done,  might  have  justified  a  charge  of 
treason.  It  is  «iough  for  the  present  purpose 
to  say,  that  if  the  force  which  the  parties  bound 
themselves  bj  this  oath  to  use,  for  obtaining 
annual  parliaments  and  universal  suflVage,  had 
been  actually  employed  for  those  purposes 
.  (which  are  not  only  of  a  public  nature,  but 
utterly  subversive  of  the  whole  frame  of  the 
constitution)  this  would  clearly  have  been  that 
species  of  treason  which  consists  in  levying 
war  against  the  king. 

It  vras  said,  that  the  coneluding  part  of  the 
indictment  does  not  correspond  with  what 
goes  before,  as  the  charge  of  intending  is  omit- 
ted, and  that  of  purporting  only  relied  upon. 
It  is  .true,  that  the  prosecutor  relies  completely 
on  the  charge  of  purportmgy  because  the  pur- 

Eort  and  open  meaning  of  the  oath  is  so  clear ; 
ut  the  proper  answer  to  this  critical  objection 
is,  that  it  is  quite  unnecessary  and  unusual  to 
repeat  in  this  part  of  an  indictment  the  whole 
expressions  previously  used,  as  it  sdways  bears 
such  a  reference  to  what  goes  before,  as  to 
point  the  attention  to  the  preceding  description 
as  that  which'  is  here  spoken  of.  Thus,  ^'  Times 
and  placesybreaauj  the  said  oath  or  engage- 
ment,'' &c.  This  is  the  usual  style,  and  it  is 
not  customary  to  repeat  all  the  preceding 
epithets  and  qualifications  which  are  included 
and  held  repeated  by  the  reference  to  what 
goes  before. 

I  am  sensible  that  there  are  many  things 
which  I  have  omitted,  but  I  will  not  detain 
your  lordships  longer. 

Mr.  SoUcUof  General. — In  concluding  the 
debate  on  the  part  of  the  crown,  I  must  be 
pardoned  for  observing  in  behalf  of  the  prose- 
cutor, that  nothing  is  or  can  be  more  remote 
from  his  intention,  than  to  introduce  into  the 
law  of  the  land  any  of  those  constructive 
treasons  tp  which  reference  was  made  by  my 
learned  friend  at  the  commencement  of  his 
speech  for  the  panel.  Nothing  can  be  more 
remote  from  the  intention  of  the  public  pro- 
secutor in  Scotland  at  any  period.  And  if 
such  a  profligate  design  existea,  it  would  meet 


with  a  sure  and  signal  defeat  from  the  ind^ 
pendence  of  the  bar,^and  firaim  the  vigour  and 
integrt^  of  the  court. 

The  present  prosecution  does  not  involve 
any  eharge  of  constructive  treason.  It  is 
founded  upon  a  statute  of  recent  introduction  ; 
a  statute  quite  plain  and  explicit;  a  statute 
which,  very  unfortunately  for  tne  country,  the 
late  comiption  of  the  public  mind  and  of  ^e 
moral  habits  of  some  part  of  the  population 
has  rendered  necessary  for  the  protection  of 
the  state. 

In  answering  the  argument  nudntained  for 
the  panel,  I  must  take  leave  to  recai  to  your 
lordships'  notice  two  of  the  species  of  treaeoov 
which  were  not  introduced,  but  vrell  definedv 
by  the  statute  of  £dward  III.  These  two 
species  of  treason  are,— ^irtf.  Compassing  the 
death  of  the  king^  fe60iu%,  Levying  war 
against  the  king. 

Your  lordships  are  all  aware,  that  by  dedar^ 
ing  and  defining  the  first  species  of  treason, 
the  legislature  Stowed  upon  a  mental  act — 
upon  the  imagining,  or  compassing  ip  the 
mind,  the  death  of  die  king— the  character  of 
a  completed  crime,  punishable  by  a  luj^  sane* 
tion ;  and  it  provided,  that  in  the  case  of  this 
highest  offence  against  the  state,  mere  intMH 
tion  (which  in  other -cases  is  not  cognizable  by 
the  criminal  tribunals  to  that  effect)  shoiM 
held  the  same  rank  in  the  scale  of  guilt  kmi. 
of  punishment  with  a  completed  act.  It  rein 
dered  the  compassing  or  imagining^  Uiemere 
conception  or  design  of  destroying  the  king^ 
punimable  with  the  pains  of  treason.  There 
IS  a  remarkable  distinction,  therefore,  between 
this  class  of  erimee  and  all  others.  It  may  be 
said  generally,  almost  without  exception,  that 
the  mere  compassing  of  any  other -act,  the 
mere  compassing  of  murder,  for-  instance,  the 
criminally  imagpining  suoh  a  deed  is  not  a 
cognizable  crime,  at  least  is  not  cogniiable  as 
the  crime  of  murder.  But  in  this  department 
of  the  law  the  ease  is  different.  The  imagi- 
nation of  the  king's  death  is  the  statutory 
crime>  and  nothing  more  is  required  than  an 
overt  act,  by  which  this  imagining  is  infened 
or  proved. 

As  to  the  next  species  of  treason^  that  of 
levying  war  against  the  king,  I  do  not  mean 
to  give  an  opinion  upon  die  question,  whether 
the  mere  imagining  of  it,  as  proved  by  the 
administering  or  taking  an  oath,  or  by  any 
thing  short  of  the  total  or  partial  execution  of 
the  act  of  levying  war,  would  be  held  to  foil 
under  the  statute.  I  am  not  here  called  upon 
to  offer  any  opinion  on  sneh  a  question.  But 
you  wilt  see  by  and  by  the  reason  why  T 
have  ealled  jc^t  attention  to  the  drcomslancea 
which  have  now  been  stated. 

On  die  supposidoa,  that  by  the  former  and 
existing  law  it  was  donbtfiil  whether  in  the 
geneml  case  the  mere  intentio%  or  imagining; 
or  compassing  to  commit  any  treason,  when 
not  reauced'  into  action,  is  in  itself  treason, 
the  statute  of  the  52d  of  the  king  was  intro- 
duced, the  object  of  which  was,  to  bring  the 


Jbr  Aimmideriiig  mlm^  Oaikt. 


«7Y) 

frfftifffr  €f  committiiig  treasoD,  when  so  &r 
matuTed  as  to  be  reoaeied  obligatory  hy  an 
oath,  into  tlie  class  d  crimes  pooishabk 
with  death.  Bjr  tbe  previefiis  law,  it  might 
perhaps  be  donbttiil  tihether  such  criminal  in- 
tention could  in  oertata  cases  infer  a  capital 
fNuishaient.  Bot  when  the  intention  is  ap- 
piozimated  to  esecotion  by  an  oath,  and  is 
manifested  by  snch  as  overt  act,  when  it  is 
accompanied  by  an  oath,  to  commit  and  con- 
ceal it,  tiie  legislature  has  enacted  that  it  shall 
be  pfinished  as  a  capital  crime.  That  the  act 
described  so  distinctly  in  the  statute  is  a 
iiigb  dfence,  an  ofenoe  from  which  the  great- 
caa>danger  to  the  public  may  be  apprehended', 
and  by  -which  the  deepest  depravity  of  heart 
in  the  perpetiator  is  proved,  no  man  will 
▼entnre  to  aispute.  I  can  see  no  reason  why 
the  highest  sanction  should  not  be  affixed 


4. 0;  xm- 


well  as  its  i^^plication  to  the  picvtotts  law,  and 
its  necessity  m  the  drcumstsACM  and  chancte? 
of  the  countiy,  on  which  I  have  insistei^,  to  be 
correct,  J  solicit  your  attention  to  the  first,  and, 
in  my  mind,  by  far  the  most  important  objeo* 
tion  Uiat  has  been  made,  as  to  the  mode  in 
.which  the  libel  is  laid.  That  ob|ection  con- 
sists of  two  points  in  law,  as  I  understand  it 
In  the  firit  place,  that  the  oath  taken  does  not, 
upon  a  fidr  construction  of  it,  amount  to  the 
oflenoe  stated  in  the  major  proposition ;  or,  in 
other  words,' to  the  statutoir  offence.  And 
thett,  supposing  it  did,  it  is  alleged,  secondly^ 
that  in  the  indictment  there  is  a  vrant  of 
specification  of  circumstances,  and  detail  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  intended  treason  was  to 
be  committed. 

I  call  your  attention,  in  the  jirs<  place,  to  the 
terms  of  the  oath,  for  I  have  no  hesitation 


hich  are  used.  '^That  every  person 
who  shall,  in  any  manner  or  form  wluitsoever, 
adviaister  or  cause  to  be  administered,  or  be 
aiding  or  assisting  at  the  administering  of  any 
oath  or  engagement,  purporting  or  inteodiiig 
to  bind  the  person  taking  the  same  to  commit 
aay  treason,  or  nraider,  or  any  felony  punish- 
able br  law  with  death,  shall,  on  eonvictioo 
thereof  by  due  course  of  law,  be  adjudged 
guilty  of  fiilony,  and  Mbr  death  as  a  felon, 
without  benefit  of  deigy.*'  It  is  plain,  in 
looking  to  tbe  terms  of  the  statute,  that  it  did 
notcoi^eniplatean  ad  uriiich  has  been  done^  but 
one  wlucfa  is  to  be  done ;  which  exists  only  in 
intention,  bnt  which,  at  the  same  time,  exists 
in  a  amtnred  intention;  an  intention  passing 
froB  the  heart  of  one  man  to  the  heart  of 
anodier,  and  attended  by  the  obligation  of  an 
oadi  te  the  eonoealment  and  accomplishment 
ef  the  jBu^ined  crime.  And  sure  I  am,  that 
it  iaimpoenhle  for  aoy<one  taking  this  view  of  it 
not  to  be  of  opinion,  that  the  act  defined  is  not 
BMrely  a  statutory  crime,  but  must  be  feU  and 
eeafaMed  to.be  a  crime  by  the  common  sense 
aadimiversal  feelingsof  dvilixed  man.  At  all 
tiaMsand  in  afi  pUiMs  it  is  a  crime,  and  in  no 
plaeeor  comtrj  is  it  more  criminal  than  in 
Holland,  utere  there  exists,  in  many  districts  of 
it  at  leasts  a  religious  feeling  amountiag-almost 
to  fanaticism ;  and  .where  a  union  of  political 
and  laligSons  pasaions  mast  create  in  tha  vul- 
gar mfaid  a  darker,  and  more  atrodous  cha- 


tlie  commission  of  it.  I  submit  that  all  this  is  I  in  sa^ng,  thai  if  this  oath  do  not  of  itself,  and 
as  dear  as  the  sun,  and  that  neither  the  ;  in  fair  and  honest  construction,  amount  to  the 
legishaure  nor  the  public  pfo^cutor  can  be  '  crime  laid  in  the  major  proposition,  there  i$  no 
barged  with  any  design  of  introducing  coo-  !  case  before  you.  For  I  have  no  intention  (I 
atractive  treason,  by*  demanding  the  ioflietion  I  disclaim  it,  and  no  one  can  with  truth  impute 
of  a  capital  puidshment  on  such  a  crime.  |  it)  to  press  a  severe  or  harsh  construction  of 

Taking  that  view  of  theobjects  and  purposes  !  the  oath.    The  terms  of  this  oath  have  been 
of  the  statnte,  and  considering  it  with  refer-  ;  often  read  to  you,  and,  however  disagreeable 
to  the  prindples  and  system  of  the  law  i  it  mav  be  to  repeat  that  which  you  have  so  often 

heard,  the  importance  of  the  case  must  be  m]^ 
apology  for  again  readiug  its  words  and  sub« 
(offdships  wiU  be    f^eased^to  attend  to  the  |  jecting  it  to  a  critical  examination.     . 

I  may  here  state,  that  in  construing  the  oath 
there  can  be  little  room  for  difference  of  opinion 
as  to  theprittcipleon  which  you  ought  to  proceed. 
I  am  willing  to  admit,  that  the  panel  .at  the  bar 
is  not  to  be  ensnared  hj  any  subtle,  recondite^ 
and  remote  iaterpretation  of  the  oath,  by  any 
interpretation  different  from  that  which  an  or- 
dinary man  would  put  upon  it,  on  reading  it 
from  beginning  to  end.  But  I  maintain  with 
equal  confidence,  that  the  panel  cannot  escape 
from  the  law,  and  the  public  safety  is  not  to 
be  eikdangered,  by  a  construotioii  in  his  favour, 
which  is  recondite  or  subtle«-4y  an  interpr^ 
tation  of  the  oath,  which  it  plainly  could  not  bear 
in  his  own  mind,  and  which  plainly  he  knew  it 
did  not  bear  in  the  minds  of  those  to  whom  it 
was  administered.  Between  these  two  ex« 
tremes,  it  is  your  peculiar  province  to  strike 
out  the  middle  .course,  and  to  adopt  that  just 
and  rational  interpretation  which  will  not  only 
command  tihe  acquiescence,  but  the  approb%* 
tion  of  the  public  prosecutor.  * 

What  does  the  oath  sayP    ^^In  the  awful 
presence  of  God,  I,  A  B,  do  voluntarily  swear 
that  I  will  persevere  in  my  endeavouring  to 
form   a  brotheriiood   of    affection   amongst 
Britons  of  every  description,  who  are  consi- 
dered worthy  oi  confidence."    I  concur  with 
my  learned  friend  in  sayino^  that  this  part  of 
the  oath,  if  taken  by  itsdl^  is  perfectly  inno- 
cent   The  oath  goes  on,  **  And  that  I  wi|l 
penevere  in  my  endeavours  >  to  obtain  for  all 
Ifhe  people  in  Oreat  Britain  and  Irdand,  not 
Holdiaff,  as  I  do,  with  a  confidence  not  in-   disquulified  by  crimes  or  insani^,  the  electiva 
ferior.to  vuki  whidi  has  bean  expressed  on  the    franchise,  at  the  age  of  twenty-one,  with  free 
dde^  the  inteimuliQnof  the  statute,  as   and  equal  lenresantalioDi  and  annuel  parlis* 

VOL.  xxzm.  N 


1791        57  GEORGE  IIL 


^Tud  tf  WiUum  E^r 


C180 


nents ;  and  that  I  will«8upport  the  tame  to  tlie 
utmost  of  my  power,  either  hj  moral  or 
physical  strength,  as  the  case  may  require: 
And  I  do  further  swear,  that  neithtr  hopes, 
fears,  rewards,  or  punishments,  shall  induce 
ine  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence  against,  anj 
member  or  members,  collectirely  or  indivi- 
dnally,  for  any  act  or  expression  done  or  made, 
in  or  out,  in  this  or 'similar  societies,  under  the 
punishment  of  death,  to  be  inflicted  on  me  by 
any  member  or  members  Df  such  societies.  So 
help  me  God,  and  keep  me  stediast.*^  Two 
questions  have  been  raised  on  this  part  of  the 
oath.  The  counsel  for  the  panel  has  main- 
tained two  propositions.  First, Thai  the  words 
**  tttpport  the  mant^^  mean,  that  the  oath-taker 
was  to  support  annual  parliaments  and  univer- 
sal suffrage,  after  these  mighty  improvements 
were  estiu>lished  by  I'egular  and  constitutional 
means.  And,  tecmdy  That  even  if  the  words 
nf^pori  Mc  same  mean,  to  support  the  eodea- 
voars  to  obtain  these  objects,  yet  the  p^/ncal 
strength  to  be  used  was  capable  of  being  used 
in  a  manner  not  illegal. 

On  the  first  point,  your  lordships  hava  to 
consider  what  is  here  uuderstood  by  the  word 
seme.  What  is  the  antecedent  to  this  pro- 
noun ?  I  submit,  there  are  only  two  ways  of 
giving  a  sound  construction  of  this  word.  It 
must-  eitfier  apply  to  the  whole  of  the  previous 
branch  of  the  sentence,  or  to  a  part  ot  it.  If 
the  first  is  adopted,  and  if  it  be  held  to  embrace 
the  whole  of  the  previous  part  of  the  sentence, 
and  if  the  antecedent  be  considered  as  thus 
extensive,  then  the  construction  put  upon  it 
by  the  other  side  vnll  be  destroyed;  for  if  the 
word  *'  same"  embraces  all  tba  previous  part 
x>f  tlie  sentence,  it  includes  both  the  use  of 
physical  force  in  obtaitiing  annual  parliaments 
und  universal  suffrage,  and  its  employment  in 
Maintaining  these  objects  after  they  are  accom- 
plished. This  is  a  mode  of  construction  so 
perfectly  fair,  that  the  panels  cannot  object 
to  it. 

'  But  this  is  not  the  construction  which  a  pe- 
rusal of  the  oath  naturally  dictates.  It  is  dear 
that  by  it  the  obligation  to  accomplish  the 
wished-for  changes  by  physical  strengtii  was 
contemplated,  and  that  this. was  the  sole  pur- 
pose of  the  oath.  I  maintain,  that  taking  t^e 
whole  of  the  oath  together,  comprehending  the 
'obligation  to  conoeaJment,  it  is  impossible  to 
consider  it  without  condudinff,  not  by  a  remote 
and  distant  cotistruction, but  Indirect  rational 
necessary  inference,  that  the  parties  had  in 
thdr  minds  a  criminal  accomplishment  of  their 
designs,  and  the  moment  criminal  intention  is 
granted  tome,  it  folfows  that  there  can  be  no 
criminal  accomplishment  of  this  design,  but 
flueh  as  would  oe  treason.  The  reasonable, 
the  ftur  constmction,  •  thai  which  -obvionsly 
mnst  have  have  been  in  the  mind  of  the  giver 
aikd  taker  of  the  oath,  is,  that  the  wvrd  same 
bad  no  other  application  than  that  wksich  I 
^bave  stated,  viz.  to  bind  to  the  use  of  phy- 
sical strength  for  the  attainment  of  the'object. 
-This  is  the  eorveet|  graminatical  ooBBtnictum^ 


pointed  out,  not  only  by  the  juxtaposition  of 
the  vrords,  but  by  the  general  sense  of  the  whole 
passage  and  of  the  vriiole*  oath ;  and  it  fs  im^ 
possible  to  put  an^  other  inteipretation  upon 
It,  without  sacrificing  the  pubuc  safety,  and 
public  law  to  a  forced  and  subtle  construction. ' 
I  do  not  dweti  longer  on  this  point,  bo- 
cause  truly  it  lies  in  a  nut-shell,  and  if  by 
merely- stating  it,  I  do  not  shew  that  I  am  in 
the  right,  I  despair  of  doing  so  by  any  length 
6f  argument. 

Now,  your  lordships  have  to  consider^ 
whether,  supposing  it  were  established  that  the 
obligation  in  the  oath  is  to  support  endeavours 
to  obtain  annual  parliaments  and  univecsal 
suffrage*  by  physical  strength,  the  act  which 
was  thus  meditated,  does,  li  accomplished, 
amount  to  treason.  That  such  purpose  woidd, 
if  accomplished,  have  constituted  treason,  is 
proved  by  the  concurrent  testimony  of  all  law* 
yers  ancient  and  modem.  The  essence  of 
treason  consists*  in  the  application  of  force 
to  the  accomplishment  of  an  alteration  in  any 
general  law.  How  did  tty  learned  Mend  get 
out  of  this  dilemma?  He  maintained  ml 
physical  strength  forttie  accomplishment  of  any 
diaiMre  in  the  laws  of  this  kingdom,  might  by 
possibility  be  exercised  without  committing 
treason ;  and  this  he  iflustrated  by  supposing  the 
case  of  the  Sneaker  of  Uie  House  ox  Commons 
being  forced  ny  threats  and  violence  to  consent 
to  a  bill  for  the  abolition  of  the  House  of  Lords, 
or  of  anv  of  the  branches  of  the  constitution, 
which  bul  having  passed  the  House  of  Lords, 
had  its  fote  dependent  on  the  Speaker's  casting 
vote.  That  whimsical  case  can  scarcely  be 
called  a  case  in  illustration ;  but  if  it  were 
neoessaiy  for  me  to  enter  into  that  supposed 
case,  I  would  say  without  hesitation,  that  here 
was  treason,  not  merely  under  the  act  of  '^e 
36th  of  the  king,  but  under  what  I  may  call  the 
previous  common  law  of  the  land.  Many  de- 
cisions might  be  referred  to,  to  establish  this. 
But  I  have  no  occasion  to  enter  upon  sudi  an 
inapplicable  question. 

The  other  instanoes  of  the  possible  exertions 
of  physical  force  in  the  accomplishment  of  the 
purposes  contemplated  by  the  panel  and  bis 
associates  are  utieriy  absurd.  It  is  said,  that 
physical  force  may  be  exerted  in  the  canying 
of  messages,  in  the  erection  of  hustings,  in  die 
keeping  off  the  crovrds,  and  in  various  other 
ways  which  are  all  innocent,  and  whid^  are  sJl 
Gondaeive  to  the  attainment  of  the  objects  in 
view.  I  contend,  that  in  these  illustrations 
the  tounsel  for  the  panel  forget  or  overiook  the 
distinction  between  the  terms  moral  said 
physical,  as  employed  to  characterise  humlm 
action.  When  a  man  delivers  an  oration, heis 
tmdeiBtflod  in  Ammon  language  to  exercise  his 
moral  power  or  strength.  But  my  learned 
friends  must  admit,  thateome  pbyncal  force  or 
strength  is  also  at  the  same  time  everted.  To 
make  the penl^th which  the  poliiioal  oaHoria 
tovrrite,  to  carry  the  bench  fromwhieh  the 
political  orator  is  to  deelaim,  to  keep  off  ti»e 
cr^wd  vrith  which  the  poUtidal  orator- woald 


ISI] 


for  Atbkitdderiiig  unlawful  Oalht, 


A.  D.  I8I7. 


Il8i» 


Otherwise  be  incominoJedy  are  all  actions  sub- 
serrient  to  the  moral  powers  which  are  to  be 
exerted.  It  is  impossible  to  d^ny  this  without 
GonfoQDdin^  the  disdnction  between  the  terms 
moral  and  physical.  Ko  moral  power  can  be 
exercised  by  man  without  physical  exertion^ 
Ifut  when  the  distinction  to  whidi  I  have  ad- 
verted is  reooUectedy  the  iUnstrationv  which 
have  been  offered  are  either  in  themf  eUes  ab- 
sard,  or  are  against  the  argument  of  the  panel, 
and  most  be  classed  with  moral,  and  not  pby* 
sical  exertiona. 

The  obligation  in  the  oath  is,  to  employ 
moral  and  phjvical  strength,  as  the  case  may 
Mquire — tlAt  is,  such  moral  strength,  as  the 
case  may  require,  and  such  physicil  strength, 
as  the  case  may 'require.— It  is  thus  clear,  3iat 
tbe  terms  of  the  oath  do  not  bear  a  limitation 
to  that  innocent  sort  of  force  by  the  criminal 
example  of  which  the  learned  counsel  illus- 
trated his  argument.  According  to  the  dear 
terms  of  tbe  oath,  such  physical  strength  was 
to  be  employed  as  the  case  might  require,  for 
the  accomplishment  of  the  purposes  which 
bare  been  mentioned.  What,  I  ask,  are  we 
to  understand — what  is  the  le^  inference 
from  the  construction  I  have  given?  It  is, 
that  physical  strength,  «s  the  exigency  might 
require^  was  to  be  used  for  the  aocoqtiplish- 
ment  of  a  change  in  the  constitution. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  advert  to  the  extreme 
absordity  of  endeavouring  to  distinguish  be- 
tween tlMS  meaning  of  the  words  sfrev^M  and 
Jane.  They  are  certainly  synonymous  terms; 
and  for  the  present  purpose,  at  least,  no  dis- 
tinctioD  can  be  stated  between  them,  either  in 
popular  or  technical  use.  It  is  impossible  to 
acoompliah  the  alteration  or  subversion  of 
any  part  of  the  constitution  by  physical  force, 
^thonty  in  legal  acceptation,  levying  war  for 
ihat  purpose,  or  compassing  the  king*s  death, 
•r  bein^  guilty  of  some  oUier  treason.  '  The 
application  of  numerical  physical  strength  is 
nothing  else  but  the  levying  of  war.  JBut  if 
war  be  levied  within  the  lungdom  for  any 
|(aiiecal  purpose, — ^for  the  purpose  of  subvert- 
ing any  of  me  branches  of  the  constitution, — 
th^  war  is  understpod  to  be  r  levied  against 
the  king,  who,  being  the  executive,  is  bound 
to  protect  the  other  branches  of  the  Legisla* 
tare.  This  is  the  import  of  all  the  antborities, 
to  some  of  which'  I  may  now.  direct  the  atten*> 
lion  of  the  Court. 

The  first  authority  to  which  I  refer  is  that 
tif  Bladcstone,  who  states  the  law  in  a  brief 
and  popular  form.  ^  The  third  species  of  treason 
n^  '  It  a  nan  do  levy  war  affunst  our  lord  tbe 
hug  in  his  realm**  And  this  may  be  done 
bj  taking  anns^  not  only  to  dethrone  the  king, 
wA  aader  pretence  to  reform  religion,  or  the 
tows,  or  to  remove,  evil  counsellors,  or  other 
grievances,  whether  real  er  pretended.  For, 
tbe  law  does  not,  neither  4^.  it,  permit  any 
private  man,  or  set  -of  men,  to  interfere 
Miciblyin  matteis  of  such  high,  importance'; 
especially  as  it  ^as;  eitablished  a  sufficient 
power,  loi  these  purposes,  in  the  bigb  court  of 


Parliament:  neither  does  the  constitution 
justify  any  private  or  particular  resistance  for 
private  or  particular  griefances;  though  in^ 
cases  of  national  oppr^ion  the  nation  has' 
very  justifiably  ris^n  as  one  man,  to  vindicate 
the  origins^l  contract  subsisting  between  the 
king  and  his  people."  * 

Ibe  next  authoritv  to  which  I  refer  is  that  of 
£w<er,  a  book  which  is  daily  cited  by  English 
Judges,  as  an  undoubted  authority.  I  quote 
from  page  211. — "Insurrections  in  order  to 
throw  down  all  enclosures,  to  alter  the  esta« 
blished  law,  or  change  religion,  to  enhance  the 
price  of  all  labour,  or  to  open  all  prisons — all 
risings,  in  order  to  effect  these  innovations,  of 
a  public  and, general  concern,  by  an  armed 
force  are,  in  construction  of  law,  high  treason, 
within  the  clause  of  levying  war ;  for  though 
they  are  not  levelled  at  the  person  of  the  king, 
they  are  against  hisjt>yal  majesty;  and  be- 
sides, th^  have  a  direct  tendency  to  dissolve 
all  the  bonds  of  society,  and  to  destroy  all 
property,  and  all  government  too,  by  numbers 
and  an  armed  force.  Insurrections  likewise 
for  redressing  national  grievances,  or  for  the 
expulsipn  of  foreigners  in  general,  or  indeed 
of  any  single  nation  livins  here  under  the 
protection  of  the  king,  or  tor  the  reformation 
of  real  or  imaginary  evils  of  a  public  nature, 
and  in  which  the  insurgents  have  no  special 
interest— risings  to  effect  these  ends  by  force 
and  numbers  are,  by  construction,  of  law, 
within  the  clause  of  levying  war;  for  they 
are  levelled  at  the  kings  crown,  and  royal 
dignity." 

the  only  other  authority  to  which  I  shall^ 
refer,  is  that  of  a  Judge,  than  whom  none  was 
ever  more  highly  or  more  deservedly  honoured 
during  a  long  and  splendid  career.  I. quote 
from  the  summing-up  of  lord  Mansfield  on 
lord  George  Gordon's  trial. — *'  There  are  two 
kinds  of  levying  war : — One  against  the  per^^ 
son  of  tbe  king;  to  imprison,  to  dethrone,  or 
to  kill  him ;  or  to  knake  him  change  measures 
or  remove  counsellors : — ^llie  other,  which  It 
said  to  be  levied  against  the  majesty  pf  the 
king,  or,  in  other  words,  against  him  in  his 
regal  capacity ;  as  when  a  multitude  rise  and 
assemble  to  attain  by  force  and  violence  any 
object  of  a  general  public  nature;  that  is 
levying  war  against,  the  majesty  of  the  king ; 
and  most  reasonably  so  held,  because  it  tend^ 
to  dissolve  all  the  bonds  of  society,  to  destroy 
property,  and  to  overturn  government;  and  by. 
force  of  arms  to  restrain  the  king  from  reigi> 
ing  according  to  law. 

^Insurrections,  by  force  and  violence,  to 
raise  the 'price  of  wages,  to  open  all  prisons, 
to  destroy  meeting-bouses,  nay,  to  destroy  all 
brothels,  to  resist  the  execution  of  militia  laws, 
to  throw  down  all  inclosures,  to  alter  the  esta- 
blished law,  or  change  religion,  to  redress 
grievances  real  or  preiended,  have  all  been 
held  levying  war.  Many  otiier  instances 
might  be  put.    Lord  Chief  Justice  lloli,  iu 

*  4Comm.  ai. 


gir  Jobn  Friend's  cas«,  says,  ^^if  pevsoin  do 
assemble  themselves,  and  act  witn  force  in 
opposition  to  some  law  which  they  think  in* 
coDTenient,  and  ho^  thereby  to  get  it  re- 
pealed, this  is  a  levying  war,  and  treason."  In 
the  present  case,  it  don't  rest  npon  an  impli- 
eation  that  they  hoped  by  opposition  to  a  uiw 
to  get  it  repealed,  but  the  prosecotion  proceeds 
npon  the  direct  ground,  tnat  the  object  waiy 
by  force  and  violence,  to  compel  the  Legis- 
lature to  repeal  a  law;  imif  tAere/bre,  witAoitf 
fifty  doubif  lUU  you  the  jomi  opinion  ofvsaUj 
that  J  if  thii  mtdmide  auembled  with  intent^  by 
ccts  y  force  and  violence^  to  compel  <Ae  L^U' 
lature  to  rneal  a  Imo,  it  ii  high  tmmm. 

^Tboogn  the  form  of  an  indictment  for 
this  species  of  treason  mentions  drums,  trum- 
pets, arms,  swords,  fifos,  and  guns^ye^  ntme  of 
ikt$e  dramntoRca  are  etMentiaL  The  quettion 
choeysiMy  Whether  the  intent  tt  hy  farce  and  vio^ 
knee  to  obtain  an  oljeet  of  a  general  andmtbtic 
nature  by  any  imtrwnents,  or  bydmt  of  their 
numbertf  Whoever  incites,  advises,  encon- 
nget,  or  is  any  way  aiding  to  sudi  a  multitude 
so  assembled  with  such  intent,  though  he  does 
not  personally  appear  an>oog  them,  or  vrith 
his  own  hands  commit  any  violence  whatsoever, 
yet  he  is  equally  a  principal  with  those  who 
act,  and  guilty  of  nigh  treason/'*  .Many 
other  authorities  to  the  same  effect  might  be 
accumulated.  I  need  not  quote  Hume,  who 
«ves  a  very  luminous  abstract  of  all  the 
English  antboritieron  the  subject,  and  gives  a 
summary  which,  in  perspicuity  and  preci- 
sion, is  not  surpassed  by  the  boasted  oracles 
df  English  law. 

I  say,  therefore,  on  these  authorities,  it  is 
utterly  impossible  to  imagine  that  any  change 
*in  the  constitution  can  be  accomplished  by 
physical  strength,  without  necessarily  implying 
— not  constructively,  but  necessarily  implying 
— 4hat  it  is  done  by  force  and  violence.  Levy- 
ing war  is  nothing  more  than  the  application 
of  an  act  which  is  treason.  The  for&v  or  mode 
of  this  act  may  probably  be  that  of  levying 
war,  to  overcome  or  prevent  resistance.  It 
does  not  consist  in  having  drums,  or  uniformity 
of  dress,  or  the  other  usual  appendages  of 
warlike  pomp.  It  does  not  consist  in  any 
particular  kind  of  offensive  arms,  but  in  the 
application  of  a  powerNk  and  numerous  force; 
and  it  is  impossible  tl^t  strength  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  any  change  in  die  consti- 
tution can  be  applied  in  any  way,  so  as  not  to 
include  the  crime  of  treason,  either  of  levying 
war,  or  of  compassing  the  king's  death,  or  m 
treason,  under  the  Stat.  36  G.  III.  That 
which  is  accomplished  by  force  can  only  be 
dotie  iub  rpeae  oelUf  in  so  fer  at  those  terms 
have  any  intelligible  meaning,  and  the  same 
quality  must  characterise  that  which  is  in« 
tendea  mt  resolved  to  be  donei  I  submit, 
therefore,  that  the  construction  given  by  die 
learned  gentleman  to  the  oath  is  erroneous,- 
and  that  the  only  sound,  the  only  legal,  and 


Triai  qflViUiam  Edgttr 


tlM 


•«MM«n 


•  2t  How.  St.  Tr.  644. 


the  only  obvious  eoi)stniction  of  it,  i»  that 
which  I  have  stated  to  your  lordships. 

It  iHs  contended  forther,  however,  tha^ 
supposing  a  treasonable  purpose  to  have  ex- 
isted, it  is  still  necessary  that  it  should  be 
proved  by  and  appear  in  the  oath,  and  in  the 
oath  alone,  in  oruer  to  have  the  Tase  braiught 
under  the  statute.  If  I  rightly  understood 
tiiis  plea,  two  things  were  maintained,  wMch 
I  own  appeared  to  me  to  be  inconsistent:  It 
was  first  maintained,  that  then  is  a  want  of 
specification  in  the  indictment  as  to  the  mode 
in  which  the  treason  contemplated.by  the  oath 
was  to  be  effected ;  next,  it  was  maintained, 
that  in  this  indictment,  charging  the  panda 
with  administering  unlawfM  oaths,  we  are  not 
entitled  to  go  into  any  proof  of  acts  of  treason 
said  to  have  been  committed  \q  them,  for  that 
would  be  to  make  the  proof  of  one  crime  the 

Fr9of  of  the  commi^on'  of  another.    These 
consider  to  be  inconsistent  objections. 

Whether  the  treasonable  purpose  should  ap- 
pear in  the  oath  itself,  to  bring  the  case  witiun 
the  statute,  it  is  unnecessary  to  ame,  because 
in  the  present  case  we  do  not  desire  to  go 
beyond  the  contents  of  the  Oath.  But  in  pas- 
sing, I  roust  deny  that  this  plea  for  the  panel  is 
sound,  or  at  all  warranted  by  the  terms  of  the 
statute. 

With  respect  to  the  other  objections,  I  must 
observe  that  from  the  nature  of  the  crime 
which  the  statute  hasi  defined,  you  neither  can 
require,  nor  can  yon  eiqiect,  in  charging  it, 
a  specification  of  overt  acts  of  treason.  Ac-. 
Corain^  to  the  previous  argument  of  the  panrt, 
the  prosecutor  is  not  entitled  to  prove  any  acts 
of  treason,  if  such  had  been  actually  com- 
mitted, and  herein  lies  the  monstrous  incon* 
sistency  of  his  present  argument.  In  my  view 
of  the  case,  tM  specification  which  the  mad 
thus .  alternately  opposes  and  demandt,  is 
morally  impossible. 

The  charge  hero  is  not  for  the  accomplish- 
ment and  completion  of  the  crime  of  treason ; 
— the  Charge  is  for  the  conception,  the  nia- 
gination  of  treason,  sanctioned  by  an-  oath, 
and  so  far  by  an  overt  act  consisting  in  the 
administration  of  an  oath.  When  a  crime  bas 
not  been  actually  committed  it  is  impossible 
Co  state  the  circumstances  of  mode,  time,  aii^ 
detail  of  execution.  When  a  crime  has  been 
.  committed,  it  is  of  course  an  essential  mode  of 
that  criminal  act,  that  it  was  accompanied  by 
time,  place,  and  circumstances;  and  when  a 

Eanel  is  brought  to  the  Bar  on  a  diarge  of 
aving  committed  a  ciim^  the  prosecutor  can 
have  no  knowledge  regarding  it  without 
knovring  some  of  the  prominent  dreuastances 
of  its  execution.  But  you  must  all  be  aware^ 
that  this  rale  cannot  ap»ply  fo  what  merely 
exists  in  intention.  Of  intention  hete,  ytmr 
lordships  have  evidence  by  the  oath,  and  th« 
oafli  is  such  as  the  statute  has  made  it  a 
crime,  dther  to  adminfoter  or  to  take. 

The  crime  charged  is  the  adaadniBtetisif  an 
oath  of  a  certain  kind,'  and  the  mode  of  tbit 
aot  is  admitted  to  be  suflkiently  ^kldled.    H 


1853 


Jar  AdrnmiiUring  UmIm^  Oathi. 


A.  D.  1817. 


UM 


IB  powble  that^wben  tlie  otth  was  adnius- 
tefedy  not  cme  circmnstiDee  was  finally  ra- 
solved  upon  as  to  the  detail  of  the  ezecation 
of  tike  treaaon  ^-it  is  cpute  pooible  that  no 
ooe  cncomaunoe  nnqr  hare  b^en  fixed  on  as 
to  the  mode  in  whidi  it  was  to  have  been 
carried  into  elfeet ; — and  no  lesoliitions  adopt- 
ed as  a>  the  ooune  of  proceeding  to  be  folkm- 
ed  fiw  the  nocompHaoment  of  the  atrocions 
imiposea  of  the  parties.    Diflerent  plans  ma^ 
tare  eiiated  in  the  minds  of  difiierent  consp- 
lators; — ^therenay  have  been  nnmeioasdttH 
pvtea  on  the  anbject :— end  therefore^  from  the 
very  naftnre  of  the  statntoiy  crim^  it  is  hn* 
poanble  that  any  snch  detail  as  the  opposite 
yeity  raqniin  could  be  given ;  and  it  is  enon^ 
lo  any  thai  the  statute  has  not  required  it. 
The  nature  of  the  treaaon  which  the  oath  bound 
the  parties  to  commit  is  as  much  specified  as 
it  is  poaaible  fi>r  the  public  praaecutor,  or  for 
any  human  being,  to  spedfv*    He  has  said, 
that  the  treaaon  contemplated  waa  iiM  vdiich 
cenaismd  in  compelling  an  alteration  in  the 
aataifaliabed  laws  by  force  and  violence.    That 
this  would   be  treason^    who   can   doubt  t 
Wbethepy  in  the  actual  aeoomplislunent  of  it, 
the  erimhals  would  have  levied  war  against 
the  king,  in  the  sense  in  which  the  law  uses 
dwaetennsy  or  whether  they  would  have  com* 
paased  or  imagined  the  death  of  ttie  king,  or 
whether  both  these  legal  Crimea  would  have 
been  perpetrated  in  the  actual  conaammatvM 
of  dieirpurpeae,  whocanpfetend  tosay?  To 
demand,  that  the  public  diould  divine  and 
specify  the  mode  in  which  ^  treason  was 
•etnaliy'to  be  perpelmted,  isaDsuid  andim* 
poasibte,  because  Uie  modes  ate  various.    To 
deBBsad  tfamt  he  should^spedfy  all  the  modes 
m  whicii  the  intended  treason  ought  to  be  per- 
petrated, is  plainly  unneceasary  and  uaeMtt* 
It  ia  aofficient  fivr  him  to  satisfy  your  lortehipi^ 
'that  the  object  contemplated  if  the  oadi  could 
ftot  be  aoeompUAed  but  by  means  of  treason ; 
and  on  tins  I  have  already  statod  m  v  argument, 
na  Ihe  w<»d8  of  the  highest  anthontieB  of  the 
Aaw. 

Bat  it  was  also  rather  inconsistently  urged, 
tfiat  if  we  had  stated  treason  to  have  been 
committed  witlTall  itactreamataiiceSyWeslMmld 
not  have  been  entitled  to  ofier  any  proof  of 
this  averment,  or  to  give  any  detttl  of  the 
teta  haai,  as  the  panel  is  not  on  hia  trial  for 
high  treason;  and  one  otrjeetion  to  |he  indict- 
aaant  la  to  thenairative  of  details  widi  vriiioh 
the  Btatotory  ofieace  is  iatrodueed.  On  lo<dc- 
iag  into  the  statute,  I  think  it  is  hardly  neeea* 
aaiy  togointothuquestiony  beeanse  itianot 
oeeioimre  that  the  commission  of  o¥cit  acts  <£ 
ummm  Aotdd  be  aJleged.  I  submit  tOto^thA 
avfaat  my  leamed  iriendy  who  Hamediately  ^liro- 
«eded  me  in  behalf  of  the  public  praeecutor, 
acnted  on  this  put  of  the  sntgect,  was  agrees 
•hie  to  the  law  of  Scotland,  and  suffieieiitly 
obviates  a&  that  was  urged  in  .the  way  of  ob- 
jectien  to  ttfirpart  of  th»  ease. 

IncomlneioaL  it  ins  etrondy  and  powei^ 
.ftiB9^«i«fi,  o^a  hWbhi|i  In  %  «ub  oC  ibt 


paiAL  tftet,  though  acquitud  On  diis  oaaarion. 
Be  might  be  afterwards  tried  for  treason.  If 
he  were  to  be  acquitted  of  this  chaige,  and 
afterwards  brouffht  to  trial  ibr  treason,  I  sus- 
pect we  ehould  near  ficom  his  couasel  an  eflbc- 
taal  atgument  a^nst  sodi  second  tiiaL  I 
content  myself  with  aaying,  that  nor  view  and 
interpretatioa  of  ttie  statute  it  totaUy  and  abso- 
lutely different  ftom  that  of  my  leeroed  friend, 
Mr.  Cranstonn,  and  that  m  eonceivei  ftom 
the  temn  of  it,  it  is  impossible  audi  a  second 
trial  could  be  atteaipted.  It  is  said,  in  the 
last  chKise^  '« Ibat  any  person  who  shall  be 
tried,  and  acquitted  or  convicted  of  any  offeneo 
against  this  act,  sleff  not  k  fittfe  lo  fte  MKiid; 
proeeoul0^  or  tritd  flgwii  fbt  ths  toawcwisMCji 
or  factf  as  high  treaaon,  or  misprision  of  hlgii 
treason;  and  mat  nothing  in  this  act  eootaiMd 
shall  be  cousfaued  or  extend  to  prohibit  any 
perMm  guilty  of  any  offenee  against  this  ne^ 
and  who  ahidl  not  be  tried  for  the  same  aa  aa 
offence  against  this  act^ftom  being  tried  for 
the  same  as  high  treason,  or  miipriiian  of 
higfatreaaoui  in  such  manner  as  if  tins  aet  had 
not  been  made.^ 

This  chutte  wae  intended  to  gnrd  aganat 
two  inconveniences.  '1st,  It  waa  intended  tf 
protect  the  eubject  ftom  being  tried  again  aa 
for  tijaaon  upon  the  facts  on  whieh  die  ttailtt- 
toiy  crime  shall  have  been  already  prosecuted^ 
In  odier  words,  it  would  be  impoeaude  to  give 
in  evidence,  in  any  subsequent  trial  of  this  pti* 
soner,  any  of  the  fi«ts  whidi  have  been  Ad- 
mitted to  proof  in  the  present  case,  ted.  It 
was  intended  to  guard  apinst  the  posaih&ty 
of  the  enactments  of  thn  itatute  beinff  ce»* 
strued  to  afibct  the  prindples  of  the  nw  of 
treaaon  previously  establislied.  If,  theirefoN!^ 
the  pubuc  prosecutor  were  to  attempt  to  bring 
the  prisoner  to  trial  for  treason  ilter  an  oo- 
qnittarin  this  case>  he  could  not  bring  in  evi» 
deuce  iiiiy  one  of  die  fhets  tfhieh  were  mere 
or  len  connected  with,  the  present  ehaife* 
11iisfa.the  plain  and  aeoeesary  oCnstrnction  of 
the  clause  in  the  statute^  and  entirely  removea 
the  olijeelion.  • 

•  I  have  to  cdl  your  attention  to  an  aothori^T 
upon  Ae  question  that  has  been  started  io» 
lating  to  'the  speeifloation  of  the  erime.  It  haa 
been  maintained,  that  we  are  bound  to  tpecify 
the  general  nature  of  dm  conapiiacjr  heme  wo 
can  proceed  to  phove  the  <iriaMnil  mtentign  of 
the  perties.  On  this  tnWect  I  may  nfor  to 
the  gesetal  tsims  inwUdi  ah  BAgtiah  aldtct- 
ment  haa  been  laid  and  fcnod  relevant.*  Sodb 
A  dediion,  idthough  it  eaimot  afibot  the  law  of 
Scotland  as  a  oenclutive  uutbority,  vat  ia;r#- 
spaotdbteia  its  way,  and  worthy  eteonaiffcv* 
utiom  I  Mbmit  that  in  describing  the  iUefal 
iodfltieB,  Ao  temife  uM  in  this  English  in* 
dietment'tre  more  geavial  thato  Aoia  wUdi 
dm  praiechtor  has  employed  on  lids  ocaasioii, 
and  to  which  an  otgectxm  has  been  taken.  On 
dmwhol^  I  ma&maitt  tiuit  dm  indietaMnt  be- 


jm 


^  JSL  V.  Mcon^aod  :o<faer%  «  JBL  41^ 
,1  Aim.  tm ;  3  CUl»  Crim,  JLetcylO). 


n; 


1871 


ff!  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  miUam  Edgar 


[188 


fore  yoQy  in  the  £)rm  in  which  it  is  liid/  (Might 
to  be  ftmnd  rdevant. 

Mr.  GfarA.^— Tliis  indictment  'proceeds  upon 
nn  act  of  parliament  passed  in  the  52nd  year 
of  his  majesty's  reign,  against'  administering 
nclawfiil  oaths ;  and  accordingly  certain  clauses 
of  the  act  are  set  forth  in  themuor  proposition, 
ts  containing  the  description  of  the  crime  to  be 
diarged.  This  being  the  accusation,  I  need 
not  remark  that  it  would  haVe  been  easy  for 
the  ]^nbUc  prosecutor,  if  he  had  a  case  faitting 
within  the  act  of  parliament,  to  confine  him- 
self to  it  in  the  minor  proposition  of  his  indict- 
ment, by 'Stating  in  plain  terms,  that  true  jt 
was  and  of  verity,  tiiat  the  panel  had  admi- 
nistered such  an  unlawful  oatn  as  that  which 
was  prohibited  by  the  statute— reciting  the 
terms  of  the  oath— averring  that  an  oath  in 
theie  terms  ftll  under  the  statute  as  being  a 
tnosonable  oath — stating  how  and  in  what 
TCspectit  was  treasonable,  and  to  which  of 
^  different  species  of  treason  it  iqpplied — 
and  specifying- the  time,  place,  and  occasion 
of  connnitting  the  crime.  The  relevancy  of 
such  an  indictment  might  perhaps  have  been 
sustained.  But  the  pifblic  prosecutor  has  not 
confined  himself  to  the  proper  charge  appear* 
ing  on  tiie  major  proposition  of  his  own  inclict- 
ment,  but  has  attempted  most  illegally  to  in- 
tiodnce' matters  totuly  unconnected  with  it, 
for  the  purpose  of  embarrassing  the  prisoner 
with  accusations  of  a  kind  totally  dmerent, 
and  which  cannot  be  the  subject  of  inquiry 
with  reference  to  this  charge. 

In  aid  of  his  argoment  the  public  prosecutor 
has  founded  on  an  Englidi  case,  in  which  one 
was  convicted  on  evidence  of  circumstances  to 

rre  Ids  intention  in  administering  an  unlaw« 
oath.  I  mention  this  now,  because  it  is 
proper  to  Udce  an  eariy  opportunity  of  distin- 
gniMiing  that  case  from  tne  present.  I  know 
veiT  little  of  the  English  case  referred  to;  but 
on  hearing  it  read,  I  observed  quite  enough 
to  perceive  that  it  was  a  case  totally  diiSerent 
fipom  the  present— proceeding  oa  another  act 
«r  Parliament,  different  in  its  terms  from  the  act 
which  is  now  fbonded  on  by  the  public  prose- 
cutor. Under  the  former  act  it  is  competent 
to  prove  the  intention  of  the  unlawfid  oath  by 
dreumstances  extraneous  to  the  oath  itself, 
though  that  is  not  oompetent  in  the  present 
case,  in  which  the  Court  and  jury  must  cour 
sider  the  terms  of  the  oath  and  nothing  else. 

It  has  to-day  been  noticed  more  thvi  once, 
^t  besides  the  act  of  pariiament  libelled  on, 
there  is 'another  ael^elating  to  unlawful  oaths. 
But  when  yon  attend  to  the  language  of  that 
act,  you  will  see  the  difference  between  the 
terms  ^re  used,  and  those  which  are  em- 
ployed in  this  act  of  the  52nd  of  die  kin^,  and 
yovL  will  see  the  reason  of  that  difference,  and 
now  it  ought  to  afitect  indictments  founded  on 
these  acts. 

■  The  indictment  before  the  Court  is  founded 
en  the  act  passed  in  tiie  52nd  year  of  his  ma* 
jesty,  directed  against  those  ^  who  shall,  in 
imy  manner  or  form  whatsoever^  administer, 


or  eanse  to  be  administered,  or  be  aiding  or 
assisting  at  the  administering^  of  any  oath  or 
engagement,  pwrportmg^  or  nUendmg  to  bind 
the  person  takioff  the  same  to  commit  any 
treasoq."  &c.  These  persons  are  liable  to  the 
punishment  of  death,  and  every  person  iriio 
shall  take  the  oath  is  punishable  by  transporta- 
tion. By  the  4th  section  it  is  enacted,  that 
persons  aiding  and  assisting  at  the  administer- 
ing of  any  such  oath,  shall  l^  deemed  principal 
omnders,  and  liable  to  the  same  punishment 
of  death.  By  section  5  it  is  not  necessary  to 
set  forth  the  wqrds  of  the  oath,  and  it  **  shall 
be  sufficient  to  set  forth  the  purport  of  sodi 
oath,  or  some  material  part  thereof.'*  By 
section  6.  *^  any  engagement  or  obligation 
whatsoever  in  the  nature  of  an  oath,  purport' 
ing  or  miendmg  to  bind  the  persoa  taking  the 
same,  to  commit  any  treason,  &c.  shall  be 
deemed  an  oath,  within  the  intent  and  meaning 
ofdiisact.'' 

Now,  by  comparing  this  act  with  the  former, 
it  appears,  that  as  the  penalties  are  more  severe, 
so  me  description  of  the  crime  is  more  limited 
than  in  the  former  act  It  is  necessary  that 
the  oath  or  engagement  shall  j?Hrpor^  or  intend 
to  bind  the  person  taking  the  same  to  commit 
the  treason,  or  other  crimes  punishable  with 
deadi,  wbidi  plainly  signifies,  that  the  purport 
or  intendment  of  the  oath  only,  or,  the  true 
meaning  of  its  words,  shall  be  considered  in 
any  prosecution  against  those  who  administer 
it.  The  purport  of  an  oath  has  no  reference 
to  the  in^tion,  criminal  or  otherwise,  of  the 
party  who  administen  it.  The  words  of  the 
oath  may  be  innocent,  and  vet  the  intention 
may  be  very  criminal.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
words  may  oe  veiy  mischievous,  and  vet  the  in* 
tention  may  be  otherwise.  But  the  legislature 
imposes  the  penalty  according  to  the  purport  of 
the  oath ;  the  intendment  is  the  same  with  the 
purport  in  speaking  of  the  oath ;  and  either  ot 
these  terms  may  be  considered  as  synonymous 
with  the  true  meaning  of  the  oath  separately 
considered,  and  without  regard  to  the  intention 
of  the  party  who  administers  or  takes  it. 

In  one  view,  this  statute  is  uncommonly 
severe,  inflicting,  as  it  does,  a  capital  punish*- 
ment  for  administering  an  oath  which  may  be 
followed  by  no  crime  whatever.  And  even  ia 
taking  tibe'oath  according  to  its.  purport  or  in- 
tendment, there  is  much  severity;  because  the 
notion  or  opinion  of  the  party  who  administers 
or  takes  it,  as  to  its  meaning  -and  object,  may 
be  very  different  from  the  opinion  of  a  court 
of  law  as  to  its  true  construction,  and  so  the  real 
intent  ef  the partv  may  be  muchlesscriminalthan 
the '  intent  whioi  is  imputed  to  the  oath  itself, 
by  the  judgment  of  the  CourL  Bu^  on  the 
other  hand,  while  the  act  is  foil  of  severity  on 
tAese  points,  it  is  lenient,  in  so  for  as  it  restricts 
the  charge  to  the  purport,  intendment, .  or  true 
meaiiingof  the  oath,  and  does  not  admit  of  aproof 
(Which  might  be  veiy  loose  and  unsatisfactory, 
and  very  hard  upon  the  prisoner  to  be  tried)of  an 
intention  on  his  part,  that  went  beyond  the  true 
meaning  of  the  oeta  which  he  administered. ' 


fir  ^Mmdermg  unla^  Oaths. 


18P] 

For  tbttftfit  docf  not  allow  it  to  be  proved, 
tlttt  ihoogfa  the  words  of  the  oath  were  appa- 
rently ioDooent,  yet  that  under  colour  of  an 
-inoocent  engagement  the  moat  criminal  inten- 
tions were  concealed  or  C07d!red.  In  what  way 
soever  te  pablic  prosecutor  may  make  a 
diaige  of  that  kind  (which  supposes,  no  doubt 
(hat  a  neat  crime  had  been  committed),  it  is 
plain  that  he  codd  not  make  such  a  charge 
under  this  acL  And  the  statute  tempeis  its 
own  severity  with  lenity  in  an6Aer  important 
circumstanoe.  Those  who  aid  and  assist  in 
administering  tbe  oath,  are  liable  to  the  punish- 
ment of  doth ;  but  those  who  were  present  at, 
and  consentinff  to  the  administering  the 
oath,  are  not  liable  as  for  administering  it,  and 
it  seems  to  have  been  the  intention  of  the  legis- 
lature that  they  should  not  be  so  liable. 

This  act  may  be  contrasted  with  that  which^ 
WIS  passed  in  the  37th  year  of  the  kin^,  in 
which,  though  the  punishment  to  be  inflicted 
upon  offenders  was  less  severe  (transportation 
for  seven  years),  there  is  a  much  ^^reater  an- 
xiety to  prevent  them  from  sscamng;  and, 
•coordinglv,  the  cases  in  which  mat  puniab- 
ment  may  be  inflicted  are  much  more  numerous 
and  comprdiensive.  It  is  enacted,*  ^^That 
any  person  or  persons  who  shall,  in  anymanner 
or  form  whatsoever,  administer,  or  cause  to  be 
administered;  or  beaidiuff  or  assisting  at,  or 
praad  and  conaadmg  to  the  administering  or 
taking  of  any  oath  or  engagement,  purporting 
or  mUnded  to  bind  the  person  taking  the  same 
to  engaee  in  any  mutinous  or  seditious  purpose ; 
or  to  disturb  the  public  peace  ;  or  to  be  of  any 
association,  society,  or  confederacy  formed  for 
any  sudi  purpose;  or  to  obey  the  orders 
OfT  commands  of  any  committee  or  body  of 
men,  not  lawfully  constituted,  or  of  any  leader 
or  commander,  or  other  person  not  having 
authority  b^  law  for  that  purpose ;  or  not  to 
iafomi  or  give  evidence  against  any  associate, 
confederate,  or  other  nerson;  or  not  to  reveal 
or  discover  any  unlawful  combination  or  con- 
Ibderacy;  or  not  to  reveal  or  discover  any 
illegal  act  done  or  to  be  done;  or  not  to  reveu 
or  discover  any  illegal  oath  or  engagement 
which  may  have  been  adnkinistered  or  tendered 
to  or  taken  by  such  person  or  persons,  or  to 
or  by  any  other  perKm  or  persons,  or  the 
import  of  aiqr  snob  .oath  or  engagement; 
ahalL  on  conviction  thereof,*'  &c.  And  by  the 
third  kection  it  is  enacted,  **  That  persons 
aiding  and  assisting  at,  or  prtitnt  at  and  am- 
aeafni^  to  the  admmbtering  or  taking"  of 
^he  oath,  &c.  shall  be  deemed  principal 
otfendei& 

Here  is  a  very  numerous  collection  of  crimes; 

and  as  to  the  oath  itself,  not  only  are  the 

persons  liable  to  the'  statutory  punishment, 

'  who  are  present  at  and  consenting  to  the  ad- 

ninistering  or  taking  of  it,  but  every  oath  is 

eomprehended,  where  it  is  of  the  nature  sped- 

•tfed,  either  in  its  purport  or  meaning,  or  where 

•It  is  intended,  by  the   par^   admioistering 

,^  37Geo.  3cd,  c.  133,  s.  1. 


A,  D.  1817. 


1100 


or'  taking  it  as..aq^  path  of  thai  deseriptaon, 
whatever  mn  be  .its  particular  words.  For 
the  terms  of  the  act  are  ^-  purporting  or  w- 
tendtd.Xo  bind  f  fmrporOMg  refers  to  thf  mean- 
ing of  the  oath;  tntaided  refers  to  the  intention 
of  the  party.  An  oath  purporting  to  bind,  is 
mtendea  hj  the  party  for  that,  purpqse.  The 
purport  of  the  oath,  and. the  intention  of  the 
par^,  may  be  diflertot;  but  the  statute  makes 
him  liable  for  both;  not  merely  the  meaning 
of  the  words  emplq^,  but- his  own  iptention 
(pQosibly  a  secret  intention)  in  using  thev, 
which  may  be  ynuch  more  miscbievons  or 
wicked  than  the  plain  or  true  meaning  of  the 
words.  Accordingly,  in  the  Engliui  case, 
which  was  tried  upon  the  37th  of  tte  king,  the 
meaning,  object,  and  intention  of  the  party, 
distinct  from  the  meaning. of  the  words,  was 
allowed  to  be  proved.  There  was  dearly  roosa 
in  that  act  for  the  construction  put  upon  it  bj^ 
the  learned  judge*  who  presided  at  the  triaL 
But  whatever  1^  the  constructioB  of  that  ad, 
there  is  not  the  least  room  for  such  a  oqnstnM>> 
tion  in  the  present  case,  where  the  words,  as 
well  as  the  objecte  of  this  statute, .  are  so 
very  diflerent  The  words  ^  potporting  or  in- 
tending to  bind,**  plainly  require  en  osM  whicb 
purports  or  intends  to  bind,  and  refer  e>- 
dusively  to  the  intendin|(  or  intent  of. the  oath, 
without  regard  to  the  intending  or  intent  of 
the  party,  further  than  his  intent  to  administer 
or  take  Uiat  oath.  And  this  was  apparently 
admitted  bv  Mr.  Solidtor  General,  when  he 
observed,  that  the  meaning,  purport,  and  in- 
tention of  the  oath,  are  to  be  referred  to  in 


V 

1 


this  argument,  and  not  any.  c^ospiracjf  or 
traneous  drcumstances.  Inos  there  is  a 
son  sufficiently  evident  for  ezchiding  a  proof 
of  circumstances  whoe  the  indictment  is  laid 
unon  the  52nd  of  the  king,  which  might  be 
admitted  where  the  indictment  is  laid  on- the 
37th  of  the  king.  And  if  it  be  oompetent 
under  the  37th  to  prove  the  intent  of  the 
party  by  dicumstanoes  whidi  do  not  appear 
from  the  oath,  it  was  intended  by  Uie  52|mI 
.  that  no  evidence  beyond  the  terms  of  the  oath 
itself  should  be  allowed  for  proving  the  tnteni 
of  the  party. 

If  the  observations  I  have  now  made  are 
well  founded,  the  public  prosecutor  is.  entirely 
wrong  in  attempting  to  introduce  in  the 
minor  proposition  of  the  indictment  a  long 
detail  of  circumstances,  with  no  other  object 
than  to  establish  the  supposed  wioked  intent 
of  the  prisoner,  by  evidence  thai  is  extraneous 
to  the  administering  of  the  nnlawlid  oath.  The 
prosecutor  ought  to  have  confined  himsdf  to 
that  charge ;  and  I  must  again  observe,  thai 
he  had  it  in  his  power  to  frame  an  indictment 
without  obiection,  by  the  proper  redtals  of  the 
statute  and  of  the  oath,  with  proper  aUegntioos 
that  the  oath  was  prohiUted  oy  the  act  of  naih- 
liament.  But  instead  of  adopting  thif  plain 
method  of  proceeding,  he.  has  d^K!q|ea  the 
pand  yriih  an  indictment  that  is  evposed  to 
mnumeiable^obieotiQns.    .;  , .      i  . 

*  Lord  Alvanley ;  C  JB.  4*0,  n.^ 


IMI 


57  GBOROB  Ifl. 


Tritd^mUkmOfg^ 


[IW 


noobjedtioii 


would  be  fiiiBcieiit  to'  ofest  the  iadieCtteiity  if 
BO  other  could  be  *  stated.  Bat  I  sheU  rtmark 
upoD  some  of  the  other  olgeotioiis.  A  good 
deal  was  said  upon  the  competency  of  a  gMie- 
-nl  charge  of  high  treason  made  in  an  indict- 
mept,  without  pointing  out  any  particular 
apecies  of  treason.  There  can  be  nodo«bt 
whatever^  that  where  tire  party  is  to  be  tried 
lor  the  crime  of  high  treaiony  a  general  charge 
of  high  treason  made  against  him  in  tiie  in- 
dictment would  be  good  for  nothing,  and 
would  at  once  be  dismissed.  For  there  are  so 
many  different  kindii  of  high  treason,  eadi  of 
them  distinguishable  from  all  the  rest,  that 
it  would  be  Just  as  welT  to  charge  a  man  with 
>  iMtring  committed  a  crime,  without  saying  what 
crime,  as  to  charge  him  with  haring  committed 
treason,  without  saying  what  treason.  But  it 
seems  Jto  have  been  thought  by  the  prosecutor 
that  in  this  indictment  it  is  sufficient  to  refer 
to  high  tteason  generally  without  distinguish* 
ing  between  one  treason  and  another,  b^use 
the  pandl  te  not  to  be  tried  for  committing  high 
treason,  but  for  baring  administered  an  oaUi, 
pfurporting  or  intending  to, bind  the  person 


IhaifejostMfoifedtolcablc.    Itseemathebto  beinlispiEtable,  thai 


the  species  of  treason,  should  hare  oeen  alleged 
or  assigned  in  this  indictment,  and  that  the 
totel  want  of  the  specification  in  it  is  as  olijeo- 
tionaUe  as  it  would  be  in  a  trial  for  high 
treason.  The  objection  is  founded  on  the  gieat 
and  indispensable  rale  in  criminal  justice,^thal 
the  panel  ought  to  have  notice  of  the  pvecise 
accusation  against  him ;  and  the  want  of  such 
notice  in  this  indictment  makes  the  case  pre- 
cisely the  same  as  if  the  prosecutor  had 
attempted  to  proceed  without  an  indictment 
at  all. 

Another  objection  to  the  indictment  was 
strongly  and  doquentlv  urged  by  Mr.  Crans- 
toutt,  that  you  cannot,  n>r  the  proof  of  a  crime 
that  is  charged^  prore  any  other  crime  that  is 
not  charged.  This  was  stated,  on  the  authori^ 
of  Mr.  Burnet,  and  of  long  practice.  But  one 
or  two  cases  were  cited  against  us  by  the 
counsel  for  the  prosecution.  I  do  not  admit 
that  these  cases  were  correctly  stated ;  but,  ai 
all  erents,  they  do  not  establish  that  the  pro. 
secutor  is  entided  to  prove  the  extraneous  cir^ 
cumstances  alleged  in  the  present  case.  One 
of  the  cases  related  to  the  uttering  of  foiged 


taking  the  same  to  commit  high  treason.  In  a  notes  within  Scotland,  and  it  was  said,  that  id 
ohaige  of  this  kind,  it  has  been  thought  unne-  order  to  prove  the  charge  of  uttering  in  Scot^ 
eessary  to  spedfy  the  treason  which  the  oadi .  land,  it  was  competent  to  prove  the  forgeiy  of 
purported  or  intended  to  bind  the  person  the  notes,  although  that  crime  was  committed 
taking  the  same  to  comnnt  But  it  seems  to  in  England.  That  was  a  case  of  crimm  cmh 
be  obrious,  that  there  is  precisely  the  same  fimwm,  in  which  the  criminal  act  was  begun  in 
reason  to  specify  the  treason  in  this  case  as  in  '  one  place^  ooniinmd  and  completed  in  another, 
a  trial  for  high  treason  itself.  If  it  be  unneces- ;  If  I  recollect  right,  a  case  occurred  some  years 


•salT  to  spedfy  the  treason  in  this  case,  would 
it  be  snfflcient  to  aUeffe,  that  the  oath  pur- 
ported or  Intended  to  bind  the  person  talcing 
nie  same  to  commit  a  crime^  without  spedfy- 


ago,  in  which  evidence  of  one  crime  to  prove 
another  was  allowed,  and  the  panel  was  con- 
victed on  a  proof  of  that  descriptioo.  But  that 
oonriction  was  not  approved  of  in  another 


wg  what  crime,  or  giving  any  notice  whatever  ,  quarter,  and  when  the  circumstances  attending 
to  the  pahel  of  the  nature  of  that  offenee  whleh  it  were  known,  the  man  got  a  pardon,  in  re»- 
Ihe  oath  purported  or  intended  to  bind  the  pect  of  the  manner  in  which  his  trial  had  been 
person  taking  the  same  to  commit!  It  is  i^ain,  conducted.  One  of  your  lordships  will  pro- 
-that  in  such  a  case  the  pinel  would  have  no  bably  support  me  in  this  account  of  the  case  to 
iiotie#  at  all  of  the  crime  for  which  he  was  to  ,  which  I  now  allude.  I  do  not  recdlect  the  name 
1m  kied.    An  oalh,  binding  the  penon  taking    of  the  party. 

^^  ii     --  i!!r  jJT*^  J^!wl5"  iL-^r«    1.U    «des  with  what  Mr.  Clerk  has  suted  ;  but  1 

s^'ss^sr/rrXir^ir^i  do.otp.rti<^i„.yr«»u..ith.ci«««.t«K«. 

defence  emnpletely  conclusive  against  the  ai-  Mr.  Clerk, — There  are  no  dkta  in  the  work 
leaation,  that  the  oath  led  to  the  commission  of  Mr.  Hume,  nor  in  that  of  Sir  Greorgo 
6r  one  crime,  would  be  no  defence  at  all,  if ,  M'Kenrie,  inferring  that  a  crime  m^j  be 
the  prosecutor  sliould  not  insist  on  that,  but  on  >  proved  by  another  crime  which  is  not  libdled ; 
a  diferent  sllegafion,  namely,  that  the  oath  led  and  the  authority  of  Mr  Burnet,  who  was  a 
to  the  commission  of  another  crime.  The  very  attentive  observer  of  the  proceedings  in 
panel  might  be  prepared  to  defend  'himself  criminal  cases,  is  directly  against  the  doctrine, 
as  to  the  application  of  the  oath  to  one-half  of .  He  lays  it  down  expressly,  that  one  crime 


the  erimes  &  the  Statute-book,  aiid  yet,  baring 
no  distiOct  Notice  of  the  prosecutor's  views, 
ndght  be  in  iio  state  o#  preparation  to  defeord 
himself  as  to  the  a|[yphcation  of  the  oath  to 
adiother  erim'^  of  which  he  had  no  notice,  and 
of  mtika  he  had  never  thought.  The  same  con- 
dd^tioii  shei^  that  among  the  different 
•pedee  iH  lrektf6n,that  jparticiilaT  spedes  should 
be  poiBtel  oat  in  the  mdietment,  to  which  the 
pKose^utor  is-  to  imist  that  the  oeth  was  appti^ 


cannot  "be  proved  by  another.  Thus  the  autho* 
•ri^r  as  well  as  Um  justice  of  the  case,  is  on  the 
sioe  of  the  accused. 

But  there  is  another  objection  to  a  moof  of 
the  oonspitacy  here  mentioned.  The  allegation 
is  in  snbatance  a  charge  of  high  treason  ;  and 
would  your  lordships  allow  sudi  a  charge  to  be 
proveo,  under  this  indictment,  In  direct  con* 
tradiction  to  the  Act  of  Pariiament  upon  whidi 
you  try  crimes  of  treason?  Without  the  inter- 


1091 


J«T  Admmslerittg  unlaHofid  Oatht. 


A.  D.  1S17. 


[104 


ventioa  of  a  mud  juiy,  treason'  cannot  be 
tried.  But  if  it  be  ntteriy  incompetent  to 
prove  an  allegation,  it  muist  be  equally  incom- 
petent to  maJce  the  allegation.  No  party  is 
entitled  to  allege  what  it  is  not  competent  for 
him  to  prove.  And,  if  the  public  prosecutor 
cannot  be  allowed  to  prove  the  crime  of 
treaaoUf  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  proceed  on 
this  indictment. 

To  another  objection,  no  sufficient  answer 
has  been  made,  that  if  the  proof  of  treason  is 
entered  on,  the  trial  is  a  pnblic  precognition; 
and  if  the  result  in  this  present  trial  does  not 
satisfy  the  prosecutor,  tne  panel  may  be  tried 
agiun  upon  the  same  &cts.  What  was  said  in 
answer  to  this?  From  the  very  terms  of  the 
act  of  parliament  the  panel  cannot  be  tried 
again  for  the  same  offence.  What  is  the  same 
•TODce  T  The  prisoner  is  now  to  be  tried  for 
administering  the  oath,  and  not  for  high  trea- 
son. The  two  crimes  are  altogether  different. 
The  prisoner,  if  he  is  acquitted,  cannot  be  tried 
for  hi|;h  treason,  on  account  of  his  having 
administered  a  treasonable  oath;  but  there  is 
nothing  in  the  statute  against  his  being  tried 
for  a  separate  treason,  extraneous  to  the  charge 
of  having  administered  the  oath.  But,  accord- 
ing to  the  idea  of  the  public  prosecutor,  the 
oath  may  be  connected  with  overt  acts  of 
treason,  which  might  be  distinctly  an#  sepa- 
rately charged;  and  if  it  were  permitted  to 
prove  thete  overt  acts  incidentally  in  this  trial,[the 
prisoner,  might,  on  such  a  precognition,  be 
afterwards  tried  for  treason. 

Another  objection  is,  that  the  requisite  speci- 
fication ci  die  aUegedconspiracy  has  been  with- 
hdd  by  the  prosecutor,  the  prisoner  not  having 
Veen  fovonned.  with  the  names  of  any  of  the 
persons  alluded  to  as  engaged  in  the  conspiracy; 
and  this  objection  is  of  itMlf  fatal  to  the  indict- 
ment. It  IS  stated  in  the  indictment,  that  the 
prisoner  wickedly,  &c.conspired,&c.  with  other 
evil-disposed  persons,  to  break  and  disturb-the 
pablic  peace,  &c.  But  no  one  of  the  persons 
engaged  in  the  conspiracy  is  mentioned.  Why  ? 
We  luive  not  even  been  told  that  the  public  prose- 
eatardoei  noi  kmow  the  names  of  these  supposed 
persons  ;  but  if  he  was  ignorant  of  their  names, 
■e  should  have  said  so ;  for  in  an  indictment, 
the  public  prosecutor  should  give  a  full  detail  of 
what  he  knows  to  the  panel,  for  the  preparation 
ofhis  defence.  When  a  fact  that  should  bostated, 
if  known  to  the  prosecutor,  is  unknown  to  him. 
He  sboald .  at  least  state  that  such  fact  is  un- 
known to  him.  He  should  do  evenr  thing  to 
apprise  the  accused  of  the  nature  of  the  proof 
vdijch  he  has  to  meet.  Where  that  is  not  fair- 
ly done,  the  prisoner  is  entitled  to  object  that 
be  has  not  received  the  notice  on  the  subject  to 
vrfaidi  he  is  entitled  by  law.  If  a  panel  be 
^taiged  with  a  wicked  conspiracy,  he  should  be 
udbrmed  of  the  other  persons  with  whom 
he  is  supposed  to  have  oeen  engaged^  if  the 
praeecntor  knows  who  they  are ;  and  he  ispre- 
mmeti  to  know  them,  if  he  ^pe9  not  state 
that  they  are  mdinown  to  him.  How  hard 
woold  it  be  if  the  law  were  otherwise !  •  A  con- 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


spiracy  charged  may  be  one  of  fifty  supposed 
conspiracies.  If  the  conspiracy  is  not  identi- 
fied by  the  names  of  the  persons  engaged  in 
it,  how  can  the  prisoner  know  what  the  prose- 
cutor really  means  to  charge? 

The  other  objections  to  this  part  of  the  indict- 
ment, though  they  may  be  less  material,  are 
still  of  ver^  great  importance,  and  their  validity 
is  recognized  hr  Mr.  Hume,  who  employs 
many  pages  of  his  valuable  work  upon  ques- 
tions of  this  description. 

The  gentlemen  opposite  admit  that  fair  and 
reasoniJ»le  notice  ox  facts  must  be  given,  and 
that  Mr.  Hume  says  so.  He  does  indeed  say 
so.  But,  although  they  acknowledge  his  au- 
thority, they  assert,  that  such  notice  is  not 
always  necessary.  How  does  this  agree  with 
the  opinion  of  Mr.  Hnme^  who  says  eipressly, 
that  where  the  public  prosecutor  has  it  in  his 

Sower  to  mention  particulars,  and  where  his 
oing  so  may  be  essential  to  the  information 
of  a  panel  for  his  defence,  the  Court  will  not 
oblige  the  panel  to  answer  without  his  gating 
a  fuU  and  particular  statement  of  the  charge 
against  him. 

I  come  next  to  the  argument  maintained  on 
the  import  of  the  oath.  It  is  asserted,  that  an 
oath  in  certain  terms  was  administered  by  the 
panel.  I  do  not  profess  to  understand  the 
precise  meaning  of  this  supposed  oath.  It  is 
rather  loosely  and  indefinitely  expressed.  To 
understand  it  precisely  is,  however,  not  ab- 
solutely necessary  to  the  consideration  of  the 
question  before  the  Court,  Whether  this  be  a 
lawful  oath,  is  no^  the  question.  The  oath  may 
be  extremely  wicked,  and  perhaps  there  is  no 
one  who  now  hears  me  wno  does  not  think 
that  there  was  a  bad  intention  in  it.  But  that 
is  not  the  question  before  your  Lordships. 
The  question  is,  whether  thai*  oath  amounts 

TO  AV  OBLIGATIOH  TO  COMinT  HIGH  TREASON? 

Where  a  man  is  indicted  for  the  crime  of  mur- 
der, the  question  is  not,  Whether  he  has  been 
guilty  in  other  respects?  whether  he  has 
committed  a  robbery  or  any  other  crime  P — 
he  has  oidy  to  answer  to  the  indictment  for 
murder.  Ine  question  here  is.  Whether  the 
oath  did  purport  and  intend  an  obligation  to 
commit  high  treason?  For  the  oath  is  not  said 
to  be  an  ^ligation  to  commit  murder  or  other 
felony.  It  is  alleged  to  be  an  obligation  lo 
commit  tre^on,  and  to  that  allegation  the  ques- 
tion is  confined. 

The  averment  of  the  pnblic  prosecutor  upon 
this  point  is  expressed  thus  in  the  indictment, 
^^  which  oath  or  obligation  did  thus  purport 
or  intend  to  bind  the  persons  taking  the 
same   to   commit   treason,    by  effecting    by 

giysical  force  the  subversion  of  the  Established 
ovemment,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this 
kingdom." 

Mr.  Cranstoun,.  in  his  excellent  speech, 
completely  demonstrated  the  fuiUity  of  this 
averment,  both  in  its  form  and  in  its  sub- 
stance ;  but  it  appears  to  me  that  an  argument 
much  less  complete  and  powerful  would  have 
b«eQ  quite  somcient  in  such  a  case.    For  can 

O 


i 


195} 


57  GEORGE  III. 


THalo/miUamSdgdr 


ri90 


it  be  possible  to  sustain  an  indictment  aUeging, 
with  so  little  specification,  an  obligation  to 
commit  treason?  Who  does  not  know  that 
tbece  are  a  great  variety  of  treasons  distin- 
guished from  each  other  by  difference  of  species, 
in  the  same  mannerandto  the  same  effiectas  other 
crimes,  which  are  known  each  by  its  species 
and  so  distinguished  from  other  crimes  which 
do  not  belong  to  that  species  ?  Yet  the  indict- 
ment contains  nothing  to  mark  the  species  of 
treason  which  was  to  be  committed.  It  ap- 
pears from  his  words,  that  the  prosecnior 
wishes  to  charge  the  prisoner  with  a  delin- 

2nency  that  has  a  relation  to  some  treason,  bat 
lat  is  all.  His  meaning  goes  no  further; 
and  such  is  not  a  legal  meaning  when  express- 
ed in  an  indictment,  as  the  substance  of  a 
charge  to  be  tried.  Indeed,  it  is  so  indefinite, 
that  ]  do  not  understand  what  it  really  imports. 
Cleariy  it  does  not  sufficiently  describe  any 
known  treason.  It  seems  to  point  at  a  treason 
to  be  committed  by  levying  war.  But  is  there 
any  word  about  le^yin?  war  in  the  indictment? 
Not  one  syllable ;  and  yet  it  is  acknowledged 
by  every  authority  from  Coke  downwards^ 
that  where  a  man  is  tried  for  levying  war 
against  the  king,  the  levying  of  war  must  be 
specially  set  forth  in  the  charge ;  and  however 
brief  and  general  our  neighoours  may  be  in 
drawing  their  indictments  (and  they  are  more 
so  than  we),  this  specification  is  required,  that 
the  parties  have  conspired  and  actually  engag- 
ed in  levying  war  [Mr.  Clerk  here  referred 
to  Lord  Coke  and  Sir  Mathew  Hale,  and  made 
some  further  .observations  relative  to  a  charge 
of  levying  war.] 

All  this  shows,  that  if  in  the  present  case 
the  treason  to  be  committed  was  levying  war, 
that  species  of  treason  should  have  been  set 
forth.  But  in  this  indictment,  though  the  oath 
is  set  forth,  and  certain  words  are  used,  in- 
tended as  an  averment  of  its  criminal  ten- 
dency, the  averment  is  in  terms  so  vague  and 
general,  that  it  cannot  be  gathered  from  them 
what  the  prosecutor  means  as  to  the  species  of 
treason  which  the  prisoner  had  in  view. 

Thus  the  meaning  of  the  oath,  whatever  it  may 
be,  is  not  sufficiently  charged  in  an  indictment 
proceeding  upon  the  statute  52  of  the  king. 
And  though  an  exposition  of  its  actual  mean- 
ing may  be  attended  With  difficulty  (perhaps 
no  <^rtainty  can  be  had  in  expounding  it),  it 
is  easy  to  show,  that  it  cannot  be  regarded  as 
a  treasonable  obligation,  however  objection- 
able in  other  re8|>ects  your  lordships  may  thin^ 
it.  In  considenng  this  obligation^  I  shall  lay 
«iside  for  a  moment  two  circumstances  that  are 
immaterial  to  the  question.  Whether  it  is  an 
obligation  to  commit  treason  ?  one  is,  that  it 
is  an  oolA— another,  that  it  binds  to  secrecy; 
for  these  circumstances,  though  they  are  of  an 
aggravating  nature,  do  not  make  the  ohligaHon 
more  or  less  treasonable.  As  an  engagement 
may  be  treasonable,  without  being  in  the  form 
of  an  oath,  so  an  engagement  may  be  confirm- 
ed with  an  oath,  without  being  treasonable  or 
criminal  at  all.    In  one  remarkable  transac- 


I  tion  of  this  kind,  an  oath,  when  moposed  wss 
I  rejected  by  the  most  determined  or  the  con- 
spirators. 

**  No,  not  an  oath : 


what  other  bond 
Than  secret  Romans,  that  have  spoke  the  word. 
And  will  not  palter?^  * 

The  nature  of  a  conspiracy  is  the  same  witk 
or  without  an  oath,  though  an  oath  may  be  an 
aggravation  of  its  wickedness.  In  the  i^e»*' 
'  tion  whether  the  engagement  was,  to  commit 
the  crime  of  treason,  I  may  therefore  lay  dot' 
of  consideration  the  circumstance  that  it  was- 
in  the  form  of  an  oath.  Again,  an  oath  o£ 
secrecy  may  be  wicked,  even  although  the  ia^ 
tention  of  the  persons  who  t^e  it  is  innocent 
in  other  respects ;  and  it  will  not  make  an  en-^ 
gagement  or  obligation  treasonable  or  othei^ 
vrise,  that  the  parties  to  it  were  sworn  to  se* 
crecy.  Ihe  question  as  to  the  tme  nature  of 
the  obligation,  as  being  treasonable  or  not 
treasonable,  evidently  caimot  depend  upon 
the  secrecy  to  which  the  parties  were  sworn. 
The  form  of  an  oath,  and  an  oath  too  of  se* 
crecy,  may  and  will  greatly  aggravate  the  o& 
fence  that  is  committed  by  entering  into  way 
conspiracy,  whatever  its  illegal  object  may  be. 
But  neither  the  oath  itself,  nor  the  obligatioa 
of  secrecy,  will  make  that  treason  which  is  not 
treason,  nor  change  an  obligation  to  commit 
any  illegal  act  or  crime,  in  itself  not  treason, 
into  an  obligation  to  commit  the  crime  of  high 
treason. 

Keeping  these  important  considerations  in 
view,  that  an  engagement  may  be  very  crimi^' 
tial  without  being  treasonable — ^that  die  int^- 
vention  of  an  oath  does  not  make  it  treason* 
able, — ^and  that  even  an  oath  of  secrecy  cannot 
have  the  effect  to  change  a  crime,  how  wicked 
and  dangerous  soever,  into  high  treason,  if 
the  crime  is  not  in  itself  high  treason,  but  a 
crime  of  another  character  and  description, — ^I 
shall  offer  some  remarks  upon  the  terms  of 
this  oath.  And  here  I  roust  repeat,  that  the 
oath  may  admit  of  no  certain  or  precise  con- 
struction. It  may  be  understooa  in  twenty 
different  senses  by  twenty  different  persons. 
Perhaps  no  two  men  wonld  agree  with  eadi 
other  as  to  it»  precise  meaning.  But  my  p»re- 
sent  task  is  not  to  show  the  precise  meaning 
of  the  oath,  but  a  different  and  an  easier  task, 
namely,  to  show  that  it  does  not  import  an 
obligation  to  commit  high  treason.  For  this 
purpose-  I  shall  offer  a  very  few  remtiks 
upon  it. 

Nothing  can  be  known  of  the  nature  of  this 
engagement,  but  from  the  words  of  it.  The 
party  binds  himself  by  an  oath,  and  the  first 
part  of  his  obligation  is  expressed  iii  theta 
words :  ^  That  I  will  persevere  in  my  endea-» 
vouring  to  form  a  brotherhood  of  affection 
amongst  Britons  of  every  description  who  are 
considered  worthy  of  confidence ;  and  that  £ 
will  persevere  in  my  endeavours  to  obtain  for- 

*  Shaksp.  Jul.  Cses.  Act  2;  Scene  1. 


t97] 


Jot  Mminuitrhig  unlatioful  Oaihs, 


A.D.  I8I7. 


1198 


all  tke  peofle  m  Great  Britain  and  Ireland, 
not  diaqnaiified  by  crimes  or  insanity,  the 
elective  franchise  at  the  age  of  twenty-one, 
vilh  free  and  eqaal  representation,  and  annual 
parliaments."  The  purposes  here  expressed 
are,  I  piesame,  innocent  of  treason,  though  it 
wonld  not  be  easy  to  tell  the  precise  meaiv* 
jng  of  the  words,  and  it  is  evident  that  they 
hsLve  no  precise  meaning.  On  the  con- 
tiaiy,  they  are  so  extremely  vague  and 
indefinite,  that  every  person  taking  such 
aa  oath  seems  to  be  at  full  liberty  to  put 
his  own  meaning  upon  it,  without  being  at  all 
exposed  to  the  reproach  of  refusing  tb  fulfil 
Ins  obligation.  Universal  sufir^e  and  annual 
paxiiaments  are  very  naturally  supposed  to 
Aave  been  the  objects  in  view ;  but  still  there 
is  nothing  in  the  engagement  itself,  nor  in  the 
manner  of  expressing  it,  tiiat  is  treasonable  or 
even  illegal  in  any  respect.  If  the  obligation 
had  stopped  with  the  words  to  which  I  have  just 
lefierred,  a  prosecution  for  aidministering  a  trea- 
aonable  oam  would  have  been  utterly  absurd. 
But  the  obligation  proceeds  with  other 
words,  which  are  supposed  in  the  indict- 
mast  to  be  treasonable,  ^  and  that  I  will 
SQpport  the  same  to  the  utmost  of  my  power, 
ei^er  by  moral  or  physical  strength  as  the 
case  may  require."  These  words  are  the 
foundation  of  Uiis  indictment,  and  the  material, 
if  not  the  only  c^estion,  as  to  the  relevancy, 
depends  upon  their  meaning,  or  rather  upon 
die  question,  whether  they  sidmit  of  no  mean- 
ing or  construction  but  one,  the  meaning 
alleged  by  the  prc^ecutor,  who  argues.,  that 
they  purport  and  intend  to  bind  the  party 
taking  the  oath  to  commit  the  crime  of  high 
treason.  It  is  to  be  considered,  whether  the 
words  have  that  treasonable  meaning,  or  if  that 
ia  not  their  meaning,  it  is  evidently  of  no  con* 
sequence  what  they  mean. 

The  words  of  the  oath  now  under  considera- 
tion bind  the  party  to  wpport  the  uxme ;  and 
there  has  been  some  argument  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  supporting  the  uane,  as  the  words  occur 
in  this  part  of  the  oath.  It  was  said  for  the 
prisoner,  that  when  taken  along  with  the  pre- 
vious words  of  the  oath,  the  meaning  of  the 
whole  is,  that  the  party  should  persevere  in  his 
ehdeavours,  and  in  particular,  his  endeavours 
to  obtain  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
iufirage,  and  also  to  support  the  same,  namely, 
the  annual  parliaments  and  universal  suffrage, 
when-  obtained  and  recognized  by  law.  Ao^ 
ooiding  to  this  construction,  the  oath  in- 
tended any  thing  but  treason.  It  was  to  sup- 
port a  l^al  establishment  when  it  should  be 
obtained,  and  not  even  to  support  an  attempt, 
though  legal,  to  obtain  a  change  of  the  exist- 
lag  laws.  And  this  view  of  the  oath  seems  to 
be  perfectly  well-founded.  On  the  one  band, 
there  is  an  mcbngmity  in  saying,  that  the  party 
will  support  his  own  endeavours ;  and,  on  the 
tither,  the  expression,  **  support  the  same,'^  is  a 
relative  thai  can  only  apply*  to  the  last  antece- 
dent, unless  it  appears  m>m  the  grammatical 
«Mistxiictioii,  or  ttou^  the  meaning  of  the  con- 


text, that  the  relative  necessarily  applies  to 
former  antecedents.  But  that  is  not  thecase  here. 
There  is  a  disjunction,  not  only  in  the  sense, 
but  in  the  grammatical  construction,  of  the 
subject  of  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
snfnrage,  from  the  previous  part  of  the  oath. 
The  more  natural  construction  of  the  obliga- 
tion  to  ^  support  the  same "  is  obtained, 
therefore,  by  referring  it  to  a  support  of  the 
wished-for  changes  when  recognized  by  law. 
And  there  is  another  consideration,  which 
leads  to.  the  same  determination  of  the  ques- 
tion. There  are  many  rules  for  the  interpreta- 
tioapf  words ;  but  the  great  rule  of  interpreta- 
tion in  a  criminal  charge  is,  that  in  case  of 
doubt,  that  construction  which  is  roost  favour- 
able to  the  accused  must  be  adopted.  And  if 
the  prisoner  is  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  the 
rule  I  have  just  mentioned,  J  cannot  see  much 
difference  betwec-n  the  interpretation  offered 
on  his  part,  and  that  which  has  been  contend- 
ed for  by  the  prosecutor.  For,  whether  the 
phrase,  **  support  the  same/'  shall  be  referred 
back  merely  to  the  proposed  changes>  when 
obtained,  or  to  the  endeavours  to  produce 
them,  still  it  must  be  held,  that  the  support  to 
be  given  is  intended  as  a  legal,  and  not  as  an 
illegal  support,  and  rather  as  a  support  of  the 
law  itself,  to  be  appealed  to  in  every  stage  of 
bis  endeavotirsby  the  person  taking  the  oath, 
than  as  a  support  of  illegal  attempts  to  over- 
turn it. 

But  the  argument  of  the  prosecutor  is,  that  the 
clauses  now  under  consideration' do  not  merely 
bind  the  person  taking  the  oath,  to  support 
his  endeavours  at  innovation,  but  to  ''  support 
the  same  to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  either  by 
moral  or  physical  strength  as  the  case  may 
require.''  The  prosecutor  seems  to  think,  that 
these  words  complete  the  treasonable  obliga- 
tion, and  leave  no  doubt  whatever  as  to  the 
meaning  either  of  the  party  who  administered, 
or  of  the  party  who  took  tne  oath.  That  there 
should  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  of  these 
words,  appears  to  be  not  a  little  extraordinary, 
when  it  is  considered,  that  if  they  have  any 
meaning  at  all,  it  is  a  meaning  as  vague,  in« 
definite,  and  uncertain,  as  can  be  imagined. 
Yet  the  prosecutor  thinks,  that  tliey  can  mean 
nothing  but  treason,  and  he  will  not  allow 
that  any  other  meaning  can  be  put  upon  them. 
Even  the  uneducated  people,  for  whose  use  the 
oath  was  contrived,  must,  without  all  doubt, 
have  understood,  that  it  was  the  purport  of 
these  words  to  bind  them  to  commit  treason ! 

These  assertions  are  finely  exemplified  by 
the  abortive  attempt  made  in  the  iudictment, 
to  put  any  intelligible  meaning  upon  the  words. 
The  prosecutor  has  not  been  able  to  apply 
them  to  any  description  of  treason,  excepting 
that  constructive  treason,  which  he  would  re- 
vive after  it  has  been  abolished  for  several 
centuries.  And  here  it  is  proper  to  notice  an 
inexcusable  gloss  in  the  indictment,  as  to  the 
misaning  of  the  words  now  under  consider* 
ation.  The  words  of  the  oath  are,  f^Iwil) 
sapport  tiie  same  to  the  utmcet  of  my  power, 


199] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


trUd  of  WaUam  Edgar 


raoo 


cither  by  moral  or  physical  itrtngthf*  but  it  is 
alleged  in  the  indictment,  that  the  treason  was 
to  be  committed,  ^*  bv  effecting  by  physical 
foiie,  the  subTersiott,  &c.  Here  the  word 
itrenjgih  is  changed  into  the  wordybrce,  a  word 
of  a  different  meaning.  It  has  been  said,  that 
th^  words  are  synonymous.  If  that  is  the 
case,  why  change  the  one  for  the  other?  But 
they  are  not  synonymous.  It  is  very  true,  that 
on  some  occasions  either  word  may  be  used, 
without  much,  if  any,  difference  of  meaning. 
But  the  same  thing  may  be  said  of  words,  that 
so  far  from  being  synonymous,  have  significa- 
tions that  are  very  different.  The  distinction 
between  strength  and  force  is  quite  obvious. 
Strength  refers  to  jKntwr,— force  to  the  violeni 
$me  of  that  power.  Force  always  implies  vio- 
lence, but  strength  does  not.  A  precept  in 
the  Holy  Scriptures  is  thus  expressed,  '*  Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  aU  thy  heart, 
and  with  all  thy  itrengtk."  How  would  this 
passage  read  with  the  word  force  instead  of 
the  word  itrength?  To  support  with  moral 
and  physical  strength  does  not  mean  that  vio- 
lence is  to  be  used  at  all.  So  far  from  mean- 
ing that  violence  is  to  be  used  in  attacking 
others,  it  does  not  necessarily  mean  thai  vio- 
lence which  may  be  used  in  resisting  the 
violent  attacks  of  others. 

Thus,  it  has  been  assumed,  with  very  little 
ceremony  indeed,  that  the  moral  and  physical 
strength  referred  to  in  this  oath,  was  to  be 
applied  for  the  purposes  of  treason.  It  seems 
to  DC  just  as  reasonable  to  take  it  for  granted, 
that  the  moral  and  physical  strength  was  to  be 
employed  in  the  commission  of  any  other  crime. 
Can  a  reform  in  parliament  be  promoted  only 
by  the  commission  of  treason  ?  No,  it  will  be 
answered ;  but  treason,  if  it  was  useful  or  ne« 
cessary,  was  to  be  committed.  Then,  if  the 
parties  wer^  not  to  shrink  from  the  crime  of 
treason  if  necessary  for  the^e  purposes,  it  must 
be  supposed  that  they  would  have  been 
equally  ready  for  the  commission  of  any  other 
crimes.  But,  I  ask,  whether,  according  to  the 
meaning  of  this  oath,  the  parties  who  took  it 
were  bound  to  commit  murders,  robberies, 
thefts,  eveiy  sort  of  crimes,  in  order  to  pro- 
mote reform  in  parliament?  Is  it  possible 
that  any  human  Deing  can  be  so  destitute  of 
charity  and  common  sense  as  to  put  that  con- 
struction upon  the  oath  ?  When  I  bind  my- 
self to  forward  the  purposes  of  reform  to  the 
utmost  of  ray  power,  by  moral  and  physical 
strength,  am  I  bound  to  commit  all  or  any  one 
of  the  crimes  which  have  been  mentioned? 
Must  I  rob  on  the  highway  in  order  to  promote 
annual  pariiaments  and  universal  suffrage? 
And  if  the  oath  is  not  an  obligation  to  commit 
crimes  generally,  is  it  not  absurd  to  say,  that 
it  is  an  obligation  to  commit  the  greatest  of  all 
crimes,  the  crime  of  treason  ?  To  maintain  a 
proposition  so  monstrous,  is  the  best  example 
to  prove  the  danger  and  atrocity  of  charsres  of 
constructive  treason.  Suppose  one  of  the 
persons  who  are  stated  in  the  indictment  to 
nave  be^  engaged  in  a  conspiracy;  bat  whose 


names  4rt  not  commuoicated,  had  been  told 
that  the  oath  being  an  obligation  to  support 
the  plan  of  annual  parliaments  and  univemd 
suffrage  to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  by  moral 
and  physical  strength,  so  he  was  required  to 
commit  some  great  crime,  an  assassination  for 
example.  If  such  a  conversation  among  these 
conspirators  can  be  supposed,  the  person  ad* 
dressed  might  surely  answer,  I  engaged  to  do 
every  thing  in  my  power  to  obtain  annual 
parliaments  and  universal  suffrage,  but  I  have 
not  engaged  to  do  any  thing  that  is  against 
law — ^there  is  no  such  obligation  in  the  oath. 
Could  any  one  of  the  fraternity  have  replied, 
you  are  bound  by  the  obligation,  and  must  now 
perform  the  part  you  have  undertaken :  This 
assassination  wili  support  the  cause  of  univer- 
sal suffrage;  and  it  is  an  act  within  your 
power.  This  reasoning  would  hardly  serve  ; 
and  if  there  is  no  obligation  to  commit  a  great 
crime,  there  is  just  as  little  to  commit  a  small 
erime.  The  oath  does  not  purport  or  intend  to 
bind  the  party  taking  it  to  commit  any  crime 
whatever,  or  even  to  infringe  the  slightest  rule 
of  morality. 

Nor  is  there  any  difference  between  a  mere 
paction  in  such  a  case  and  an  obligation 
strengthened  by  an  oath,  how  tremendous 
soever.  As  to  the  present  question,  the  cases 
are  quite  the  same. 

But  it  is  said,  that  if  the  intentions  of  the 
parties  were  so  innocent,  why  take,  an  oath  ? 
Why  this  obligation  to  secrecy  ?  I  have  an- 
swered that  sdready.  I  do  not  know  why 
there  was  an  oath  at  all.  I  do  not  know  why 
it  was  an  oath  of  secrecy.  I  have  heara, 
indeed,  that  some  politicians  have  not  the 
most  absolute  confidence  in  each  other. 
There  are  animals  known  by  the  name  of  rats, 
of  whom  I  sometimes  read  in  the  newspapers, 
who  are  said' even  to  infest  a  certain  great 
assembly.  Some  of  those  who  were  engaged 
in  this  association  may  perhaps  have  suspected 
that  animals  of  that  species  might  get  amongst 
them,  and,  in  order  to  prevent  such  an  acci- 
dent, they  had  recourse  to  the  oath.  Why 
was  there  an  oath  of  secrecy  ?  I  see  no  rea- 
son why  they  should  have  bound  themselves 
to  secrecy,  ant  is  secrecy  to  imply  the  great- 
est atrocity  of  conduct?  If  they  wished  fbt 
secrecy,  does  it  necessarily  follow  that  they 
were  to  commit  treason?  Many  enterprises 
require  secrecy.  That  there  were  persons 
whom  they  did  not  wish  to  offend,  might  be  a 
sufficient  reason  for  their  secrecy.  .  Jt  would 
be  very  unsafe,  indeed,  to  infer  the  illegality 
of  any  combination  from  the  circumstance 
that  it  is  held  together  by  an  oath  of  secrecy, 
but  it  would  be  still  more  unsafe  to  infer  a 
treasonable  conspiracy  upon  such  flimsy 
grounds.  But  the  question  is  not,  Whetiier 
the  obligation  to  secrecy  was  right  or  wrong  ? 
The  only  question  is.  Whether  Uiere  is  in  this 
oath  an  obligation  to  commit  treason?  The 
question  is  not.  Whether  the  panel  committed 
treason  in  any  way?  but  it  is.  Whether  .there 
is  in  the  oath  any  obligation  to  conait  trtSf 


SOI] 


Jor  AimmUUring  unkmfiit  Oaiki. 


•cm?  OntbeM  <iM«tk)D0^  I  think  it  iiiinec«8- 
lary  to  trouUe  your  lordslupft  witili  any  farther 
obsenrations. 

lard  Jtatke  Clerk, — ^After  the  uncommonly 
able  arguments  which  you  hare  heard  from 
both  sides  of  the  bar,  die  question  for  your 
lordships'  consideration  is.  In  what  manner 
jon  are  now  to  proceed  in  determining  whe- 
ther the  present  is  a  relcTant  indictment  P 

Lord  EermamL — ^I  had  no  doubt  in  my 
mindy  when  I  first  saw  the  Indictment,  that  it 
was  relevant.  But  a  great  deal  has  been  said 
to-day  on  the  competency  of  alleging  one 
crime  in  order  to  proTe  another.  I  have  formed 
no  opinion  on  the  objections  which  have  been 
stated  to  the  indictment ;  and  being  desirous 
to  understand  them  thoroughly,  I  wish  to  see 
them  discussed  in  informations.  Several  au- 
thorities have  been  cited,  particularly  by  Mr. 
CranstouUy  and  it  would  oe  proper  to  have 
them  fully  stated,  before  giving  any  opinion 
with  regard  to  them. 

Lord  GiiSa.'—I  am  of  the  same  opinion^ 
and  strongly  wish  to  see  Informations. 

Lord  FUmilfy. — ^I  am  particularly  anxious  to 
consider  that  point  which  we  have  heard  de- 
bated, and  which  is  of  general  importance — 
I  mean,  the  question  as  to  the  admission 
of  the  narrative  part  of  the  indictment  to 
proof. 

With  regard  to  the  other  objections,  I  have 
read  all  the  authorities,  and  should  have  been 
ready  to  give  my  opinion  upon  them.  It  does 
not  appear  to  me,  that  the  cases  of  forgery 
alludea  to  are  analogous  to  this  case.  If 
special  acts  of  treason  had  been  stated,  the 
introductory  part  of  the  narrative  might  have 
been  admitted  to  proof.  But  as  the  minor 
charge  is  not  treason,  but  a  different  erime, 
zny  mind  is  not  yet  made  up  to  the  opinion 
that  the  indictment  is  relevant.  As  far  as  I 
am  able  to  judge,  I  cannot  help  thinking  that 
the  panel,  if  acquitted  on  tms  indictment, 
might  be  again  tried'for  treason.    - 

.  Lord  JuUiu  Cierk. — I  am  much  in  the  situa- 
tion of  my  brother  who  has  last  spoken.  In 
leferenoe  to  the  meaning  of  the  oadi,  I  have 
given  great  attention  to  what  has  be^  said ; 
and  I  had  looked  into  authorities,  besides 
those  referred  to  to-day. 

As  -to  the  other  point,  it  has  been  most  ably 
argued,  and  is  deserving  of  most  serious  and 
d^iberate  attention — ^whether  it  be  competent 
to  let  the  public  prosecutor .  into  a  proof  of 
the  nairative  of  this  indictment.  Tnat  is  a 
point  which,  in  reference  to  ^is  important 
case,  and  all  other  cases  of  a  similar  nature,  is 
deserving  of  the.  most  mature  consideration. 
This,  too,  is  the  first  time  that  an  indictment 
has  been  broi^ht  before  us  founded  upon  this 
statnte.  I  am  .quite  clear,  therefore,  that  the 
solemn  and  regular  manner  of  deciding  the 
potottsin  question  is,  to  have  Informations 
mepai^d,  in  which  the  uguments  may  be 
Jiilly  czhansted.    .       . 


A.  D.  18I7. 


XHTBaLocirrom. 


lam 


9thJpra,  1817. 
^The  Lord  Justioe-Clerk,  and  Loids 
Commissioners  of  Justiciary,  ordain  par- 
ties' procurators  to  give  in  InfSmrinations 
upon  the  relevancy  of  the  Indictitaent,  to 
see  and  interchange  these  Informations, 
and  to  print,  and  lodge  the  saose  with  the 
Clerk  of  Court  in  older  to  be  recorded, 
and  that  within  three  weeks  ftom  this 
date :  Continue  the  diet  against  the  panel 
till  Monday  the  19th  day  of  May  next, 
at  ten  o'clock  forenoon,  in  this  place; 
and  ordain  parties,  witnesses,  assiiers, 
and  all  concerned,  then  to  attend,  each 
under  the  pains  of  law ;  and  the  panel  m 
the  mean  Ume  to  be  carried  baiw  to  the 
Castle  of  Edinburgh. 


COURT  OF  JUSnCLARY. 
May  19,  ISIT. 

Rt  Hon.  Dmd  Boyle^  Loid  Justice  Gerk. ' 
Lord  Semani, 
Lord  GiiHa. 
Lord  PUmiUy. 
Lord  Eaton. 

Comudfor  $he  Crotm. 

Rt.  Hon.  Alexander  MaconochUf  Lord  Advo^ 
cate  [afterwards  a  lord  of  Session  and  Justi- 
ciary, with  the  title  of  Lord  Meadowbank.] 

Jamet  Wedderbum^  Esq.  Solicitor-General. 

H.  Home  Drummondf  £sq. 

K  Warrender,  W.  S.  Agent. 

Cowmlfor  WUliam  Edgar, 

John  Clerk^  Esq. 
Geo.  Cranttoun,  Esq. 
Thoi.  Thornton^  Esq. 
Jamet  Monaieff',  Esq. 
FrandiJeJrwj  Esq. 
J.  P.  Grant,  Esq. 
Hemy  CodAum,  Esq. 
J.  J,  MfOTigfy  Esq. 

G.  TT.  Boyd,  W,  S,  Agent* 

William  Edgar  Vras  placed  at  the  bar. 

Lord  Juttice  Cierk, — William  Edgar,  attend 
to  the  indictment  against  you,  which  is  now 
to  be  read. 

**  William  Edgar  present  prisoner  in 
the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  you  are  in- 
dicted and  accused,  at  the  instance  of 
Alexander  Maconochie  of  Meadowbank, 
his  majesty's  advocate,  for  his  m^esty's 
interest:  That  albeit,  by  an  act  pass- 
ed  in  the  fifty-second  year  of  his  pre- 
sent majesty's  reign,  intituled,  *  An  act 
to  rendet  more  efiectual  an  act  passed 
in  the  thirty-seventh  year  of  his  present 
majesty,  for  preventing  thf  .admuuSter- 


]         57  6BOBGB  IIL 

ingor  taking  nnUtwIbl  oaths,'  itistn/er 
aHa  enacted,  *  That  every  person  who 
shall,  in  any  manner  or  form  whatsoever, 
administer,  or  cause  to  be  administered, 
or  be  aiding  or  assisting  at  the  adminis- 
tering, of  any  oath  or  engagement,  pur- 
porting ot  intending  to  bind  the  person 
taking  the  same  to  commit  any  treason  or 
mvtr&ty  or  any  felony  punishable  by  law 
with  deadi,  shall,  on  conviction  thereof 
by  doe  eontse  of  law,  be  adjudged  guilty 
of  felony^  and  suffer  death  as  a  felon, 
without  benefit  of  clergy/  And  fui^ther, 
by  seetion  fbnrth  «f  the  said  act,  it  is  en- 
SK^ed,  ^  That  penona  aiding  and  assist- 
ing at  the  administering  of  any  such  oath 
or  engagement,  as  aforesaid,  and  per^ 
«>ns  causing  any  such  oath  or  engagement 
to  be  administered,  though  not  present  at 
the  administering  thereof,  shall  be  deemed 
principal  offenders,  and  shall  be  tried  as 
such ;  and  on  conviction  thereof  by  due 
course  of  law,  shall  be  adjudged  guilty  of 
felony,  and  shall  suffer  deaui  as  felons, 
without  benefit  of  clergy ;  although  the 
persons  or  person  who  actually  adminis- 
tered such  oath  or  engagement,  if  any 
such  there  shall  be,  shall  not  have  been 
tried  or  convicted.'  And  further,  by  sec- 
tion sixth,  of  the  said  act,  it  is  enacted, 
*  That  any  engagement  or  obligation 
whatsoever,  iii  th^  nature -of  an  oath,  pur- 
porting or  intending  to  bind  the  person 
taking  the  same  to  commit  any  treason  or 
murd^,  or  any  felony  punishable  by  law 
with  death,  shall  be  deemed  an  oath  within 
the  intent  and  meaning  of  this  act,  in 
whatever  form  or  manner  the  same  snail 
be  administered  or  taken,  and  whether 
the  same  shall  be  actually  administered 
by  any  person  or  persons  to  any  other 
person  or  persons,  or  taken  by  any  other 
person  or  persons,  without  any  adminis- 
tration thereof  by  any  other  person  or  per- 
sons:' Vet  true  it  is  and  of  vebitt, 
that  you,  the  said  William  Edgar,  are 
guilty  of  the  said  crimes,  or  of  one  or 
more  of  them,  actor,  or  art,  and  part: 
Jn  so  for  at  you,  the' said  William  Edgar, 
did,  at  secret  meetings,  and  on  other  oc- 
casions, at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  thereof,  in  the  course  of  the 
months  of  November  and  December 
1816,  and  of  January  and  February,  181 74 
wickedly,  maliciously,  and  traitorouslv 
administer,  or  cause  to  be  administered, 
or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administering, 
to  a  great  number  of  persons,  to  the 
sufnount  of  several  hundreds,  etn  oath  or, 
engagement,  or  an  obligation  in  the  nature 
of  an  oath,  bindhag,  or  purporting  or  in- 
tending to  bind,  the  persons  taking  the 
same  to  commit  treason;  which  oath, 
engagement,  or  obligation,  was  in  the 
fbllowing  terms,  or  t6  the  following  pur- 

Sort , — *  In  awful  presence  of  God,  I,  A 
I,  do  voluntarily  sw^ar^  Aat  I  will  per- 


TrialofmiUam^Edgdr 


[304 


ievere  in  my  endeavouring  ia  form  a 
brotherhood  of  affection  amongst  Britons 
of  every  description,  who  are  considered 
worthy  of  confidence ;  and  that  I  wiU 
persevere  in  my  endeavours  to  obtain  for 
all  the  people  in  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land^ not  disqualified  by  crimes  or  insa- 
nity, the  elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of 
twenty-one,  with  free  and  equal  represen- 
tation, and  annual  parliaments ;  and  that 
I  will  support  the  same  to  the  utmost  of 
my  power,  either  by  moral  or  physical 
strength,  as  the  case  may  require :  And 
I  do  further  swear,  that  neither  hopes, 
fears,  rewards,  or  punishments,  shall  in- 
duce me  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence 
against,  any  meinber  or  members  collec- 
tively or  individually,  for  any  act  or 
expression  done  or  made,  in  or  out,  in 
this  or  similar  societies,  under  the  punish- 
ment of  death,  to  be  inflicted  on  me  by 
any  member  or  members  of  such  societies. 
So  help  me  God,  and  keep  me  stedfast.' 
Which  oath,  or  engagement,  or  obligation, 
to  the  foregoing  purport,  did  bind,  or  did 
purport  or  intend  to  bind  the  persons  taking 
the  same  to  commit  treason,  by  effecting  by 
physical  strength  the  subversion  of  the 
established  government,  laws,  and  con- 
stitution of  this  kingdom,  and  especially 
by  obtaining  annual  parliaments  and  uni- 
yersal  suffrage  by  unlawful  and  violent 
means.  And,  more  particularly^  you,  the 
said  William  Edgar,  did  upon  the  1st  day 
of  January  1817,  or  on  one  or  other  of  the 
days  of  tnat  month,  or  of  ]!)ecember  im- 
mediately preceding,  or  of  February  im- 
mediately following,  at  a  secret  meeting, 
held  in  the  house  of  William  Leggat, 
change-keeper  in  Ring-street,  Tradeston,- 
in  the  vicinity  of  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere 
at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate  vicinity 
thereof,  wickedly,  maliciously,  and  traito- 
rously administer,  or  cause  to  be  admin- 
istered, or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  admin- 
istering an  oath  or  obligation  in  the  terms 
above  set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport, 
to  Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lauchlane,  John 
Campbell,  and  Hugh  Dickson,  all  present 
prisoners  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh ;  as 
also  to  James  M^'Ewan,  now  or  lately 
carding-master  at  Humphries  Mill,  Gor- 
bals  of  Glasgow,  and  M^Dowal  Pate,  or 
Peat,  now  or  lately  weaver  in  Piccadilly- 
street,  Anderson,  tn  the  vicintty  of  Glas- 
gow, vrho,  conscious  of  their  guilt  in  the 
premises,  have  absconded  and  fled  from 
justice;  as  also  to  John  Conneltoti,  or 
Congleton,  now  or  lately  cotton-spinner 
in  Calton  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one  or  other 
of  them,  and  to  other  persons,  whose 
names  are  to  the  Prosecutor  unknown,  the 
said  oath,  or  engagement,  or  obligation, 
to  the  said  purport,  binding,  or  purporting 
to  hind,  the  persons  taking  the  same 
to  commit  treason,  as  said  is.  (9.)  '^^ 
further,  you,  the  said  Williain  Edgar  .did^ 


9051 


llll&llg^^OaiAf. 


A.  D.  Wrti 


upon  the  4di  day  of  Jtmiarj  1817,  or  on 
one  or  other  of  the  dvjn  of  that  monih,  or 
of  December  ifiiBediately  preceding,  or 
of  February  immediately  following,  at  a 
^eeret  meetiiig  held  at  the  house  of  Neill 
MwiD,  inn^keeper  aod  stabler  in  Ingram* 
street,  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow, 
or  in  the  immediate  vicinity  thereof, 
wickedly,  maliciously,  and  traitorously 
administer,  or  cause  to  be  administered, 
or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administeiing 
an  oath  or  obligation,  in  the  terme  above 
set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport,  to  the 
said  Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lauchlane 
John  Campbell,  Hugh  Dit^uran,  M^owal 
Pate,  or  Peat,  and  James  M'Ewan ;  as 
also  to  James  Hood,  present  prisoner  in 
the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  Anarew  Som- 
merWlle,  John  Buchanan,  and  James 
Robertson,  all  now  or  lately  prisoners 
in  Che  Tdbooth  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one  or 
other  of  them,  and  to  other  persons, 
whose  names  are  to  the  prosecutor  un- 
known, the  said,  oath,  or  engagement, 
or  obligation,  to  the  raid  purport,  binding, 
or  purporting  to  bind,  the  persons  taking 
the  same  to  commit  treason,  as  said  is. 
And  you,  the  said  William  Edgar,  having 
been  apprehended  and  taken  before 
Daniel  Hamilton,  Esquire,  one  of  the 
SbertffiHsnbstitute  of  Lanarkshire,  did, 
in  his  presence,  at  Glasgow^  on  the 
6th  day  of  March  1817,  enxit  and,  sub- 
aeribe  a  declaiation ;  and  hai^g  been 
taken  before  Robert  HamilU^  fisqmra, 
Sheriff-depute  of  Lanarkshire,  yOu  did,  ia 
his  presence,  at  Glasgowy  upon  the  fth 
and  8th  days  of  March  1817,  emit  and 
subscribe  two  several  declarations ;  whidir 
declarations,  being  to  be  used  in  evidence 
against  you  at  your  trial,  will  be  lodged 
in  doe  time  in  the  han<u  of  the  Clerk  of 
the  High  Court  of  Justiciaiy,  before  which 
you  are  to  be  tried,  that  you  tnay  have  an 
opportunity  of  seeing  the  same.  At  least, 
times  and  places  foresaid,  the  said  oath, 
or  engagement,  or  obligation,  to  the  same 
pvirport,  binding,  or  purporting  to  bind, 
the  persons  taking  the  same  to  commit 
ireasoD,  as  said  is,  was  wickedly,  malici- 
oQsly,  and  traitorously  administered,  or 
csLuaed  to  be  administered;  and  some 
persons  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  adminis- 
tenng  thertof  ;^  and  you  the  said  Williahi 
Edgar  are  guiltj^  thereof,  actor,  or  art  and 
part  All  which  or  part  thereof,  bmg! 
nand  proven  by  the  verdict  of  an  asatze*, 
hekm  the  Lord  Justice  General,  the  X^brd 
JusticeCleik,  ind  Lords  Comraisiiioners  of 
Justiciaiy,  yoa  the  said  William  Eidgar 
ought  to  he  pQfdshed  with  the  pains  of 
law,  to  deter  others' nQm  committing  tfie 
like  crimes  in  all  time  coming. 

^  H.  Home  Druxk oiTo,  >1»  D/^ 

LIST  OF  WITNESSES. 

t.  Bfiiferi  HamUUmt  Esq.  sheriff-depafta.  of 
'      Lanarkshire. 


3.  Darnel  fioantoi/Era.  one  of  the  4i«ni^ 

substitute  of  Lanarkshire. 

3.  Dankl  WCaUum^  clerk  to  Joluji  Dryi^ale^ 

sheriff-clerk  of  Lanar^hirs^ 

4.  Matthew  Butms^  clerk  to  George  Salmond, 

procuratorufiscal  of  Lanarkshire. 

5.  Jckn  LeMUe,  derk  to  the  said  John  Xhj^^ 

dale. 

6.  Jo$eiA  Beidf  writer  ia  Glasggy, 

7.  Alexander  Cal4ar^  sh«rilMip«r  ia  Ghun 

gow. 

8.  Jaares  Z^omsoa,  derk  to  the  said  Joha 

Drysdale. 

9.  Jletander   Hynier,    ehange-keeper,    QM 

Wynd  of  Glasgow. 

10.  Marion  M^Laren^  0x  M*Lachla%  now  or 

lately  servant  to  the  said  Alexander: 
Hunter. 

11.  JbAnEo6er2Mm,  inn-keeper  and  altahl«r/>aln 

lowgate  Glasgow. 

12.  Jgne$  CampbeU,  wife  of  Thomas  IXmr, 

steam-boiler  makes  and  smith  at  GM-9 
wood  and  Company's  foundry  in  Huichr. 
esontown,  in  the  vicinity  of  Glasgow.    . 

13.  Janet  l^eauMj  now  or  lately  servant  ta 

Neill  Munn,  innkeeper  aad  stabler  in 
Ingram-street,  Glasgow. 

14.  AliMon  WUton,  now  or  lately  servant  to  the 

said  Neill  Munn. 

15.  Matthew  Fyfo,  spiritrdealer  in  Wilio^*. 

street,  Glasgow. 

16.  Jean  Boyd^  wile  of  the  said  Matthew  Fyfek 

17.  William  Leggatf  change-keepei;,  iio  Kin^. 

street,  corner  of  Centra-fUreet,  Tiadftth 
'  ton,  in  the  vicinity  of  Glasgow. 

18.  John  Mitchell,  we^ver^  residing  iRWilki*Vt 

Laod«  Charles-street,  Caltonof  Glasgow. 

19.  Eugh  Vkkfca,  present  prisoner  in  the 

Castle  of  Edinburgh. 

20.  Ptter  Oiifion,  present  prisoner  there. 

21.  John  M'Lauchlane,  present  prisoner  there. 

22.  IFt^iiam^ismion,  presei^t  prisaifier  (hate. 
28.  Jamet  Haoa,  pteaeat  prisoner  there. 

24.  John  Cam^Uf  present  prisoner  there. 

25.  nomas  Smclair,  present  prisoner  there. 

H.  Homb  DauMMOVD;  A,  J>. 

t  •  •   • 

LIST  OS   ASSIZS. 

County  of  Edinburgh, 

Francii  Carter^  Scdtf  of  BaUemo. 
Bichard  Wooley^  of  Whitehouse. 
Jame»  White^  tobacconist  in  Dalkeith. 
Robert  lyle^  baker  there. 
John  Woodj  merchant  there. 
JoAfi  Bfoidn,  farmer,  Carrington. 
Atudreo)  JohnUan,  farmer.  Primrose-bams. 

County  of  Haddington, 

William  Aicheton,  junior,  of  Dnunmore. 
John  SommerviU  Ox  Moreham. 
WUliam  Emfj  farmer,  Howden. 
John  Brodiey  £urmer.  West  Fentoa. 
Moheri  Hope,  fanner,  FentOn. 

County  of!  LinUtbgoio, 

WiUiamGUn  oiJAM», 


3071 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Tml  6/ WiOam  Edgar 


[308 


WiBiam  Diwirmy'ypmifer,  Bonnytoun. 
Jchn  Trotter^  fiinner  at  Stacks. 
JMfft  Toi/lory  residing  at  Blackness. 
George  TurvkuU^  fanner  at  Northbank. 

CUy  cf  Xdinburgkk 

Robert  Fraur^  jeweller  in  Edinburgh. 
noma  Bichardumy  merchant-tailor  there. 
J}amd  Whiiekmfy  watoh-maker  there. 
Peter  Feddie,  tronk-inaker  there. 
WUiiam  Thtiter,  upholsterer  there. 
Aletumder  BtmeU,  coach-maker  there. 
John  Inoerarityy  upholsterer  there. 
George  Yule,  meroiant  there. 
AleMmder  Jtfii&e,  saddler  there. 
John  Sieelf  confectionet  there. 
Jamee  hmee,  gunsmith  there. 
Darnel  Forreti,  hosier  there. 
Peter  Smoeny  saddler  there. 
George  Hunter,  merchant  there. 
Wilham  Ret$,  tailor  there. 
Cktrlee  M'Xeafiy  draper  there. 
JoHn  Laing,  saddler  there.    / 
John  M'^ereon,  tailor  there. 
Franek  Dmideonj  confectioner  there. 
WUliam  Cooper^  boot-maker  there. 
WUUam  Dwnbretky  hotel-keeper  there. 

TowneflMth, 

John  M^Kennef  merchant  in  Leith. 
Archibald  Clegkomy  corn-merchant  there. 
Thmm  MatrUmy  ship-builder  there* 
FUierte  Patereony  painter  there. 
CAorfef  Bobertion,  merchant  there. 
John  Sandertf  a^nt  there. 
JMi- Cir/cwer,  Wright  there. 

Ad.  Gilliu. 

d.  movtpsvmt. 

David  Dot7oias« 


Lord  Jmttke  CfeHfe.--William  Edgar,  what 
do  you  say  to  this  indictment? — ^Are  you 
^il^  or  not  guilly  of  the  charges  contained 
mitr 

WUUam  JS<(giar.— Not  guilty,  my  Lord. 

Mr.  Gronffotm.— The  prisoner  pleads  to  the 
indictment  which  has  just  been  read,  I  have 
to  state  to  your  lordships,  that  he  is  advised 
to  object  to  the  competency  of  the  present 
proceeding ;  and  I  humbly  submit  that  this  is 
the  proper  time  for  stating  «tbe  objection  to 
.  your  loraships. 

Your  lordihips  will  recollect  that  the  pri- 
soner at  the  bar  was  latelv  indicted  upon  the 
statute  the  52nd  Geo.  3 ,  mr  the  crime  of  ad- 
ministering unlawful  oaths,  binding,  or  pui^ 
porting  or  intending  to  bind,  the  takers  to 
commit  die  crime  of  treason.  That  indictment 
was  regularly  served  upon  the  prisoner— he 
was  brought  to  the  bar — ^he  pleaded  not 
guilty^-and  your  lordships,  upon  hearine  a 
debate  upon  the  relevancy,  appointed  inior« 
mations  to  be  giv^n  in,  and  continued  the 
time  for  doing  so  until  this  day. 

My  lords,  that  criminal  prosecution  is  still 


]  in  dependence  against  the  prisoner.  The  diet 
has  not  yet  been  deserted  so  far  as  I  know. 
I  need  not  tell  your  lordships,  that  his 
Majesty's  Advocate  cannot  desert  a  prosecu- 
tion, either  eimplkiter  or  pro  loco  et  tempore, 
without  the  permission  of  your  lordsnips. 
Bf  deserting  nmplicifer,  I  mean  here,  deserting 
with  a  view  to  try  upon  a  new  indictment  for 
the  same  crime. 

.While  the  first  prosecution  was  thus  in 
dependence,  his  Majesty's  Advocate  has 
thought  fit  to  eiecnte  a  second  indictment 
against  mv  client,  calling  him  to  answer  at 
your  bar  mr  precisely  the  same  crime  as  was 
charged  in  the  first  mdictment.  I  submit  to 
your  lordships,  that  this  proceeding  is  alto- 
gether incompetent — because  the  diet  in  the 
first  indictment  is  not  yet  deserted;  and  that 
it  would  be  equally  incompetent  to  proceed 
at  present  on  the  second  inaictment,  even  if, 
on  the  motion  of  the  lord  advocate,  the  first 
should  now  be  deserted.  I  shall  state,  in 
veiy  f^w  words,  the  grounds  upon  which  I 
think  our  objection  is  irresistible. 

It  is  known  to  your  lordships,  that  by  the 
criminal  law  of  this  country,  as  now  firmly 
established,  every  person  who  is  brought  to 
the  bar  upon  a  criminal  charge  ii  entitled  to 
have  the  indneuBoi  fifteen  free  da3rs.  What 
benefit  could  be  derived  from  the  indnda  if 
he  eouid  be  brought  to  trial,  and  during  the 
dependence  of  that  trial  induda  might  be 
running  against-  him  all  the  while  for  another 
trial  on  account  of  the  same  crime?  Why,  he 
would  be  placed  in  a  situation  in  which  the 
law  certamly  never  meant  him  to  be  placed ; 
he  would  be  perplexed  and  embarrassed,  by 
being  under  the  necessity  of  defending  twp 
actions  subsisting  together  at  one  and  the 
same  time.  Observe  how  far  this  principle, 
if  once  admitted  would  go.  The  prisoner  is  in« 
dieted,  he  is  brought  to  the  bar,  an  objection 
is  stated  to  the  relevancy  of  the  indictment, 
and  3rour  lordships,  after  an  argument  of  twelve 
hours  upon  the  relevancy,  find  the  indictment 
irrelevant.  The  next  moment  his  Majesty^s 
Advocate  takes  a  new  indictment  out  of  his 
pocket,  and  the  prisoner  is  immediately  put 
again  upon  his  trial  for  the  very  same  offence. 
Well,  the  second  dav  you  have  an  argument 
upon  the  rele?ancgr  of  this  second  indictment^ 
an  argument  which  also  lasts  twelve  hours; 
and  when  that  indictment  is  found  irrelevant^ 
what  happens  next?  A  third  indictment  is 
produced  by  his  Majesty's  Advocate,  and  he 
msists  that  the  prisoner  shall  again  be  tried. 
And  thus  there  might  be  fif&n  different 
indictments,  under  which  the  prisoner  is  ac* 
tnally  kept  upon  his  trial  for  fifteen  days, 
being  the  whole  mdueia  contained  in  the  first 
indictment;  and  upon  the  sixteenth  charge, 
the  panel  might  be  brought  to  trial  upon  a 
relevant  indictment,  and  without  having  had 
one  moment's  time  to  prepare  his  defence, 

I  may  be  told  that  this  is  stating  an  extreme 
case,  one  which  is  not  likely  to  happen.   Such  * 
a  case  certainly  may  not  happen  while  my 


te»} 


Jhir  AimmimvHg  mfa^j^  Ouihi. 


A.  D.  1817. 


{»!<» 


fiknd  is  loid  adiocilo  9  bttt  if  whm  I  Iwi^ 
•tated  ought  happen  in  ao  estpeme  case,  it  1% 
WMMigb  |br  my  ammeiit.  Eveiy  poisiUa 
dttojger  ol  tkis  koto  ooght  w  lie  guarded 
agaiMt,  ibr  expeneDce'-  .taaches  w  that  cri- 
niDa)  pBOWMtttioDS  are  often  reaoxted  to  Aom 
ambition^  ittreDge,  aad  other  impfoper  mo- 


Aa  %  geneial  rale,  therefore,  in  the.  law  of 
SootkocC  I  affirm  that  if  a  peiaoa  is  indicted 
%9K%.  crime,  aad  if  he  oomea  to  the  har,  and 
ple»ob  JO  that  indictment,  then  there  is »  a  de- 
pending psooem  apaioat  him,  imm^vahkk  he 
cattttbt  again  be  cited  tO'anawer  Tor  the  fame 
cikaige,  aad  in  that  way  be  deprived  entirely 
of  ih«  beneit  of  hii  MiCht*  Ine  moment  he 
baa  pleaded  to  hia  indictment,  it  ia  incompe- 
tent to  have  another  indictment  running 
aigainat  him  for  the  aame  ofibnee. 

There  are  variona  waya  in  which  I  might 

iilaatrate  the  haidihip  aad  oppieation  which 

wooUL  reaolt  Aom  a  difiereni  mle.    Sappoae 

a  pand  faas-pleaded  to  an  indictment  and  haa 

been  actually  pot  upon  his  trial  here,  if  the 

dfaiectton  whidi'  I.  am  now  stating  ia  not  a 

good  objection,  his  Mi^eat/s  Advocate  mi^ 

aaisa  another  indictment,  reqoiring  him  to  take 

hia  trial  at  a  distance^  for  instance'  at  Aher* 

deen,  the  day  after  the  diet  of  the  first  landict^ 

men^  whidi  is  to  be  tried  at  Edinburgh,  and 

ahat  i»  the  vaiy  purpose  of  d^eiting  the  fint 

indirtmeat  and  paoceeding  upon  the  second. 

In  thia  veiy  case  it  b  pomible  that  the  panel 

any  hare  fifty  .witnesses  to  examine,  and  of 

eonrae  he  ia  bound  to  have  Ihem  here  to-day 

in  caaa  the  trial  ahonld  go  on  on  the  fonaer 

indictmenl.    Bnt  if  the  fornier  is  deserted, 

and  a  new  one  called  at  Aberdeen  to-mortow, 

ia  what  manner,!  would  ask,. is  the  paod  to 

tianapnrt  his  wime^aea  toAberdeen?  ThetadMr 

cac  an  giren  by  law  for  the  very  purpose  of 

pwiferting  the  accused  against  surprises  of  dua 

land;  bnt  the  practice-alteBaipted  on  -the  part 

of  the  Oown  would  defeat  that  purpose. 

It  ia  in  .-vahi  to  aay  that  the  Court  would  io- 
tarfem  to  give  ledieas,  if  an  oppreasive  pio- 
needing  oriha aataie  I  hare  supposed  were  to 
he  attempled.  Ihat  plea  was  once  uiged, 
when  a  pioeecnter,  inaefiaaoe  of  all  law,  had 
jHt  given  the  eadiaaiy  iadbicHr,  and  I  am  sorry 
to  say,  thai  it  was  listaned  to  by  the  Conit. 
The  Kbel  oonta^ied  indbaur  of  twelve  daya 
on^;  and  .iribea  <tbe  panel  eomplained,  he 
waa  toldj  th«t  i£  he  had  applied  to  ^e  Court 
iw  hngfar  tiflM,  it  monld  have  been  allowed. 
The  olgeetion  was  eocoidingly  repelled,  bnt, 
aa  lfe«ilume  justly  observes,  it  was  most 
improperly  repelled^  2f  the  ordinary  rales  of 
JaWy  aelded  by  the  maclioe  of  centuries,  are 
4a  be  diapeaaed  witn»  and  a  priioner  lotted 
iDversipoathe.Cooit:foraadieaa,  iaitreimagb 
aaaaffithat.he  .wsllobtain  aaa  favour  wMt 
ha  in  icatifled  ito  teiMd  aa  a  right?  If  thia 
be  dia.eaae>  .all  lenuaty,  all  liberty  ia  at  aa 


Tins  vmiaasaad  very  gmathardahipa  would 
mialt,  if^paaems^  admit,  thAt  after  a  panoa 
VOL,  XXKIIL 


hatii^MM  to  one  erimjnal.prosec«^o,  and 
iwhi)e  it  is  in  dependence —for  example,  while 
ixiformations  are  preparipg^  on  the  relevancy 
«-4be  tnduci^  of  another  prosecution  for  thf 
same  crime  may  be  current. 

I  do  not  9ay  that  the  question  .which  I  am 
now  stating. to  your  loidshipa  has  been  de- 
cided in  (enganii  l^  the  jQQurL  If  it  has  so 
been  decided,  it  has  escaped  m  obaeryation, 
and  the  learned  counsel  upon  the  other  side 
,of  the  bar  will  mention  the  cases  in  jivhich  the 
objection  has  occurred,  and  has  been  repelled. 
For  any  thing  that  I  luiow,  there  may  he  in- 
.atances  of  trials  having  proceeded  on  indict- 
.ments  raised  in  the  same  manner  as  the  pre* 
sent;  but  tfiat  must  have  happened  where  the 
objection  waa  not  stated ;  and  you  will  ,easUy 
see,  that  in  many  cases .  it  might  be  for  the 
interest  of  the  panel  to  wave  .the  objection^ 
In  many  cases  a  prisoner  would  wi^h  to  be 
tried,  without  Any  indnKUBi  for  instance,  in  a 
charge  of  a  subordinate  or  inferior  nature^ 
there  may  often  be  an  interest  on  the  part  of 
the  prisoner  to  wave  thU  objection.  But  what 
I  found  upon  is  thia,  tht^  as  foraa  I  have  been 
able  to  discover,  this  objection  haa  not  been 
stated  and.repelled  ia  lenaiiai. 

Bnt. though  I  cannot  refer  to  a  precedent  in 
which  it  haa  been  sustained,  I  think  there  has 
been  a  case  decided  which  apjpears  to  me  te 
proceed  on  the  vmy  same  prmdple^  and  to 
jdlnatrate  aad  support  the  argument  which  I 
■have  now  the  honour  to  maintain.  .There  are 
instances  of  hdf  a  do«en  indictments  having 
been  served  upon  a  prisoner,  one  after  anothea, 
.and  calling  him  to  attend  at  the  bar  at  diS- 
•ferent  times ;  and,  in  particular,  that'  happen^ 
ed  in  the  celebrated  caae  of  colonel  Francis 
X^harteris.  Four  difierent  libela  were  executed 
.against  'him  to  take  his  trial  for  the  same 
eriine,  all  cdluig  him  to  appear  ia  Court  at 
diffi»ei}t<tiniea;  .and  when  he  appeared  upoa 
the  first  of  thesd  indictaoeats,  he  stated  that 
•ha  ^as  act  beand  to  plead  at  all,  until  the 
4ord  advocate  selected  the  indictaftent  upon 
whtoh  he  intended  to  oarry  oa  the  trial;  and 
ihe  Court  found,-  or  it  was  admitted  on  the  peat 
of  the  prosecution,  that  this  was  necessary^; 
and  accordingly,  befoide  the  trial  prooeeded, 
it  was  necessasy  to  desert  three  of  the  indict 
ments-»and  when  they  wareao  deseoted,  then, 
and  not  till  then,  vraa  ooleael  Charteria  rch 
quired  4o  plead. 

Is  not  that  case  precisely  the  same  m  trta- 
(Buk  as  the  present  P  For,  if  before  colonel 
Cnarteris  pleaded,  every  indictment,  then  in 
^dependence  but  one  was  necessarily  deserted, 
— ^now  that  my. client  haa  pleaded,  there  being 
but  one  indictment  when  he  pleaded,  it  fol- 
iows  for  the  same  reason,  that  other  three  in- 
dictaaenta  cannot  be  hung  over*  his  head.  K 
yon  ,do  not  jupport  this  objection,  you  place 
n^  dient  in  that  situation  in  which  it  was 
deoided  that  colond  Charteria  could  not  be 
placad.  If  ooload  Charteria  had  plead^lo 
hia  hrat  indictment,  while  the  others  li^em  in 
snmense,  he  would  have  been  in  the  siiuation 


3071 


57  GEORGE  IIL 


TrM  of  Wmam  Edgar 


[308 


WUHam  Bmmon^jom^^  Bonnytoun. 
Jchn  TVntter^  former  at  Stacks. 
JMfft  Toifhry  rending  at  Blackness. 
George  iSiirviiuUy  farmer  at  Northbank. 

CUy  of  Edkiburgk, 

Robert  FroKTy  jeweller  in  Edinburgh. 
l%oma»  BicharAony  merchant»tailor  there. 
Damd  WkiieknPy  watch-maker  there. 
Peter  FeddSe,  tronk-maker  there. 
WiUiam  Droiter,  upholsterer  there. 
Aletutnder  lUmtUf  coadi-maker  there. 
John  Inoerarity,  upholsterer  there. 
Cfeorge  Yule,  merdiant  there. 
Alexander  Aindie,  saddler  there. 
John  Sieelf  confectionet  there. 
Jamee  Iimet,  gunsmith  there. 
Darnel  Forreti,  hosier  there. 
Peter  Saweriy  saddler  there. 
George  ^mier^  mer^ant  there. 
WU&m  Ron,  tailor  there. 
Ckarlee  WLun,  draper  there. 
John  Laingf  saddler  there. 
John  M^PiUroony  tailor  there. 
Pnmdk  Tknidaonj  confectioner  there. 
WUUom  Cooper^  boot>niaker  there. 
WUUam  Dumbrecky  hotel-keeper  there. 

ToumofLeith, 

John  M^Kennef  merdiant  in  Leith. 
Archibald  Clegkomy  com-merchani  there. 
Thinmt  Morion^  slup-builder  there. 
Rohert$  Patereooy  painter  there. 
C4aHSef  Boberteon,  merchant  there. 
John  Sandertf  a^nt  there. 
JMii- Cir/cweri  wnght  there. 

Ad.  Gillibs. 

d.  movtpbhmt. 

David  Dot7oia8. 


Lord  Jtatiee  CfeHfe.--William  Edgar,  what 
do  you  say  to  this  indictment? — ^Are  you 
guilty  or  not  guilty  of  the  charges  contained 
mitr 

WUlimn  JS<(g)ar.— Not  guilty,  my  Lord. 

Mr.  Gmmifotm.— The  prisoner  pleads  to  the 
indictment  which  has  just  been  read,  I  hare 
to  state  to  your  lordships,  that  he  is  advised 
to  object  to  the  competency  of  the  present 
proceeding ;  and  I  humbly  submit  that  this  is 
the  proper  time  for  stating  «the  objection  to 
.  your  lorafihips. 

Your  lordships  will  recollect  that  the  pri- 
soner at  the  bar  was  lately  indicted  upon  the 
statute  the  52nd  Geo.  3 ,  for  the  crime  of  ad- 
ministering unlawfol  oaths,  binding,  or  pur- 
porting or  intending  to  bind,  the  takers  to 
commit  die  crime  of  treason.  That  indictment 
was  regularly  served  upon  the  prisoner — ^he 
was  brought  to  the  bar — ^he  pleaded   not 

Snilty — and  your  lordships,  upon  hearing  a 
ebate  upon  the  relevancy,  appointed  infor* 
mations  to  be  giv^n  in,   and  continued  the 
time  for  doing  so  until  this  day. 
My  lords,  that  criminal  prosecution  is  still 


in  dependence  against  the  prisoner.  The  diet 
has  not  yet  been  deserted  so  for  as  I  know. 
I  need  not  tell  your  lordships,  that  his 
Majestjr's  Advocate  cannot  desert  a  prosecu- 
tion, either  impHeUer  or  pro  loco  et  tempore, 
without  the  permission  of  your  lord^ips. 
Bf  deserting  emqUiciter,  I  mean  here,  deserting 
with  a  view  to  try  upon  a  new  indictment  for 
the  same  crime. 

.While  the  first  prosecution  was  thus  in 
dependence,  his  Majesty's  Advocate  has 
thought  fit  to  eiecute  a  second  indictment 
against  my  client,  calling  him  to  answer  at 
your  bar  ror  precisely  the  same  crime  as  was 
charged  in  the  first  mdictment.  I  submit  to 
your  lordships,  that  this  proceeding  is  alto- 

S ether  incompetent—- because  the  diet  in  the 
rst  indictment  is  not  yet  deserted ;  and  that 
it  would  be  equally  incompetent  to  proceed 
at  present  on  the  second  inaictment,  even  if, 
on  the  motion  of  the  lord  advocate,  the  first 
should  now  be  deserted.  I  shall  state,  in 
very  fow  words,  the  grounds  upon  which  I 
think  our  olijection  is  irresistible. 

It  is  known  to  your  lordships,  that  by  the 
criminal  law  of  this  country,  as  now  firmly 
established,  every  person  who  is  brought  to 
the  bar  upon  a  criminal  charge  is  entitled  to 
have  the  mdueia  of  fifteen  fi«e  days.  What 
benefit  could  be  derived  from  the  indnda  if 
he  could  be  brought  to  trial,  and  during  the 
dependency  of  that  trial  induda  might  be 
running  against  him  all  the  while  for  another 
trial  on  account  of  the  same  crime?  Why,  be 
would  be  placed  in  a  situation  in  which  the 
law  certainly  never  meant  him  to  be  placed  ; 
he  would  be  perplexed  and  embarrassed,  by 
being  under  the  necessity  of  defending  twp 
actions  >  subsisting  together  at  one  and  the 
same  time.  Observe  how  far  this  principle, 
if  once  admitted  would  go.  The  prisoner  is  in« 
dieted,  he  is  brought  to  Uie  bar,  an  objection 
is  stated  to  the  nlevancy  of  the  indictment, 
and  your  lordships,  after  an  argument  of  twdve 
hottis  upon  the  relevancy,  find  the  indictment 
irrelevant.  The  next  moment  his  Majesty's 
Advocate  takes  a  new  indictment  out  of  his 
pocket,  and  the  prisoner  is  immediately  put 
again  upon  his  trial  for  the  very  same  offence. 
Well,  the  second  davyou  have  an  argument 
upon  the  rdevancy  of  this  second  indictment, 
an  argument  which  also  lasts  twelve  hours; 
and  when  that  indictment  is  found  irrelevant, 
what  happens  next?  A  third  indictment  is 
produoed  by  his  M^esty's  Advocate,  and  he 
insists  that  the  prisoner  shall  again  be  tried. 
And  thus  there  might  be  fifteen  different 
indictments,  under  which  the  prisoner  is  ac- 
tually kept  upon  his  trial  for  fifteen  days, 
being  the  whole  mdueia  contained  in  the  -first 
indictment;  and  upon  the  sixteenth  charge, 
the  panel  might  be  brought  to  trial  upon  a 
relevant  indictment,  and  without  having  had 
one  moment^i  time  to  prepare  his  defence. 

I  may  be  told  that  this  is  stating  an  extreme  ^ 
case,  one  whidi  is  not  likely  to  happen.  Such ' 
a  case  certainly  may  not  happen  while  my 


imi 


Jar^dminktm^mtlai^fii^Ottihs. 


A.  D.  1817. 


ino 


fiind  is  loi4  ad»acM«>  bat  if  whit  I  buiit 
•Urted  might  happen  jn  »d  eztreine  cue,  ft  j» 
«ooagk  Ck  my  tmmeoL  £vecy  possiUe 
dttoger  «P  tNs  k«ia  ought  ta  be  guarded 
agaiiM^  Ibr  experience  teaches  us  that  cri- 
naipal  pwocatioM  are  often  reaoctc^  to  from 
ii]Bbiilie%  lereage^  and  other  impioper  mo- 


i^f  genenl  rale,  therefore,  in  the  law  of 
Scettonn,  I  aflirm  that  if  a  penon  is  indicted 
te«  crime,  aad  if  be  comes  lo  the  bar,  and 
pleads  pi>  that  indictment,  then  there  is.  a  de- 
pending pmess  apinst  him,  dttrmgfohick  he 
caanbt  again  be  cited  tO'answer  for  the  same 
dwcge,  and  in  that  way  be  deprived  entirely 
of  «k«  benefit  of  his  imdmitr*  llie  mosBent  he 
bas  pleaded  to  hia  indictment,  it.  is  incompe- 
tent to  hara  another  indictment  running 
ugainst  him  for  the  same  ofihnee. 

There  are  various  ways  iu  which  I  might 
illnstcate  the  haidship  and  oppression  which 
mntUL  result  fyua  a  diffurent  role.  Suppose 
«  pansl  haS'pleaded  to  aa  indictmeai^  and  has 
been  actnsjfy  pot  upon  his  trial  here,  if  the 
ohyeetion  w]i<&  I.  am  now  stating  is  not  a 
g«M>d  objection,  hie  Maiest/s  Advocate  might 
taiae  anolhec  indictment,  requiring  him  to  take 
fcia  trial  at  a  distance/^  for  instance*  at  Aber* 
deen,  the  day  after  the  diet  of  the  first  rsodict- 
nent,  whidi  is  to  be  tried  at  Edinboigh,  and 
that  iar  the  very  purpose  of  d^erting  the  first 
indictq^ent  and  proceeding  upon  the  second. 
In  tins  very  case  it  is  posaible  that  the  pend 
wmj  have  fifty  witnesses  to  examine,  and  of 
coarse  he  is  bound  to  have  them  here  to-day 
in  casa  thetiial  should  go  on  on  the  former 
iadietmem.  But  if  the  Ibrmer  is  deserted, 
and  a  aew  one  called  at  Aberdeen  to-mortoWy 
ia  what  asanner,  I  would  ask,  ,is  the  psn^  to 
twiwport  his  witnesses  toiAherdeen?  Thetnda- 
csa  are  given  by  law  for  the  very  purpose  of 
pwilsctiiig  the  accnsed  against  surprises  of  this 
Bad;  but  the  practicealteaspted  on  -the  part 
of  the  Orovin  would  defeat  that  purpose. 

It  is  in  vain  ta  say  that  the  Court  would  ia- 
terfssa  to  give  ledressy  if  an  oppressive  pro- 
cseding  otibt  aatnie  I  have  supposed  were  to 
be  attempted.  That  plea  was  once  umd, 
when  a  prosoctttor,  in  oefiance  of  alt  law,  had 
asS  given  the  OB^bosKry  ts^b^,  and  X  am  sony 
so  say,  that  it  was  bstened  to  by  the  Court. 
The  libel  oonta^ied  Mmm  of  twdve  days 
oofy;  and  .wbeft  <the  panel  oomplained,  be 
w«  told,  thai  i£  he  had  applied  to  the  Court 
iw  hmgnr  time,  it  would  have  been  allowed. 
The  olgeetioB  was  aocoidinf^y  repelled^  hut, 
as  Mr.  Home  jastly  observes,  it  was  most 
amfioperly  vq^elled^  l£  the  ordinary  rules  of 
J»r,. settled  by  the  McUce  of  centuries,  are 
40  he  di^MOsed  wtin»  and  a  prisoner  loUed 
0v«rsifMmlha.Couit>lQrsadiess«  isk^enough 
Snsay».tbii<be  .will  obtain  as  a  fasoufv  wlMt 
bs is  jeslsied  ito  dbsiasd  as  a  tight?  If  thi»: 
be  Sl»><s0e,  all  ssttarily,  M  liberty  is  at  an 


Thus  irasiMssjaod  very  gwathardshipt  would 
aHult,  if  9#B'  ones  edmit|  Ihat  after.a  pssaon 
VOL.  XXXIII, 


}^,p|Mded  to  one  «rinunal.pn)siicaJ;iQO,  aad 
iwldle  it  is  in  dependence  —for  example,  while 
iqformf^ns  are  prepariiig  on  tha  relevancy 
^Hthe  tffduM  of  anodier  prosecution  for  th^ 
samjB  crime  may  he  current. 

I  do  not  say  that  the  question  .which  I  am 
now  stating  to  your  lorj^ships  has  been  da- 
cided  ia  tenmm  by  the  jQcturt.  If  it  has  S9 
been  decided,  it  has  escaped  my  observatioo, 
and  the  learned  counsel  upon  the  other  side 
,of  the  bar  wiU  mention  the  cases  in  ;which  the 
objection  has  occurred,  and  has  been  repelled, 
•for  any  thing. that  I  know,  there  may  be  in- 
.stanoes  of  trials  having  proceeded  on  indict- 
.ments  raised  in  the  same  manner  as  the  pre- 
sent; but  that  must  have  hapnened  where  the 
x>bjeotion  was  not  stated ;  ana  you  will  .easily 
see,  that  in  many  cases  it  might  be  for  the 
interest  of  the  panel  to  wave  .the  objection^ 
Jn  many  cases  a  {prisoner  would  wi^h  to  be 
tried,  without  any  imdmrni  foripstanoe,  in  a 
ohaige  of  a  subordinate  or  inferior  nature^ 
there  may  often  b^  an  interest  on  the  part  of 
the  prisoner  to  jwave  thi^  olgection.  But  what 
I  found  upon  is  this,  that,  as  far  as  I  have  been 
able  todiaco^»r>  this  objection  has  not  been 
stated  and.reptiAed  m  krmim. 

But  though  I  cannot  refer  to  a  precedent  in 
which  it  faaa  been  sustained,  I  think  there  has 
been  a  case  deoided  which  appears  to  me  ta 
proceed  on  the  very  same  prmciple,  .and  to 
dhistrate  aad  support  the  argument  which  I 
have  now  the  honour  to  maintain.  ,There  are 
instances  of  hadf  a  do^en  indictments  having 
been  served  upon  a  prisoner^  one  after  aaothes^ 
,and  calling  him  to  attend  at  the  bar  at  diS> 
•ferent  times ;  and,  in  particular,  that'  happen«> 
ed  in  the  celebrated  case  of  colonel  Francis 
Charteris.  Four  difierent  libels  were  executed 
,  against  him  to  take  his  trial  for  the  same 
teiine,  all  cdling  him  to  appear  ia  Court  at 
diflfasei^t  (times;  .and  wben  be  appeared  upon 
the  first  of  tbes^  indictments,  be  stated  that 
■he  ivas  not  bound  to  plead  at  all,  until  the 
Jord  advocate  selected  the  indictment  upon 
whioh  he  intended  ta  cany  ea  the  trial;  and 
Ihe  Court  found,  or  it  was  admitted  oa  the  past 
of  the  prosecution,  that  this  was  necessary^; 
and  accordingly,  bsfoSe  the  trial  proceeded, 
it  was  necessacy  to  desert  three  of  ihe  indicW 
ments— and  when  they  weteap  descEted,  then, 
and  not  till  then,  was  oolosiel  Charteris  ra« 
quired  to  plead. 

Is  not  that  case  precisely  the  same  m  irta- 
(BnU  as  the  present?  For,  if  before  colonel 
Charteris  pleaded,  every  indictment  then  in 
dependence  but  one  was  necessarily  deserted, 
— ^now  that  my  client  has  pleaded,  there  being 
but  one  indictment  when  he  pleaded,  it  fid- 
lows  fi>r  ihe  same  reason,  that  other  three  in- 
dictments cannot  be  hung  over*  his  head.  H 
you  do  not  support  this  objection,  you  place 
n^  client  in  that  situation  in  which  it  was 
decided  that  edonel  Charteris  could  not  be 
.placed.  If  cokmd  Charteris  had  plead^  to 
Us  first  indictment,  while  the  others  were  in 
snsnensei  hawooid  have  been  in  the  situatuui 


«lll        m  GiSOttGE  III. 

in  wliich  it  is  wished  to  p1ac«  n^rdient  «t 
wesent.    The  principle  of  the  rule  in'cokmel 
Charteris's  case  is  so  wdl  laid  down  by  the 
learned  author  of  the  Commentariesy  that  I 
cannot  refrain  from  stating  it  in  his  words.   In 
Hie  4th  iroU  of  Mr.  Hume's  works,  or'  the  2nd 
▼ol.  upon  the  Law  of  SobHand,  as  to  the  ttkA 
ef  Cnmes,  page  34,  after  haTing*  first  stated 
tiiat  the  Court  erroneously  and  improperty,  in 
two  preceding  cases,  had  repelled  that  objec- 
tion, he  proceeds  to  stale  die  case  of  Ghsrteris, 
^  On  the  one*  hand,  the  prosecutor  cannot  say, 
that  he  is  hardly  dealt  wiUi  in  being  put  to 
make  his   choice   among  his  scTeral  libels, 
whereof  some*  one  at  least  ongfat  td  be  correct, 
and  executed  in  proper  form.    On  tile  either 
hand,  tiie  panel  snifiBrs  a  disadTantage  in  con- 
ducting  bts  defence,  unless  snch  an  ellsotion 
shall  be  made.    For  there  may  be  blunders  in 
the  body  of  one  of  those  Ubeis,  or  in  the  Kst 
of  witnesses,  or  in  the  manner  of  exeoudon 
against  the  panel  or  witnesses,  which  may  be 
more  or  less  a^ailaUe  to  him,^aiid  may,  perhaps, 
aerye  to  his  acquittal,  if  the  prosecutor  insist 
ezclusiTclyon  mat  one.    Whereas,  aocoiding 
to  the  latitude  allowed  in  Lindsay's  oas^  even 
after  making  good  such  objections,  the  panel 
in  nowise  profits  bv  his  success  therein,  and  is 
dius  perplexed  and  encumbered  with  die  care 
«f  a  double  set  of  pleas.    I   learn  from  a 
printed  petition  and  answers  (lor  ther  are  not 
m  the  record),  that' in  the  case  of  colonel 
Charteris,  the  panel  had  been  serred  with  no 
fewer  than  four  libels,  calling  him  to  several 
4iets,  and  o^erwise  differing  one  from  ano- 
ther; and  of  this  proceeding  he  compliiitts, 
•ad  insists  that  the  proseentor  shall  specify  the 
dittay  on  whidi  he  intends  to  go  to  trial.    The 
prosecutor  does  so  accordingly,  in  his  answers 
to  the  petition ;  and  it  appear»  from  the  infor- 
mations in  the  ease,  that  the  colonel  nerer  had 
to  plead  to  any  of  those  libels  but  one,  which 
alone  appears  in  the  record.^ 

You  therefore  see,  that  before  coloneV  Ghar- 
teiis  would  open  his  mouth  upon  that  indict- 
ment, he  was  entitled  to  have  every  cither  ia^ 
dictment  for  ^  same  crime  pat  out  of  the 


Trial^WiOiamtd^ 


(fflS 


tiie  lord  advocate  has  followed  a  diiennt 
eourse  here,  for  he  first  caiied  one  indidment, 
to  which  the  panel  pleaded ;  and  after  your 
lordshifM  had  ordered  informations,.  therebY 
continuing  the  dependence  of  the  trial,  whidi 
at  Ibis  very  moment  has  not  been  deserted^— I 
say  pending  Ifcat  process  to  whidi  the  prboner 
pleaded,  he  has  been  dtedliy  another  indict- 
ment, which  is  also  now  otet  ms  Wad;  and  he, 
nnd  his  counsel  if  they  have  dene  th^ir  duty, 
have  been  encumbered  and  peiplesed  fiftiseh 
days  in  attending  to  different  set»of  pleas^  in 
these  prosecutions.  If  the  objection  in  the 
ease  or  colonel  Charteris  was  sustained,  yeo 
•uffht  to  sustain  the  olijection  in  thisuaie  a|po. 

It  majr  perhaps  be  maintained,  but  there  is 
no  prindple  to  bear  out  the  statement,  that  the 
second  indictment,  ▼irtuaUy'iihports  an  aban- 
donment jof  the  fimtindictimeiit.  Anindictment 


mi^  be  abandoned  before  the  panetis-Mought 
into  court  and  pleads:    The  lord  advocate  mi^ 
bring  twenty  indictments ;  but  before  bringing 
tiie  panel  to  plead,  he  most  desert  all-  of  then 
but  one.    And  I  ask.  Can  won  case  be  pointed 
out  to  me,  of  three  or  four  itfdictasents  brought 
against  an  individual,  and  of  hi»  being  brought 
to  trial,  not  upon  the  last,  but  on  the  fiitt  ef 
these  iuiftctments^    The  prindpto  ia^  tfaa^ 
where  several  have  been  served  upon  a  paae^ 
the  seeobd  is  understood  to  be  a  virtaal  desbr& 
tion  of  the  first,  the  third  of  the  second,  and  s« 
forth.    The  prisoner  is  always  entitled  to  plead 
to  one  only,  and  that  is  always  the  last.    But 
tiie  prindple  by  which  »  subsequent  indictment 
is  held  to  imply  an  abandonment  of  a  foriMr 
indictment,  cannot  apply  in  the  <saie  befoi<a 
us ;  for  the  moment  that  issoeis  jeined  betwees 
the  prosecutor  and  the  pttad,  it  is  no  longer  in 
t&e  power  of  the  public  pieseMtor  to  abandon 
the  indictment,  unlesshe  db  if  for  ever.    Wheii 
the  prisoner  has  pleaded  to*  an  iifdictment,  ke 
is  then  m  mmitm  m^  and  ^  prasecnlov 
must  have  the  express  sanction  of  the  Court 
for  the  deserting  of  the  libd.    This  ift  laid  dnwa 
in  so'many  words  by  the  learned  Commenlntor 
at  the  38th  page  of  the  volume  already  men- 
tiened :  ''^It  is  also  a  case  which  sometiinea- 
happens,  that,,  thbogh  still-resolved  on  bringi^ 
the  pand  to  justice,,  the  presecutor  sees  canee^ 
however,  not  to  insist  in  thetrid  of  him  on 
that  particular  libel    Because,  periiaps,  be  has 
discovered  some  flaw  in  it,  or  the  exeentioii» 
thereof;  or  on  account  of  new  and  material 
evidenoe  whidi  has  latdy  come  to  4iii  know- 
ledge; and  whidi  requires  an  addition-to  his 
list  of  witaesses,  or  may  occasion  ai  difeunca 
in  the  laying  of  his  charge.    In  dtuaiioaaof 
this  sort,  whtdi,  notwithstanding  all  due  ^wm 
on   the  prosectttor^s  part,'  must  sometimes 
happen>'  it  is  necessary  to»tbe  advancement  of 
justice,tfaat  he  have  the  power  of  desertine  hia 
present  libel,  without  prsjodiee  to  bis  lignt  cC 
insisting  anew,  at  the  time,  and  in  the  foim^ 
which  he  shall  find'  advisable'.    U  indeed  be 
had  the  absolute  and  uncontrolled  privilegn  ef 
throwing  up  h]s>  process  as  often,  and  ft>r  what 
causes  soever  he  ideased  ;  this  would  be  dan- 
gerous to  the  panel,  who  might  thus,  under  fldae 
or  alfoeted  pretences,  be  hanased  #ith  repeatsd 
libds.    Our  custom  does  not  therdbre  trust 
the  piniecutor  to*diat  extent^  but  ifflows  hiak 
only  to  move  ih»  court,,  to  desert  the  d»t  pre 
Isss  €i  Umfore;  in  which  request  thiif  ifiny 
refiisfr  to  gratify  him,  if  diejf  see  cause  to  hi- 
lievethat  he*  intends  any  thing'  oppreisivu  or 
improper,  or  if  thcrjr  are  not  satisfied  that  there 
aro  good  reasons  fiMrsuch  an  indidgence.    It  is 
true,  the-  stjple  has  crept  into  piMtioB,  of  M 
pviseafor  merUng  the  diet;  because  it'  ee 
often   happens  that  his  motion  finr  such  a 
purpose  IS  sueoessftil.    But  in  tnlth  this  is  a 
tebse  and  inaccurate  exprenion.    For  die  aiet 
of  desertion  is^not  his  act,  but  timt  of  the  Court; 
without  whose  permission  and  ddivesanoe'tlie 
process  cannot  be  withdrawn  in'this  tempomry 
wm.    And^  indiMd>'il  he  be  ft  private  fafmh 


9131 


Jfer  jiimMitJimg  unlan^ld  Oaiis* 


A.D.  18)1 


[S14 


^tttoTirteiCftwl  Iwfe  4rii«Bd7«i«tiQo  ten  him  ^ 
to  itMiAt  •■  Uiat  Ubd;  and  to  this  thej  maj 
hold  him,  and  refuM  to  gire  him  new  letten, 
if  ihey  tee  cbom.    Aooordingljry  in  the  debate 

on  the  caee  of  Aftehihakl  (Maich  1, 1768X  the 
pioaecnlin  Ixai^fydiapwna  all  pretenmns  to 
9f^f  such  fibitrary.  power.  Hie  mi|jes^f  so- 
lictor vqireacntSy  that  he  obsenreB  in  the  infor- 
laatinnj  on  the  part  of  the  pand,  Tery  alanning 
oonaecpMnoes  are  endeavoured  to  be  grafted  on 
1^  doetaae  |)led  in  behalf  of  the  protecttior  in 
4ue  amt  a»  if  it  gare  to  the  pnblie  proseealoff 
a.fefy  aMtraiy  pofper^  f^preiiing  4he  enb* 
jeets  in  this  oovmtiyy  by  deaerting  4lieli  ai  often 
aahiateicyaiggested^  bntns  aU  the  alarming 
cpoaeyiencet  pointed  out  are  founded  iq>on 
the  aiqppoaition  of  a  doctrine  which  ike  never 
ilMnnft  to  plead,  he  thinks  it  now  proper  to 
liavo  this  matter  cka^y  undemtood;  as  the 
mtblie  pfosecntor  nerer  pleaded,  nor  does  he 
desire  it  to  be  beUoTed  by  the  suljeets  in  this 
oooBtiy,  thai  he  has  anv  arbitrary  power  of 
deseitanf  diets  wilbout  the  anthonty,  and  in* 
tervestioa  of  Court:  which  daeumstanoe  to- 
tal^ removes  all  those  apprehensions  which  the 
couBsd  for  the  panel  has  grafted  upon  the  sup- 
poaitioo,  that  an  arbitrary  |>ower  of  deserting 
3%Bla  wan  claimed  in  this,  or  in  anj  other  cause. 
by  the  public  prosecator.*'  And  it  is  stated 
in  still  stronger  terms  in  his  notes  asto de- 


rcthis  were  an  open  petntt  I.«annot  hesitate 
for  a  toement  to  betiefe^  lh«t  your  lordships 
wonld  decide  it  in  the  manner  which  I  now 
suggest;  'for  the  hardships  which  would  arise 
foam  imar  other  decision  are  plain  and  great. 
Bnt  I  anbmit  that  it  is  not  open;  for  diough  it 
waan^decided  ta  ienmnii  in  the  case  of  colonel 
<^nrleris,  the  objection,  theroi  maintained  is 
fmctlT  die  same  in  principle*  Upon  these 
ffoanof  I  bnmbly  submit  to  your  lordships^ 
lliat  the  objection  which  I  haie  stated  is  well 


I  think  I  have  already  observed,  that  the 
mistake  cannot  be  rectified  by  the  public  pro- 
seentor  deserting  the  former  prosecution  at 
this  stagiB  of  the  businem.  The  reason  is,  that 
the  panel  has  already  jiufiered  all  the  perplexity 
and  embaifamment  which  two  co«exj8ting  pro- 
secutions for  the  same  crime  must  necessarily 
eecaaion ;  and  he  has  in  consequence  been  de- 
prived of  the  benefit  of  his  mduda.  Both  in- 
dietmeats  h^ve  been  suspended  over  his  head ; 
and  lihe  desertion  of  the  first  now  at  the  veiy 
hoor  of  trial,  will  never  authorize  you  to  pro- 
ceed vridi  ihe  second.  To  what  hardship  was 
colmri  Charteris  exposed  in  going  to  trial  upon 
indictment,  white  others  were  hanging  over 
head,  to  whid>  the  prisoner  is  not  exoosed 
in  the  piesent  case  ?  Uolon^l  Charteris  anew 
well,  tnat  if  he  was  once  sent  to  a  jury  in  one 
indictment,  thu  rest  were  for  ever  at  an  end. 
Bat  the,Court'|hought,'that  he  was  not  bound 
ssi^i  tc-mkad  with  four  indiotments  hanging  over 
him;  that  Jie  was  apt  bound  to  take  his  chai^ce  of 
tlm  Ktetu^y  b«ii^i|iyti«d  tP^Qoe  of  these,  pro- 


aeentionsy  and  the  verdict  retuned  in  another. 
You  wonld  not  force  him  into  the  preUminatr 
step  of  pleading  and  arguing  the  relevancy  until 
evwy  indictment  but  one  was  withdmwn.  Now, 
I  beg  leave  to  ask  the  onestion  where  is  the  dif- 
forence  between  pleading  to  one  indictment, 
and  having  other  three  afterwards  served,  or 
having  all  the  four  served,  and  being  compelled 
to  plead  to  one  ?  In  the  first  case,  j[ust  as  mudi 
as  m  the  second,  the  four  prosecntions  are  co- 
existent, and  that  is  the  hardship  a>mplained 
of*  The  prosecutor  has  placed  my  client 
in  the  emysame  predicament  in  which  yon 
found  eokmel  Charteris  could  not  be  plaosd. 

I  maintain,  therefore,  that  the  second  in- 
dictnient  vras  served  enoneoudy,  beoanse  it 
was  served  while  the  prisoner  was  under  trial 
for  the  crime  charged  in  that  indictment.  For 
it  cannot  be  disputed,  ttmt  the  prisoner  u  under 
trial  from  the  moment  that  he  pleads,  althougji, 
according  to  our  forms,  the  jiuy  have  not  then 
entemd  ujpon  their  functions. 

Now,  if  a  prisoner  can  be  brought  again  and 
again  to  trial  for  the  same  crime, — and  he  may 
be  brought  twenty  times  to  trial  for  the  same 
crime,  while  the  act  1701  is  suspended,  as  it  is 
at  present,— it  is  but  fiur  that  he  should  have 
fifteen  free  days  between  each  of  these  trials ; 
namely,  the  ordinary  indMcim  of  the  law. 

If  you  once  admit  the  princijde  on  which  the 
lord  advocate  proceeds,  you  might  have  these 
twenty  trials  goin^  on  for  twenty  consecutive 
days,  without  respite  either  to  the  prisoner  or 
to  vourselvea.  I  beg  to  ask.  If  this  would  not 
only  be  to  harass  and  perplex  him,  but  to  deprive 
him  altoaether  of  the  oenefit  of  his  inducia? 
Could  fifteen  days  so  spent  be  called  fifteen 
days  allowed  for  preparation  F  The  prisoner 
would  be  perfectly  confounded,  not  knowing 
upon  what  day,  or  under  what  indictmeiit,  ha 
was  to  be  sent  to  the  jury. 

I  humbly  submit,  therefore,  that  the  poipt  is 
clear  and  established  in  principle,  that  the  ta- 
ducU  of  no  one  indictment  can  run,  even  after 
the  prisoner  has  jdeaded  to  another  indictment 
for  the  same  crime,  consequently,  although 
your  lordships  were  to  allow  the  lord  advocate 
to  desert  the  first  indictment,  that  the  prisoner, 
not  havins  had  his  tadacios  under  the  second^  is 
not  bound  to  plead  to  it. 

Mc  HiMne  Drummandi^l  do  not  think  that 
it  is  necessary  for  me  to  say  much  in  answer  1^ 
this  objection,  as  the  point  has  been  settled  in 
practice  long  ago.  ,  The  whole  question  in  dis- 
cussion here  seems  to  be,  whether  it  is  neces- 
mry  now  for  the  prosecutor  to  pass  expressly 
from  the  other  indictment,  or  whether  it  is 
already  virtually  JMssed  from?  The  learned 
gentleman  was  quite  incorrect  in  speaking  of 
ue  prosecutor  'deserting  the  indictment,** 
instead  of  '<  passing"  from  it ;  as  it  is  not  the 
mdietmait  which  is  said  to  be  deserted,  but  the 
dki  and  besides,,  the  desertion  is  not  the  act 
of  the  prosecutor,  but  of  the  Court.  If  the 
diet  were  to  be  deserted,  there  mi^t  be  a 
doubt  whether  both  indictments  would  not 


th^r^jrb^  ^tfnguished,  as  the  diet  «f  bolfl 
happens  to  fall  on  the  same  day.  Fuifber  thta 
fhis,  the  prosecutor  can  have  no  interest  hi  ob- 
jecting to  any  mode  of  eztingnishrng  the  irst 
lA>el.  He  could  hare  no  other  mothre  in  nbt 
having  recourse  t6  the  Ibrm  of  moring  the 
Court  to  desert  the  diet;  and  he  conceived 
that  he  was  following  a  simpler  course, 
and  one  less  calculated  to  create  trouble  and' 
Aehy. 

I  happen  to  have  loioied  into  the  practice  ef 
late  years  as  to  the  point  in  question,  and  I 
naintainy  that  the  proceeding  in  tMs  case  afe 
agreeable  to  the  practice  which  your  lotdsUps 
have  sanctioned  and  shall  mention  iht  cases 
that  have  occurred.  lindsay  Crawford  was  in* 
dieted  to  stand  trial  on  the  9m  of  Januaiy  ldl3. 
The  diet  was  continued,  on  the  motion  of  his 
own  counsel,  to  the  3rd  of  February;  before 
which  3rd  of  February  new  criminal  letters 
#ere  raised  against  the  panel ;  and  the  trial 
proceeded  on  the  criminal  letters,  without  any 
notice  being  taken  of  the  first  indictment, 
though  the  trial  on  the  criminal  letters  took 
place  on  the  same  day^  the  8rd  of  February. 

Mr.  Mum^, — ^Had  he  pleaded  ? 

Mr.  Drumntond. — He  had  not.  He  had  come 
into  court,  and  the  diet  was  continued  upon 
the  motion  of  his  own  counsel.  It  is  of  no 
consequence  to  the  principle  of  tlie  objection 
whether  the  panel  pleaded  to  the  indictment  or 
not ;  but,  at  all  Events,  there  are  cases  enough 
where  this  proceeding  has  taken  place  after 
panels  have  pleaded. 

The  veiy  next  case,  that  of  lliomas  Somet^' 
▼ille,  was  one  of  that  description.  He  was  in- 
dicted to  stand  trial  on  the  25th  of  January 
1813.  On  that  day  a  long  pleadiag  took  place 
iipon  the  relevancy;  conseqqetitly  he  did  plead 
to  the  indictment.  There  cojiifd  iiot  have  been 
d  debate,  If  he  had  not  pleaded  not  guilty. 
Informations 'on  the  relevancy  were  ordered  to 
be  given  in  on  the  15th  of  February;  and  be- 
fore that  time,  new  criminal  letters  were  raised 
which  fell  upon  the  same  day,  the  15th  of 
February.  I  took  a  note  at  the  time  of  a  con- 
versation on  the  bench  as  to  the  particular  ob- 
jection which  has  now  been  stated,  and  which 
I  beg  leave  to  read,  i  see  two  gentlemen  on 
the  other  side  of  the  bar,  who  can  correct  jne 
if  I  am  inaccurate,  who  I  remember  to  have 
f  een  counsel  in  that  cause.  *^  Lord  Hermand 
asked,  if  it  was  not  proper  in  such  a  case  to 
desert  former  diet  pro  loco  et  tempore  ?— Ob- 
jected, That  former  indictment  abandoned  by 
service  of  this.  And  Court  said  they  would 
adhere  to  the  practice,  and  cate  proceeded"  I 
had  added  this  remark  to  the  note ;  ''Had  not 
the  diet  fallen  upon  the  same  day,  it  would 
have  dropped  out  of  the  record,  by  the  passing 
of.  the  day  without  its  being  called.'^  Now, 
can  the  prosecutor  be  compelled  to  .appear  or 
insist  in  any  hbel  he  does  not  choose  to  insist 
in  f  and  if  not,  must  not  the  diet  fall  and  be 
dropt  for  want  of  aa  instance  ? 
'  VpCB  d)«  13th  of  Jane  1814;  Johntfom 


TrM  of  fymm  Edgar 


C216 


wtti  brought  fothebaronachHrga^ffohnQiy. 
Pleadings  at  great  length  took  place  cia  the 
relevancy  of  the  iadictisent,  the  pand  bavivje 
pleaded  not  guilty.  Infonoatioiia  were  CfdereS 
to  be  given  in  on  the  8di  of  Jaly,  and  aiaiaar 
proceedings  took  place.  Before  that  day  m 
new  indictment  had  been  served,  Ae  diet 
whereof  fell  upon  an  earlier  day,  aild  wpom 
that  day  informationB  wer^  ofdered  of  iieia 
upon  the  new  iadictment. 

Jhett  was  also  the  leeent  eaaeof  lbs  TiMstle 
Bank  of  Glasgow  against  Befli  and  DMgla*^ 
After  the  panel  Dcwglas  had  pleaded  g^fty, 
informations  were  oideied^  aan  a  new  indiot- 
ment  was,  in  the  mean  time,  served  upon  ^m 
panel,  which  was  understood,  as  is  the  Ibi 
cases,  to  have  eattfaiguiahedthe  first. 

These  are  all  the  cases  since  1811,  iik 
it  was  possible  for  this  olje^etion  t*  eicoiir;- 
and  the  same  practice  took  place  h^  a&  of 
them  that  has  been  followed  here,  whicb  eoaki 
not  have  happened  if  this  objectioB  had  been' 
wMl  founded.  The  plea  of  its  having  pasMd 
luff  tUetUio  cannot  be  maintained,  as  it  is  Iha^* 
daiy  of  die  Court  to  see  that  eve^  thing  shidl* 

So  on  according  to  the  proper  forms  of  hnr,  a- 
uty  which  the  Court  at  all  times  disdiarge^ 
whetlier  the  panel's  couiisel  think  it  totMr 
fnterest  to  state  objectiona  or  not.  A  stroa|;ar 
example  of  this  cannot  be'  ^en  4ian  &tt 
very  case  of  Douglaa,  Where  tibe  Ceait  etrdered 
informations  on  the  relevancy  of  an  faidict-^ 
ment  to  which  the  panel  had  pEl^aded  ndlty. 

The  embarrassment  of  the  panel  witn  dilpei^ 
ent  libels,  and  the  other  evils  coMphoned  e^' 
are  entirely  imaginary.  The  service  of  ^  ttdr 
indictment,  or  at  least  the  eidlitig  of  the  diet,- 
extinguishes  the  old  one ;  ahd  th^  is  my^Ub^ 
sistincr  indictment  but  ^  last  obe'  widdi  i^ 
served  on  the  panel.  If  any  diet  were  to  bef 
deserted  at  all,  it  would  be  the  diet  of  tto 
last,  as  no  notice  could  be  taken  of  thefint* 
If,  however,  your  lordships  dioold  have  am 
dpubt  upon  the  subject,  the  prosecutor  wm 
pass  from  the  indictment,  or  will-  move  for  a 
desertion,  or  follow  any  coune  that  tho  Cowt 
ffiay  think  best  calculated  to  put  an  end  to  Ae 
first  indictment,  if  its  existence  shotild  still  bo 
thought  possible.  He  has  no  wish  to  maintais 
any  argument  on  the  subject ;  only  it  is  Ma  opi<* 
nion,  that  by  the  service  of  a  second  indiet* 
ment  he  has  abandoned  and  virtually  pa»ed 
ft-om  and  extinguished  the  first. 

Lord  Advocate. — ^After  the  statement  wfadcli 
has  been  giveii  by  Mr.  Dmmmond,  I  do  not 
mean  to  detain  you  by  entering  into  a  qoe^ 
tion,  which  I  understand  to  be  shut  hytiie 
uniform  practice  of  your  lordships.  Bat  I 
think  it  necessary  to  advert  to  one  point  hi 
ttf r.  Cranstoun's  speech.  He  stated,  that^  finr 
some  time  past,  the  cotin^  i(k  Ihe  panel  bad 
ihought  it  incumbent  on  them  to  attend,  not 
only  to  this  indictment,  but  also  to  Ihe  last,  in 
which  informations  n^re  ordered  on  the  rke- 
vancy.  He  ought  to  have  stated-^-and  aa  I 
know  his  ftdmess,  I  think  it  mast  have  boett 
byaimssioil  ttiat  he  did  iiautate«**aurt  alN 


* 


ivn 


Jbr  Mmiiith0Uig  udm^  OaOu. 


A,  n,  1«(% 


\m» 


ita»  &  nondl  befiie  tlv  paid  iNte  Mrred  ^mdi 
i^iA  indietamty  notioe  was  givoi  to  his  ooantel 
\ff  liiwtf,  tiitt  it  was  BOt  intended  MrpiDMeate 
lk«  fittC  iddietfliaat,  but  to  sarfe  mib  with 
aaMhetf.  I  tfaink  it  fleoettary,  i«  vindieatioi^ 
«f  tlM  pablio  ptoaecntor^  to  aiatn  this  to  your 
lonlsiups>  u  it  ahawa  there  was  no  hitei^aD 
in  oppms  th9  panel,  av  to  give  hiacouiael 
«nf  naediaw  tronhla^ 

Ob  the  point  iisal^  I  sfHe  la  yon,  lini  net 
onlf  since  181S  hit  this  point  bean  nndemot>d 
toh^ahtit,  but  in  «U  the  caaea  before,  this  was 
Aanniftmnpnotiae.  lathecaaaof  Mendhaniy 
there  waa  » iMig  avfoaaent  whether  tiie^iaBaing 
af- notes  in  Eof^and  oould  be  ataled  in  this 
Govt,  on  the  gionnd  of  the  crfme  in  the  one 
ootmtiji  being  a  ootttbstiation  of  the  orime 
<BuiBiitted  in  the  dtiiCT.  After  the  panel 
niairifri  upon  that«  i«lbtttationa  taese  drdefed^ 
It  was  dien  thought  the  better  tiode  of  pao-* 
cneding  to  abandon  that  iadiettnent^  ana  to 
give  n  new  one,  whidi  was  detia  while  ialbf^ 
naadena  weita  in  depend^nee;  and  in  that 
cnaei  where  it  ia  hnown  to  jtxM  loxdidnp  that 
9iwtf  attempt  was  made  to  safe  the  individnal 
Aen  at  tho  bar,  this  point  was  tmdecstood  to 
be  shut. 

•  The  Mittt  jnst  comes  to  this,  that,  where 
Ae  pnbOe  proaecntor  has  ndsed  an  indicCment, 
it  is  competent  fo  him,  antecedent  to  pleading 
Mbre  a  Jnty,  to  abandon  the  indictment  and 
las^  a  second.  It  appears  to  me  that  the 
dicnmstanoe  of  a  pleading  on  the  relevancy 
httittg  tdcen  phboe,  cannot  prerent  the  public 
pt^asecoior  frmn  abandoning  the  indictment 
vriien  be  thinks  fit,  and  bringing  a  new  indict* 
inent.  liddng  both  the  principle  and  invalria- 
Me  pthdtice  into  Tiew,  there  cannot  be  a  donbt 
111  the  caaoi  In  sappcH  of  what  was  stated 
hj^  Mr*  DtttniflAond,  the  oise  of  colonel 
Chhtteris  is  in  p6iht.  If  It  bad  not  been  held 
Aaft  Ae  kM  ifldictmtot  waa  a  Viiaaa^pahaing 
fiom  the  Ibrmer  oaesy  all  of  them  wontd  ha^e 
appeaared  tm  th^  recMk  Bat  he^e  it  oAly  on# 
tipon  tlie  r^rdi  tlierfefbre  the  service  of  th# 
aecoiid  wai  a  virtnal  abandemnent  cf  the  first. 
Upon  thefee  gkmnds,  I  hat^e  no  doabt  of  the 
«eBipetency  cf  the  proceeding  in  this  aaae^ 

Mr.  Gferit— If  the  objection  stated  by  Mr. 
GraAat^uh  has  any  solidity  ih  it,  I  am  sure  no 
^aod  anawer  has  been  givett-to  it  on  the  other 
sid^  of  the  bar,  and  indeed  no  answer  at  all. 
Ihe  tewned  gentlemen  were  pleased  to  talk 
of  a  pfMtiee  since  lbl3,  of  which  they  have 
shown  yoor  lordships  no  te06rd ;  aind  one  of 
fSueub  talks  of  a  case  brought  into  Court  a 
nanber  nf  yeata  ago,  in  whidi^  he  sliyBi  a  fiMt 
iadictmettt  waa  abandoned,  and  a  tcoond 
aefved  oA  the  panel,  upon  wlikft  sec(yhd  In^ 
dicttncBt  the  trial  proceeded.  As  t6  Ae-ch^ 
camstatwpes  of  tfiai  case,  we  have  Ih^  aofbority 
of  m  learned  firiend,  which  li,  Kvo  d<MiM, 
feonaiderable;  but  it  is  not  an  authority  upoti 
which,  in  duty  to  my  client,  I  am  bound  to 
^kfi  And  to  What  dothesfeicaset  amount  after 
^ak  Jasl  to  ttit^  Ihtt  the  pabfH  tUkMred  hiai^ 


selfio  bh  Med  npoit  a 
out  makiag  any  obyectioik  to  it«  It  is  very 
eaay  to  aooaiiDi  for  all  dMoe  caaes.  H  vat^ 
freqiaentfy  happem^,  that  it  woald  not  avail 
a  panel  to  have  his  triat  pat  off— 4ia  ia  prapaaad 
to  meet  it,  and  his  oomtsd  beina  laadhr,  ha 
Would  not  wish  to  pot  off  the  tnal,  or  ineur 
any  farther  delay. 

We,  who  are  ooanael  in  this  ease,  consaHed 
topether  whether  it  waa  worth  while  to  ataia 
thia  ohjectton,  aa  it  trauld  menty  lead  to 
dah^.  Dating  eae  period  of  the  coaaaltalieiB 
I  waa  of  cpiBion,  that  it  waa  not  worth  whila 
to  sute  the  c«f^ection,  being  all  tha  whOa 
aatiafi^  it  waa  a  good  sAiieoitQn.  What  I  hara 
said  is  aaffidaat  to  aaeoaat  far  all  tfaa'casaa 
which  have  been  cited,  even  auppeaing  they 
wane  ataled  accatately.  In  geneial,  I  may 
observe  this,  that  it  eHea  happena  ia  eaaca 
tfemips^befoiatfars  Coatt^  that  tha  gtntiemen 
who  attend  for  the  panel  tea  better  aanmiated 
with  civil,  than  with  crimiaal  trials.  Sudi  an 
objection  as  wa  now.  maintain  would  very 
possibly  not  have  occurred  to  m«.  But  it 
stands  on  the  ground  of  authority  and  of 
principle,  and  it  tbast  ba  considered  well 
fbunded.  Upon  what  is  it  founded  f  JWaf, 
It  is  positively  laid  down  bvMr.  Hume,  who 
mentions  his  authorities,  ana  he  himself  is  & 
great  authority,  that  the  prosecutor,  pubUo  or 
private,  cannot  abandon  his  indictment  after 
the  relevancy  is  pleaded  to.  He  has  no  right 
to  give  it  up.  He  has  no  more  right  than  any 
other  litigant  has  to  give  up  any  case  without 
the  leave  of  the  Court  I  apprehend  yoa 
cannot  reasonably  have  any  doaot  as  to  uiia 
point,  that  no  ^iroaecutor  •  can  of  his  own  au- 
thority desert  the  diet,  or  abandon  the  libel,  or 
prevent  the  Court  from  discutting  that  libel. 
The  matter  must  be  judged  of  by  the  Court. 
This  is  expressly  laid  down  by  Mr.  Hume, 
and  I  am  surprised  my  learned  friend  should 
use  his  own  authority  against  Mr.  Hume's  au- 
thority, without  offering  any  argument  upoa 
the  sulriect.  '^  It  is  also  a  Case  which  some- 
times happens,''  says  Mr.  Hume,*^  ^that 
though  still  resolved  on  bringing  the  panel  to 
Justice,  the  prosecntor  sees  eaase^  however, 
not  \^  insist  on  the  trial  of  him  on  that  parti*'^^ 
cular  libels  Because,  peihaps,  he  has  diseo- 
vered  some  fiaw  in  it,  or  the  executions  thdrao^ 
or  on  account  of  new  and  mateiial'  evidence 
which  has  lately  eome  to  his  knowledge,  and 
which  requires  an  addition  t<^  his  list  of  wit- 
nesses, or  may  occasion  a  difference  in  the 
laying  of  his  charge.  In  situation«  of  thia 
soFt,  which,  notwitlMtanding  all  due  petns  en 
the  prosecutor's  pai^  must  sometiaafts>  happen. 
It  is  necessary  to- the  advancement  of  JuMiee 
that  he  have  thefiower  ^ofdesertinghia  present 
Ubel,  Withoat  f>i«|ttdlee  to  his  right  oC  insisting 
anew  at  the  time,  and  la  the  form  which  k« 
shall  find  advisaUa*  if,  indeed>  he  had  the 
absohrte  and  uncdnttfolled  privilege  of  throw- 
ing up  his  process  aa  often,  and  Ibr  what 


«M«*MMMfri|«i|**M»'^«l— i*^hM 


*     »«l>i^<i<*#<Mi 


%  S-Tr* :|»  Gr.l8» 


aifi]         57  0BO«3£  Ifl. 

iMUi9efl.«o«f tt  h%  'plwsedy  tiii»  wooid  be  d«ii- 
gerous  to  the  panel,  who  might  thus,  uider 
nlio  or  afieeted  prelenoesy  be  berawcd  with 
lepeeted  libels.  Our .  iciutom  does  not,  there- 
m%  trust  the  prosecaCor  to  that  extent,  but 
atfows  him  onlj  to  more  the  Court  to  desert 
the  4iet  jptm  hco.  et  tmfurt;  in  which  request 
they  may  refose  to  gratify  him,  if  they  see 
cause  to  beUeve  that  he  intends  any  thing 
•pfureiaiTe  or  inqiroper,  or  if  they  are  not 
satisfied  that  there  are  good  reasons  lor  such 
an  indulgence.  It  is  true  the  style  has  .crept 
iBle  practice,  of.  the  pmsecutor  deserting  the 
4iet,  because  it  so  often  happens  that  his  mo* 
lion  for  such  a  purpose  is  suocessf uL  But  in 
truth  this  is  a  loose  and  inaocucMe  expression: 
Ibr  the  act  of  desertiop  is  not  lus  act,  but  that 
^  the  Court,  without  whose  permission  and 
4eliferance  the  process  cannot  be  withdrawn 
in  this,  tempoiaiy  form.''  There  is  a  great 
4eal  moreto  the  same  eflfoct. 

Lord  GUSm, — Mr.  Drummond  says  this  is 
not  a  desertion  of  the  diet,  but  an  abandon- 
ment of  the  indictment. 

Mr.  €Mk.— It  is  clear  that  the  whole  of  tins 
passage  applies  to  the  case  now  before  the 
Court. .  I  shall  put  this  case  to  your  lordships. 
Suppose  that  a  libel  is  served  on  a  panel  with 
St  list  of  .witnesses  annexed,  that  the  panel 
ob|edts  to  the  relevancy,  that  the  Court  takes 
the  libel  into  constdeiatioo,  and  that,  in  the 
courM  of  the  aigument,  the  prosecutor  disco- 
Ten  he  could  strengthen  his  ceie  by  throwing 
lup'  that  libel.  Sumrase  that  he  therefore 
brings  a  new  libel  with  a  nfw  list  of  witnesses : 
May  not  the  panel  reasonably  object,  I  have 
disclosed  my  witnesses  in  pleading  to  the  foi^ 
mer  libel,  and  therdbre  it  is  improper  that  the 
prosecutor  should  have  power  to  throw  up  the 
former  and  bring  a  new  libel  accusing  me  for 
Cha same  crime? 

What  Mr.  Hume  says  is,  that  the  Court 
may  allow  the  prosecutor  to  throw  up,  or  de- 
sert his  libel,  but  that  he  cannot  dp  so  without 
leave  of  the  Court.  Were  the  prosecutor  to 
be  allowed  of  himself  to  desert  his  indictment 
^d  bring  a  new  one,  he  might  make  such  im 
attack  -on  the  prisoner,  as  the  prisoner  might 
.find  diiBcttlty  to  perry.  That  would  be  a 
.hardship  on  the  prisoner,  and  one  produced 
partly  by  the  discussion  on  the  first  indict- 
jnent.  And  if  the  first  indictment  were  to 
-bediscussed,  and  the  panel  to  be  tried  on  it, 
the  case  mif^t  be  such,  or  the  verjr  evidence 
such,  as  to  entitle  him  to  an  absolvitor.  That 
is  an  important  consideration.  The  authori|ies 
.are  clear  with  me.  The  proeeoator  of  himedf 
•hes  no  right  to  throw  up  his  lib^  after  it  has 
been  pleaded  to.  ^The  act  of  desertion  it 
not  htt  act,  but  that  of  the  Court,  without, 
wlupse  permission  and  deliverance  the  process 
cannot  oe  withdrawn  in  this  temporary  form.'' 
.  A  private  prosecutor  must  give  caution  to 
.insist  in  his  VAifX  **  Indeed  if  he  be  a  private 
prosecutor,  the  Court  have  already  caution 
trom  him  U>  insif t  on  tba^  libel|  and  to  this 


TM^WiUUm  S4g§f 


\a» 


they  may  h^  him  and.  lefae.  to.  oife  m^ 
letters  if  they  see  cause.  According^, ,  in  the 
debate  in  the  case  of  Aichibald,  the  proeeoutor 
innkly  disown*  all  pretensions  to  any  saidi 
arbitrary  power.  His  migesty's  solicitor  ^ 
presents, — that  he  observes,  in  the  informatioB 
on  the  part  of  the  panel,  very  alarming  coitse- 

Snenoes  are  eadeavouied  to  be.grafled  on  the 
octrine  pled  in  behalf  of  the  prooecator  ia 
this  case,  as  if  it  gave  to  tkie  public  piosecutor 
a  very  sirbitrary  power  of  Mpressittg  the  sub- 
jects in  this  country,  by  aesertiiig  diets  as 
often  as  his  (aney  euggested.  But  as  all  tihe 
alanning  consequences  pointed  outare  founded 
upon  the  supposition  of  a  doctrine  vduch. he 
never  meant  to  plead,  he  thinks  it  now  proper 
to  have  this  matter  clearly  understood^  as  the 

Sublic  pROsecutor  never  pleaded,  nor  doee  be 
esire  it  to  .be  b^eved  by  the  sul^ects  in  this 
countij,  that  he  has  any  arbitmry  power,  of 
deserting  diets  without  the  au^rity  and  in^ 
tervention  of  the  Court;  wh^  circumstavpe 
tota^y  removes  all  those  apprehensions  yrhkfk 
the  counsel  for  the  panel  has  grafted  npoq  the 
supposition  that  anarbatrair  power  of  deserW 
ing  diets  was  claimed  in  thi^  or  in  way  otbee 
case  bv  the  public  prosecutor.'' 

Beaily,  my  lord,  after  reading  that  Mssage^ 
and  the  whole  of  the  passages  in  M^  Humei 
I  submit  that  it  is  quite  idle  to  maintaiu  that 
the  public  prosecutor  has  it  in  his  power  in  idl 
cases  to  desert  his  libel,  and  throw  up  his  pn^ 
cess.  He  mav  do  so  before  the  panel  bsa 
pleaded ;  but  the  moment  the  panel  has  joined 
issue  with  him,  thfen  the  pleasure  of  the  Court 
must  be  taken  as  to  a  new  trial. 

The  assertion  if  manifestlv  groundless  tbae 
the. public  prosecutor  may  abudpn  an  indipt^ 
ment  after  it  has  been  pleaded  to,  and  briiOg  a 
new  indictment  Before  such  pleading  lie 
may  execute  a  new  indictment,  which  is  undof- 
stood  as  an  abandonment  of  the  dd.  But  it 
is  contrary  to  principle  and  authority  to  sim- 
pose,  that,  after  a  panel  has  pleeded,  the 
prosecutor  may  throw  up  his  UM,  and  haTe 
lecourse  to  a  new  indictment.  He  slay  be 
compelled  to  discuss  the  libel  to  which  die 
panel  has  pleaded.  If  it  be  thrown  out  upon 
the  relevancy,  the  prosecutor  may  bring  for- 
ward a  new  indictment.  But  suppose  (hat  it 
is  not  thrown  out  upon  the  relevancy,  that  the 
case  comes  tp.  trial,  and  that  the  pen^  obti^ 
an  aktoMbor  upon  that  trial,  the  prosecutor 
caunot  bring  a  new  trial  for  the  onence  there 
chaiged.  Therefore,  I  say  thai  the  public 
prosecutor  has  up  njgai^  without  the  au$liorihr 
of  the  Court,  to  abandon  this  indictment;  aiia 
although  he  has  taken  upon  himself  to  execute 
a  new  indictment,  he  cannot  abandon  .the  old 
indictment  vrithout  the  authority  of  tl^  Court. 
If  this  proposition  is  true,  the  public  pro- 
secutor must  do  something  more,  or  you  n^ist 
do  something  more  for  him,,  before  he  is  enti- 
tled to  proceed  on  the  indictment  before  your 
lordships. 

As  to  the  case  of  colonel  Charteris,  we  are 
Ipld  ip  answer,  |bat  for  some  tiniB  pMl  it  l|ee 


snl 


Jw  MmkuHeriKg  unttimflit'Oatht, 


A.  a  mr.' 


Xft3S 


be^a  tile'  pnbetite  -tbr  the  public  pfosecator  to 
wSbmoAim  a  fint  iodktBicnt,  without  tadcin|  any 
notice  of  it  to  the  Coitrt  at  all,  but  metetj  by 
execalini^  a  new  iadictiiient.  The  panel  ma^ 
BO  doabt  be  tried  on  this  new  indictment,  if 
he  is 'more  elrftid  of  the  old  than  the  new  one. 
But  whenever  the  point  of  objection  is  stated, 
JOG  nnist  go  back  to  the  principles  and  jndg- 
lAentii  of  yoor  loidAips  in  parallel  cases ;  and 
upon  these  it  is  dear,  that  till  the  pdblic  pro^ 
aecvtw  gets  thr  first  indictment  oat  of  hk 
w^y,  which  he  has  not  yet  done,  he  cannot 
pvoceed  on  the  second. 

If  he  ihodd  move  to  desert  the  diet  n'syfi 
cKer  on  the  fint  libel,  which  he  may  do,  liie 
«pieslion  will  be.  Whether  he  is  entitled  to  go 
ion  dis  pkn»  with  the  second  ?  We  have  tieen. 
4ni^  pBvinr  the  way  for  this  last  question, 
which  is  the  troe  snliject  for  yonr  consider- 
srtion*  Tne  cpiestion  oomes  to  be.  Whether 
the  public  firbsecntor,  npon  now  giving  np  the 
ftnt  libel,  is  entitled  to  proceed  on  the  se- 
^i^bnd  r  We'  sabmh  that  he  is  not.  For  it  ap- 
pears from'  the  case  of  Charteris,  that  the 
Conft' wbnld  not  allow  the  public  prosecotor 
fb  bave  in  dependence  several  Ubeb  at  the 
snie  time.'  lliey  forced  him  to  abandon 
tbrte  of  his  libels  altogether,  and  then  colonel 
Chltfleris  went  to  trial  on  the  fourth.  Sup- 
posing it'  had  been  dismissed  upon  the  rele- 
Wncy,  and  that  the  public  prosecutor  had 
ifsen  allowed  to  depart  from  tiiat'libel  by  the 
Court,  hie  might  have  brought  a  new  indict- 
liieiiti  But  I  ask  this,  upon  wlndi  the  whoTe 
point  now  depends;  Would  it  have  been 
eompetent  for  the  public  prosecutor,  after 
Ittvl&g  been  fbreed  by  the  Codrt  to  withdra.w 
^bee  of  the  libels,  before  diie  panel  was 
obliged  to  plead  to  the  fourth,  to  have  on  the 
Mne  day.  ettciited  these  other  three  libels, 
and  foned  the  panel  to  ao  on  and  plead  to 
thiemt  This  winild  have  been  considered  so 
giest  an  evasion  of  the  justice  done  by  the 
Cduft  just  befons,  that  H  would  not  have  been 
«ndared«  No  public  prosecutor  could  have 
«et  Us  fooe  to  that  Yet,  ^bere  is  the  differ- 
ence betwcien  diat  proceeding'  and  the  pro- 
ceeding in  the  preseht  iutande^  'Fhe  first 
libd  here  is  in  dependence,  and  a  new  one 
iMtt  been  executed  upon  the  same  grounds, 
dMNigh  not  in  the  same  form.  The'  posecutdr 
eneentes  a  ne#  indictment  before  tne  old  one 
Ins  been  disposed  of.  Is  there  any  difference 
between  this  case  and  the  case  of  colonel 
Charteris,  as  it  wotdd  have  existed,  if  the  pub- 
lic prasecotor,  after  abandoiung  three  indict- 
ments, had  proceeded  in  the  manner  vrhich  I 
liave  just  supposed  ? 

Your  loidsMps  have  been  t^d,  that  there  is 
lio  intention  to  do  any  injustice  to  my  client. 
'Idojwt  say  Aete  is.  I  say  they  havie  gone 
witmg  in  point  of  form— in  point  of  power — 
diSsy  have  no'  right  to'  proceed  as  they  are 
dbmg.  Tbouffh  die  puoKc  prosecutor  now 
n^  not  be  disposed  to  do  injustice,  his  suc- 
msor  may;  and  we  mi^t  as  well  set  afloat 
the  vrhole  forms  of  the  Court  at  once,  upon 


sa^nf  that  the  pubtie  prosedlitor  intends  no 
injustice. 

It  vras  said,  that  the  counsel  for  the  panel 
had  notice  that  a  new  indictment  ina  t6  be 
execnted,  and  that  the  former  indictment  was ' 
to  be  abandoned'.  I  am  one  of  the-  paneFs 
counsel,  and  I  did  not  ^et  notice  of  this.  But 
vrhat  signifies  the  notiee?  It  is  binding  on 
nobody-^it  is  not  binding  on  the  prosecutor, 
or  on  the  panel.  Sodi  a  thing  could  not  bn 
done  wfthcmt  the  Court.  Tt  was  very  well  in 
my  lord  advocate  to  have  such  polite  inteitf- 
tions  toward  the'  panel;  but  it  ift  not  fbr  hk 
lordship  to  determine  this  matter.  It  is  the 
Court,  vriiich  are  to  do  or  "not  do  what'  he 
wishes,  according  to  their  opinien  of  Ihtt  merits 
of  the  case. 

This  land  of  specialty  pleaded  by  the  pro^ 
secntor  signified  nothing.  l>own  to  the  present 
hour,  my  client  and  his  counsel  have  been 
forced  to  the  consideration  of  bodi  indicf- 
ments;  and  no  Uttle  consideration  has  been 
pven  to  both — and  that  is  the  hardship  winch 
It  is  the  object  of  the  law  to  prevent.  Upon 
the  whole,  therefore,  I  hope  that  I  am  not 
obliged  to  answer  this  indictment  before  the 
fint  shall  be  disposed  of— and  then  I  am  enti- 
tled to  the  benefit  of  ftill  tadiiekr,  after  the 
first  libel  shall'  be  abandoned.  I  akn  not 
bound  to  answer  to  this  indictment  vrithout 
any  warning.  If  the  prosecutor  had  no  right 
to  execute  that  indictment,  it  must  be  consi- 
dered as  not  executed  at  aU.  Fifteta  dayi^ 
at  all  events,  must  be  allowed  after  the  fin*- 
indictment  shall  be  legally  abandoniid. 

Mr.  j€§r^. — ^There  are  only  two  pointSi— . 

lardJdnocaU. — I  olject  to  more  thin  two 
counsel  for  the  panel  in  reply. 

Lord  Earmamd, — As  many  of  tht  pvMi's 
counsel  as  please  may  speak. 

Irsrd  Ado&oaU.'^KB  many  of  them  as  vrirfied 
might  have  spoken  before  the  Crown  vriaa 
called  upon  to  tfnsvrer,  but  they  cannot  now 
all  be  allowed  to  speak.  It  is  also'  irregtilar 
for  ft  juirior  counsel  to  speak  after  a  steieit 
counsel. 

Hr.  Jf^ri^.^What  have  you  to  do  With 
that? 

Lord  fiiBrmand.-*In  justice  to  myself,  I  must 
here  offer  an  explanation.  One  of  the  oldest 
cases  I  remember  is  the  trial  of  ProvOSst  tdooi- 
gomerie  in  1759.  Half  a  docen  counsel  theie 
spoke  wrMm.  I  have  myself  been  in  cases 
in  which  this  was  done,  having  spdcen  in  the 
middle  of  four  or  five  counsel ;  but  it  vras  at 
the  beginning,  in  answer  to  a  plea  to  the  lel^ 
vancy,  and  not  in  r^ly. 

LordJuttice  Cfer^— I  am  of  opinion  vKth  ford 
Bermand.  Here  the'  vrhole  eight  counsel  f6r 
the  panel  oiiffht  hilve  spoken  in  succession  im- 
mediately aner  Mr.  Cranstoun ;  but  I* know 
no  instance  of  two  replies  having  been  ad* 
ntiitted  for  a  panel. 

My  lords^  you  hlive  beard  thia  argument 


SSB]       ^7  GBOBGe  MI. 

what  are  your  opinions  on  toe  subject. 

Lord  JStrmmd, — Jn  eve  17  eaie  I  abouM  bfe 
4esirou0  of  gfttUng  anjr  infi^rmatimi  to  enable 
w^  io  sitftaiii  ^li^ctioiis  in  ikvom  of  a  pet- 
•oaer.'  But  my  opinion  k,  that  the  objection 
,in  tbe  prelent  case  moat  be  Kepelled^  bectnae 
.the  piiaoner  baa  no  inteveat  to.  ptead  the  ob- 
jftofcion. 

At  tlie  aame  ttme^  I  am  dispoeed  to  do  all 

rMte  to  the  argnment  of  Mr.  Granatoon. 
«tated»  ihaK  the  panel  had  pleaded  not 
<giii>l|r  tp  the  fimiier  todietment-r^thait  Inibrmar 
'tioQS  bad  been  ordarad  upon  objections  which 
mv»  atHted  lo  the  nleynney-T-lfaftt  a  new 
indictment  had  been  served  while  the  fonner 
indictaent  had  i»ot  bean  deaerted-^-and  that 
itbe  f<ffinor  indictment  oannot  be  deserted 
^vithout  the  authoritT  of  the  Court.  He 
.atatfldy  that  fifteen  days  farther  of  Mhcmb 
,iiii|^tba  of  material  adtaaftaga  to  the  panel; 
Mid  he  figured  ttroog  cases  of  hardship  which 
.4ha  Court  would  h»re  to  check ;  for  iottaace, 
.4bere  might  be  a  series  of  indictmentfy  upon 
#Qfna  one  of  which  the  king's  adrocsata  aught 
Uk9  it  ipto  his  h«ad  to  transfer  suddenly  tine 
4rial  to  Iiiv^meM  or  Aberdeen.  '  I  hope  no 
imch  thing  will  erer  happen;  bat  should  it 
liappen,  the  Court  has  power  to  redress  the 
gnevance. 

In  ooosideiing  jtfie  oljsection  which  has  bean 
ibronght  forvard^I  wish  to  know  vriiat  interest 
the  panel  has  to.  plead  it.  I  could  figure  a 
case  whsie  the  panel  might  have  a  strong  i»- 
terest  to  plead  sucH  an  objection;  and  then  I 
might  think  dlfierently  from  what  I  do  on  the 
fires^iit  occMtton. 

The  case  would  have  been  altogether  diHev- 
fnty  if  a  different  crime  had  beendi^rged  in 
the  second  indictment  from  what  was  diaiged 
in  the  first,  or  if  the  crime  had  been  differenUy 
gtis^  nr  if  fqqiethipg  had  been  added  by  the 
,|N>bUc  piosecator.  Qat  here  the  indictments 
#fe  tha  4fMna.  Something  is  left,  out  in  the 
second,  which  aj^ared  to  me  .objecti<^;iable 
in  toe  fif)|t^tbe  nfivative,  that  the  paoal 
hating  ''at  Glasgow,''  &c.  ^'wickedlr,  mali- 
cipusl^ri  and  ^mtprooiily  conspired  and  agreed 
with  ouer  evil  disposed  persons,  to  break  and 
disturb  the  public  peace,  to  change,  subvert, 
and  overthrow  the  government,  and  to  excite, 
move,  and  nd^  insurrection  and  reb^Hon, 
and  especially  to  hold  and  attend  secret  meet- 
ings, n>r  the  purpose  of  obtaining  annual 
parliaments  and  universal  suffrage  by  yt^Iawftil 
"means,  did,"  8ec.  But  are  the  pane's  counsel 
much  the  worse  in  their  cogitations  on  the 
second  trial,  from  this  passaee  being  struck 
out  of  the  indictment  ?  There  is  no  increase 
jia  ^  second  indictB}ient;  a^d^  with  tlie  dimi- 
nution wUcoI  h^ve  now  mentioned)  the  twp 
ic^ictnieata  ai;e  ip  the  same  t9rm<«.  The 
pai^,  itHerefore,  i^aa  nq  M^r««t  to  plead  the 
.(^e^jtioa  apon  t¥<^  M  appears  to  rely. 

It  is  true  that  the 'pros^Utar,  .in  lavr,  or  in 
¥^  «C  *»W>;i«B»ot^4>f  biP^s^^  4^«.the 


tridt/WiOkmU^ 


tMi 


4iat  fiat  did  tha  judgas  aTor  #1^  4t  iatp 
their  minds  <o  ask  tba prosecutor,  upo»as^ 
ocoasioQ,  why  he  deiwca  4^  diet  to  be  da- 
sarted  7  We  preanme  he  has.  gaod  ;resaana 
for  doing  80»  im  we  never  fudc  him  to  state 
those  jreaaone.  The  power  of  paaping  liroai  «r 
desartii^  an  iadiiitqient^  is  sabstant»a4y  in  hb 
m^eat/s  adaocate  or  hni  depaties< 

J  think  the  counsel  for  the  panel  woald  hava 
done  belter  to  have  withheld  their  otteetion* 
Qps  this  paoal  pleaded  to  the  present  indid- 
maot?  J  believe  not;  for  his  counsel  pjna- 
vented  him.  The  fir^t  indictment  had  aat 
gona  ta  a  jaiy^  aad  never  will.  jBefna  ait 
iadictment  go  to  a  jury,  it  has  l>aaa  Vy  pata* 
tice  in  the  power  of  the  pB0faca(cir  ai  wf 
time  to  p»sa  firam  itbylvn^ginga.aaooadA»- 
dictment;  and  it  ware  ;univise  to  pat -a  lash 
hand  to  a|i^  vanatian  in  the  procadaraiiaaii- 
minal  iriM**  Many  in^tanoes  mig^  be  cited 
of  a  ^TRt  indicti^ant  having  b^n  virMiaUf 
passed  ftom  by  a  sacoad  aamagy  and  taanr 
casei  ^  ithat  efiact  .were  'ditad  by  one  of  ihis 
learaad  g^tlemaui  withont  going  fni^^er  bnek 
than^ail}.  Thasa^yisasai^ifMailiar^ojiaj^)' 
I  wap  pre9?qt  at  sei^eral  of  4ha  tiials«  Tha 
lord  advocate  want  further  baqk,  apd  he  slatait 
the  o(#a  of  IVUndham.  I  taka  the  tme  Tiaar 
of  ^e  law  to  ;be  .j^hi4*^at  iba  aemn^  <{f  n 
new  indictment  israaabsAaAtlal  dereUctMpof 
a  fpraMt  indiatmant.  An  a|i|>UcaftiQn  to  <he 
Coi^?t  an  tfia  iml^apt  is  a  mare  master  of  lam. 
No  good  aaa  arise  iipm  snsiaiiaagtheolQe^ 
tion in  this  case;  and  M<^  not  tUidt  tfentin 
law  and  praatiea  it  can  )>a  anatainad. 

Lord  6M/im,— I  aia  notaava.  that  i  eaa  ar- 
rive at  the  same  condition  yri^h  mgf  bsoihar 
who  has  now  spolfLon^ 

I  think  it  fiur  to  state  in  ihe  outlet,  thm 
actual  hardship  is  a  plan  whi<;^  cannot  te 
stated  in  the  present  inat^ce.  I  do  nqjt^hiidE 
that  the  panel  can  complain  of  hardship ; 
na  snob  plaa»  I  belW^a*  i^  aaaously  ii 
on,  as  thai  of  actual  bardiMiip-  IV 
of  trtte  pcisonar's  oonnsal  is  aa  oUaotion.  in 
point  of  ibias,  foondad  ^i^pon  prineipi^  and  all 
mims  whidi  ragnlate  anamal  proeednra  are 
of  importance* 

The  case  of  Charteris  was  tha  first  nfenad 
to;  and  what  do  I  gather  from  thai  aaaa.? 
There  were  fonr  indictmaats ;  and  thapiisaaar 
was  brought  to  the  bar  under  the  charge  ooa- 
tained  in  all  these  four  indictments^  having 
pleaded  at  that  time  to  none  :0f  tbem.  Bis 
counsel  excepted  to  thiSi  and  I  thiidc  widi 
reason;  and,  in  consec|uenca  of  whatpaaaed, 
the  prosecutor  was  obliged  to  abandon  tbran 
of  iba  indictBMuts,  and  the  trial  pmeeaded 
npon  tba  fourth.  I  undemtood  Idr.Clai^.'^la 
ftay>  that  the  trial  djfd  not  pvoeefed  mstaM»; 
in  which  I  think  be  is.  mata&aik  I  think  thsl 
aD  that  lais  done  in  that  oaHi  waa  tofiad  ilr 
piasecutor  aouH  not  praoeed  on  siky  (ipe  in- 
4ictma^t  without  expressly  abandoniag.alMa 
rest;  and  I  understand  the  ^al  proeaadafi 

ia^^iaAeiy. ,  TMs  judgraeat,  whethat  r^ 


Jmr'AiminitierMg  miikfmfiU  Oaiht. 


ttSSl 

er  wronif  In  ibe  Mte  of  Chaiterit,  and  tlK>6gh 
mvdk  fomded  on,  seems  to  have  been  depart- 
ed Irmb  in  the  subsequent  practice  of  the 
Coorii  it  senm  lo  have  become  an  establisb- 
«d  praetiee^  reooBcileaUe  with  prindjple,  thai 
«  IMiblie .  pvostecmor  vaj  raise  indictments 
■gainsc  a  prisoner  in  soecetoion  for  any  peiiod, 
«>m1  Msy  bring  fainiy  when  he  chooses,  touiai, 
•nd  that  the  ptisoner  has  now  no  gnumd  for 
ol^ectioo  as  in  the  case  of  Charteiis.  I  iM>ld 
eOy  for  this  reason,  that  it  is  now  an  established 
fifinciple^  ^diat  in  eriminal  prosecutions,  a 
public  praaecutor^  by  raising  a  fresh  indict- 
sncBi  against  a  prisoner,  so  ^m>  passes  from  all 
teaser  indictments.  Suppose,  therefore,  that 
dbe  uaiMtttnate  man  at  me  bar  had  not  plead* 
«d  to  the  old  indictment,  I  should  have  consi- 
dered the  new  indictment  a  nrtual  abandon*- 
ment  of  the  former  one.  I  conceive  that  the 
practice  which  has  followed  the  case  of 
CSiarteBS,  b  reconciieable  to  pnnciple,-and  for 
this  reason,  thai  till  a  prisoner  pleads  to  an  in- 
dictment, the  public  prosecutor  has  the  dis- 
posal of  the  indictment  and  be  may  brin^  it  or 
aot  befine  the  Court — be  may  abandon  it  vir- 
tual^, or  expressly,' without  the  consent  of  the 
Ceeort. 

IJiai  is  what  the  practice  goes  to.  But  what 
is  the  case  here  ?  The  difference  between  this 
and  cdbnel  Charteris's  case  is,  that  here  the 
priscmer  did  plead  to  the  indictment,  ^d  what 
Was  the  consequence  of  bu  doing  so  ? — that 
the  indictment  wa^  no  longer  within  the  power 
of  the  public  prosecutor — ^he  no  longer  could 
desert  the  diet — that  is  all  within  the  exclusive 
power  of  the  Court.  If  I  am  Asked  whether, 
when  Utiscontettation  has  taken  place,  and  the 
pleading  of  the  prisoner  to  the  Indictment 
may  finrly  Ito  considered  as  an  act  of  litiscon- 
testation,, the  public  prosecutor  is  entitled,  of 
bis  otm  anthority,  to  desert  the  diet  or  aban- 
don the  charge  r  I  answer  in  the  negative. 
He  cannot  do  it  without  the  interposition  of 
the  autfaori^  of  this  Court. 

*  Tbet  question  is  decisive  to  a  certain  degree 
.on  the  pment  point.  If  he  cannot  abandon 
it  ezpiessly,  be  cannot  do  it  virtually-r^he 
cannot  do  it  by  implication — he  cannot  do  it 
Without  the  authority  of  the  Court.  It  is  laid 
down  bjT  ^^'  HumSir-i^iid  I  conceive  it  to  be 
a  moe^  important  principle  in  our  proceeding 
— tfbt  after  a  panel  has  pleaded  to  an  indict- 
ment^  |be.  authority  of  the  Court  must  be  had 
for  the  abandonment  of  that  indictment.  I  do 
not  talk  of  tinis  as  a  case  of  hardship ;  but  I 
eoneeiTe  hiiidilups  might  arise  from  the  exer- 
cise, by  %  public  prosecutor,  of  such  a  right 
as  Ue  maies^s  advocate  now  contends  for. 

The  pmUc  proeecntor  has  many  ptivilege». 
Masf  ^  jbilqrr  end  reasonnblj,  aiul  wisely, 
end  Ibr  tb^  most  proper  puiposcs,  given  to 
Ui^  isiicb  an  noLaihmed  to  a  private  prose*- 
tetoe;  AtiiiliieeBtfstalien  goes  through  all 
CM&.  Afitar  it^  neither  party  <^  go  out  of 
fSeoil  widsni  the  euthoritv  of -the  Court. 
'Hesae  ifiostsalce  tbe  nghsi,  the  aitaation,  and 
fwiWaanmit  eC  the  piwttc  preiecttler,  1^ 

you  xxxm. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[*«(» 


ferring  to  the  situation  of  the  private  prose- 
cutor in  similar  cases*  i  can  easily  conceive 
cases  to  exists  thcjogh  I  have  no  apprehensions 
of  their  existing,  in  which  it  might  oe  the  duty 
of  your  lordships,  in  point  of  justice  and  law, 
and  on  important  eonsiderations  of  every 
description,  to  aay  that  you  would  not  allow 
the  public  prosecutor  to  abandon  an  indict 
ment  and  take  up  a  new  one. 

I  apply  this  principle  to  the  present  ease. 
The  panel  has  pleaded  not  guilty  to  the  first 
indictment,  and  a  new  one  ham  been  raised. 
I  do  not  say  the  new  one  is  null — ^I  am  not 
prepared  to  go  that  length.  But  this,  much  I 
say,  that  this  does  not  extinguish  the  old  .one 
-Ahat  it  is  not  a  virtual  diK^aige  of  it,  ber 
cause  the  public  prosecutor  cannot  expresily 
disdiarge  or  desert  the  first  of  himself.  I 
conceive  that  the  first  stiU  subsists«4t  has  not 
been  dischaiged  by  any  atuthority  competent 
to  disdbarge  it.  tt  still  subsists;  ana  here 
the  prisoner  has  a  fresh  indictment  served 
against  him.  What  is  to  be  done  with  the 
present  indictment  ?  It  is.  not  null— but  whal 
the  prisoner  says  is,  I  must  have  full  tadud^ 
granted  me;  and  the  whole  questiou  is, 
whether  the  full  tnduour  shall  be  granted  him, 
YesorNo? 

I  think  that,  in  point  of  form,  you  are  bound 
to  dispose  of  the  first  indictment,  and  then  the 
question  is,  whether  you  will  allow  the  panel 
the  fifteen  days,  Yes  or  No  ? 

It  was  said  that  the  prisoner  has  no  interest 
to  plead  the  objection.  I  cannot  go  into  that. 
This  is  a  question  of  life  and  death,  and  he  is 
the  best  jodge  of  his  own  interest.  I  am  not 
lentitled  to  tell  him  that  he  has  no  interest  not 
•to  be  tried  to-day.  For  any  thing  I  know,  he 
has  a  great  interest — a  material  interest,  by 
which  his  life  may  be  preserved  or  prolonged' 
To  have  his  life  proloaged  even  for  fifleen  or 
sbcteto  days,  is  perhaps  a  serious  object  to 
him,  as  avoiding  nim  possibly  a  better  chance 
to  save  it  from  ue.  present  danger* 

If  tbe  practice  lounded  on  by  tbe  Crown 
counsel  were  of  long  standing,  inveterate,  and 
feconcileable  to  principle,  I  should  hold  it 
sufficient  to  authorise  the  proceeding  which  i# 
olijeeted  to  in  thk  case.  But  as  to  the  prac- 
tice cited  here,  where  an  indiotment  has  been 
pleaded  to  by  the  prisoner,  I  have  seen  ne 
eases  stated  prior  to  .1813.  The  ease  of 
SomervHle  in  I8ia,  and  that  of  Horn  in  1814, 
iwere  mentioned.  The  case  of  Mendham  I 
hafve  no  distinct  recollection  of.  I  take  it  for 
Uraated  it.was  coneetly  stated.  These  three 
cases  are  all  we  have  been  told  of,  which  truly 
epl^y  to  the  present  case.  I  cannot  pay  such 
jegard  to  these  cases,  as  to  be  of  opinion  that 
they  entitle  me  to  overrule  the  objection  ^ 
.Jlirs^  Becauie  they  are  too  recent  in  date,  and 
too  few  in  nnmben  for  regulating  our  decision: 
Saoondfy^  I  thibk.they  ought  not  to  be  M;tended 
to,  for  thisTeaton^  -  taacanse  I  da  not  -see  that 
the  ol^)ection  was  stated;  and  vi!e  all  know 
Imw  apt  the  best  men  are  to  fall  into  errors 
and  shght  irtegulaiities  when  not  put  cm  their 

0 


4271 


57  G£ORG£  III. 


gtiard  by  the  bar.  Wewert  told^  that  it  is 
%e  duty  of  the  Coart  to  watch  over  the  pto> 
ceedingSy  and  see  that  they  are  regular  and 
consonant  to  established  forms,  whether  any 
thing  be  stated  from  the  bar  or  not.  In  that 
obsmation  I  agree;  and  I  am  sure  that  I 
sneak  the  sentiments  of  the  Court  when  I  sav, 
that  we  are  sensible  of  the  anxious  and  able 
care  displayed  by  your  lordship  on  all  occft- 
sions  of  that  kind.  But  it  is  impossible  for 
any  man  to  attend-  to  every  thing,  I  say, 
therefore,  I  pay. much  the  less  regard  to  these 
cases,  because  they  were  not  argued  by  the 
bar.  They  are  cases  in  which  the  objection 
was  not  urged.  If  the  objection  had  been 
stated  the  Court  would  have  given  greater 
consideration  to  the  point.  I  nave  a  third 
reason,  viz.  that  I  cannot  reconcile  these  deci- 
sions to  strict  principle.  I  think  that  after  a 
panel  has  pleaded  to  an  indictment,  the  public 
prosecutor  cannot  pass  from  that  indictment 
without  the  authority  of  the  Court;  and  that 
he  cannot  virtually  abandon  a  first  indictment 
after  such  pleading,  merely  by  serving  a  second 
indictment  upon  the  prisoner. 

I  therefore  think  this  objection  is  well  found- 
ed, to  the  effect  that  it  is  our  duty  to  insist  that 
the  lord  advocate  shall  proceed  on  the  former 
indictment,  or  shall  now  move  the  Court  to  de« 
sert  it.  Whether  any  consequences  may  follow 
from  delay,  I  am  not  aware.  The  panel  asks 
fifteen  days  longer;  and,  if  he  is  right  in  point 
of  form,  I  cannot  refuse  his  demand,  on  the 
ground  that  he  has  no  interest  in  what  he  asks. 

Lord  PUmUfy — This  is  a  point  attended 
with  some  difficulty  ;  and  it  would  be  singular 
indeied,  if,^  after  attending  to  the  learned  plead- 
ings at  the  bar,  and  y^nai  we  have  heara  from 
the  bench,  I  could  say  I  fek  it  unattended 
with  difficulty.  My  impression  however  is, 
that  the  objection  is  not  well  founded.  In 
questions  of  this  description,  the  practice  is 
the  safest  guide  to  go  oy.  It  here  appean 
strong.  I  do  not  speak  particularly  ot  the 
case  of  Mendham ;  but  the  cases  of  Somer- 
ville  and  Horn  are  distinctly  in  point«— are 
identical  to  the  point  before  us. 

It  is  true  that  these  are  late  cases,  and  that 
na  others  have  been  mentioned.  But  let  it 
be  remembered,  that  this  objectioo  cmbcs 
upon  us  unprepared.  Neither  vbur  lordships 
nor  counsel  have  had  time  to  look  to  prece- 
dents ;  and  I  diink  it  would  be  ri|^t  to  have  a 
search  made  into  former  cases,  to  see  whether 
these  are  the  only  cases  which  are  the  same 
with  the  present. 

It  ie  certainly  true  that  these  eases  were  not 
argued  before  your  lordships ;  but  the  Court 
is  bound  to  attend,  and  always  does  attend  to 
the  relevancy  of  proceedings  of  this  kind,  and 
particuiariy  when  it  is  important  to  the  de- 
fence of  a  panel  at  the  bar.  The  Court  will 
in  all  such  cases  attend  to  the  regularity  of 
procedure ;  and  in  the  case  of  Somerville  this 
point  Was  suted  to  the  Court— it  wae  aot 
argued,  but  it  vras  not  overiooked. 


Trial  of  fFiOiam  Edgar  [328 

I  do  not  see  that  any  hardship  could  ariw 
from  holding  that  the  serving  of  a  new  indict- 
ment is  a  virtual  abuidonment  of  the  old. 
It  was  upon  that  principle  that  the  case  of 
Somerville  was  decided ;  and  if  I  did  not  uxf 
derstand  that  to  be  the  principle  in  the  case  of 
Somerville,  I  should  be  of  a  oifierent  opinion 
as  to  the  present  case.  I  see  no  hardship  to 
the  panel,  nor  any  want  of  principle  in  the 
rule.  It  is  upon  these  grounds,  though  with 
difficulty  and  hesitation,  that  I  think  the  ob* 
jection  cannot  be  sustained.  At  the  same 
time,  it  may  appear  to  be  of  importance,  and 
I  have  no  objection  to  have  the  poini  more 
fully  considered,  and  a  search  maae  for  pra^ 
cedents,  because  I  am  satisfied  that  when  the 
matter  is  investigated,  it  will  be  found  that 
the  Court  has  proceeded  upon  these  grounds 
in  other  cases. 

Lord  Re$ton, — The  first  inquiry  is,  whether 
this  (question  has  been  settled  or  not  by  prior 
practice?  If  it  is  not  so  settled,  I  agree  in 
the  opinion  which  Lord  Gillies  expressed. 

If  I  understand  the  quotations  that  were 
read  from  Mr.  Hume,  it  is  not  in  the  power  of 
the  public  prosecutor,  without  the  autnoritT  of 
the  Court,  to  pass  from  an  indictment  to'whic& 
a  panel  has  pleaded ;  and  the  panel  may  in* 
sist  that  the  case  should  now  go  on  upon  the 
first  indictment.  The  panel  riiould  not  Be 
exposed  to  the  hardship)  of  not  knowing  upon 
which  indictment  his  trial  is  to  proceed.  It  is 
in  the  power  of  the  Court  to  pass  from  the 
first  indictment  or  not,  upon  the  motion  of  the 
lord  advocate;  and  the  panel  should  not  be 
uncertain,  upon  coming  into  Court,  upon 
which  of  the  two  indictments  he  is  to  be  tried. 
It  would  be  a  hardship  to  put  him  in  that 
situation. 

It  was  said  that  the  indictments  are  ibm 
same,  or  the  one  only  a  part  of  the  other. 
That  certainly  does  appear  to  be  the  case; 
but  when  they  come  to  be  minutely  sifted^ 
other  circumstances  may  be  discovered,  of 
which  the  panel  may  avail  himself. 

I  think  ne  ought  to  have  fifteen  days  mdudm 
on  the  second  indictment,  after  the  authority 
of  the  Court  is  given  to  the  abandonment  of  the 
first  indictment. 

As  to  the  practice  which  has  been  cited. 
Lord  Gillies  stated  very  good  reasons  wi^  we 
should  not  be  bound  by  it.  It  is  only  or  firar 
years  standing,  and  the  objection  was  not 
stated'  in  any  of  the  cases  which  were  cited. 
The  oractice  cannot  therefore  be  binding  on 
the  Court  I  am  for  sustaining  the  objeCtioii, 
or  allowing  a  search  for  precedents.  The 
practice  is  periiaps  of  Icmger  staindfiag. 


Lord  Jmtiee  Cferle.— I  certainly  have  ne 
difficulty  in  etating.to  your  lordahipB,  ^lal^ 
notwithstanding  the  veiy  able  manner  in  wUd^ 
this  argument  has  been  urged  on  the  part  of 
the  prisoner,  and  notwithstanding  my  deib- 
Anee  for  the  opinions  of  my  brothen  on  tnj 
left  hand,  I  am  not  pfepoasd  ^orcoaeur  in  ih« 
oliectiQUwIiifikhis.WflD  hreoght  forward  in 


3SQJ 


Jitr  AimvKutmng  unla»gfiil  Oaiht. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[39» 


thk  cast ;  ^nd  if  driven  to  the  neeeisity  of 
ming  a  decided  opinion  at  present,  I.  most 
differ  from  these  learned  lords,  and  find  that 
.  the  objection  ought  not  to  be  sustained.  Not- 
withstanding the  weight  of  these  opinions,  you 
have  the  practice  established  in  point  of  fact 
— for,  from  the  deliberate  averment  of  the 
Counsel  for  the  Crown,  you  must  assume  that 
there  is  a  series  of  cases  in  which  yon  have 
acted  on  a  principle  directly  opposite  to  that 
which  is  now  contended  for  by  the  Counsel  for 
the  prisoner.  I  apprehend  that  it  is  also  a 
weighty  consideration  in  this  question,  that  in 
one  of  the  cases  which  has  been  cited,  as  to 
the  procedure  in  cases  like  the  present,  the 
prisoner  was  visited  by  most  exemplary  pu- 
nishment. I  allude  particularly  to  the  case  of 
Lindsay  Cranford,  who  was  sentenced  to  trans- 
|M>rtation  for  fourteen  vears.  Somerville  too 
was  unfortunate  indeed,  if  there  was  a  valid 
objection  which  might  have  been  stated 
against  his  trial,  as  the  sentence  upon  him 
was  imprisonment,  aeoampaaied  witn  an  ex- 
lubition  on  the  piUory.  These  are  precedents 
which  have  net  been  hitherto  doubted  by  the 
Court;  and  yet  our  attention  is  now  called 
to  this  ({uestion,  and  we  are  desired  to  austain 
the  obfection  of  the  panel's  counsel.  I  hold 
it  to  be  mj  sacred  duty,  sitting  here  as  a  Judge 
in  a  question  as  to  aform  of  procedure,  before 
I  pat  my  rash  haAd  to  alter  what  has  been 
the  practice,  to  be  convinced  by  argument, 
reason,  and  authority,  beyond  doubt,  that  that 
practice  so  uniformly  adopted,  and  followed 
by  SQcb  consequences,  is  oontrarv  to  law.  If 
I  did  not  so  act,  I  should  consider  myself  as 
in  foet  accessory  to  a  fundamental  subversion 
4^"  oor  criminal  procedure. 

But  although  my  opinion  is  different  from 
that  of  my  learned  brothers,  I  am  disposed  to 
ge  into  the  proposition  made  by  Lord  Pitmilly 
of  inquiring  into  the  fact,  Whether  or  not 
these  recent  eases  are  bottomed  upon  an 
-Meat  piactiee;  which,  if  established,  would 
go  greatly  to  do  away,  or  would  much  diminish 
&e  Impression  of  the  opposite  opinions  which 
tere  been  delivered. 

I  -dunk  it  no  more  dun  justice  to  the  lord 
advocate  to  say  of  the  statement  of  his  lord- 
ship, that  he  had  no  other  view  than  to  bring 
beme  the  Court  the  practice  prior  to  that 
staled  1^  Mr.  Dnimmond.  The  case  of 
Meodham  occurred  in  1804,  not  so  recent  as 
the  practice  ^uded  to  in  1812.  Mr.  Burnet, 
where  speaking  of  forgery,  page  190,  says, 
^  The  question  again  occurred  m  the  trial  of  the 
same  person  (Mendham)  in  October  1804,  for 
ottering  and  vending'  forged  notes.  The  Court 
esdared  informatioBS  on  the  point,  hut  the 
^[Kosecotor  aftervrardspaned/rim  the  charge,  and 
teoB^t  llendham  to  trial  on  a  different  indict- 
ment in  December  following,  for  forging  and 
uttering  Bank  of  England  notes,  with  an 
Intent  to  defiand  the  Bsuok  of  EngbLnd."  Your 
lordships  see,  that  Mr.  Burnet,  vrho  was 
fintoiltar  with  the  forms  of  the  Court,  and 
was  indottrioos  to  make  himself  acquainted 


with  every  thing  relating  to  the  criminal  law 
and  procedure,  states,  in  the  very  language 
which  is  objected  to  in  this  case,  that  the  pro- 
secutor afterwards  .passed  ftom  the  charge. 
This  is  another  case  to-be  added  to  that  traia 
of  precedents  which  have  been  cited. 

This  then  being  the  case ;  there  being  evi- 
dence before  you  of  a  practice  since  1804, 
and  in  one  of  the  cases,  the  attention  of  the 
Court  having  been  particularly  directed  to  the 
point  in  question, — a  circumstance  which  I 
now  positively  remember, — the  question  is. 
Whether  the  panel  is  now  entitled  to  state  to 
your  lordships,  that  there  is  such  a  formidable 
objection  to  this  practice,  in  point  of  principle^ 
that  you  ought  to  lay  it  aside,  and  establish  a 
new  practice  in  this  Court.  That  is  the  ex- 
tent of  the  argument  pressed  upon  you.  Cases 
formerly  were  not  so  fully  reported  as  they 
now  are ;  but  you  are  bound  to  hold,  that  in 
those  in  which  the  practice  now  objected  to 
was  followed,  it  had  the  consideration  of  the 
Court.  If  the  practice  had  .appeared  to  the 
Judges  to  be  objectionable,  they  would  have 
interfered,  .though  no  objections  were  stated 
by  the  panel's  counsel. 

I  cannot  agree  vrith  my  learned  brothers  as 
to  the  possibilitjr  of  hardship  arising  io  a  party 
from  toe  practice  which  has  been  followed 
in    this    case.     I  do   not  .think    that   the 

Sublic  prosecutor,  in  virtually  passing  from  a 
rst  indictment  by  serviog  a  second,  leaves 
the  panel  m  dubio  upon  which  indictment  he  is 
to  be  tried.  If  it  could  be  made  out  to  my  sa- 
tisfaction that  such  was  the  case,  I  should  in- 
deed see  something  like  hardship.  But  the 
moment  it  is  held  to  be  clear  law,  that  even 
after  the  debate  on  the  relevancy  of  an  indict* 
ment,  and  after  informations  ordered  on  tlie 
subject  of  the  objections  stated,  the  public 
prosecutor,  by  serving  a  second  indictment^ 
passes  from  the  first,  no  injury  can  ^possibly 
arise  to  a  panel ;  he  cannot  be  ignorant  upon 
which  of  the  indictments  he  is  to  he  tned. 
The  Counsel  must  know  .the  law;  and  when 
eonsiilted  by  him,  they  can  inform  him,  that 
though  five  indictments  have  been  served 
against  him,  it  is  only  the  last  to  which  he  has 
occasion  to  direct  his  attention.  It  is  the  duty 
of  counsel  for  an  accused,  in  reference  to 
what  I  hold  to  be  the  clear  rule  of  practice,  to 
give  the  panel  this  information,  and  then  ncf 
panel  can  be  held  in  doubt  as  to  the  indict- 
ment upon  which  his  jtrial  is  to  proceed.  It 
is  upon  a  settled  conviction  that.no  prejudice 
can  arise  to  a  panel  tn  such  a  situation  that  I 
think  the  objection  is  not  well-founded. 

Indictments,  where  there  has  been  no  plead- 
ing, are  every  day  passed  from,  with  or  with- 
out any  reason  appearing  on  the  face  of  the 
indictment.  I  say,  the  same  principle  applies 
to  a  case  like  the  present.  The  cases  are  the 
same  as  to  the  safety  of  the  prisoner.  There 
cannot  remain  in  his  mind  a  shadow  of  doubt 
as  to  the  indictment  upon  which  his  trial  is  to 
proceed ;  the  rule  of  practice  is  a  sufficient 
guide  for  him. 


3di] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  ]Vilimm  Btlgar 


[OSS 


Upon  th«M  yroQlidt,  I  my  9  I  ikovld  be  for 
lepelUiig  the  objettioD ;  but  I  oonenr  in  tba 
piropoBiliOD  wbieb  bum  boon  vomA%  to  yom:  loid^ 
ships,  that  in  a  point  of  pactioe,  which  is  of 
nnfifiite  consequence  to  the  aocased--4he  lew 
of  the  country-^-and  the  guidance  of  faturity-^ 
and  where  it  is  stated  that  a  recent  practice 
only  had  crept  in  which  was  unknown  in 
former  cases,  an  inquiry  should  be  made  to 
ascertain  clearly  how  the  matter  stands. 

A  small  indulgence  in  point  of  time  may  be 
granted.  The  parties  may  be  allowed  to  give 
in  short  Miovtes  of  the  state  of  the  practice, 
to  be  delivered  on  or  before  Saturday  next ; 
and  the  case  may  be  resumed  tlus  day 
se'enoight. 

Lord  Advocate. — ^There  is  another  trial,  that 
of  Douglas,*  fixed  for  Monday.  I  never  have 
felt  au^  desire  to  press  a  prisoner  in  point  of 
time,  if  any  object  whatever  w%8  stated  to  me 
for  his  wishing  delay.  If  the  panel's  counsel 
wish  for  time,  I  can  have  no  objection  to  grant 
il  them.  On  the  present  occasion,  I  only  think 
it  necessary  that  I  should  be  permitted  to 
state  upon  your  lordships*  record,  vrhat  I  now 
state  vtvd  voce,  that  I  aid  understand  that  by 
the  service  of  ihe  second  indictment  there  was 
a  virtual  abandonment  of  the  first. 

I  have  no  objection  to  this  point  being  settled, 
even  previous  to  Monday.  The  Minutes 
should  be  ordered  to  be  given  in  immediately, 
that  there  may  be  no  delay  in  bringing  on  the 
trial  afterwards,  as  we  may  be  told,  perhaps, 
that  no  indttcut  had  been  running  upon  a  se- 
cond indictment.  I  do  not  wish  to  press  the 
business ;  but  a  short  day  should  be  assigned 
for  the  inquiry  proposed,  which  may  be  com- 
{»leted  without  delay. 

Mr.  Clerk, — It  is  impossible  to  search  a  re- 
cord which  has  no  index,  in  two  days. 

Lotd  ChUiet, — There  may  be  a  debate  upon 
the  relevancy;  and,  by  possibility,  what  the 
lorjl-edvooate  tayt  may  tslte  place. 

Lord  Advocate. — ^I  passed  from  the  first  in- 
dictment by  executing  the  second,  and  the  ti»- 
ducUe  on  the  second  began  to  run  from  that 
time.  I  owe  too  much  to  the  law  and  the 
decisions  of  your  lordships,  not  to  oppose 
the  objection  which  has  been  brought  fi)rward 
to  day. 

LordJuttiee  Clerk, — ^Therais  to  be  no  argu- 
ment in  the  minutes.  They  are  to  be  seen  imd 
interchanged. 

c  

Lord  Advocate, — ^With  regard  to  the  terms  of 
your  interlocutor,  a  diet  cannot  be  continued 

rto  an  indictment  which  has  been  passed  from, 
passed  from  the  first  indictment,  and  a  ma- 
jority of  the  Court  agree  that  the  first  does  not 
now  subsist. 

Lord  Ot/lMt.F*The  authority  of  the  Court 
roust  be  obtained  to  the  passing  from  that  in^ 
dictment. 


.  Iprd  Jmtim  CMk.--Wt  ke^  evaij  thing 
entire. 

Lord  Advocate. — ^The  question  for  your  con- 
sideration has  not  arisen  under  the  first,  but 
uDder  the  second  indictment.  Your  lordshipi 
called  the  second  indictment ;  you  called  tb^ 
panel  to  plead  to  it ;  and  in  bar  of  his  doing 
so,  a  motion  was  made  that  the  trial  should  not 
take  place  upon  that  indictment ;  and  the  ques- 
tion IS,  whether  the  trial  can  proceed  ou  it  or 
not  ?  Therefore  you  cannot  proceed  on  anj 
other,  or  continue  any  other  than  the  second 
indictment.  A  majority  of  your  lordships  are 
of  opinion  that  the  first  indictment  was,  yir^ 
tiially  passed  from,  and  I  called  the  diet  of  no 
other  indictment  than  the  second. 


■V*. 


•  VideFott. 


i%efoUowkig  wmutei  of  the  debate  were  them 
entered  ttpon  fAe  record. 

CraneUMB,  for  the  paa^  objatiedg — 
That  il  was  incompetent  to  serve  od«^  libel 
against «  panel,  while  another^  upon  whid^ 
he  hfkd  siready  joined  issue  by  ple^tding^ 
was  still  current  against  him  ;  That  the 
first  libel,  having  been  pleaded  to  in  fiic^ 
of  the  Court,  was  no  longer  eub  potettate 
of  the  public  prosecutor,  and  could  notb* 
deserted,  or  otherwise  disposed  of,  hot  bv 
iudgment  of  the  Court :  That  tlus  Ube^ 
being  still  in  fiDrce  against  the  panel,  mm 
the  only  one  against  which  he  could  nofw 
be  called  to  defend  himself;  and  that  iit 
vras  not  till  after  it  had  been  disposed  of 
by  sentence  of  their  lordships^  thai  there 
was  room  lor  the  semoe  of  a  second* 
against  which  tbe  panel  was  entitled  to  hav^ 
the  full  mdMcim  of  fifteen  days  to  prepare 
for  his  defence. 

Home  DniBUBond,  for  his  mijesty'aad- 
vocaike,  aatwered^ — That  the  proceeding 
4ipon  this  oocasion  ia  sanctioned  bv  the 
established  practice  of  the  Court;  and  thai 
the  very  same  oourae  has  been  invariablf 
followed  in  every  caae  wh^o  the  same 
drcumstanoes  have  occurred.  So,  for  ex- 
ample»  in  the  case  of  Lindsay  Cranford, 
indicted  to  stand  trial  on  the  9th  Jannaiy 
1812,  when  the  diet  being  continued  tifl 
3rd  February,  new  criminal  letters  were 
in  the  meahtime  raised,  the  diet  whereof 
fell  on  the  same  day,  and  the  trial  pro- 
ceeded. Thomas  Somerville  was  indicted 
to  stand  trial  on  the  25th  Janoary  1818. 
He  pleaded  not  guilty ;  and  after  a  debate 
on  tne  relevancy  of  the  libel,  informatioii^ 
were  ordered  to  be  lodged  on  the  15th 
.  Febniaiy ;  but  new  criminal  letten  were 
raised,  the  diet  whereof  fell  on  die  aaaie 
day,  ttid  the  trial  proceeded*  A  question 
was  asked  in  this  case  by  one  of  the  jodgee» 
if  it  would  not  be  proper  to  desert  the  diet 
of  the  first  libel  r  but  it  waft  amwerfO^ 
tha^  a  desertioa  might  be  aigued  to  affect 
the  second  also;  and  thai  the  former  wa* 
held  to  be  abandooed  1^  the  aenrioe  of  m 


883] 


Jot  AHAkimhkg  ««te|^  Oa<b. 


A.  D.  mi 


(B8« 


bere  to  the  pndSoe ;  avid  the  case  pro- 
ceeded. In  tlie  caset  of  Joha  Hom»  JoDe 
13th  and  July  6.tb  1814,  and  of  Joha  Bell, 
who  pleaded  giiilty  on  the  first  oaUing  of 
the  diet,  January  9th  and  Fieibraary  3id 
and  loth,  1817,  similar  proceedings  look 

eace;  aa  also  in  the  preyious  case  of 
endham  in  1804. 

2do,  His  majesty's  adrocate  possesses 
an  uncontrolled  power  orer  his  iKAanct  in 
all  stages  of  a  criminal  process.  He  is  not 
bound^as  a  private  prosecutpr  is,  by  statute, 
to  insist  at  the  appointed  diet,  but  may  at 
all  times  abandon  or  pass  from  any  indict- 
ment he  has  raised,  or  any  part  thereof; 
and  he  does  so  in  daily  practice,  according 
to  his  pleasure*  And  if  he  exercise  this 
power  at  any  time  before  an  assize  is  set 
to  try  the  case,  he  is  still  at  liberty  to 
insist  of  new  against  the  panel  in  another 
indictment  for  the  same  offence. 

3tio,  The  remedy  for  the  possible  abuses 
that  may  follow  from  this  power,  is  to  be 
found,  not  in  attempting  to  compel  the 
prosecutor  to  maintain  an  instancy  whidi 
ne  has  dropped,  orer  whldi  the  Court  have 
BO  control,  and  for  which  the  panel  has  no 
interest  to^  insist,  as  he  is  out  of  Court  by 
the  abandonment  of  the  charge  but  in 
opposing  its  oppresxiTe  renewal  or  con- 
tinuation, when  the  Court  may,  on  suf- 
ficient cause  being  shewn,  desert  the  diet 

4to,  No  objection  is  ot  can  be  made  to 
the  numberless  examples  of  an  instance 
dropped  where  the  panel  has  never  pleaded 
to  the  charge.  Now  this  case  is  in  nowise 
different  in  principle ;  for  the  parties  can 
ui  no  sense  be  said  to  have  '^  joined  issue" 
befoiia  an  assise  is  set ;  no  «plea  or  state- 
ment of  tacts  beine  i&nal  Inal  is  enteied 
More  the  judges  of  the  fact  are  named ; 
nor  can  a  panel  have  a  jim  quantum  in  his 
own  plea.  The  doctrine  of  jmmng  time 
or  Uiucontettaiionf  has  no  existence  in  this 
court,  being  foanded  in  a  presumed  ju- 
dicial contract  between  the  parties;  a 
thing  inconsistent  with  the  first  principles 
of  criminal  law. 

Lastly. — Service  of  a  second  libel  has, 
in  the  recent  practice  of  the  Court,  been 
held  to  imply  the  virtual  abandonment  of 
the  first ;  and,  consequently,  there  is  no 
ground  for  the  complaint  of  two  indict- 
ments subsisting  at  once  against  the  panel, 
and  of  his  ancertainty  to  which  he  may  be 
called  upon  to  answer.  Accordingly,  his 
najeaty's  advocate  dedares,  that  hebAs 
abandoned  the  first  libel ;  and  he  has  no 
objectioQ  to  aath^nticate  this  statement  on 
the  leeoid  in  ^y  form  the  Court  may  thmk 
fit;  and  this  he  appieiiends  18  aU  the  panel 
Ims  any  ri^t  to  requite. 

As  to  the  taAiCtif  of  fifteen  days,  tiiere 
is  nothing  In  the  aoi  of  paiHameat  to  pre- 
mitlht  service  of  a  second  libiel 


the  OEisleBoa  of  « 16m»  oner;  aaS  it  is 
contrary  Co  no  prindple,  and  sanctioned 
liy  the  inveterate  pnK»^  of  the  Court. 


The  Lord  Justice  dei^  and  Lords' com* 
missioners  of  Justiciary  having  oonsfdered 
the  foregoing  objection,  wifli  the  answer 
thereto,  and  heard  parties'  procuraton 
tliereupon  at  neat  length,  before  afiswer, 
ordain  parties^  procurators  to  pi^pare  and 
give  in  minutes,  stating  the  practice  re- 
^tiv^  to  the  said  olpectipn;  to  see  and 
interchange  these  minutes ;  and  to  print 
and  lodge  the  same  in  tiie  hands  of  tiie 
clerk  of  court  between  and  Saturday  next, 
in  order  to  be  recorded.  Continue  the 
diet  against  the  panel,  and  whole  other 
diets  m  court,  tiU  Monday  next,  at  tea 
o'clock  forenoon,  in  this  place :  And  or- 
dain parties^  witness^,  assizers,  and  sJI 
concerned,  then  to  attend,  each  under  the 
pains  of  law;  and  the  panel  in  the 
meantime  to  be  carried  back  to  the  Castle 
of  j^inburgh. 

(Signed)    D,  Botlk,  J.  P.  D. 


BUNl/TES  or  Search  ov  tbb   Books  ov 
AnjouBKAL,  From  lif  January  1777. 

Alexander   Penrose   Citming,  £s<|uire, 
against  John  Lawson.  Perjury,  1785. 

The  dietwas  deserted  pfo/aoo«/ tombre  on 
1st  Februaiy  1785,  the  panel  not  Tuiving 
pleaded.  After  the  interiocator  deserting 
the  diet,  ^  Mr.  Erskine  then  represented 
that  new  criminal  letters  had  been  raisea 
and  executed,  at  the  instance  of  Mr* 
Cuming  of  Altyre,  against  the  said  John 
Lawson,  the  diet  thereof  stood  ooatinued 
to  thiA  day,''  The  Court  continued  the 
diet  upon  these  last  criminal  letters  to  the 
14th  of  February;  on  which  day  the 
panel  pleaded  not  guilty,  and  informations 
were  ordered.  He  was  afterwaids'' tried, 
and  found  not  guilty. 

John  Burns  and  Alrxanbrr  Bailur 
VRitcH.  Atumli,  17B0»    * 

The  diet  was  called  on  21st  I>ecember 
1789,  when  Veitch  was  outlawed;  and 
the  diet  continued  against  Bums  to  18th 
January  1790,  before  he  had  pleaded  to 
the  charge.  In  the  mean  time,  Veiteh 
applied  to  the  Court  tobe  reponed  against 
the  sentence  of  fugitatioh. 

On  i6ih  December  1789,  Burns  and 
Veitch  were  served  with  a  new  indictment 
for'  trial  on  the  said  18th  of  January. 
Upon  that  day  the  Court  ad^oatned  to  the 
25th ;  from  which  it  was  a^ouned  to  the 
26th,  and  iirom -the  26th  .to  the  let 
February.  The  trial  proceeded  on  1st 
February,  when  the  pnels<«rere  tried  and 
convicted.  .  '       I   , 


S36] 


57  GEORGB  IIL 


^WHUam  Edgar 


[336 


BEftBYi   RoBBKXSONy  Alld    CaLLAWDBB,^ 

Se^aUm^    1793. 

Upon  28tk  JanuBiy,  diet  was  called ; 
Callander  was  outlawed;  and  the  diet 
was  continued  against  the  other  prisoners 
(who  had  not  pleaded  tO' the  indictment), 
till  11th  Febmaiy,  when  the  instance  was 
allowed  to  fsXX, 

On  18th  February  they  were  tried  and 
connoted  on  an  indictment  which  had 
been  served  previous  to  the  said  11th  of 
February. 

Alexavdeb  ScoTT.f    SedUian.    1794. 

Upon  20th  January  the  diet  was  called 
and  deserted  pro  loco  et  tempore;  but, 
upon  the  ISth,  anew  indictment  had  been 
served  against  the  prisoner,  chargiAg  him 
to  compear  upon  3a  February. 

On  3d  February  the  diet  of  the  second 
indictment  was  called,  and  Scott  was 
fuiitated. 

RrpHABO  Mbvoham,  Forgety.  1804. 

Ricjianl  Mendham  was  cited  to  com- 
pear on  10th  October  1804,  when  he 
pleaded  not  guilty. 

Informations  ordered  to  be  given  in  on 
or  before  30th  October :  diet  continued 
to  1st  November ;  further  continuation  to 
13th  November,  when  whole  diets  of 
court  continued  to  14th;  on  which  day, 
instance  aRainst  Mendham  dropt. 

New  indictment  served  on  3rd  Novem- 
ber, charging  him  to  appear  the  19th 
November.  On  that  day,  a  continuation 
to  26th  November;  then  continued  to 
lZ9th,  and  from  Uiatto  3rd  December; 
long  pleading  on  the  relevancy ;  and,  after 
debate,  his  majesty's  advocate  passed 
from  the  libel,  so  far  as  laid  on  the  com- 
mon law;  and  diet  continued  till  next  day. 

4th  December,  continued  till  7th  De- 
cember; continued  till  next  day.  8th, 
further  continued  till  10th ;  on  which 
day,  interlocutor  on  relevancy;  not  rele- 
vant ;  dismissed  from  the  bar. 

Alexanoeb  Campbell.      T^eft   and 
Robbery.    1809. 

After  pleading  not  guiltr,  the  lord  ad- 
Tocs(te  representod,  that,  for  the  present, 
he  passed  from  the  third  charge  in  the  in- 
dictment, viz.  the  theft  committed  at  the 
inn  at  Dunfermline ;  but  reserving  to  the 
public  prosecutor  to  proceed  against  the 
panel  on  that  charge  in  a  new  indictment, 
if  he  shall  deem  it  proper  so  to  do ;  and 
therefore  restricts  tne  indictment  to  the 
two  charges  of  robbery. 

John  Likdsay  Cbaufobd  and  James 
Bbaoley.  Forgery  ofwritmgt,  January 
8,  1812. 

Diet  continued  on  motion  of  panels 

•  rt<fe.2.How.Mod.St.Tr.79.  ' 

i  Vide  2  How.  Utod.  St.  Tr.  383. 


tiH  ad  February ;  did  not  plead  ;  in  the 
mean  time,  sen^  with  a  new  libel  to 
stand  trial  on  the  -  3rd  of  February.  Trial 
proceeded  accordingly. 

Napieb  and  Grotto:    Murder  and 
BMery,    March  31,  1812. 

-  After  pleading  to  the  indictment,  the 
prosecutor  passes  from  the  charge  of 
murder,  and  all  the  charges  of  robbery, 
except  the  robbery  alleged  to  have  been 
committed  on  Peter  Bruce  and  J.  Buchan 
Brodie.* 

The  Court  find  the  indictment,  as 
limited  by  the  foregoing  minute,  relevant 
to  infer  toe  pains  of  law. 

Thomas  Sommbbville.     Petjury. 
January  25,  1813. 

Pleaded  not  guilty.  Debate  on  rele- 
vancy; and  informations  ordered  to  be 
fiven  in;  and  diet  condnued  till  15.th 
February.  In  the  mean  time,  a  new  in- 
dictment served  on  the  panel,  calling  him 
to  stand  trial  on  said  15th  February. 
IVial  proceeded  accordingly ;  and  Som- 
merville  convicted.  Imprisoned,  fined, 
and  put  on  the  pillory. 

John  Hobn.    SelUng  Forged  Notes. 
June  13,  1813. 

Pleaded  not  guilty.  Informations  order- 
ed, and  diet  continued  till  12th  July,  Iq 
the  mean  time  new  libel  raised,  and  served 
for  trial  on  6th  July ;  when  panel  again 
pleaded  not  guilty,  and  the  order  fpr  in- 
formations renewed ;  on  advising  which, 
libel  was  found  relevant,  on  15tb  July, 
when  panel  pleaded  guilty,  and  was 
sentenced  to  transportation. 

Bell  and  Do vo  las.     Uttering  Forged 
Notee,    January  9,  1817. 

Diet  against  Douglas  desertedpro  loco ei 
tanpore.  Bell  pleaded  guilty.  The  Court 
ordered  informations  on  the  relevancy  of 
the  indictment,  and  continued  the  diet 
against  the  panel  John  Bell,  till  3Td  Fe* 
bruary.  In  the  mean  time,  a  new  libel 
served  for  10th  February,  when  trial  pro- 
ceeded, and  Bell  pleaded  guilty  again, 
and  had  sentence  of  transportation,  the 
libel  being  restricted.f 


*  Many  cases  of  abandoning  or  passing  from 
a  part  of  the  charge  might  be  produced ;  but 
it  must  be  admitted  to  be  a  common  practice, 
as,  for  example,  in  cases  of  child-murder, 
where  the  charge  at  common  law  is  frequently 
passed  fh>tn,  upon  confession  of  the  statutory 
offence.  H.  H.  D. . 

t  Nble.— -There  are  in  this  period  various 
examples  of  diets  deserted,  on  the  motion  of 
|he  prosecutor,  pro  loco  et  tempore f  after  plead* 
in([  to  the  char^  and  af^r  interlocutor  ^f  re- 
levancy, which  it  IS  thought  unnecessary  to 
produce,  as  the  coinpetency  of  that  proceeding 
18  settled  law.  H.  H«  D. 


2371 


Jht  AdmimiUnttg.  unkmfid  Oaihit 


ADDITIONAL    MINUTES    or    csh«| 

TAIN  Cases  bisyovd  the.  Psbiod  op 
Sbarck. 

IsoBEL  NicoLsoK.    Fire  Raiting. 
June  25,  1711. 

Indicted  and  accased,  &c. 

Hbe  Lord  Justice  Clerk  and  commis- 
sionen  of  justiciary^  at  desire  and  with 
consent  of  her  majesty's  adTocate,  desert 
the  diet  of  the  first  indictment  raised  at 
the  instance  of  her  majesty's  advocate 
against  the  said  Isobel  NicoJson,  panel; 
but  prqndioe  to  him  to  insist  in  his  other 
indictment  already  raised  and  execute 
against  the  peael)  as  accords. 

Patrick  Haxiltoh  of  Green.    Murder. 
July  30,  1714. 

Mr.  Dnncan  Forbes,  his  majesty's  ad- 
Yooate,  consents  to  the  deserting  of  the 
diet  against  PatiidL  Hamilton,  younger, 
of  Green,  upon*,  this  libel,  without  pre- 
judice to  him  to  insist  in  the  new  inaict- 
ment  raised  at  the  instance  of  his  ma- 
jesty's advocate  against  him.    (SieSub.) 

Dun.  Forbes. 

Tbe  Lord  Justice  Clerk  and  commis- 
stoners  of  justiciary,  in  respect  of  the 
above  consent,  desert  the  diet  against  the 
above  Patrick  Hamilton,  younger,  of 
Green,  upon  this  indictment,  wiUiout 
prejudice  to  the  pursuer  to  insist  upon 
the  new  indictment,  as  accords. 

(Signed)    Ad;  Cockbubk,  J.  P.  D. 

This  after  informations  given  in  and 
recorded,  and  several  adjournments  of 
tlie  diets. 

AvDRsw  Feknie,  and  Others.  Indicted 
for  Sedition,  Debate ;  and  Infbrma* 
tions  ordered.    May  24. 1720. 

July  28. — ^Mr.  Walter  Stewart,  his  ma- 
jestv's  solicitor  and  advocate^epule,  for 
his  highness'  interest,  judicially  consents 
to  the  deserting  of  the  diet  against  the  with* 
in  named  and  designed  iUidrew'Femie, 
ice.  wit)iont  prejudice  to  his  majesty's 
advocate  of  insisting  a^nst  such  against 
lAom  new  libels  are  raised,  as  aocoras. 

The  Lord  Justice  Clerk  and  commis- 
nonerj  of  justiciary,  in  respect  of  the 
sJMve  consent,  desert  the  diet  agaidst  the 
said  Andrew  Femie  and  others,  above- 
named,  wi^out  prejudice  to  his  majesty's 
advocate  of  insisting  against  such  of  them 
against  ivhom  new  libels  are  raised,  as 
aooordsl 

(Signed)    An.  Cocxbvbv,  J.  P.  D* 

.'  »         » 

The  second  libd  beiny  called, 
JiiilrM  Andrew  Fenve,  kc.  Indicted 
«ldaecnsed,-fcc.  Debate;  and informaf> 
tions  ordered.  The  informations  ,  after- 
waidB|ivenin,  found  relevant,  and  trial 
ptooeeos. 


A.  D.  1817;  1ji39 

JiJins  IiiGLia^  ladwelter  in  Leitii.  In* 
dieted  and,  accused  as  ^Ity  of 
Thefts  B4Mery,  aid  Friecm-irmJMig, 
4«.  August  24,  1720. 

m 

Diet  continued  till  26th  September,  and 
afterwards  to  17th  October.  On  which 
day, 


hdirm  James  Inglis.    Indicted  and 
cused,  id  in  dkprecedefUL 

Mr.  Robert  Dundas,  lus  majeat/s  ad- 
vocate, for  his  highness'  interest,  jnakially 
consents'to  the  deserting  of  the  diet  of 
the  within  indictment  against  James 
Inglis,  panel,  without  pr^iMlice  of  insist- 
ing  in  the  new  indictment^  as  aecpfds. 
(Signed)    Ro.  DuwnAS. 

• 

The  lords  commissioners  of  justiciary, 
in  respect  of  the  abo?e  consent,  desert 
the  diet  upon  this  libel  against  the  said 
Jfumes  Inglis,  without  prejudice  of  in- 
sisting on  the  new  libd,  as  accords. 


Inlran  James  Inglis,*  panel. 
Indicted  and  accused  on  the  new  in* 
dictment.    Informations  ordered* 


MM. 


MoNCBiBFF  Stated*  That  in  oompUanesr 
with  the  order  of  the  Court,  a  search  had 
been  made  in  the  Books  of  Adjournal  for 
precedents  applicable  to  the  question  now 
before  the  Court.  That  a  search  from 
the  year  1777  downwards,  had  tot  been 
made,  and  the  result  had  been  communi- 
c^ed  to  the  panel's  counsel  some,  daya 
ago;  but  that  alter  this  a  forther  search 
had,  it  seems,  been  made,iwhich'  appear* 
to  go  back  to  the  beginning  of  the  last 
centttty :  and  the  statement  of  thecases 
so  found  was  only  communicated  late  on 
this  day.    (May  23.) 

That  on  the  part  of  the  panel  i^  may 
now  be  assumed,  that  the  (Jburt  l^ts  b^ 
fore  it  every  one  example  which  his  ma- 
jesty's advocate  has  been  able  to  discover, 
in  the  course  of  more  than  a  eentwy,  of 
any  proceeding  which  he  thinks-  cafcu- 
lated  to.  suTOort  th^  measure  which  has 
been  adopted  in  this  case,  or  to  meiet  tha 
objection  foundect  on  th^  deari^t  princi- 
ples of  law. 

That  on  the  resiilt  of  this  seanh  the 
following  remaiks  are  humbly  sijibmit- 
ted: — 

Ittf  That  there  }b  not  oiU  :e3^mple  in 

.the  whole  practice  of  the  Court,  in  vrhich 

.  the  same  0Djectipi\  which  is  h^re  insisted 

on  was  stated  to  the  Cour^  and  rspeUid 

.  hy  a  judgment  ' 

24  That  the  lord,  advocate  haa  pointed 

the.  statement  with  recard  to  .tiiose  caaei 
on  which  it  is  pr^uined  he  means  19  rely; 
ai}d  that,  as- for  as  the  panel's  couni^  cuk 
discover,  the  only  cases  in  the  long  period 
which  hate  the  smallcet  tendency  to  shew 
any  pmctioe  la  f aT^ni  of  the  proeeonin^ 


0893        ^  GfiORGB  UL 

•  et  ii}AditnxLrtfAtm^^  htting  such 
a  tendent^y  are  hoo  cases  m  1714  and 
VMf  onei^ase  in  1804,  two  hi  1813,  and 
0n0ial817.  Beiweentlieyear  1790,  and 
the  jtar  1804,  tbe  pilisecator  4ias  not 
beeii  aUe  to  find  cfie  single  case  in  the 
vecoid,.in  wUcn,  after  a  panel  had  plead- 
ed to  an  indictment,  a  libel  Was  served 
tuftd  susbuned  without  a  prewhm  desertion 
of  the  diet  on  Ihe-flrst  indietoent.  ^ 

8r«^  TlAl  to  sliew  this,  lie  iAiooldshortly 
taka  notice  of  eacli  of  the  oaies  pHnted 
•  by  iM  majisty^i  adrocate* 

On  the  first  seaicb,  the  folkMriog  state- 
ment is  sabmitted :-« 

Mm  Jjmmm^  1785.~]|i  this  case  the 
pancA'had  not  fUaded, 

Burm  and  Veitck,  1789.— Paneb  had 
mot  pleaded. 

&ry^  RoberUon^  and  CaUaukr,^  1793. 
—Panels  bad  not  nhadtd, 

Akxanda-^Scoif.firU^TvieXhfdnoi 
plfadffl, 

Rkkatd  Jfendkam,  1804.— Tn  Uiis  case 
lie  panel  bad  pleaded  nbt  ffuilty.  Infor- 
mafiotts  wereordisred;  and  several  con* 
tinuations  of  the  diet  took  place,  the  last 
^  the  t4th,  November.  On  that  day,  it 
IS  said,  the  instance  vras  dropped:  And 
in  the  mean  time  a  new  indictment  had 
l>een.n^ed  on  the  3rd  November.  This, 
.  IhmfiMPe.  IS  one  case,  in  which,  after  a 
parly  bad  pleaded,  a  new  indictment  was 
simred  before  the  diet  oh  die  otiier  had 
bten  dtertUd  ^  the  aiitfioiity  of  the 
Court,  'and  'witiiout  anT  Jradi  desertion. 
Biit.the-CbQrt  win  1)e  pleased  M  observe, 
X|iat  In  that  cale  the  pftnerdetiiy  bad  no , 
ititef^t  to  make  tlie  objeolkfn,  but  quite 
'iBe  reverse.  For  the  iMotid  iliditftment 
was  eqtulty  in^evaint  with  the  first ;  and 
foooidingly  the^  Court,  after  full  dbbate, 
onleM  iuorm^tions;  attd  after  various 
•4jdomnient8,the  libel  wasybiaii  ntfT  rek- 
0«il,  and  the  iMihel  was  diaNtfMBd,/$ipm  ^ 
bar.  Vost  ciearlt,  therefore,  it  w4s  not 
bis  jn^rftt  to  make  any  e/bjection  to  the 
^irvite  of  the  iec6nd  indittmeht. 

Alexander  Cannbeli,  18Q9.^this  is  not 

a  cte  kpptitebie  to  the.  poiM  sk   ail. 

'    'There  was  no  qaeMMmslbottt  any  new  itt- 

,dictmep|;  and  the  ciroittMtailce  ^f  tiie 

jWbHcpibsaiieufor  fiairingfrote  particular 

diaigir  IB  tfd  indidlfiie&t^ Jntelidinff  or 

.  leservinff  the  power  afterwards  %o  Aose  a 

isew  iilditetmeiifti  ts  whoify'  tmMteiial  to 

.ihe^^fl|^.    Bututaayir^yltis^fauii^ 

lAy  apprehended,  thkt .  even  lUs  takes 

■     k^a^  orily  with  (ho  c^ieiit  of  the  Court, 

whicl^  is  expressed  By  the  forms,  of  the; 

Mttifedifororibevattcy.    ^^ 

;  1w  if  ^e  of  Ae  eaM  wliicli  WliA  Quoted 
/Ui  tfe  ieb4fe.    But  the  patieb  Md  not 


rriai'tfUmmSt^ 


tfi40 


■•*• 


^  !f  H6W.  If  od.  St  TV.  7^. 
t'Sa9W.Mid.St.1V; 


pUtded;  and  therefore  it  is  altogether  in- 
applicable. 

Jfapkr  md  GroUo,  1813.— This  case  is 
of  the  same  nature  with  that  of  Alexan- 
der Campbell.  There  was  no  second  in- 
dictment, and  no  question  about  a  second 
indictment 

Ilomos  SomenUU,  1813.— This  case  is 
so  far  applicable,  that  the  panel  had 
pleaded  to  the  first  indictment ;  that  the 
second  indictment  was  servad  without 
any  previous  desertion  of  the  first';  and 
^at  the  panel  was  tried  and  convicted. 
But  even  with  regard  to  this  case,  it  is  to 
be  observed,  that  ikie  crime  of  which  the 
panel  was  accused  was  that  of  peijory^ 
the  |>unishment  of  which  could  not  ex- 
ceed imprisonment  and  piUory ;  and  that 
the  panel  was  at  a  very  serious  expence 
ill  defending  himself  at  every  diet  of  the 
Court.  It  was  therefore  obviously  better 
for  him  that  the  trid  should  go  on,  what- 
Irver  night  be  the  events  than  that  it 
fhould  bi  flierely  out  off  for  fifteeu  days. 
Accordingly,  the  objection  was  not  staled 
by  his  counsel,  and  oouid  not  l^e  jodged 
of  by  the  Court 

/o^  Euii^  1813.— This  person  was  in- 
dicted for  uttering  and  selling  forged 
n^es;  the  first  of  which  is  a  camtal 
offence*  He  pleaded  not  guilty,  and  in- 
formations were  ordered.  Then  a  new 
indictment  was  served  without  a^y  deser- 
tion; and  a  pleading  on  the  relevancy 
apaih  took  J^ace.  But  the  Ccort  will  ob- 
serve whar  followed.  When  the  new 
indictment  was  ftmnd  f<elevaiii,^Patt^ 
fkmkd  gifUtyT*  to  the  secoMl  dnm,  and 
was  sentenced  to  trantportaiiim.  lA  such 
uoase^  though  the  panel  had  an  interasi 
to  ob^i  to  the  relevancy  of  the  charge 
itself  in  both  indictments,  it  is  evident 
that  it  would  have  been  very  mudi  against 
his  Interest  to  b^^t  to  the  powers  exer. 
dsfd'  by  bis  majesQr's  advocate,  or  to  tha 
regularity  of  his  proceedings. 

Bell  emi  BaufiUy  1817.— Noihiag  can 
be  drawn  ftom  this  case.  Bell  fietded 
malty  h  bath  Macfinsitfs;  and  as  to 
I>oiis^  the  diet  was  dettrted.  It  is 
submitted,  that  ithas  no  analogy  to  tha 
present  questipii* 

These  are  all '  the  cases. selected  \ij  his 
majesty's  advocate,  frd&i  (he  first  uote  of 
{earch,  fr^m  1.777  downwards.  And  it 
IS 'obvious,  that  none  of  ^hein  bave  any 
unalogv  to  the  case,  except  those  of  ilfmtf- 
hqa^aomeivilkf  and^  Bim^  and,  even  at 
"to  uiese^  the  explanations  appearing  on 
the  ho^  of  them  are  quite  su%ient  to 
'  aeeduni  for  ^(ke  o^edion  hot  heh^  ttateds 
whieh,  ifter,  all,-is  the  utmost  thft  can  be 
'drkwuditeifthenK    ' 

The   additional    obtes   mentioir  fitar 


liQtel  Nieokmi,  1711^Ptttel  ifi  this 
c^e  had  notpkmkdn 


d4lJ 


J^  AdmhAdmng  unlawful  Oaths, 


A.  D.  1817. 


[242 


Pafndb  BamltoH,  1714.— Hie  fact  it 
not  diattnctly  stated,  nor  does  it  at  all 
appear  what  beetme  of  tbe  caie.  Tbouffh. 
the  minute  and  interiocutor  fpeak  of  the 
^  new  mdictment  raised/*  this  may,  in 
truth,  refer  meniy  to  the  notice  of  the 
lord  advocate  of  an  intention  to  raise  a 
new  indictment  immediately  thereafter. 
Withoat  seeing  the  dates,  it  is  impossible 
to  draw  an  J  correct  inference.  Besides, 
though  it  is  mentioned  in  a  note  that  in- 
formaiions  had  been  given  in,  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  panel  had  pieaded.  The 
iafcTOiations  might  be  on  the  form  of 
citation,  or  on  other  points  not  necessarily 
implying  that  there  nad  been  a  plea  to  the 
inoictment. 

In  one  view,  however,  this  case  is,  with 
many  others,  a  fiOal  precedent  against  the 
doctrine  maintained  oy  his  majesty's  ad- 
vocate. For  it  will  be  observed,  that  Mr, 
Demean  Torbet  never  thought  of  maintain- 
log,  that,  after  pleading,  the  service  of  a 
new  indictment  ipio  facto  put  an  end  to 
tfie  ftrs^  or  that  it  conld  be  abandoned 
otherwise  than  by  an  express  interlocutor 
of  the  Court. . 

Jbaktm  Femk  and  others,  1720. — This 
ease  is  nearly  on  a  footing  with  the  pre* 
ceding.  It  does  nol  appear  when  the  new  ^ 
indictments  were  raised.  But  it  does  dis- 
tinctly appear  that  his  majesty's  solicitor 
and  adTocale<depute  of  that  time  did  not 
inu^ne,  that  he  had  any  power  to  abandon 
the  first  indictment  otherwise  than  by  a 
motion  to  the  Court;  and  an  express  ii^ 
terlocotor  was  accordingly  pronounced. 

Jama  IfigUs,  1720.*-ranel  had  not 
piaaded. 

This  is  an  analysis  of  the  whole  cases 
founded  on  by  his  majesty's  advoeate. 
And  the  Court  will  now  see,  that  there 
'  are  none  bearing  even  the  appearance  of 
analogy,  etcept  only,  li^,  Hamilton  in 
1714;  2nd,  Eecnie,  kc  in  1720,  the- cir- 
cumstances of  both  of  which  are  impeiv 
fectW  known ;  drd,  Mendham  in  1804,  in 
whiSi  boA  indictments  were  found  irre- 
levant; 4th,  Somerville  in  1818;  and, 
5th,  Horn  in  1813^  who  at  lut  pleaded 
guilty,  and  sot  the  libel  rastrfcted  to  the 
charge  vHudi  only  subjected  him  to  an 
arMtrary  punishment. 

That  it  would  be  for  the  Court  to  judge, 
whether  there  is  any  thing  in  theib  caaes^ 
picked  out  of  the  pra^e  of  more  than  a 
etmary^  to  oyertttsn  the  established  prin- 
ciple of  law^  which  was  explained  .In  iht 
debate,  and  is  laid  down  bj  the  fiist 
authority  on  the  subject,  that  after  a  psiael 
has  pleaided^  the  lord  advocate  h^  no 

Eto  abandon  tiie  indictment,  except 
toess  motioii  to  the  Court ;  and  that 
annot  doit  expnakf^  stilMesscftn 
'  he  doit  mrtaal^,  or  bytsip^iarfm.  '. 

>4My.That,  annexed  hereto,  there  is  the 
whole,  s^aisk of  ibe  recorda  from  the  1st 
VOL.  XXXIU.*  .. 


January  1 777,  downwards ;  and  that  ftom 
that  Hst,  the  Court  will  perceive  a  much 
atronger  practice,  by  which  the  lord  ad- 
vocate finds  it  necessary  to  move  the 
Court  expresdy  to  desert  the  diet,  inti- 
aoatiagai  the  same  time,  tliat  he  intends 
instantly  to  raise  anottier  indictment. 
And  more  particularlv,  there  are  many 
cases  in  which  this  is  done  after  the  panel 
had  pleaded. 

Cummkif  against  LessUe,  1785.— Deser- 
tion after  interlocutor  of  relevancy,  y 

WaUer  Ro$s,  1786.— Had  pleaded  not 
guilty.'  .Diet  deserted  fro  loco  et  tempore. 

Brown  and  MNab,  .1793. — Desertion 
after  interlocutor  of  relevancy,  expressly 
for  the  purpose  of  serving  a  new  libel. 

Charki  Sinclair,*  1794.— Diet  deserted 
after  relevancy  found.' 

Qamn  &tnpton,  1811.-7Diet  deserted 
after  interlocutor  of  relevancy. 

.  These  are  cases  in  which  the  panel  had 
pleaded.  There  are  many  others  in  which 
the  recdrd  bears  a  desertion  pro  loco  et 
tempore,  for  the  purpose  of  immediaUly 
serving  a  new  libd. 

David  Dalgleish,  kc.  1780. 

John  Grant,  1783. 

William  Tenant,  1789. 

Thomas  Wilson,  1790. 
'  Jacob  Tait,  1795. 

O'Neils,  1796. 

UrquharU,  1797. 

Kirby,  1799. 

Richard  Mendham,  1800.—"  Diet  de- 
serted before  pleading,  as  the  advocate 
stated  he  meant  to  serve  a  new  libel  this 
qfternoonJ* 

Clark  and  Brown,  1802. 

Monro  and  M'Farlane,  1809. 

■  ■ 

That  from  this  evidence  of  practice,  to 
which  may  be  added  all  the  cases  in  the 
additional  notes,  it  is  humbly  submitted, 
the  inference  is  irresistible,  that  no  such 
principle  ever  was  recognised  as  that 
maintained  by  his  majesty's  advocate,  that 
by  executing  a  new  indigtm^nt,  a  previous 
indictment  to  which  the  panel  had  pleaded 

J's  ^pso  facto  extinguished.  The  law  has 
leknowledged  no  such  power  in  the  lord 
advoeate^  and  it  is  as  little  sanctioned  by 
any.  practice.  On  the  contrary,  the  uni- 
Ibcm  practice,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few.  straf^liog  instances,  all  since  the 
year  1904,  and  all  but  one  since  the  year 
1812,  is  directly  the  i-everse,  the  lord 
yd^ocate  having  always  thought  it  ne« 
i6cluary  expre^ly  to  move  the  Court  to 
idesert  the  diet. 

•  That  on  the  whole,  it  was  humbly  sub- 
taitted,  that  this  search  into  the  practice 
instead,  of  supporting  the  plea  of  his 
majesty's  advocate,  founded  on  a  mere 
allegation  of  practice,  in  opposition  to 

♦  3  How.  Mod .  St.  Tr.  777. 


243]        57  GEORGE  III. 

the  principle  of  law,  tends  very  strongly 
to  support  the  plea  of  the  panel,  and  to 
shew  trie  incompetency  of  the  proceeding 
here  objected  to:  That  if  there  were 
nothing  more  to  be  stated,  it  wonld  be 
enough,  that  between  the  year  1720  and 
the  year  1804,  there  is  not  one  example  of 
a  second  indictment  raised  after  a  panel 
had  pleaded  to  the  first,  and  before  a  de- 
sertion of  the  diet  by  aathoritjr  of  the 
Court.  The  case  in  1804  has  be«n  ex- 
plained ;  and  it  will  be  for  the  Court  to 
judge,  whether  a  practice,  which -really 
rests  on  one,  or  at  the  utmost  itoo  cases  in 
1813,  can  make  law,  in  opposition  to 
principles  otherwise  clearly  esublished. 


Trial  of  WUUam  Edgar 


L344 


COURT  OF  JUSTICIARY. 

May  26,  1817. 

FreKnt. 

Rt.  Hon.  DaM  Boylty  Lord  Justice  Cleik. 
Lord  Hermand. 
lord  GUlies. 
Lord  PUmiUy. 
hord  Re$ton. 

Cowuelforthe  Crown. 

Rt.  Hon.  Alexander  Maeonockie,  Lord  Advo- 
cate [afterwards  a  lord  of  Session  and  Justi- 
ciary, with  the  title  of  Lord  Meadowbank.] 

James  Wedderbum,  Esq.  Solicitol^eneral. 

H,  Home  Dnmmondy  £sq. 

H,  Warrender^  W.  S.  Agent. 

Coumelfor  WiUiamEtigar. 

John  Clerky  Esq. 
Geo,  Cramtotm,  Esq. ' 
Thot.  Thomtoni  Esq. 
James  Moncrieff",  Esq. 
Francis  Jeffrey,  Esq. 
J.  P.  Grant,  Esq. 
Henry  Coekbum,  Esq. 
J.  A,  Murray,  Esq. 
G.  W,  Boyd,  W,  S.  Agent. 

William  Edgar  was  placed  at  the  bar. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — ^Your  lordships  re* 
member  die  obieaion  that  was  stated  in  this 
case.  You  ordered  minutes  to  be  giTen  in  fot 
the  parties,  stating  the  practice  relative  to  the 
objection.  These  are  now  upon  the  table ; 
and  you  are  to  say  how  they  are  to  be  dis- 
posed of. 

[Here  Mr.  Cranstoun*  was  beard  at ,  consi* 
derable  length  in  support  of  the  objections 
to  the  competency  of  the  indictment.] 

Lord  Gillies. — Before  the  prosecutor  begins,. 
I  want  an  explanation  of  a  point.  The  case  of 
Ilaniiltoh  has  been  mentioned,  in  which  Dun- 
can Forbes  was  prosecutor.    That  name  must 

*  No  report  of  this  speech  has  been  pro- 
cured. 


excite  in  vs  xiU  peculiar  attention.  On  page 
5,  of  the.  joint  minute  of  the  parties,  it  is.stated 
by  the  public  prosecutor,  -^'Mr.  Duncan 
Forbes,  his  majesty's  advocate,  consents 'to  the 
deserting  of  the  diet  against  Patrick  Haaulton, 
younger,  of  Green,  upon  this  libel''  (I  under- 
stand informationa  had  been  ordered,  which 
raises  a  presumption  that  that  libel  had  been 
pleaded  to),  **  without  prejudice  to  him  to 
insist  in  the  new  indictment  raised  at  the  in- 
stance of  his  majesty's  advocate  against  him.*' 
What  I  want  to  know  is,  whether  this  new  in- 
dictment raised  was  served  i  In  looidng  at 
the  preceding  case,  **  but  prejudice  to  him  to 
insist  in  his  other  indictment  already  raised 
and  executed,''  the  insertion  of  ^  exeaUed/*  in 
one  case,  and  the  omission  of  it  in  the  other, 
excites  suspicion  that  it  was  not  executed  in 
the  other.  It  is  mentioned  in  the  one,  and  not 
in  the  other. 

Mr.  Drummond. — My  Lord  Justice  Clerk ; 
It  appears  to  me,  that  there  are  two  points  for 
consideration  in  this  case.  The  first  is  one  of 
considerable  importance,  the  other  is  of  no  im- 
portance at  all  as  ofiecting  the  paneL  The 
first  to  which  I  allude,  is,  whether  it  be  com- 
petent, during  the  dependence  of  one  indicts 
ment  to  serve  another.  The  consequence 
would  be  that,  if  this  be  incompetent,  the 
service  of  the  last  indictment  in  the  present 
case  would  be  a  nullity ;  and  the  panel  would 
thus  obtain  a  ftirther  delay,  to  allow  time  for 
serving  it  over  a^n.  The  other  point  ia, 
whether,  after  au  indictment  has  been  pleaded 
to  (to  use  an  expession  which  has  been  more 
dwelt  upon  in  ttie  present  case  than  in  all  the 
former  practice  of  the  Court),  it  can  be  aban- 
doned by  the  prosecutor,  without  an  act  of  the 
Court,  or  whether  it  can  only  be  got  rid  of 
with  the  authority  of  your  lordships,  lliia 
second  point  is  of  no  importance  on  this  occa- 
sion, and  is,  in  truth,  a  mere  question  of  form ; 
for,  whatever  your  finding  should  be,  the  retnlt 
will  be  the  same  to  the  panel  at  the  bar. 

Hie  first  point,  however,  fortunatdy  appears 
to  be  attended  with  no :  difficulty ;  for  it  is 
settled  by  constant  and  inveterate  practice. 
I  shall  not  detain  the  Court  by  repeating  what 
is  stated  in  tKe  printed  minutes,  where  your 
lordships  have  before  you  not. merely  theftve 
cases  to  which  only  the  learned  gentheman  has 
thought  proper  to  allude,  but  a  series  of  other 
cases  of  which  nothing  has  been  aaid.  There 
are,  besides,  the  cases  from  1711  to  1T20,  in 
the  additional  part  ojf  the  minutes,  which  are 
completely  in  point  upon  this  part  of  the  sub- 
ject, proving  tnat  any  given  number  of.  indict 
ments  may  subsist  against  a  pand  at  one  and 
the  same  time.  Even  the  case  of  -colonel 
Chayteris,  of  which  so  much  has  been  sidd  on 
the  bther  side  of  the  bar,  may  be  reforr^  to  in 
support  of  this  doctrine.  As  quoted  ^by  Mr. 
Hume,  it  establishes  a  c(nn|riete  precedent, 
that  it  is  competent  to  raise  at  oacci  and  con- 
sequently to  execute,  a  number  of  libels  against 
an  individual  accusing  him  either  of  the  same, 
or  of  fifty  different  crimes. 


345] 


Jm  AAmnitUring  utilat^iil  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[246 


The  only  tvUe  of  law  as  to  the  defence  of  a 
panel,  in  sndi  circomstancea,  to  wbich  onr 
practice  seems  to  pa  j  any  regaid,  and  it  is 
snfiSeient  for  ereiynseiu]  purpose,  is  this,  that 
the  proeecator  must  make  bis  choice,  before 
flQing  to  trial,  as  to  the  indictment*  upon  which 
le  is  to  proceed  against  the  panel.  Bat,  in 
the  present,  of  all  cases,  I  do  not  know  to 
what  usefel  pnrpose  it  can  tend  to  enter  into 
this  discQSsion  at  all ;  for  if,  as  happens  here, 
there  is  one  and  the  same  crime  charged,  and 
the  same  particnlars  are  mentioned,  the  de- 
fence also  will  be  the  same  under  the  different 
libels. 

Besides,  it  will  always  be  remembered,  that, 
l>y  the  Tiew  of  the  law  which  I  maintain,  the 
first  indictment  is  already  extinguished.  For 
either  the  prosecutor  does  virtually  abandon  all 
prerious  indictments,  by  executing  a  subse- 
quent one,  or  the  Court  will,  as  a  matter  of 
coarse,  desert  all  diets  but  that  in  which  he 
desires  to  appear.  And  here  it  is  upon  the 
record  of  the  Court,  that  he  has  abandoned  the 
first  libd;  and  it  remains  for  the  learned 
gentleman  to  show  by  what  proceeding  it  is 
possible  to  keep  the  prosecutor  in  Court  longer 
thao  he  chooser  to  remain.  What  I  state  is 
the  settled  practice  in  a  multitude  •  of  cases, 
which  are  ot  that  description  that  they  cannot 
appear  in  the  books  of  adjournal,  or  form  any 
entry  on  the  record.  When  a  panel  forces  on 
his  trial  by  means  of  the  act  1701,  and  the 
prosecutor  does  not  bring  on  the  trial  on  the 
first  indictment,  but  new  criminal  letters  are 
raised  against  the  panel,  these  letters  must  be 
serred  before  the  expiration  of  the  first  indict- 
ment, otherwise  the  panel  could  not  be  de- 
tained in  prison.  Now,  in  all  the  numerous 
eases  of  this  descriptiou,  it  is  plain  that  two 
libels  are  in  existence  against  the  panel  at 
once,  without  the  diet  ever  being  called,  or 
the  panel  even  brought  into  the  presence  of 
the  Court,  and  no  objection  has  ever  been 
made  to  such  a  proceeding.* 

*  I  was  not  aware  at  this  time,  that  on  one 
occasion  it  had  been  thought  worth  while  to 
state  an  objection  to  this  form  of  proceeding. 
The  circumstance  is  detailed  in  the  following 
note  to  Mr.  Burnet's  work,  page  367  :  ''  But 
is  it  necessanr,  in  point  of  form,  that  the  diet 
he  called  and  simpUcUer  deserted,  as  the  act 
ordains,  in  order  to  entitle  the  prosecutor  to 
the  benefit  of  new  erimmal  letters  r  In  practice 
it  is  not  held  sO ;  and  justly,  for  though  not 
calling  the  diet  be  a  virtual  desertion  of  it  by 
the  prosecutor,  the  prisoner  can  sustain  no 
pitjudice  by  this  form  not  being  gone  through. 
It  being  still  competent  to  recommit  him  on 
new  criminal  letters  being  served.  Accord- 
ingly in  the  case  of  Welsh,  who  had  run  his 
letters,  and  on  that  ground  petitioned  for  libe- 
ration on  the  lape  of  the  first  forty  days,  but 
who  had  by  this  time  been  served  with  new 
criminal  letters.  Lord  Justice  Clerk  (Hope), 
'  on  advising  his  petition^  pronounced  this  inter- 
locutor:  ^28th  October  1806|  having  con- 


In  the  case  of  colonel  Charteris,  quoted  by 
the  learned  geddeman  who  precedea  roe,  the 
discussion  was  not  as  to  the  running  of  the 
tmfticur,  and  the  subsbtence  of  several  indict- 
ments at  once,  as  he  seemed  to  suppose,  for 
that  was  taken  for  granted  to  be  lawful ; 
neither  .was  it  imagined,  that  on  having  pro- 
ceeded to  the  trial  of  one  indictmeat,  all  the 
others  were  not  thereby  extinguished.  like 
question  was,  whether  the  panel  should  not  be 
informed,  before  being  called  on  for  his  de* 
fence,  to  which  of  several  indictments  he  was 
to  answer.  There  was  no  doubt  as  to  the 
competency  of  raising  and  executing  them  all. 
No  person  ever  entertained  a  doubt  upon  that 
subject.  The  demand  made  was,  that  before 
the  trial  the  panel  should  be  informed  on 
which  indictment  the  trial  was  to  proceed ;  it 
not  being  admitted,  or  so  well  understood  as 
now,  that  the  last  service  extinguishes  a  pre- 
vious libel.  It  is  unnecessary  to  say  more 
upon  this  first  point;  for  it  is  settled  by  the 
established  practice  of  die  Court,  that  there • 
may  be  fifty  indictments  subsisting  at  one 
time,  if,  before  the  panel  be  made  to  answer 
or  take  his  trial,  they  be  all  reduced  to  one. 

The  next  question  is  as  to  this  doctrine  of 
pleading  to  an  indictment,  about  which  the 
learned  gentleman  did  not  choose  to  speak  by 
itself,  but  only  in  conjunction  with  the  other 
point,  and  about  which  I  should  have  been 
glad  to  have  beard  what  he  could  say ;  for  I 
have  not  yet  obtained  the  remotest  glimpse  of 
what  the  idea  of  **  joining  issue,''  as  applicable 
to  the  case  before  the  Court  can  rest  upon. 
The  form  of  interrogating  the  panel,  as  to  his 
guilt  or  innocence,  before  naming  the  jury,  is 
one  of  the  most  immaterial,  I  might  almost 
venture  to  say,  useless  steps  of  the  whole  pro* 
ces&.    In  England,  a  panel  confessing  may  be 

sidered  the  foregoing  petition,  with  the 
letters  of  ihtimation  and  execution  herewith 
produced,  in  respect  that  new  criminal  letters 
have  been  raised  and  executed  against  the  pe- 
titioner, and  have  been  laid  before  hb  lord- 
ship, along  with  the  petition  for  his  majesty's 
advocate,  for  a  warrant  to  detain  the  petitioner 
in  prison ;  refoses  the  desire  of  this  petition, 
in  so  far  as  it  prays  to  set  the  petitioner  at 
liberty ;  reserving  to  the  petitioner  the  benefit 
of  any  argument  he  may  oe  advised  to  found 
on  against  being  subjected  to  a  new  trial,  in 
consequence  of  the  diet  not  having  been  de- 
serted timpUcUer  on  the  27th  current,  as  he 
alleges  it  ought  to  have  been,  under  the 
act  1701.' 

^*  Accordingly  wlien  the  trial  came  on,  on 
21st  November  following,  the  prisoner  founded 
tn/er  alia  upon  the  circumstance  of  the  diet  not 
having  been  deserted  simpUciter  when  the  diet 
of  the  former  libel  fell ;  but  the  Court  held 
there  was  no  necessity  for  an  interlocutor  to 
that  effect,  the  non-appearance  of  the  prose- 
cutor being  a  vtrtual  desertion  of  the  diet,  and 
entitling  him  to  serve  new  criminal  letteiS|  in 
terms  of  th$  5tatute."-^H.  H.  D. 


247] 


57  GEORGE  Ul. 


Trial  of  U^illiam  Edgar 


{fi48 


convicted  and  punished  by  the  Court  without  i 
the  intervention  of  a  jury;  and,  if  he  remain 
silent,  he  may,  in  certain  cases,  I  believe,  be 
presumed  guilty;  and,  in  others,  till  very 
lately  might  have  been  punished  by  a  barbarous 
sort  6f  death.*  Now,  in  all  this,  our  praotiee 
is  essentially  different.  The  Court  are  no  more 
judges  of  the  fact,  in  a  case  of  confession,  than 
where  the  proof  rests  npon  an^  other  species 
of  evidence ;  and  silence  is,  in  all  cases  hor 
inanely  interpreted  into  a  plea  of  not  guilty, 
the  prosecutor  being  bound  to  prove  his  charge 
unless  expressly  admitted  by  the  accused  in 
presence  of  a  sworn  assize, 

I  have  looked  through  our  law  books,  and, 
from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  all  the  au- 
thorities of  the  law  of  Scotland,  there  is  not  a 
word  of  the  doctrine  of  litiscontestation  to  be 
found  in  criminal  proceedings.  There  is  no 
such  word  used  Ij.''^  George  M'Kenzie,  nor 
by  Mr.  Hume.  There  is  nothing  in  Dractice, 
or  in  principle^  to  give  it  support,  and  the  in- 
troduction of  It  is  contrary  to  the  first  princi- 
Sles  of  our  criminal  law.  Upon  what  does  the 
octrine  of  litiscontestation  rest?  Upon  an 
implied  bargain  or  presumed  judicial  contract 
between 'the  liti^nts.  But,  is  that  a  doctrine 
which  can  be  introduced  here?  Can  a  man 
make  a  lawful  paction  oonceming  his  life  or 
his  liberty?  Litiscontestation  has  no  sense  or 
meaning  in  this  place.  I  have  not  been  able 
to  find  the  word,  even  in  a  pleading,  except  in 
one  case  reported  by  M'Laurin ;  and  I  wbb 
the  doctrine  for  ever  expelled  from  the  de» 
liberations  of  this  Court. 

No  party  has  at  present  9.ju$guaUum  in  any 
thing.  To  what  could  the  panel  here  acquire 
a  right?  To  his  own  plea?  certainly  not. 
Of  what  benefit  could  that  be  to  him  t  If  he 
plead  guilty,  it  may  to  the  prosecutor;  if  not 
guilty,  is  that  of  any  use  to  himself?  Is  it  to 
any  act  of  the  Court  he  has  acquired  a  right? 
There  is  no  act  of  Court  in  this  instance..  If 
there  had  been  an  inteiiooutor  of  relevancy,  I 
should  at  least  have  understood  the  aigument, 
but  we  have  not  yet  advanced  so  far.  This  is 
the  only  ground  on  which  I  could  conceive  the 
•argument  of  the  panel  to  have  any  semblance 
of  reason.  But,  unfortunately  for  the  panel, 
in  the  case  I  have  alluded  to  in  M*Laurin*s  re- 
ports as  being  the  only  place  in  which  mention 
IS  made  of  litiscontestation,  there  was  an  in- 
terlocutor of  relevancy,  and  yet  no  regard  was 
paid  to  the  argument  by  the  Court.  The  case 
IS  that  of  James  Archibald,  in  February  1768. 
The  petition  in  support  of  which  the  ide^  of 
litiscontestation  among  other  arguments  was 
there  advanced,  was,  that  the  Court  could  not 
desert  a  diet,  pro  loco  ei  tempore  idlber  an  inter- 
locutor of  relevancy ;  but  the  Court  deserted 
the  diet  in  terms  of  tlie  prosecutor's  motion, 
and  granted  vrarrant  for  recommitting  the 
panel. 

I  have  to  submit  that  the  same  consequence 
must  follow  to  the  panel,  whether  you  are  of 

*  i  Stark.  Crim.  Plead.  340. 


opinion  that  the  libel  is  abandoned,  or  whether . 
you  to  tlirough  the  form  of  declaring  it  de- 
serted. The  Court  cannot  acquit  the  panel  of 
thechar^  against  him.  Your  lordships  are 
not  the  judges  of  the  fact  AU  you  can  do  is 
to  declare  the  diet  deserted ;  and  the  conse^ 

Suence  to  the  pauel  is  the  same,  for  he  may  be 
etained  in  prison  and  indicted  again  next  day 
for  the  same  offence.  To  constitute  the  Court 
judges  in  a  previous  question  as  to  the  pro- 
priety of  the  prosecutor's  conduct  in  insistins 
m,  or  abandoning  the  libel,  would  be  attendea 
with  the  most  extraordinary  consequences,  for 
whidi  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  the  panel's 
counsel  are  prepared  to  argue.  It  would  in-- 
troduce  a  course  of  procedure  hitherto  un- 
known, which,  if  it  bad  been  introduced  in 
other  tiroes,  might  have  led  to  the  superseding 
of  the  jury  altogether,  and  which  must  in  any 
times  invest  the  Court  with  the  office  of  the 
prosecutor. 

It  was  said  that  the  Court  has  a  discretioa 
to  exercise  in  deserting  the  diet;  that  it  may 
do  it  simpliciier^  as  well  as  pro  loco  et  tempore^ 
if  good  grounds  be  shown ;  and  that  the  power 
<^  abandoning  the  indictment  contended  for 
takes  this  discretioa  from  the  Court.  Mr. 
Bumet,*  contrary  to  this  statement,  howwer, 
savs  that  the  prosecutor  is  not  bound  to  show 
why  be  moves  for  the  desertion  of  a  diet  pro 
loco  et  tempore^  and  thai  the  Court  must  grant 
any  motion  which  he  makes  to  that  effect.  But 
I  am  quite  willing  to  admit  that  Mr.  Bnmet 
has  stated  this  doctrine  somewhat  too  broadly^ 
and  that  he  has  quoted  in  too  unqualified  a 
manner  (as  he  not  unfrequently  does),  the  im- 
port of  a  decision  to  which  he  refers  in  the 
note  in  its  sup^rt.  I  perfectly  coincide  with 
Mr.  Hume's  view  of  the  subject,  that  thou^^ 
the  prosecutor  cannot  be  compelled  to  discloae 
his  reasons  for  his  motion  to  desert  pro  loco  el 
temporcy  the  Court  have  a  discretion  which,  if 
an  extreme  case  be  made  out,  they  may  exer* 
cise  by  deserting  the  diet  simpUciter  ;\  thou^  n 
more  difficult  question  remains  behind,  to  dis- 
cover what  benefit  the  panel  can  possibly  de- 
rive from  that  proceeding.  All  this,  however, 
relates  to  the  case  of  the  prosecutor  moving 
for  a  desertion  pro  kco  et  tempore^  whereas 
here  he  has  made  no  such  motion. 

I  am  not  contending  for  a  povrer  inherent 
in  the  public  prosecutor,  without  a  remedy  for 
any  evil  that  may  follow  from  it.  All  I  say  is, 
that  the  panel  is  already  out  of  Court  as  for 
as  the  first  libel  is  concerned,  and  that  he  has 
nothing  more  to  ask  for  by  desertion  of  the  diet 
of  that  libel  than  what  has  happened  by  its 
abandonment  by  the  public  prosecutor.  Where 
then,  it  may  be  askea,  is  the  remedy  in  a  case 
.  of  oppression  ?  The  answer  Is,  that  by  serving 
a  multiplicity  of  libels  and  successively  aban- 
doiung  them  all,  the  circamstances  of  oppres- 
sion may  be  stated  to  the  Court,  if  there  be 
any  to  complain  o^  when,  by  insisting  on  a 
new  indictment  the  panel  shall  at  length  be 


•  Page  310, 


t  Supplemonli  237. 


3491 


Jbr  AdminitUring  untawfid  Oaika 


A.  D.  18lt 


BHMr 


called  opon  to  answer  at  llie  bar ;  or  the  panel 
may  have  liis  grieTances  previously  discussed 
by  presenting  a  petition*  But  it  will  always 
be  reaembrnd,  that  it  is  his  own  fitult,  by 
neglecting  the  remedies  of  the  act  1701y  if  his 
imprisonment  shall  in  the  meantime  be  pro- 
longed a  single  day.  And  it  is  not  easy^  there- 
lore,  to  conceiTe  m  more  harmless  application 
that  can  be  made  to  a  prisoner  than  tne  service 
of  a  series  of  indictments,  whether  relevant  or 
not,  that  are  never  insisted  in,  or  to  imagine 
bow  any  evil  or  oppression  can  arise  from  such 
a  proceeding. 

in  the  present  instance,  and  in  the  present 
BiMft  of  me  business,  there  is  clearly  no  case 
before  the  Court  from  which  the  panel  has  to 
ask  rdiei^  or  of  which  he  can  complain,  or  on 
which  be  can  be  heard  at  alL  The  learned 
counsel  for  the  panel  are  entitled  to  come  for- 
vraid  and  state  their  hardships,  if  any  shall 
occur  to  their  fertile  fancy,  and  they  will  be  in 
order  in  doing  so,  when  the  panel  shall  be 
broQght  again  to  the  bar,  and  the  prosecutor 
shall  insist  in  a  charge  against  him.  It  will 
then  be  for  the  Court  to  consider,  whether  a 
case  is  made  out  that  calls  upon  Uiem  to  desert 
the  diet  sinrpKciiter,  rather  than  pro  loco  et  tern- 

C\ ;  and,  after  all,  if  your  lordships  should 
e  recourse  to  this  unusual  proceeding,  I  am 
yet  to  learn  what  be  lefits  it  would  confer  upon 
a  prisoner  more  than  the  ordinary  species  of 
desertion  pro  loco  et  tempore^  if  obtained  with- 
out the  consent  of  the  prosecutor.  On  a  point 
on  whidi  Mr.  Hume  has  spoken  with  so  nrach 
caution  and  reserve,  it  does  not  become  me  to 
say  any  thing.  For  every  evil  there  must  be  a 
remedy;  and,  for  all  injustice  there  must  be 
redress  in  the  common  law  powers  of  this  su- 
preme court;  but  the  question  is,  whether  the 
provisions  of  the  act  1701  are  not  intended  to 
meet  every  case  that  can  occur,  and  whether  a 
case  can  possibly  occur,  in  which  the  Court 
would  be  justified  in  adding  or  attempting  to 
add,  to  the  safeguards  of  that  law. 

^e  have  heard  that  Mr.  Hume's  authority  is 
against  us  in  this  part  of  the  case,  and  that  is 
an  authority  to  which  we  are  all  disposed  to  bow. 
But  I  must  confess,  that  I  have  not  been  able 
to  discover  in  any  part  of  that  learned  author's 
work,  such  a  meaning  as  has  been  imputed  to 
bim.  I  admit  the  justice  of  all  the  remarks 
that  have  been  quoted.  But  your  lordships  will 
observe  how  Mr.  Hume  was  quoted.  There  was 
nothing  referred  to  as  to  his  opinions  of  the 
prosecutor's  power  of  passing  from,  or  aban- 
doning his  own  instance;  but  passages  were 
quoted  from  diflerent  parts  of  tne  b<K>k  as  to 
Ibe  desertion  of  the  diet.  I  must,  however, 
beg  your  attention  to  those  passages  in  Mr, 
Hume's  woriL  where  he  speaks  of  the  prosec^ 
tor's  power  to  abandon  hu  instance ;  thus,  he 
^ys,*  ^  at  any  period  before  remitting  an  in- 
dictment to  an  assize,  the  prosecutor  may 
abandon  a  faulty  libel,  and  raise  another  in  a 
more  correct  and  better  form."    I  am  aware 


•  Vol.  3,  p.  30C. 


»    «      •  . 


that  dkis  is  not  an  authority  directly  In  point, 
as  the  author  is  there  only  speaking  inci* 
dentally  on  this  subject,  and  we  have  seen  how 
easv  a  matter  it  is  to  take  detached  passages 
without  reference  to  the  context  and  general 
bearing  of  the  author's  meaning,  in  order  to 
support  a  particular  purpose.  Let  us  then  see 
what  Mr.  faume  says  vrMu  treating  ezpresriy 
of  the  prosecuto/s  iiistance.  ^'  ^  the  Lord 
Advocate's  instance  is  thus  in  one  sense  inde- 
pendent of  the  party  injured ;  so  it  is  also  in' 
this  other  sense,  that  it  is  entirely  under  hie 
own  management  and  disposal  as  to  the  sea^ 
sons  and  occasions  when,  or  the  mode  wherein, 
or  the  effect  to  which  it  shall  be  used.  For  in 
none  of  these  points  can  any  individual,  nor 
even  the  supreme  court,  pretend  to  any  con- 
troul  or  superintendence  of  him;  as  indeed,'^ 
marie  the  conclusion,  ^  as  indeed  to  allow  any 
such  interference  on  their  part,  would  in  sub-' 
stance  be  to  make  the  judges  prosecutors^  who 
ought  to  be  kept  free  as  &r  as  possible  of  all 
previous  impressions  of  the  case."* 

I  submit,  that  if  these  passages  be  oomparecl 
wiUi  those  quoted  on  the  other  side,  whin  last 
rdate  entirely  lo  the  desertion  of  the  diet,  and 
do  not  contain  a  word  about  the  proseoitor's 
power  over  his  instance,  there  wiu  be  no  dis-' 
crepancy  or  contrariety  found  between  them. 
Deiertion  of  the  diet  is  an  act  of  the  Court  Y 
but  as  to  the  instance,  the  prosecutor  has  that 
entirely  in  his  own  hands.  Your  lordshipe 
cannot  keep  the  prosecutor  in  Court  a  minute 
longer  than  he  chooses ;  and  the  panel  cannot 
prevent  him  from  withdrawing,  mr  he  has  all 
the  bene6t  from  that  proceeding  which  he  can 
derive  from  any  desertion,  and  receives  no 
harm  from  it 

As  to  the  MiKie  of  15  dajrsy  if  it  be  compe- 
tent and  proper  to  serve  one  indictment  dunng 
the  currency  of  a  previous  one,  that  question 
is  at  an  end.  The  mimim  of  the  second  must 
run  from  the  date  of  the  service^  else  the  power 
to  serve  the  second  would  have  no  meaning 
whatever;  and  accordinglv  this  will  be  found, 
on  inquiry,  to  be  agreeable  to  the  praotioflKi 
Your  lordships  will  remember  the  ongin  and. 
nature  of  the  iMftiM  of  citation,  for  an  ettenp- 
sion  of  which  the  panel  is  not  attempting  to 
plead  any  equitable  claim.  The  vJme  aie 
not  founded  upon  statute  but  upon  an  equitii 
able  practice.  No  case  is  here  made  out  in 
equity  for  a  delay;  and  it  certainly  will  not 
be  said  that  there  is  any  practice  against  the 
running  of  the  second  tndMnc  before  the  deses- 
tion  of  the  previous  diets.  If  it  be  competent 
to  serve  three  or  four  indictments  at  once,  it 
must  follow  that  the  Mmm  of  the  whole  wmif 
run  at  the  same  time.  But  at  all  tiiase,.befoie 
a  trial  is  brought  on,  the  Court  wR  grant  sooh 
delay  ka  may  appear  proper  in  the  drcum- 
stances  of  ^ny  particufaff  case. 

'  A  complaint  has  been  made  that  the  panil 
has  been  embarrassed  with  diffarent  hbelipin 
preparing  bis  defence.  To  this  it  is  a  svflkient 


4^ 


«  Pag^  215. 


sftU 


57  GEORGE  HI. 


Tri4d  of  fViUiam  Edgar 


i:362 


answev,  that  he  may  establish  this  fact  of  em- 
hamuBsmenty  if  he  cany  as  the  grounds  of  a 
iBOtion  for  delay  (which  appears  to  be  consi- 
dered a  great  advantage  to  the  panel,  and  is 
in  fact  the  real  object  of  this  discussion)  sup^ 
poaiag  him  to  succeed  in  persuading  your 
lordships  ibaX  the  first  libel  is  not  abandoned. 
But  I  nave  already  said  that  there  is  no  room 
here  for  any  statement  of  hardship ;  the  se« 
cood  indictroept  being  the  same  as  the  first, 
with  the  omission  of  two  or  three  lines.  This 
<l^jection,  if  it  existed  at  all,  would  apply  with 
tenfold  force  to  the  common  case  of  au  alter- 
i^tive  charge  of  two  crimes  in  tlie  same  libel, 
or  to  the  ease  of  a  panel  served  with  several 
Ub^s  for  as  many  different  offences,  when  he 
would  have  ten  times  more  difficulty  in  the 
preparation  of  his  defence  ;  and  yet  it  could 
w>t  be  pleaded  to  be  incompetent  to  make 
such  a  cnaige,  or  to  serve  different  libels  at 
once  for  different  offences.  This  very  year  an 
ipataiice  occurred  where  the  same  individual, 
John  Campbell,  was  tried  on  two  separate 
Ubels  on  two  consecutive  days^  and  convicted 
OB  both. 

LordJtMice  derk,-—!  tried  a  man  on  two 
different  libels  upon  the  same  day  last  circuit. 

Mr.  Drtmimond. — ^It  was  observed,  that  in 
ibe  prooeedings  of  the  Court  of  Justiciary  in 
points  of  form,  many  cases  have  occurred  un- 
worthy of  being  followed  as  precedents,  and 
namv  examples  of  loose  and  irregular  practice. 
My  lord,  I  cannot  allow  this  to  pass  uncon- 
iradicted.  I  have  never  had  occasion  to  make 
•fiieh  a  remark  myself,  or  to  hear  it  made  by 
oUiers :  'On  the  contrary,  I  have  always  looked 
up  to  the  practice  of  this  Court,  as  a  model  of 
aceuracy  and  correctness  in  points  of  form.  If 
the  learned  gentleman  go  back  to  bad  times,  he 
nay  find  some  things  not  to  be  imitated,  but  not 
certainly  in  modem  times  when  the  practice 
of  the  Court  has  become  more  mature  and 
perfect. 

I  cannot  sit  down  without  ofierins  a  few  re- 
anarks  upon  the  cases  stated  in  £e  printed 
minute  for  the  panel.  It  is  said,  in  the  second 
page,  ^  Tliat  a  search  from  the  year  1777 
idownwaxda  bad  first  been  made,  and  the  result 
iiad  been  communicated  to  the  panels  some 
4ays  ago :  But  that  after  this  a  search  had  It 
«eema  been  made,  which  appears  to  go  back 
to  the  beginning  of.  the  last  century ;  and  the 
«Catement  of  the  oases  so  found  was  only  com- 
aiuaicated  kte  oa  this  day.  That  on  the  part 
"^if  the  panel  itijaay  now  be  assumed,  that  the 
Court  W  before  it  every,  one  example  which 
liis  majesty's. advocate  has  been  able  to  dis- 
•eorer,,  ia  the.course  of  more  than  a  century ^  of 
any.  proceedings  which  be  thinks  calculated  to 
>a«pport  the  measure  which  has  been  adopted 
in  this  case,  or  .to  meet  the  objectioq  founded 
on  the  cleai^st  principles  of  law.''  This  is  a 
▼ery  erroneoos  statement  of  what  has  been 
dene  in  point  of  fact.  Our  search  began  in 
-t777f  Hmd  prior  to  that  there  Jvas  lui  aeaich 
at  all.    The  cases,  stated  before  ao^  not  the 


result  of  a  search ;  and  the  panel's  counsel 
are  not  entitled  to  say  that  no  other  cases  can 
previously  be  found,  for  the  only  search  made 
was  since  1777. 

Upon  the  case  of  Mendham,  it  is  observed, 
that  **  in  that  case  the  panel  had  cleariy  no 
interest  to  make  the  objection,  but  quite  the 
reverse.*'  I  do  not  think  that  the  circumstance 
of  a  panel  having  no  interest  to  state  an  objec- 
tion is  at  all  a  sufficient  reason  to  exclude  a 
case  from  being  quoted  as  a  precedent,  as 
seems  to  be  assumed.  It  is  the  duty  and  the 
practice  of  the  Court  to  look  to  the  correct- 
ness of  the  proceedings  at  trials,  whether  ob- 
jections be  made  or  not :  A  strong  example  of 
which  lately  occurred  in  the  case  of  Bell  and 
Douglas,  where,  though  the  guilt  charged  was 
acknowledged,  the  indictment  was  not  allowed 
by  the  Court  to  go  to  an  assize.  Similar 
examples  of  the  discharge  of  this  duty  by  the 
Court  must  be  familiar  to  us  all. 

It  is  said,  however,  that  in  this  case  of 
Mendham,  the  panel  had  no  interest  to  state 
the  objection.  But,  we  must  not  look  to  the 
result  in  judging  of  this  interest,  but  to  the 
circumstances  in  which  he  stood  at  the  time 
for  making  the  objection.  How  could  he  know 
at  that  time  the  result  of  the  obiection  to  the 
relevancy  ?  and  until  the  Court  determined  as 
to  that,  It  was  impossible  that  he  could  know 
whether  it  was  his  interest  to  make  this  ob- 
jection. 

If  you  turn  the  page,  your  lordships  wilt 
find  a  complete  shifting  of  the  argument  of 
interest,  for,  in  the  case  of  Somerville,  it  is 
there  maintained  that  the  panel  had  no  interest 
to  state  the  objection  in  question,  although  he 
was  found  guilty  and  convicted.  He  had  an 
interest,  it  would  appear,  to  state  objections  to 
the  relevancy  of  the  libel ;  for  this  was  done 
by  some  pf  me  learned  gentlemen  on  the  other 
side  of  the  bar  who  defended  him ;  and  in 
consequence  of  the  objections  so  stated,  the 
indictment  was  abandoned,  and  a  second  in- 
dictment was  brought*  He  had,  however,  no 
interest,  according  to  the  view  of  the  case  in 
the  minute  for  the  panel,  to  object  to  the  trial 
and  punishment,  became  the  latter  <'  could  not 
exceed  imprisoiimeni  and  pillory,^  Those  re- 
sults are  not  in  general  so  coolly  anticipated ; 
but  where  did  the  learned  gentleman  who 
wrote  this  minute  find  the  law,  that  this  is  the 
utmost  extent  of  the  punishment  of  perjury  ? 
and  how  did  he  lose  sight  of  the  fact  ih  that 
particular  case,  that  the  panel  was  over  and 
above  condemned  to  what  was  perhaps  to  him 
a  still  severer  fate,  to  pay  ^150  of  damages, 
and  the  whole  expenses  of  process?  As  to 
the  expense,  he  had  only  the  ordinary  allow- 
ance bt  two,  or  at  most  three,  counsel.  Here 
there  are  a  great  many  more.  I  do  not  pre- 
tend to  enter  into  tlie  secrets  of  the  giher  side 
of  the  bar,  but  appearances,  at  least,  are 
against  the  panel  on  this  ground.  The  trial 
again,  it  is  said,  could  be  merely  put  off  for 
1^  dayei4  Now,  is  not  this  all  the  panel  asks 
for  in  the  preaeat  case  f  and  yet  we  are  told 


2531 


Jor  Adtrinistering  unUn^  Oatht, 


A.  D.  1817. 


I3ff4 


that  was  the  reason  (he  panel  had  no  interest 
to  plead  the  objection  in  the  case  of  Somer- 
Tille ;  and  on  that  occasion  it  was  said  to  be 
as  well  to  beconvicted  now  as  15  days  hence 
though  in  thik  case  the  very  idea  of  such  a 
doctrine  is  reprobated  as  quite  untenable  and 
preposterous. 

With  regard  to  the  case  of  Alexander  Camp- 
bell, it  is  saidy  "  This  is  not  a  case  applicable 
to  the  point  at  all.  There  was  no  question 
about  any  new  indictment,  and  the  circum* 
stance  of  the  public  prosecutor  passing  from 
particular  charges  in  an  indictment,  intending 
or  reserring  the  power  afterwards  to  raise  a 
new  indictment,  is  wholly  immaterial  to  tbe 
question."  I  conceiye  nothing  can  be  more 
iu  point  than  this.  What  is  law  as  to  one 
charge  in  an  indictment,  must  be  law  as  to  the 
whole.  My  statement,  I  observe,  excites  ridi- 
cule— ^but  let  it  be  answered.  I  repeat,  that 
whatever  proceeding  is  competent  for  the  pro- 
secutor as  to  one  charge  in  an  indictment, 
ninst  be  competent  as  to  the  whole  charges ; 
and  that  whatever  he  can  do  as  to  one  of 
several  diarges,  he  can  do  as  to  one  charge 
standing  alone.  It  will  be  observed,  too,  that 
this  proceeding  took  place  in  the  case  of 
Campbell  after  the  panel  had  pleaded  not 
guilty,  though  that  certainly  does  not  appear 
to  me  a  matter  of  so  much  importance,  as  it 
cannot  £ul  to  appear  to  the  learned  gentle- 
men opposite  from  their  views  of  this  point 
of  form. 

It  is  not  disputed  that  the  prosecntor  may 
afterwards  bring  another  indictment  on  a 
charge  so  abandoned. 

It  is  next  said,  with  the  customary  inaccu- 
racy, ^  But  at  any  rate  it  is  humbly  appre- 
hended, that  even  this  takes  place  only  with 
the  consent  of  the  Court,  which  is  expressed 

Sf  the  terms  of  the  interlocutor  of  relevancy  .*' 
ow,  there  was  no  consent  of  the  Court,  and 
there  neither  was  nor  could  be  any  mention  of 
it  in  the  interlocutor  of  relevancy.  The  inter- 
locator  finds  the  relevancy  of  the  libel  as 
resiricUtL  Tbe  Court  did  not  desert  any  diet, 
and  could  do  nothing  but  proceed  to  the  con- 
sideration of  what  remained  after  the  prose- 
cntor had  withdrawn  one  of  the  charges. 

Then  comes  the  case  of  John  Horn,  who  is 
also  said  to  have  had  no  interest  to  make  this 
ol>|ection«  He  had  an  interest,  however,  to 
ol]gect  to  the  relevancy  of  both  indicfments : 
At  least,  a  learned  gentleman,  Mr.  Jeffrey,'' 
most  have  thought  so,  who  was  his  counsel, 
and  made  the  ejection.  Now  I  cannot  see 
how  he  had  an  interest  in  the  one  and  not  in 
tbe  otber^  delay  being  the  object,  and  the  only 
consequence,  of  stating  either  the  objection  to 
tbe  service  or  the  objection  to  the  relevancy. 
Id  fkn.  pase  of  Horn  there  were  two  charges, 
uttering  and  selliog  forged'  notes;  both  of 
which  were  ultimately  £und  relevant,  Tbe 
panel  did  not  know  till  after  the  interlocutor 
cfi  relevancy  that  the  prosecutor  had  a^y  in- 
tention not  to  insist  on  the  first,  which  was  a 
capital  charge. 


liie  case  of  Bell  and  Douglas  we  are  tolA 
has  no  analogy  to  the  present  question,  because 
^*BeU  pleaded  gidUy  to  both  vuUctmenii  ;  and  as 
to  Douglas,  the  diet  was  deserted.'*  But  that 
cannot  remove  the  case  as  a  precedent,  for 'the 
panel  certainly  had  an  interest  to  state  the  ob^i 
jection  if  he  bad  thought  fit  to  do  so ;  nay,  he 
had  a  more  than  ordinary  interest,  having  his 
confession  of  the  first  indictment  standing  on 
the  record,  whatever  the  prejudicial  efllsct  ctf 
that  circumstance  may  be  to  a  panel.  This 
induciA  of  the  two  libels  are  proved  in  th& 
case  to  have  run  at  once. 

With  regard  to  the  case  of  Hamilton,  it  is 
said  that  there  may  have  been  only  an  intention 
to  raise  a  new  indictment,  notwithstanding 
mention  is  made  of  the  ''new  indictment 
rmteiJ'  That  will  not  do.  It  is  impossiUe 
to  construe  an  indictment  actually  raised  into 
an  intention  to  raise  an  indictment  The  re- 
mark, that  thd  informations  ''  might  have  bean 
on  the  form  of  citation,  or  on  other  points  not 
necessarily  implying  that  there  had  been  a 
plea  to  the  indictment,''  is  quite  unfounded  in 
tact.  Before  the  Jurisdiction  Act  of  George 
II.*.  informations  were  given  in  in  eveiy  c^e, 
that  being  a  form  which  could  not  be  dis- 
pensed with.  Those  informations  contained 
tbe  statement  of  foots  ux>on  which  the  panel 
chose  to  rest  his  plea  of  not  guilty,  as  well  as 
the  objections  that  occurred  to  him  in  point  of 
law  to  the  relevancy.  In  place  of  this  cum* 
brous  proceeding,  which  had  become  a  grie- 
vance and  an  obstruction  to  the  course  of 
justice,  that  excellent  law  substituted  the 
written  defences,  which,  by  a  slovenly  practice, 
are  often  neglected  to  be  lodged,  though  they 
are  in  fact  one  of  the  most  important  steps  of 
the  whole  process,  and  might,  perhaps,  super- 
sede altogether  the  unmeaning  and  embarras- 
ing  ceremony  of  entering  a  plea  before  the 
Court,  which  may  be  immediately  afterwards 
retracted  when  the  Jury  are  sworn.  The  in- 
formations were  in  fact  at  that  period  not 
merely  pleadings  on  the  relevancy,  but  also 
defences,  or  explailations  of  the  plea  of  not 
guilty ;  and  it  is,  therefore,  most  erroneous  to 
say,  that  though  informations  had  been  given 
in,  it  does  not  follow  that  ''the  panel  Aocf 
pleaded:^ 

As  to  the  case  of  Feroie,  the  minute  stated, 
''  that  it  does  not  appear  when  the  new  indict- 
ments were  raised.''  But  your  lordships  will 
see  in  the  prosecutor's  minute,  page  6,.  that  it 
was  the  very  same  date  upon  which  both  libels 
were  called,  consequently  they  must  have  been 
both  previously  raised,  and  must^have  sub- 
sisted together;  and  the  MuddB  of  the  last 
must  have  run  notwithstanding  the  existence 
of  the  first,  which  is  all  that  is  contended  for. 
The  word  "  raised "  in  this  place  plainly  in- 
cludes and  implies  "  executed,  for  tbe  diet  of 
compearance  could  not  have  arrived  unless 
this  had  been  the  case.  That  the  lord  advo- 
cate, therefore,  has  not  power  to  proceed  as  he 
■  — >__^ " 

•  •  Stat;  20  G.  2,  c.  48. 


9561 


ffl  OEOROE  Uh 


TryUqfWUUamEdgQf 


(356 


liM  doM  on  this  occasioDy  is  %  oonclntion 
whioli  cannot  be  diawn  from  this,  any  mote 
Chan  from  the  other  oases  that  have  been  men- 
tioned ;  and  tbeie  is  no  authority  whatever  for 
the  statement,  that  **  it  was  not  imasined  at 
that  time  that  he  had  any  power  to  abandon 
an  indictment  otherwise  than  by  motion  to  the 
Court.'' 

The  other  cases  in  the  minute  for  the  panel 
«ra  not  in  point ;  but  they  serre  to  shew  the 
practioSy  that  diets  may  be  deserted  pro  loco  et 
iempote  even  after  interlocutors  of  relevancy. 

Lord'AAfocate, — ^It  is  unnecessaryi  and  it 
would  be  doing  little  justice  to  the  argument, 
if  1  added  one  word  to  what  has  been  stated. 

Mr.  DruimmmtU — ^I  omitted  to  observe,  that 
the  case  of  M^Renxie,  which  Mr.  Cranstoun 
tjnoted  from  Mr.  Hume,  vol.  iiL  page  10.  seems 
to  have  been  quite  misonderstOKod.  It  ob- 
viously relates  to  a  perfiMtly  different  question 
from  any  thing  now  before  the  Court.  There 
the  prosecutor  moved  the  Court  to  desert  the 
diet  in  absence  of  the  panel,  contrary  to  the 
great  leading  principle,  that  no  oroceeding  can 
•take  place  ra  absence  except  nigitation ;  and 
the  Couft  continued  the  diet  (as  fugitation 
was  not  moved  for),  till  the  panel  should  have 
tin  opportunity  of  showing  why  he  did  not 
tittend. 

Mr.  Ckrk. — ^I  am  sorry  it  has  fallen  to  me 
lo  answer  the  other  side,  for  Mr.  Cranstoun 
bad  an  opportunity  of  considering  the  case : 
I  had  not.  I  have  but  a  general  recollection 
of  what  passed  last  day.  But  I  shall  submit 
a  lew  observations  upon  what  has  been  stated 
by  Mr.  Home  Drummond. 

If  your  lordships  think  that  the  practice  is  of 
considerable  importance  on  this  point,  I  shall 
begin  with  offering  some  remarks  upon  the 
precedents  which  luive  been  cited.    Your  lord- 

.  ships  have  heard  quoted  a  great  many  instances 
in  which  the  public  prosecutor  thought  it  in- 
cumbent on  him  to  get  quit  of  one  indictment 
before  he  directed  another  to  be  served.  You 
have  a  great  number  of  instances  of  this  prac- 
tice by  the  most  learned  persons  who  have 
filled  the  situation  of  his  majesty's  advocate ; 
and  it  seems  to  be  the  natural  and  necessary 
consequence  of  th^e  opinions  which  your 

'  lordidups  have  firom  Mr.  Hume  in  several 
different  passages  of  his  woik.  I  shall  refer 
your  lordships  to  that  practice.  It  is  one 
which  has  been  discovered  in  consequence  of 
a  very  anxious  search  into  the  records  for  more 
than  a  century.     We  have  been  told  by  Mr. . 

.  Home  Drummond  that  there  has  been  no  re« 
gular  search  into  the  records  of  Justiciary.  I 
understood  that  these  records  had  been  very 

'  anxiously  searched;  and,  whether  so  or  not, 
I  am  entitled  to  assume  that  neither  party 
can .  suppose  there  are  anjr  other  instances 
in  the  records. than  those  whidi  have  been  laid 

.  before  your  lordships.  These  are  sufficient, 
at  least  as  specimens  of  the  practice ;  and  I 
must  retain  my  private  belief,   that  whether 


he  is  or  is  not  entitled  to  say  there  has  not 
been  that  sort  of  examination  which  may  be 
properly  called  a  search,  yet  that  there  was 
such  a  search  as  to  satisfy  your  lordships  of 
the  eeneral  nature  of  the  precedents  to  be 
found  in  these  records. 

Assuming  this,  what  is  the  result?  Upon  the 
one  hand,  you  have  a  great  many  instances 
indeed  of  first  indictments  being  abandoned — 
the  diet  being  deserted — ^where  the  libel  had 
been  abandoned  by  the  public  prosecutor 
before  the  panel  had  pleaded — which  we  never 
disputed  his  title  to  do.  We  never  hinted, 
that  he  has  not  as  good  a  title  to  abandon  as 
he  has  to  raise  and  execute  an  indictment,  if 
the  panel  has  not  been  brought  into  Court,  and 
parties  have  not  joined  issue.  In  a  certain 
number  of  these  instances,  you  have  evidence 
of  the  opinions  of  the  learned  persons  who 
conducted  the  business,  that  this  is  a  proper 
and  necessary  mode  of  proceeding,  because, 
by  proceeding  in  that  way,  they  put  themselves 
to  some  more  trouble  tnan  according  to  the 
mode  now  recommended  by  my  learned  friends. 
This  is  a  practice  as  to  whidi  there  could  be 
no  contradiction,  for  it  is  admitted,  that«  what- 
ever is  right  or  wrong  in  the  present  debate, 
the  prosecutor  may  abandon  the  old,  and  raise 
a  new  indictment.  This  is  a  practice  which 
can  only  show  the  opinion  of  the  public  prosecu- 
tors — most  learned  men — and  also  their  opinion 
of  the  way  in  wliich  the  Court  consideredT these 
matters.  It  is  impossible  you  could  have  the 
judgment  of  the  Court  upon  all  of  these  points. 
What  are  the  proofs  ?  Except  in  one  case,  it 
is  not  pretended  that  the  point-  was  brought 
before  the  Court  at  all,  so  that  there  is  no 
judgment  upon  it.  And  as  to  that  case,  all 
that  was  said  was,  that  there  was  some  conver- 
sation, but  no  record  of  it — a  conversation 
between  the  learned  gentleman  and  one  of 
your  lordships.  And  though  I  attended  every 
diet  as  counsel  for  the  panel,  I  certainly  do 
not  remember  that  conversation :  and  that  is 
all  that  is  brought  forward  as  a  precedent.  It 
is  a  jest  to  say  it  is  a  precedent.  It  is  incum« 
bent  upon  you,  and  you  perform  the  duty  as 
well  as  you  can,  to  attend  to  the  regularity  of 
your  proceedings ;  but  where  the  two  parties 
are  both  keen,  zealous,  and  anxious,  all  the 
zeal  of  the  public  prosecutor  on  the  one  side 
to  obtain  justice  for  the  public — all  the  acute- 
ness  upon  the  other  side  to  state  every  thing 
for  the  defence  of  Uie  panel,  in  so  far  as  useftil 
to  him,  it  is  natural  for  you  to  take  for  granted 
that  every  thing  is  right,  if  nothing  is  menti- 
oned as  being  wrong.  Therefore,  if  an  cAjec- 
tion  be  not  ^ted  on  either  side,  and  do  sot 
appear  from  any  innpeetion  of  ^e  record,  I 
submit  to  your  lordships,  that  to  stale  a  practice 
of  this  kiiid  as  being  of  any  authority  wnat^r, 
is  one  of  the  most  violent  attadE^  upon  n  f«igu<* 
lar  system  of  law  that  I  have  ever  beard  of, 
either  in  this  Court  or  in  any  other.  I  was 
counsel  for  Somerville.  I  dare  say  I  attended 
to  his  interest  as  weU  as  I  could.  He  was 
anxious  enough,  T  dare  say,  to  escape  convic- 


J 


2571 


Jqt  Itdminutering  unlawfiil  Oaths* 


A.  D.  1817. 


[238 


Uon  of  tlie  crime  of  whidi  he  was  accused — the 
crime  of  perjtiiy.  Bat,  noiwithstandiDg  my 
situation,  I  certaioly  did  not  consider  it  of 
tbBLt  great  eminence  which  the  pablic  prose- 
cutor seems  to  think  it  was.  I  did  not  consider 
myself  as  acting  as  a  great  legislator  upon 
the  occasion.  Nor  did  Mr.  SomerviUe  on 
the  piUoiy  think  he  was  dispensing  new  law 
ftr  me  government  of  your  lordshijps.  What 
was  done  was  done  with  consent  of  SomerviUe, 
and  without  objection. 

Tour  lordships  watch  orer  the  regularity  of 
proceedings — but  if  the  panel  consent  to  any 
particular  measure,  and  your  lordships  do  not 
observe  that  it  is  irregular,  can  that  affect  the 
proceeding  in  law,  and  a  most  important  prin- 
ciple in  law  f  What  I  apply  to  the  case  of 
&)menrille  may  be  applied  to  every  one  of  the 
cases.  If  they  coula  nave  produced  one  pre- 
cedent—one case  in  which  the  panel,  consi- 
dering it  to  be  necessary  for  his  defence,  or  of 
any  use  to  him,  had  opposed  a  proceeding  of 
this  nature,  and  you  had  overruled  the  objec- 
tion, I  should  have  considered  that  precedent 
iforth  all  the  rest  upon  both  sides  of  the 

aoestion.  No  such  precedent  has  been  pro- 
uced.  And  because  perhaps  a  hundred  pan- 
els have  been  brought  to  the  bar,  and  a  few  of 
them  have  allowed  this  proceeding  without 
objecting  to  it,  possibly  without  having  an 
interest  to  state  an  objection,  'and  possibly 
without  being  aware  objections  might  be  stated, 
as  junior  counsel  are  often  for  the  panels,  they 
cannot  be  considered  as  prec^cnts.  It  may 
be  for  the  interest  of  a  panel  that  his  trial  should 
not  be  delayed ;  and  mstead  of  putting  off  the 
time  of  the  Court  with  the  objection,  and  re- 
alining  longer  in  prison,,  a  panel  may  often 
wish  his  trial  to  proceed,  where,  had  his  counsel 
oflTered  the  objection,  and  supported  it  before 
tbe  Coart  by  argument,  the  Court  would  have 
siren  it  attention,  and  seen  its  propriety  and 
mce.  But  a  panel,  by  delay,  may  also  incur 
fiirther  expense,  to  which  he  will  naturally  be 
mveise.  This  person,  Mr.  SomerviUe,  was 
not  one  of  those  mendicant  clients,  of  which 
ihexeare  numbers  in  the  Castle  at  this  mo- 
ment. He  was  ..not  in  the  situation  of  the 
panel  at  the  bair,  whose  counsel,  from  a  sense 
of  public  duty,  are  putting  him  to  no  expense 
what^rer.  t,  for  one,  am  proud  of  my  situa- 
tMm/  and  every  one  of  my  learned  friends 
entertains  the  same  feeling.  SomerviUe  was 
ppt.ta  a  great  deal  of  expense  in  the  manage- 
nent  of  his  case ;  and  how  could  it  have  served 
Mm  to  delay  his  trial  from  day  to  day  ?  It 
would  not  have  availed  biim.  There  were  Mr. 
ISiQertDn  and  myself,  and  perhaps  another 
counsel  at  the  bar  at  his  expense.  There  is 
no  doubt  it  was  his  wish  to  go  to  trial  upon 
that  day. 

Lord  Jtutiee  Clerk. -^I  see  from  my  notes 
yea  did  move  the  Court  to  allow  the  expenses 
of  preparing  for  the  defence  of  the  panel. 

Mr.  Clerk, — I  feel  great  obligation  to.  your 
)x»rdahip,  and' so  mi&st  my  client  the  panel, 

VOL.  xxxm. 


for  your  mentioning  this  circumstance.  That 
shews  there  was  great  expense  attending  that 
trial,  and  as  there  was  great  expense,  Mr. 
SomerviUe  would  naturally  be  averse  to  any 
unavailing  delay,  which  must  have  been  attend- 
ed by  additional  expense. 

At  to  the  other  cases,  it  has  been  remarked 
by  the  prosecutor,  that  we  say  it  was  for  the 
interest  of  SomerviUe  to  go  on  with  the  trial, 
although  a  conviction  foUowed ;  and  then  he 
gave  us  a  most  facetious  contrast,  indeed,  be- 
tween this  case  and  another,  in  which  it  was 
not  for  the  interest  of  the  panel  to  state  the 
objection,  because  the  libel  was  not  well  found- 
ed, and  the  panel  was  acquitted.  In  this  way, 
says  my  learned  friend,  whether  convicted  or 
acquitted,  they  find  an  interest  not  to  state  the 
objection.  I  apprehend,  such  shifts  as  this 
will  never  stand  in  your  lordships'  minds  in 
place  of  solid  argument ;  for,  in  the  course  of 
a  century,  I  think  it  is  strange  a  panel  should 
not  find  it  for  his  interest  to  wave  such  an 
objection  as  this.  Delay  is  generally  incon- 
venient, and  an  expense  to  him ;  he  has  the 
advantage  of  the  tist  of  witnesses  to  be  brought 
against  him  being  given  in  the  indictment; 
and  he  does  not  know  what  other  witnesses 
may  be  brought  forward  under  a  new  indict- 
ment ;  and  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  account 
for  the  desires  and  wishes  of  men  in  such  cir- 
cumstances. One  thing  is  certain,  that,  in  the 
consideration  and  preparation  in  all  cases  past 
and  to  come,  it  has  oeen  and  frequently  will 
be  the  desire  of  the  panel  to  go  on  without 
stating  a  dilatory  objection.  I  apprehend, 
that  in  the  present  case  you  will  not  particu- 
larly inquire  into  the  motives  of  the  panel  for 
stating  the  objection.  He  seems  to  be  in  a 
dangerous  state — ^whether  you  will  find  against 
him  or  not,  it  is  impossible  to  say ;  but  he  is 
in  a  dangerous  situation,  and  I  cannot  be 
called  upon  to  explain  the  particular  motives 
for  wishing  for  the  delay ;  and,  therefore,  I 
submit  to  your  lordships,  without  makina  more 
remarks  upon  the  particular  cases  which  have 
been  adverted  to  on  both  sides,  that  these 
proofs  which  were  pleaded  on  by  the  counsel 
for  the  Crown  are  not  such  as  should  have  the 
least  effect  in  regulating  the  law  of  the  case, 
more  particularly  as  the  proofs  are  against  the 
Crown.  i 

But,  the  principle  of  the  law  is  still  more 
against  them.  Let  us  consider  what  is  men- 
tioned by  Mr.  Cranstonn,  the  proofs  of  single 
judges  refusing  bills  of  suspension.  A  panel 
was  tried  in  an  inferior  Court,  and  subjected 
to  an  ignominious  punishment,  of  which  he 
wished  to  get  quit  altogether  or  have  it  miti- 
gated. In  numerous  cases  persons  so  accused 
presented  bills  to  this  Court,  and  they  were 
refused  by  single  judges,  some  of  them  the 
first  judges  that  ever  appeared  in  this  country. 
Lord  Braxfield  was  one  of  them,  not  to  men- 
tion other  names.  Is  it  possible  to  conceive  a 
case,  where  a  man  so  convicted  had  not  an 
interest  to  dlqect  to  a  single  judge  refusing  his 
bill  ?  It  is  impossible  to  dispute  that  the  prac- 

S 


2591 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  WiUam  Edgar 


lam 


ticewas  a^inst  the  right  principle,  and  the 
interest  was  against  the  ptactke.  Yet  when 
the  point  came  to  be  tried,  ^ou  were  of  opin- 
ion", that  the  pnttitice  mtMtt  yield  to  the  princi- 
ple of  law,  as  it  appeared  to  yoar  lordships. 

With  regard  to  the  prineiple  of  law,  a  few 
observations — It   occun  to  ne,  m  the  first 
{lAace,  that  no  attempt  can  be  more  desperaie, 
or  more  completely  nnflronded,  than  the  at- 
tempt made  by  the  Crown  counsel  to  cohvince 
yon  that  die  public  prosecutor  has  power  to 
abandon  an  Imlictment  after  a  panel  has  pleads- 
ed.    It  is  directly  in  the  teeth  of  thoie  au* 
thorities  which  we  quoted  to  your  lordships, 
coming  from  that  great  master  of  the  law  to 
whose  dktayovLt  lordships  give  great  attention. 
And  how  is  that  opposed  ?  They  camiOt  pre- 
tend to  say  that  we  have  misconstrued  this 
authority,  which  is  positive  and  express,  and 
cannot  be  explained  away.     But  they  have 
recourse  to  other  dkia  of  Mr.  Hume  as  b^g 
inconsistent  with  this^  Upon  lookiikg  to  these, 
I  have  to  express  my  astonishment  Siey  couM 
have  been  stated  as  inconsistent.    The  princi- 
pal of  them,  page  305,  first  vol.  of  Trtal  Tot 
UrimcF,  and  third  vol.  of  the  whole  work,  whete 
Mr.  Hume  reasoning  upon  another  pioitit  al- 
together, says,  *^  But  what  shall  be  said  when 
the  fact,  which  is  related  in  the  subsumption  of 
the  libel,  though  short* of  the  crime  charged  in 
the  major  propositioB,  amounts,  however,  to  a 
lower  crime  of  the  same  class;  as  in  the  case 
of  murder  atid  culpable  homicide ;  hamesucken 
and  assault;  theft  and  swindling;  notour  and 
simple  adultery;  ^and  some  others?  In  these 
circumstances,  and  on  finding  that  his  stoTy 
does  not  support  him  in  his  charge  of  thd  higher 
denomination  of  crime,  may  the  prosecutor 
nevertheless  maintain  his  process,  restricting 
his  charge  to  the  lower  species,  and  limiting 
his  conclusions  as  to  punishment  accordingly? 
This  is  an  important  question ;  and  some  di- 
versity of  opinion  there  has  b^n  among  law- 
yers about  it.    Some  have  thought  diat  there  is 
a  violation  of  that  decorum  and  propriety  so 
fit  to  be  observed  in  all  criminal  proceedings, 
if  any  '  one  shall  be  tried  on   a  libel  (the 
fundamental  writ  of  the  whole  process)  which 
esfade,  amd  taken  as  it  is  laid  before  the  Court, 
is  a  disjointed,  mis-shapen,  and  inconclusiTC 
composition ;  and  tliat  this  consideration  alone 
is  a  good  reason  why  no  such  accusation  ought 
to  be  sustained.     But  further,  say  they,  to 
shew  the  prosecutor  any  indulgence  in  this 
article,  is  attended  with  a  real  hardship  to  the 
panel,  who  prepares  for  his  defence*again8t  the 
libel  as  laid ;  and  who  knowing  that  he  is  secure 
on  the  ground  which  is  iaken  there,  will  na* 
tuially  be  less  diligent  or  solicitous  in  providing 
for  his  exculpation,  in  regard  to  any  inferidr 
degree  of  vguilt.    One,  for  instance,  who  is 
aecused  of  parricide,  and  who  knows  thbi  the 
person  he  killed 'vtas  not  Ills  fiithev^  or  who  Is 
accused  of  hamesucken,  and  knows  thai  die 
aiaauH  was  not  made  on  tbe  comphnner  at  his 
nome  }•  may  naturally  conchide  thaltMsBlnnder 
is «f  itself  aniikleBt  to  savf  his  lift;  and  will 


put  himself,  therefore,  to  less  trouble  witth  re-^ 
spect  to  those  other  pleas  of  self-defence,  gross 
provocation,  and  ^e  like,  which  might  serve 
to  exculpate  him,  or  to  alleviate  his  guilt.  If 
he  were  tried  on  an  ordin^  charge  of  bieatihjg, 
or  of  murder."    Then  he  says,  **'The  prosecu- 
tor, too,  cannot  well  say  that  he  suffers  any 
wrong  in  tfie  enforcing  of  sucSi  a  rule ;  sinee, 
fbr  o^inary,  he  has  the  means  of  being  accu* 
rately  informed  of  the  fact  before  raising  his 
libel;  and  if  be  have  any  doubt  Of  the  pkoper 
style  of  the  crime,  he  may  lay  his  chtog^  for  it 
under  all  the  seversl  denominations  wh&cli  may 
eventually  be  found  to  suit  the  case.    Nay, 
there  is  still  no  hardship,  though  he  discover 
the  weidcness  of  his  case  aft^t  the  execution 
only  of  his  indictment,  siiiee  at  any  period' 
before  remitting  it  to  at)  asance  he  may  aban)loii 
thi^  fkuUy  libd,  and  raise  another  in  more  cor- 
rect and  better  form.^  *  Does  Mr.  Hume  or  not 
cdnrecthis  own  errors,  asf' they  are  suppoted 
t6  be'  in  the  other  passage  he  had  written,  as 
to  the  power  of  the  prosecutor  to  abandon  his 
libel?  lliere  is  not  the  l^t  hint  of  it.    Tlie 
passage  quoted  by  my  client  is  that  which  must 
be  understood  as  limiting  this  general  passa^as 
to  the  power  of  the  prosecutor.'  That  he  may 
abandon  the  libel  there  is  no  doubt,  espedalqr 
before  the  indictment  is  pleaded  to;  nay,  a^et 
it,  in  a  particular  manner,  fhere  can  h4  no 
doubt ;  for  he  has  only  to  move  the  Court,  who 
will  do  so,  unless  there  be  apparent  injustice 
in  doing  so.    Mr.  Hntne  says,  fit^t,  he  may 
abandon,  and,  hi  the  second  place,  that  he  has 
it  not  absolutely  in  his  power— that  if  is  thao- 
curate  in  point  of  style  to  say  that  he  does  if 
at  ail — for  that  it  is  the  Couri  in  cases  whether 
public  or  private.  The  Court  couM  keep  him 
to  the  libel  if  nropet;  and  ^ithc^forcb  him  to 
desert  linrplkUer,  to  the  eflM  of  haying  no 
right  to  bnng  a  new  trial,  or  hold  him  to  the 
libel  already  pleaded  to.    This  is  Mi'.'Hume^s 
fair  meaning.    So  much  has  been  said'  ujpon 
this,  that  I  niall  not  trouble  you  with  any  mdi^ 
remaiks  upon  the  power  of  the  prbs^utor  iki 
desert  his  libel. '  I  may  assume,  be  has 'no 
power  without  the  authority  of  th^  Coiirt  '^He 
nas  just  the  same  power  as  h  man  in  other  in- 
stances to  do  what  is  lawfol,  but  only  in  sight 
of  the  Court.    Therefore  any  notice  from  hiin 
that  he  was  to  do  such  a  thing  might  be  very 
good  notice  that  he  was  to  move  the  Courts' 
but  could  be  nothing  ftfrther.    He  bad  powe^ 
to  give  notice  of-  that,  and  to  do  it ;  but  stiH 
it- was  only  a  notice  of  intention,  and  it  i^  hot  a 
measure  till  the  Court  interpose  for  the  pdi^. 
pose.    Ibis- is  the  sum  and  sul>stance  6f  V^kt 
can  be  extraifeted  from  Mr:  Hume  oik  tike  subj^^' 
the  authority  to  Ivhtch  youbaVe  been    '    - 
tomed  to>efer  in  all  cases.     ' 

As  to  Mt.  Bttriiret^  h^  either  is  n 
perhaps  corrects  himself  in  another 
and  be  would  ^veadmitt^)umsejiC.4i^i 
passase  was  to  be  understood  tiihmpd^$9»A. 
that  the  Court  should  consent. 

Let  us  see  where  the  rest  of  the  aiEument 


lies:    AismiiiDg  ihm  thtfpablk 


^•f  f 


^i^ 


Jot  Adminisigring  unlawful  Oaths. 


A.  D,  1817. 


[263 


no  power,  without  tbe  act  of  the  Court,  to 
•^•]|4jOQ  the  lihel  to  which  the  panel  has 
pjeaoed,  U  opous  to  me  that  a  most  ready  way 
<p  this  question  is  to  consider  the  case  of 
Charteris;  what  was  done  in  that  case;  and 
what  is  to  be  infened  from  that  case, 

Jn  the  ease  of  Chaiteris  four  indictments 
were  raised;  and  my  learned  friends  were 
B^jiytf  tp  a^KTt  (they  are  better  acquainted 
with  these  aocient  tim^  than  we)»  that  it  was 
il  that  time. a  practice  to  raise  matiy  indict- 
ments. Many  of  the  practices  of  that  period 
*a9^  better  honoured  in  Uie  breach,  thui  tbe 
obfienrancey  and  niany  of  Uiem  are  so  by  the 
preeent  Court.  Notwithstanding  this,  it  was 
said  to  be  the  practice  in  those  times  to  rais« 
a  whole  .bunch  of  indictments  at  the  same 
ti^iie.  This  was  done  in  the  <»fa  of  colond 
Charterisy  who  said  he  should  not  be  obliged 
to^  answer  to  the  whole,  fio,  but  answer  to 
t^/ope  read  in  Cour(,  and  you  may  plead  to 
^kis  lo^Mstment.  You  were  told  the  question 
was,  whether  the  prosecutor  could  insist  in 
€nir.  at  the  same  time.  I  see  no  s«ch  qaestioa. 
t(i^. .  On  the  oontraryi  it  is  stated  by  Mr. 
limmfi  that  some  9f  these  indictmenU  were 
^iQed  for  other  diets.  But,  be  this  as  it  mayy 
when  Ghaneris  wa^  told  he  had  only  to  plead 
to  this  ii»dictment,  what  did  that  force  the 
public  jwQsecutor  to  do?  Whether  he  was 
altempting  to  carry  on  four  at  the  same  time, 
or  'oDC»  is  of  no  consequence ;  for  the  Court 
ioioed  the  others  to  be  abandoned.  Why  was 
tbe  pablic  prosecutor  obliged  tQ  give  up  these 
indictments?  upon  what  ground ?  Way  was. 
ikot  be  allowed  to  go  on  with  one^  suspending 
mr  the  head  of  the  panel  all  the  others? 
why  did  not  he  say,  he  wished  this,  and  tiie 
Covui  allow  itp—the  Court  saying,  *•  only  an- 
swer one.  at  a  time,  and  no  harm  to  suspend 
the.ptheJs  over  your  head :  They  are  not  called 
Dpw,  and  may  never  be  called :  If  you  are 
ai^qjvitted^.you  cannot  be  tried  again  for  the 
same  offence :  They  are  for  the  same  offence, 
and  therefore  there  is  no^arm  in  having  these 
all  againstyQu."  The  Court  would  not  listen 
to  this.  The  proseihitor  was  obliged  to  give 
up  tbe  indictn)ents,aiid  thenCharteris  pleaded- 
iVtt  is  a  ^ir  state  of  the  case.  Now,  rohy  did 
the  Court  ol£gp  the  prosecutor  to  give  up  the 
indictments  before  tie  pleading?  Thai  is  a 
h^ipa  question ;;  and  no  answer  has  been  given 
to  it.  The  a^wer  is  given  b^  Mr.  Hume,  and 
a  jomt  aatisbctoiy  answer  it  is,  and  he  repeats 
'  itji^^  and  again  in  different  passages.  The 
r^lp^  was — oppressing  the  panel  in  the  ma- 
nagement i)f  his  defence.  The  Coprt  ought 
nj7  to  allow  that,  and  why?  Because  con- 
tmry  to  the  rules  of  justice,  which  are  para- 
mount to  aH  other  rules  in  this  CourL  We 
were  told,  that  an  act  of  parliament  is  of. 
gi;ea|«r  anthori^  than  a  law  of  practice  of  the 
Cpurt.  I  apprehend  a  judgment  of  the 
Court,  proceeaing  upon  rules  of  justice,  is 
stranesr.thai^aoX  other  precedent.  .1  am  en- 
title^ tp  jassoaae,  that  tais  was  considered  bv 
the  <Coart  as  tha  jostica  of  any  case  m  which 


more  than  one  libel  would  be  hanging  over  a 
man's  head  while  pleading.  Mr.  Cransto^n 
put  a  question,  would  it  have  be^  fcoi^peient 
tor  the  prosecutor,  after  abandoning  these,  tq 
have  served  them  over  again,  or  new  p^es  to 
the  same  effect  P  If  any  public  prosecutor  had 
dared  to  do  such  a  thing,  the  Court  would 
have  taught  him  his  duty.  If  any  public  pro- 
secutor had  been  daring  enough  so  to  tamper, 
and  attempt  to  evade  the  justice  of  the  Courts 
in  a  manner  which  would  have  been  so  grossly, 
shameful  (I  am  not  intending  to  apply  any 
strong  epithets  to  the  proceeding  before  you : 
I  think  It  is  a  mistake,  and  a  natural  one,  on 
the  part  of  my  learned  friends,  to  act  as  thepr 
have  done) :  but  in  the  case  of  Chaneri^,  it 
would  have  been  considered  a  gross  contempt 
of  the  judgment  of  tbe  Court.  What  has 
been  done  in  the  present  case  ?  It  seems  that 
a  public  prosecutor  cannot  serve  foqr  libeU  at 
once,  to  the  effect  of  bringing  a, panel  to,  trial 
upon  one.  Though  he  cannot  do  it,  he  can 
do  another  thing.  He  has  no  occasion  to  serve 
his  libels  for  the  same  time ;  but  immediately 
aiter  tbe  panel  has  pleaded  to  oney  be  may. 
serve  half  a  dozen  for  the  same  offence,  beibre 
that  libel  which  has  been  pleaded  to  has  been 
^disppsed  of  by  the  Court..  It  is  ludicrous  to 
"maintain  this.  It  is  contrary  to  all  reason 
that  could  be  applied  to  a  thing  of  the  kind. 
If  there  is  any  legal  principle  in  the  case  of 
Charteris,  this  is  impossible. 
I  apprehend  the  question  lies  here.    If  the 

f>roaecotor  was  not  entitle4  tp  serve  a  new 
ibel,  then  the  new  libel  was  not /lerved,  .for 
there  is  one  great  law  of  justice  as  of  eqiiity. 
**  Id  tantum  pot$umiu  quod  dfi  jure  pofiuutrnJ* 
If  the  public  prosecutor  had  no  right  to  serve 
that  libel,  then  you  will  consider  that  the  libel 
was  not  served)  and  that  is  my  reason  for.  in* 
sisting  at  your  lordships' bar,  thjat  the.  panel 
cannot  be  obliged  to  plead  to  that  libel.  The 
former  libel  has  not  been  deserted  to  this  mo- 
ment; you  have  not  yet  consented  to  it.  I 
am  not  going  to  Hy  anv  thing  so  insincere  as 
that  you  will  be  called  upon  to  refuse  vour 
consent,  when  proposed  on  the  motion  of  the 
public  prosecutor.  But  the  public  prosecutor 
has  taken  a  high  sution  here.  He  refuses  to 
move  your  lordships  to  desert  the  diet ;  and 
therefore  you  have  never  had  an  opportunity 
of  considering  the  point,  whether  it  should  be 
deserted  or  not.  If  the  diet  had  been  de- 
serted this  day,  before  we  began  to  state  this 
point  to  your  lordships,  there  is  another  ground 
sufficient  for  us  which  would  have  arisen.  I 
shall  not  plead  any  thing  without  an  interest. 
I  jam  entitled  to  tell  them,  the  libel  would  in 
thiat  case  have  been  considered  as  served  this 
day,  that  I  m^y  have  time  to  prepare  my  de- 
fences. I  shall  not  enlarge  upon  the  hardship 
which  might  arise  to  the  panel,  from  being 
obliged  now  to  answer  to  this  libel.  It  is 
sufficient  for  me,  that  the  practice  which  has 
been  followed  here  is  contrary  to  the  esta- 
blished practice  before  your  lordships,  and  the 
best  prosecutors  have  uniformly  deserted  libels 


263] 


£7  GEOUGE  111. 


Trial  of  IViUiam  Edgar 


Ca64 


before   serving   second   iDdictments.      There 
may  be  hardship  in  this  case,  and  thei%  might 
be  greater  in  others.    As  to  the  case  which 
was  stated  by  Mr.  Cranstoun,  of  two  libels 
depending  at  the  same  time^  and  one  of  them 
where  the  panel  was  to  be  tried  in  Edinburgh, 
and  another  at  Aberdeen,  that   proceeding 
would   be    so   harsh    and  unjust,  that  even 
leaving  mattera  to  the  discretion  of  your  lord- 
ships (which  every  sound  rule    of  jurispru- 
dence is  against,  for  the  Court  should  have  no 
discretion  as  to  such  matters),  you  would  in- 
terpose a  remedy  for  the  eviL     But  the  rule 
6f  law  is  not  more  against  such  a  proceeding 
tlian  against  the  present.    I  should  have  no 
apprehension  of  the  consequence  in  that  case ; 
for,  till  a  total  desertion  of  law  and  justice  in 
the  country,  such  a  thing  could  bot  be  admitted. 
But,  is  it  no  hardship  to  be  perplexed  with 
two  libels  at  the  same  rime }    The  question  of 
relevancy  is  attended  with  the  greatest  nicety 
and  difiiciilty,  and  has  given  counsel  a  great 
deal  of  trouble  alteady— and  is  there  no  hard- 
.ihip  in  having  to  give  as  much  consideration 
to  a  new  libel?    That  former  libel  was  at* 
tended  with  so  much  difficulty,  and  occupied 
so  much  of  the  attention  of  the  panel's  coun- 
sel, that  there  is  no  saying  what  pleas  might 
have  arisen  to  them  under  that  libel,  and  pre- 
^nted  them  fi^om  paying  attention  to  the  new 
libel.     What  if  the  connsel  in  the  former  case 
Imd   not   thought  it  incumbent  on  them  to 
support   the  panel  in  the  present  ?    What  if 
he  had  been  deserted  by  his  agents?    I  do 
>tioi  suppose  there  is  any  chance  of  that  in  this 
case ;  but  this  signifies  nothing  at  all  to  a  ge- 
neral rule,   to  which  your  lordships  should 
adhere  in  all  caaes.    There  have  been  cases  in 
which  a  man  has  beeti  defended  by  counsel 
and  agent  in  one  indictment,  who  did  not 
think  it  incumbent  npon  them  to  defend  him 
in  another.    It  wIa  said,  that  the  panel  had 
notice  a  considerable  time  ago  tliat  the  libel 
was  to  be  abandoned.    That  Hvas  an  accom- 
modation.   But  what  if  the  public  prosecutor 
had  given  no  such  notice  ?    It  was  not  incum- 
bent on  him  to  give  any  notice.    And  as  the 
panel  would  have  been  brought  to  this  bar, 
with  his  counsel  and  agents  ready  to  defend 
him  in  the  former  case,  after  bestowing  great 
attention  upon  it,  but  not  prepared  to  defend 
him  in  this  case ;  is  not  that  a  situation  which 
your  lordships  would  take  into  consideration, 
if  any  thing  depends  npon  the  possible  bard- 
ship?     The  counsel  and  agents  might  hive 
been  brought  to  your  lordships'  bar,  under  the 
impression  that  the  trial  was  to  go  on  on  the 
first  indictment.     When  they  come,  ready  to 
defend  him,  they  are  told  that  that  case  is 
not  to  be  tried.    The  prosecutor  prays  the 
Court  to  desert  the  diet  pro  loco  el  tempore^  and 
then  proceeds  npon  a  new  indictment,  of  whidi 
the  counsel  and  agents  bad  no  notice  what- 
ever.   Having  held  this  out  against  him,  he 
finds  the  whole  trouble,  research,  time,  and 
expense  of  previous  preparation,  thrown  away, 
and  that  he  must  be  ready,  upon  the  most 


summary  warning,  to  proceed  to  trial  on  ano- 
ther indictment. 

I  may  be  told,  such  a  case  can  hardly  hap* 
pen,  in  which  the  panel  can  be  deprired  (yf 
the  whole  mdueUs ;  but,  if  be  may  be  deprived  of 
even  a  part  of  the  indueia,  he  may  therebv 
lose  the  assistance  of  his  agent  ana  counsel, 
and  what  is  more,  may  be  deprived  of  the 
most  material  witnesses. 

We  are  told,  that,  in  this  indictment,  there 
is  only  an  alteration  in  a  few  words  of  the 
former.  There  is  the  very  greatest  difierence 
between  the  two  indictments;  which  is  most, 
difficult  to  defend,  it  is  not  for  me  to  say. 
The  major  proposition  is  the  same  in  both; 
but  the  minor  is  essentially  different ;  and  the 
two  require  different  sorts  of  arguments. 

Lord  Hemumd. — ^This  objection,  not  veiy 
material  at  first,  has  now  as  to  the  panel's  In- 
terest dwindled  into  nothing.  For  as  it  is  not 
pleaded  that  the  second  indictment  is  null,  so 
as  soon  as  fifteen  days  elapse  from  the  aban- 
donment by  the  prosecutor,  he  can  be  brolkg|ht 
to  trial.  But  it  is  argued  there  is  a  distinc- 
tion where  the  panel  has  pleaded,  t.  e.  uttered 
the  words ''  not  guilty,^  for  that,  it  is  said,con- 
stitates  litiscontestation.  I  doubt,  if  that  be 
a  phrase  in  criminal  law.  It  does  not  occur 
in  any  one  authority.  But  if  it  be,  it  mnst  be 
understood  as  in  cwU^m$.  •  Litiscontestation, 
however,  is  not  constituted  by  defences  nor 
by  pleading,  it  never  takes  effect  till  an  aqt  be 
extracted ;  not  an  act  and  commission  of  mo- 
dem introduction,  but  an  act  far  proof  before 
the  Court,  or  before  the  Ordinaries  on  oath* 
and  witnesses. 

On  this  analogy  the  powers  of  the  prosecu* 
tor  continue  till  a  jury  be  im);)anelled,  and  so 
was  found  in  the  case  of  Archibald,  1708. 
On  this  ground  I  cannot  agree  to  strike  out  of 
the  list  of  cases,  those  in  which  ^^  not  guilty  "^ 
has  not  been  pleaded.  On  the  other  hand,  tM 
panel's  argument  cannot  be  redargued  on 
what  is  called  list  of  cases  beyond  the  period 
of  search.  Additional  cases  are  given  in  for 
the  panel,  in  all  of  which  the  diet  had  been 
expressly  deserted;  but  precedents  enough 
remain  to  settle  the  law. 

In  1st  case,  Lawson. — Diet  deserted. 

In  2nd  case,  fiums.~No  desertion,  and  trial 
proceeded  on  second  indictment. 

In  3rd  case.  Berry. — Same  procedure. 

5.  Mendham. — Argument  that  panel  had  no 
interest  to  object;— not  understood. 

7.  Lindsay  Crawfiird. — A  serious  case,  yet 
wi^ut  desertion ;  trial  proceeded  on  second 
indictment.  It  is  argued,  that  in  none  of  tbese 
cases  was  the  objection  pleaded.  Why  ?  be* 
cause  it  was  tiot  thought  relevant :  The  whole 
bar  has  been  in  a  dream,  till  the  ingenuity  of 
the  counsel  here  discovered  what  had  been  hid 
from  their  predecessors,  though  with  all  de^ 
ference  to  them  not  their  inferiors  in  ability  i 
and  the  same  observation  equally  applies  to 
the  Court. 

Is  not  this  fiufficicnt  to  establish  a  point  of 
fonn?    In  one  case,  hovrever,  the  objeoiion 


2651 


y&r  AdmutitttritiguHittti^l  Oalhi. 


A.  D.  1817. 


(906 


was  broogbt  into  Yiew  by  myself,  Ballantine 
against  Somenrille.  My  notes  correspond  with 
Mr.  Drammond's.  An  objection  by  a  judge  is 
as  strong  as  that  by  a  counsel. 

In  10th  case,  Horn.— No  desertion,  and  trial 
proceeded  on  second  indictment.  That  second 
indictment  is  competent,  inveterate  usage 
proves. 

Lord  Giiiies, — This  objection  came  unex- 
pectedly, and  we  gave  our  opinions  imme- 
diately after  it  was  stated.  It  happens  that 
the  opinion  which  I  then  delivered  is  that  which 
I  have  formed  Sifter  all  I  have  since  heard  of 
the  case.  The  opinion  I  gave  was,  that  the 
fiist  indictment  was  not  abandoned  by  the 
service  of  the  second.  I  understood  the  plea 
stated  on  the  part  of  the  public  prdsecutor  to 
be,  that  by  serving  a  second  indictment  the 
first  vras  abandoned,  and  that  there  was  there- 
fire  no  occasion  for  deserting  the  diet.  I  think 
this  doctrine  erroneous.  I  think  the  first  in- 
dictment did  not  fall  by  the  execution  of  the 
second ;  and  the  consequence  is,  that  as  there 
are  two  indictments  subsisting  against  the  panel 
at  the  same  time,  one  of  them  must  be  dis- 
posed of  before  the  other  is  proceeded  in.  The 
service  of  the  second  indictment  does  not  ap- 
pear to  me  to  be  null,  but  the  prisoner  must  be 
entitled  to  such  delay  as  your  lordships  may 
think  reasonable,  to  prepare  for  his  trial  upon 
it. 

I  conceive  it  to  be  certain  that  the  Court 
would  think  it  a  piece  of  great  injustice,  if  the 
public  prosecutor,  after  serving  a  second  indict- 
ment, sbonld  insist  on  proceeding  with  the  first ; 
but  I  know  no  principle  or  practice  which  en- 
titles me  to  say  he  cannot  do  this.  But  whether 
he  would  be  entitled  to  go  on  with  the  first  or 
not,  the  prisoner  may  be  entitled  to  insist  that 
he  should  go  on  with  it.  What  is  the  answer 
made  to  this?  A  broad  assertion  that  the 
pablic  proseciifbr  has  entirely  the  control  over 
his  own  instance, — that  he  may  abandon  it 
whenever  be  pleases, — and  that  we  cannot  in- 
sist that  it  shall  be  prolonged  a  single  moment 
after  he  pleases.  He  has  certainly  a  control 
over  his  instance, — he  may  pass  from  his  first 
indictment, — but  what  is  the  consequence? 
The  Court  pronounces  an  interlocutor  deserting 
the  diet,  and  in  such  terms  as  they  think  proper. 
If  he  passes  firom  it  for  no  reason,  or  for  bad 
reasons,  your  lordships  may  desert  the  diet 
un^pUciUTn  You  have  the  same  power  of 
checking  him  as  any  private  prosecutor. 

The  assertion,  that  ^  his  majesty's  advocate 
possesses  an  uncontrolled  power  over  his  in- 
stance in  all  stages  of  a  criminal  process,''  if  it 
is  to  be  taken  literally,  is  directly  in  opposition 
to  the  doctrine  laid  down  in  the  case  of 
Archibald  in  1768 ;  but  if  it  merely  means  that 
he  possesses  a  power  over  his  instance,  subject 
only  to  the  control  of  the  Court,  then  it  means 
nothing  but  what  I  have  already  said,  that  al- 
tbough  the  public  prosecutor  may  withdraw  his 
instance,  yet  the  effect  of  his  doins  so  is,  that 
tile  Court  is  called  upon  to  desert  ue  diet,  but 


in  such  terms  as  they  think  proper,— ^ro  hoQ 
et  tempore^  with  right  to  him  to  insist  again ; 
or  if  the  prisoner  ^ews  that  he  acts  impro- 
perly, then  your  lordships  can  desert  it  sim- 
plicUer. 

I  must  say  generally,  that  I  am  not  in  any 
case  for  introducing  novelty  in  points  of  prac- 
tice, or  doing  any  thing  inconsistent  wim  es- 
tablished law,  by  which  a  panel  may  be  pre- 
judiced, or  which  has  a  tendency  to  increase 
the  power  of  the  public  prosecutor.  His  poweit 
in  this  country  are  far  greater  than  in  the  neigh- 
bouring kingdom — greater  perhaps  than  in  any 
other  country,  I  do  not  say  that  they  am 
greater  than  they  ought  to  be.  But  as  Uiey  are 
so  great  they  should  be  watched  by  us.  Viewing 
the  matter  in  this  light,  I  think  it  proper  to 
state,  that  the  prosecutor  having  raised  a  se- 
cond indictment,  the  Court  may,  upoh  his  mo- 
tion, desert  the  diet  pro  loco  et  tempore.  It 
remains  for  the  prisoner  to  shew,  if  he  can, 
that  the  second  indictment  has  been  raised  and 
the  first  abandoned  for  unjustifiable  purposes  ; 
and  if  he  can  make  out  this,  your  loniships  will 
desert  the  diet  umpliaier, 

I  state  these  matters  with  reference  to  general 
principle,  and  not  to  any  tiling  which  has  oo» 
currea.  For  there  is  no  plea  here  of  actual 
hardship,  and  the  panel  cannot  be  exposed 
to  any  injury  whatever  from  what  has  taken 
place. 

The  only  point  upon  which  I  gav^  no  positive 
opinion  formerly  is  now  one  of  the  pleas  of  the^ 
panel,  that  the  service  of  the  second  indictment 
IS  null  in  consequence  of  the  first  indictment 
not  having  been  deseited.  I  said  formerly  I 
did  not  think  so,  and  I  remain  of  that  opinion. 
That  opinion  is  formed  upon  considering  the 
precedents  mentioned  in  the  additional  mi-, 
nutes. 

With  reference  to  the  practice,  I  need  add 
nothing  to  what  has  been  said.  As  to  the  case 
of  Somerville,  we  are  informed  that  the  diffi- 
culty was  started ;  and  what  was  the  conse- 
quence ?  The  objection  on  being  argued  was 
overruled.  In  that  case,  after  an  indictment 
had  been  raised,  executed  and  pleaded  to,  the 
Court,  without  deserting,  proceeded  to  the  trial 
on  the  second.  I  had  the  honour  to  sit  as  a 
judge  upon  that  trial,  and  I  think  we  were 
wrong.  I  think  it  was  the  duty  of  the  Court 
to  have  disposed  of  the  first  indictment  by  in- 
terlocutor oefore  proceeding  to  trial  on  the- 
second  ;  and,  in  not  doing  so,  our  proceedings 
appear  to  me  to  have  been  erroneous.  The 
proceeding  in  the  case  of  Hamilton,  in  which 
Duncan  Forbes  "  consents  to  the  deserting  of 
the  diet  without  prejudice  to  him  to  insist  in 
the  new  indictment,**  appears  to  be  more  correct 
than  that  in  Somerville's  case.  '^  The  lord 
justice  clerk,  &c.  in  respect  of  the  above  con- 
sent, desert  the  diet  upon  this  indictment, 
witliout  prejudice  to  the  pursuer  to  insist  upon 
the  new  indictment  as  accords.*'  That  is  the 
principle  upon  which  I  proceed^  and  that  is  the 
precedent  whiich  ought  to  be  followed.  For  I 
cannot  subscribe  to  the  doctrine,  that  a  libel, 


1M9]         57  CllBORGB  UL 

diiMA  ill'  sn^y  citetitnMkixces'  iti  ^di  tcfruft  ai 
^M  Md-  addhroeate  chooses  to  dietatISi 

All-UiM  refmaHis  Us  the  qoesihm/'vvftkt'del^ir 
shall  be  given  to  the  prisoner  ?  At  present  1 
|M  ttbt^nSbii  on  tihat!; 

JkM  PiMfl^-^I  faaV^  nb  reason  tbtfaint; 
«M«^  fiom  th^  aniietf  dbplayed  by  th6 
jirtKmefer-coimscft  in  aiguing  th^  point,  that 
Iftife  cpi^stion*  rt  isftn^  is  of  anr  importance  t6 
tb^pAltem^i  but  it  is  of  importance  to  the  la"*^ 
iM  to  tb«  'pnoctice  of  this  Contt ;  and  I  trust, 
thity  aft^r  having  heard  and^read  so  miich  on 
tfi6  subject,  we  shall  be  able  to  pronounce  an 
itfttitocutor  which'  will'  set  this  matter  on  a 
|MMr  fdoting^  in  tiriie  to  come: 

Tne  atgumeeft  so  abty  stated  by  Mr.  Crans- 
CMI  is  iMTW  reduced  int6  writings  and  stands 
ufMn'thb  record  'of  the' Court ;  smd  it  appears 
16  vie.  that  in  the  radical  point  there  is  a  ma- 
tiriitliefMt  on  that  "side  of  the  bar.  It  is  said 
m  Ae  ininute  for  Ihe  prisoner,  that  it  is  Incdm- 

Kti6nt<t6  serve  ofUiglibet'wfiile  another,  by 
ving  been  pleaded  to,  is  stiS  current  agdnst 
•rpaneh  Thn  is  the  first  und  iadical  question. 
Wte  utast  first 'consider  whether  a  second  libeV 
Cttkf  fi^  served  while  a  former  is  ii)  dependence, 
9Bad  alleir  this  panel  has  pleaded  guilty  or  not 

grilty  to  fit.  Now,  upon  this  poit^t  I  maintain' 
at  there  is  no  auUiority  in  the  text-books,  or 
itt  the'plrecedetifs  of  this  Court,  for  the  propo- 
8itf6n'Udvaficed  by  Mr.  Cranstoun. 

A^diiltitlldtioii  has  iiid^ed  been  tdken  between 
di^cAseof  aprisitynet'lulvxng  pleaded  to.  the' 
fifst'iildictmeut^  and  his  not  bavng  as  yet  been 
oHUM  U)^  to-ple^ ;  and4t  is*  true  that  many ' 
of  th^  decided  cases  which  have  been  noticeo, 
reftr  only  tb'the  c^uie  of  the  panel  not  having* 
pleaded.  T^e  case  of  I^wson  in  1785 — of 
Bttms' aita'Veitch  in  it^— of  Betiy  and 
Bbb^rtMi^'aiid  CaUendar  in  1793^-of  iScott  in 
1794^-^  Lindsay  Crawfurd  and  Bradley  in 
18ft ;  tlie  older  c^ues  of  Nfcolson  in  1711,  and 
In|^lisin'l7!20,iWtBre  all  of  thenr  cases  in  which 
tUejMUt^l  had  not  pleaded  to  the  indictment; 
aUdj  in  such  cases-,  it  is  admitted  by  the  priso- 
ners^ cotkisel  in  the  Argument  which  we  have 
htofd.  that  a  se^onld  indictment  may  be 
•A*vea.' 

Bttt'ImUst-VentilTe  to  dt4te  that  there  is  in 
pribcipleno  room  for  the  tltstinction  between 
the  tase  of-  a  prisoner  having  pleaded,  and  his 
nbtlnlving  plet^ded  to  th^  indictment,  in  so  far 
a^^oocehis  the  right  of  the  public  prosecutor - 
Uf  sertea  eecond  indictment  upon  him.  If 
tlkttf  Was  room  for  this  distinction,  the  diet ' 
eiMildltever1>e  deltert^  after  the  ))riAoner  had 
pleads  to  theindictm^tit,  and'  an  tnteiiotutor 
onr  the  rele vancnr  had  1)een  pronoubced ;' — the 
prtMiler  wdoM  haVe  a  jur  qudaxtmn  in  the  pro- 
ceeding8--^he  Would  be Entitled  to  say  that  the 
CduH  bas  no  ^wet  to  desert  the  diet.  This 
pdhit  'Was  most  aUy  -argued  in '  the  case  of ' 
AjChibfldd;  in  iTdV  whibh  is  reported  in 
Irlitoirin^ 'caM;  Th^rie  wai  mucH  learning 
4ii^^ititMiargQtt(eaft;  aiid ^i&irepon of 


TrM  qfWUUtM  Sctgaf 


C3I68 


tUcf  cstke  has  ali^isted  me  iii  forming  my  opinion 
oil  the  question  now  before  us.  it  was  con- 
tended in  the  case  of  Archibald,  that  the  panel 
having  pleaded  to  thie  indictment,  and  an  in* 
terlo^utof  of  relevancy  having  been  pronounced, 
the  diet  could  not  be  deserted.  But,  in  the 
face  of  this  plea,  it  was  found  by  the  Court 
that  the  public  prosecutor  had  a  right  to  c^ 
upon  the  Court  to  desert  the  diet,  and  they  did 
desert  aticordinglv. 

llie  truth  is,  tii^t  it  is  incorrect  to  speak  of 
joining  issue  or' of  litiscontestation  in  criminal 
matters ;  the  reason  is,  that  there  is  no  room 
for'  the  contract  upo£  wbich,  in  civil  causes, 
litiscontestation  proceeds.  The  diel  may  be 
deserted  at  any  stage  of  the  procedure  until  the 
assise  is  9et,  "We  have  now^''  (says  Mr.  Hume, 
wben  treating  of  this  subject,  vol.'  ii.  p.  86.) 
"  advanced  to  that  period  of  a  criminal  process, 
when  it  assumes  a  new  shape,  and  is  in  several 
respects  lAaterially  alteredjin  its  nature  by  the 
naming  and  swearing,  or,  as  we  call  it,  tetting 
of  the  a^ize  of  fifteen  persons,  who  are  to  pass 
on  the  trial  of  the  prisokier.  In  particular,  thai 
step  is  attended  with  this  change  in  the  con- 
dition of  the  process,'  that,  the  prosecutor  no 
longer  has  it  m  his  power  for  any  reason  to 
obtain  a  desertion  of  the  diet,  but  must  let  his 
interest  take  its  fkte  with  the  libel.  Until  then, 
and  even  afte^  interlocutor  of  relevancy,  the 
prosecutor,  on  good  cause  shewn  for  it,  may 
still  be  allowed  to  desert  the  instance  pro  loco 
et  tempore^  and  save  his  right  of  insisting  anew, 
at  a  more  convenient  time  and  on  another. in* 
dictment,"  &c. 

Accordingly,  webave  a  number  of  authorities 
for  the  proposition  that  the  public  prosecutor 
may,  before  the  assize  is  set,  desert  the  diet, 
and  serve  a  second  indictment  on  the  panel. 
We  have  thewbote  cases  of  Hamilton  in  1714, 
of  Femie  in  1720;  the  case  of  Mendham  iu 
1804,  of  Somerville  in  1813;  of  .Horn  in  1813* 
and  of  Bell  and  Douglas  in  1817.  There  are 
these  six  cases  at  different  periods  in  the 
practice  of  this  Coort,  in  whi<:h  a  second 
indictment  has  been  served  before  the  first  was 
disposed  of.  It  has  been  suggested,  that 
the  Court  proceeded  incautiously  in  allow- 
ing the  second  trial  to  proceed  before  the  first 
indictment  was  disposed  of.  I  shall  speak  to 
that  point  afterwards.  At  present  I  am  con- 
sidering whether  the  second  indictment  was 
regularly  served ;  and  the  cases  now  referred 
to  are  invincible  authorities  to  show  that  a  se- 
cond indictment  may  be  served  while  a  first  is 
undisposed  of.  If  this  were  a  nullity  and  in- 
competent, is  it  possible  to  suppose  that  the 
poutt  would  haVe  allowed  the  trial  on  the  se- 
cond indictment  to  proceed?  The  cases  now 
menfioned  leave  my  mind  without  a  shadow  of 
doubt,  that  a  second  indjctmetit  for  the  same 
crime  may  be  seHed  while  a  former  one  is  not 
disposed' of  and  hsl^  been  pleaded  to. 

There  was  an  attempt  made  to  raise  an  ar- 
gument against  this  proposition,  on  the  circum- 
stance that  the  diet  cannot  be  deserted  without 
tbe  leave  of  thti  C6un  i  and  it  was  said  the 


3001 


cfiiwd  wnff  Jervsed,  he  m»  qiiil  of  ^e  .^» 


second  indictmeiit  oqght  jDOt  to  .b9  xenredy 
pending  the  first,  l)ecuse  the  indudd  are  p,yen 
to  enable  the  panel  to  prepai;e  l^s  defences^ 
and  be  cannot  prepai;e  himself  when  bj^  ijp  un- 
ceriidn  which  of  two  charges  be  is  .to  meet. 
This,  howeTer,  is  merely  an  equitable  plea 
against  going  to  trial  on  the  pai^icular  day,  and 
is  just  one  of  those  pleas  wbusb  must  be  left  to 
the  discretion  of  the  Cour^  A  panel  comes 
forward,  au<)  states  that  be  fs  harassed  by  the 
depending  of  two  indictments,  and  theriefgre  he 
moTes  the  Court  that  the  trial  should  be  de- 
layed. This  do^  i^ot  prore  tliat  the  service  of 
the  second  indictment  was  l^guUr^  and  a 
midlity ;  but  it  may  be  a  good  jea^on  for  grants 
ing  delay. 

Here,  tbeo,  I  bottom  my  opipioo.  My  fun- 
damental proposition  js,  that  a  secopd  indict- 
ment may  be  served  labile  the  first  is  not  dis- 
posed of,  apd  has  been  pleaded  to. 

The  second  link  in  the  argument  is,  that  if 
the  service  of  the  indictment  vas  r^gult^r,  then 
the  mthKut  of  fifteen  days  must  run  from  the 
date  of  thf^  service.  The  i^ucU  cannot  ran 
from  the  abandonment  or  desertiou  of  the  first 
libel.  There  is  no  period  known  to  me  from 
which  the  iwbuia  can  run  but  from  th^  period 
of  service. 

The  second  indictment,  then,  was^  regularly 
aerved.  and  the  Mudarun  fibm  that  data. 

In  the  next  proposition  a)l  are  a^r^ ed,  yiz. 
Oat  no  person  can  be  made  to  answer  upon 
more  than  one  indictn^ent  ipr  the  s^e  o0enc^. 
Tbe  question  then  comes  to  turn  upop  this 
single  pointy  Whether  ii  is  i^ecessan^  in  ooint 
of  form  for  (he  Cour^  to  desj^rt  the  diet  ot  the 
first  indictment?  or  whether  it  ^all  be  held 
as  virtually  abandoned  hy  tb^  mere  service  of 
a  second  indictment  ?  This  is  th,e  only  ques- 
tion before  the  Courtly  Whether  iippu  a  p^nel 
coming  here  uTith  twp  indictn^ents,  both  regu- 
larly served ,  is  it  necessary,  in  point  of  fprm^  to 
desert  the  first  by  an  interlocutor  of  Court ;  or 
whether  is  it  aljready  virtually  ajbandone^  ^y 
the  sctr^ice  qf  thp  secvn^  •  V»Q  i^hole  qiieir 
tkm  ^ines  to.tl^«  and  th^  opinbi^  t  givi^  up^ 
it,  after  looKii)g  to  the  precedeutSi  im  that  it  la 
more  regular,  to  desert  formally  when,  the  pond 
dwresii» 

I  am  aware  that  the  doctrine  of  virtual 
ab^n^QQxpout  ha^  be^  acted  upon  in  mai^y 
cs^.'  But  In  none  of  these  cases  was  it  exr 
plipUy  brought;  nndej^  the  notice  of  the  court, 
except  in  the  o^se  of  SomfrvjUey  apd  in  that 
c^  qp  objection  to  it  wa9  taken  by'  the  panet 
It  ibest  tberefqre,  appear  to  met  that  when  it 
is,  serio^s^y  p^ecf«4  %  a  prisoneiv  aaia  the; 
pr^ipt^i^js,  ^t  a  ^t  indictment  is  hanging^ 
over  tusbi^iiDl,  if»  should  desire  a  mimit^,  rrom 
tlMprV^Vtb^  p^^siug  fioii^th^  first  indiptm^t, 
aaJTilhavi^  p(^^9jajqce  a(gii)€f lo^itpr  deserting, 

Ajt.t^f  same  tippteU  iff  l4«W tbs^  ^  Mpel 
cm^  nojl^  svfij^r  any  ivjurj;,  from  the  vfrfm^ 
aban^oi^^'e^;  l>eca.use,tbp  proseciitor,by  exe* 
cttting  a  second,  means  to  abandon  Uie  first. 
Tbe  panel,  too,  knew,  that  the  moment  a  se- 


Knowinff  thi^,  he  was.ftee  ipofi^  a^  Pdrplapi^ 
arising  ttom  «  double  -plfwi*  TttAvetoiw  4m 
is  a  great  deal  of  ^q^y  m  i^e  dflct^li^  tkii 
the  first  indicUnent'nuls]^  jiirs,  by  the  serving 
of  asecond  for iha  saaie  £iioi/9»  ^44 1 iwtA 
not  be  for  altering  this  piFtatios  ^ban  4|it. 
pan/el  makes  no  plyection.  ^i  when  the  -paiMA 
comes  and  states  tha^  tl^ere  is  a  fint  indleu 
ment  hanging  over  him,  and  dMias  i^  ^lOiM 
be  given  up.  ti)e  Court  should  deela^e  k  f|a«> 
serted,  and  taen  the  pigiel  should  go  t*  ttfM 
on  the  seeopd  indictment.  The  rospik  isi  tfipl 
the  trial  proceeds  upon  the  veiy  day  to  whWi 
the  wducta  ran.  On  Moodajr  last  me  hfA  W9tf 
thin|  to  do  in  this  case  but  to  declpjw  thai  ^ 
first  indictm^t  was  at  an  end ;  aad  iho  aacvo^* 
being  regular,  and  the  imfueU  bavnig  nm,  im 
miglu  have  proceeded  to  the  trial,  wr  wgh* 
have  given  a  delay  if  asked  for,  and  igpon  oaait. 
shewn  for  the  indulgencs. 

Lord  BestoJt.-r-The  judges  who  Iw^wm^ 
before  me  have  anticipated  the  gvounds  or  ai|r 
opinion.    I  am  not  ashamed  to  C9ilflM  4lil  I 
have  altered  mj  opiaion..  There  aaa  |v^  qtaa^ 
tions  to  be  decid»d.    One  iM,  wh^lhiF  utt  «!•> 
entitled  to  take  into  consideration  Iha  lacosid 
indictment  till  the  first  is  express](y  abiMloQra4» 
And  the  second  is  whether  the  samea  of  tte. 
second  is  to  be  ooasideced  a  serviea.  at  mM^  aft. 
the  first  vfaa  not  expressly  abaadooed.    I  ott»f 
fes^  ihat  on  tbe  last  day.  I  was  of  opinio*  ilM 
both  thfese  points  should  be  decided  iq  fiavoo^. 
of  the  paneV— that  the  authority  of  A^CowMt 
^aa  necessai^ — and  that  the  fonnar  aernM^ 
befon^  authority  was  obiatned  to  th»  ab^iwhwr 
ing  the  first  indictment  w^  uot  a  mod  OM. 
But,  uppn  considering  thesulMect  furthefv  I 
think  I  was  wrong,  in  p^  m  tAl|t  opiuPB^  l 
think  the  prosecutos  h^  np  right  to  ppsp-  fiMpik 
his  libel,  to  the  affect  U  making  m  4oiind«r«  a. 
n^yr  one,  without  the  authoritjy  of  tiia  Copat 
Aft^r  a  firijt  iqdktmei^  ha^  baan  pltadiidi  tp^ 
tha  authf^nty  of  t)i%  Couj^  4uHi)d  htthtA  fo^it8L 
abandonm^tf 

Th^.  more!  ifipo^^t  qu^atioi^    MMaiae^ 
whetherthq.  ^arnce  o^  thf.  a^Mpd*.  diwwgv 
the  pendancy  of  the  firat»  is  a  nnUUy  on  n 
good  serace.    I  aia  quite  cUari.  ifom  the. 
precedepu;  wbioh  nm  bean  s|at^  h(jp  mjp- 
brethrep,   thai   th^  pr^^  ser^aa  ia  %  g^odi 
service.    The  papers.  cppuMl  ha(va^  adaaitted^ 
th%t  il  the  pan^l  had  iHMl^pi^adady  this  saffi— »., 
wasa^goodsemcew    Now,.  I  cimh)o(  aaawbai^' 
differaoce  can  tie  mi^  bjf  hif-  ptDiHNlMiiiP' 
the  w^s  '*  Ndt  Guilty.''    If  litisqoalsatMtiAiii 
were  to  gq  ip^<^  accouj^  itwpal^  b^.tbft  jnai* 
pgp^Uing  4lf  the.  jury  wfaafh^WMa  to.cqnstllPllP: 
lU"  Before,  the  jury.  is.  swons  aA4>  altar  ikm 
pai\^  has  plea4o4  not,  guitty,  aU.objaotiPMi 
are  op^nt^  him,  i^it  niuei^y.pi?UmPtX7.obi. 
jectiops.  tQcitati99»&p«:  h^-mai^  state  Qhjao*. 
tiom,  to  thf  releiran^,  of  the  libel*    0«  tb«> 
other  hand,  the  pros^jcntor  is,  npti  precloded: 
from  getting  the  diet  deserted  fro^looo^ePHitht- 
pqre,  any  moir^thamiC  D04)lfadu«h«A>lriM' 


971T      ^  GEORGE  lU. 

place.  The  legal  induda  mu^it  ruo  /rom  the 
aervice  of  the  second  iDdictment.  But  the 
Omrt  will  never  refuse  any  equitable  delay 
which  may  be  asked  by  the  panel. 

LordJvrtieeClerk, — I  concur  in  opinion  with  all 
of  your  lordships,  that  when  objections  are  taken 
imd  answered  in  the  anxious  manner  adopted 
in  the  present  case,  with  regard  to  a  matter  of 
form  and  practice  in  our  procedure,  we  ought 
to  take  every  means  of  information,  and  decide 
with  deliberation ;  and  so  far  from  regretting 
the  time  which  has  been  spent  in  this  discus- 
sion, I  have  to  express  my  satisfaction,  that 
on  the  former  occasion  we  adopted  the  course 
which  was  followed  of  ordering  a  search  into 
the  practice  of  the  Court.  But,  now  that  we 
have  the  result  of  that  search  before  us,  we 
sire  called  upon  to  say,  whether  the  public 
prosecutor,  having,  during  the  dependence  of 
an  indictment  which  has  been  pleaded  to,  and 
upon   the    releyancy.  of  which  Informations 

.  w«re  ordered,  executed  a  new  indictment,  is 
entitled  to  proceed  upon  it  against  the  panel. 
I  concur  with  my  learned  brother  on  my  right 
hand,  that  this  is  the  fundamental  and  preli- 
minary question,  and  that'  upon  it  it  is  neces- 
sary to  form  our   opinions  m  deciding  this 

'  case.  But  after  the  very  clear  and  luminous 
statement  from  the  learned  judge  to  whom  I 
allude,  I  should  be  guilty  of  undue  encroach- 
ment upon  your  lordships*  time  if  I  were  to 
enter  into  a  detail  of  the  grounds  of  my  opi- 
nion as  to  that  preliminary  objection.  I  shall 
only  say  in  one  word,  therefore,  that  upon  a 
careful  consideration  of  tlie  argument  upon  the 

finciple  and  train  of  practice  now  before  us, 
have  formed  a  clear,  and  will  venture  to  say, 
ui  unalterable  opinion,  that  there  is  nothing 
in  the  law  or  practice  of  this  Court  to  prevent 
.  a  public  prosecutor  from  serving  a  second  in- 
dictment during  the  dependence  of  a  prior 
one ;  and  that  when  the  legal  period  of  inducia 
granted  by  custom  to  a  panel  has  expired,  the 
prosecutor  may  proceed  upon  that  indictment. 
As  to  what  he  is  to  do  upon  the  second,  that 
is  a  different  question.  But  as  to  Uie  power 
of  serving  a  second  indictment  in  such  circum- 
stances, I  do  not  entertain  a  shadow  of  doubt. 
It  seems  completely  conceded  by  the  learned 
counsel  for  the  prisoner,  that  such  has  been 
the  practice,  and  a  practice  to  which  no  objec- 
tion can  be  stated,  where  a  panel  has  not 
pleaded  to  an  indictment.  It  appears,  how- 
ever to  me,  that  the  moment  that  concession 
is  granted,  there  is  nothing  to  hinder  a  second 
indictment  being  served  in  all  cases.  For  we 
are  brought  to  very  narrow  ground  indeed,  if 
the  whole  objection  be,  that  the  first  indict- 
ment has  been  read  and  pleaded  to ;  as,  after 
the  most  careful  attention  to  the  distinction 
t^en,  I  can  find  no  authority  whatever  for  it 
in  law.  I  am  of  the  opinion  already  delivered 
to  your'  lordships;  that  there  is  no  foundation 
for  assimilating  what  is  called  litiscontestation 
in  this  case,  to  what  occurs  in  civil  cases. 
That  point',  as  far  as  it  could  apply,  was  ar- 


Trial  of  WilHam  Edgar 


[272 


gued,  and  in  reality  decided  against  the  panel,, 
in  the  case  of  Archibald.  Your  lordships  see, 
from  the  report  in  Maclaurin,  that  the  Court 
had  every  thing  before  them  that  could  be 
urged  as  to  litiscontestation  precluding  the  de- 
sertion of  diet,  and  the  service  of  another  in- 
dictment ;  but  the  decision  there  went  in  fact 
on  the  ground  that  there  was  no  litiscontesta- 
tion in  the  sense  in  which  it  occurs  in  civil 
cases ;  and,  at  all  events,  that  it  could  only 
take  place  where  an  indictment  has  been  re- 
mitted to  the  knowledge  of  an  assize.  If,  there- 
fore, the  public  prosecutor  may  raise  a  second 
indictment,  and  proceed  upon  it  at  the  end  of 
the  mducMf  it  removes  the  only  difficulty 
which  occurs  in  this  case,  and  the  only  solid ' 
argument  stated  in  support  of  the  objection. 
For  I  am  clear  that  no  prejudice  could  arise 
to  the  panel  by  the  procedure  objected  to. 

There  is  one  view  of  this  subject  to  which  I 
beg  your  lordships'  attention.  Suppose  the 
iniicis  of  a  new  indictment  raised  in  this  case 
had  run  to  the  20th  of  May,  the  diet  of  the 
former  having  been  continued  till  the  19th,  it 
is  perfectly  clear,  that  if  there  had  been  no 
meeting  of  Court  on  the  latter  day,  the  instance 
on  the  former  indictment  would  have  been  ex- 
tinguished, and  no  proceeding  could  have  taken 
place  upon  it,  ana  nothing  would  have  been 
required  to  be  entered  upon  your  lordships^ 
record.  On  the  20th  of  May,  however,  his 
majesty's  advocate  would  be  entitled  to  move 
the  Court  to  take  up  the  indictment,  the  in- 
ducig  of  which  had  run,  and  the  diet  must  of 
course  have  been  called.  Now,  could  it  have 
been  said  there  was  any  thing  of  the  na» 
ture  of  litiscontestation,  or  that  the  panel  had 
a  jitt  gtuesUum  which  could  have  required  the 
interference  of  your  lordships  ?  There  is  no 
authority  fbr  requiring  it  to  be  shown  that  the 
instance  has  been  extinguished,  and  therefore 
to  that  extent  the  public  prosecutor  must  be 
held  to  have  abandoned  his  charge  without 
the  necessit)^  of  applying  to  your  lordships. 
Your  lordships  neither  have  nor  would  have 
given  the  slightest  impediment  to  that  pro- 
ceeding, but  must  have  taken  up  the  second 
indictment,  and  have  held  that  with  regard  to 
the  former  indictment  there  was  an  end  of  the 
case. 

Bat  it  was  said,  where  the  diets  happen  to 
fall  on  the  same  day  the  case  is  altered,  and 
your  lordships  are  called  upon  to  adopt  a  pro- 
ceeding which  the  panel  says  may  be  favour- 
able to  him.  If  any  ground  were  to  be  made 
out  for  supposing  that  a  panel  could  be  re« 
p^arded  as  standing  in  the  situation  Charteris 
IS  said  to  have  been  placed  ya^  then  your  lord- 
ships by  your  authority  would  afford  a  remedy 
for  any  such  hardship.  If  you  saw  the  public 
prosecutor  (which  I  cannot  suppose  possible) 
attemptinj^  to.  harass  a  .  panel  by  raising 
against  him  a  number  of  indictments  in  sue* 
cession,  and  leaving  him  doubtful  upon  which 
he  was  to  be  tried, — or  take  the  supposition  of 
several  new  ones  being  raised  after  nis  plead- 
ing to  the  first,  you  would  exe'rcise  that  power 


2731 


Jin  AditMUXermg  untaK/kl  Oatht, 


A.  D.  J8t7. 


1274 


irith  ^hich  you  are  entriisted  for  Che  good  of 
the  coantry,  and  afford  immediatci  relief.  But 
ify  on  the  other  hand,  yoor  lordships  hold,  as  I 
doy  that  after  service  of  a  second  indictment, 
both  being  regular,  the  {mblic  prosecator  has 
thereby  declared,  that  it  is  upon  the  second,  and 
that  alone,  he  means  to  proceed,  and  is  not 
entitled  afterwards  to  turn  round  and  say  he 
"Will  go  back  to  the  first,  there  is  not  only  no 
iojoiy  which  can  arise  to.  the  accused,  but  he 
has  a  greater  advantage  than  he  oonld  have 
vpon  the  rule  of  law  he  now  contends  for,  of 
both  indictments  being  held  to  subsist,  and 
tiMft  your  lordships  should  interfere  to  hare  the 
•desertion  of  the  nrst  recorded. 

The  case  of  Charteris,  I  think,  has  not  been 
looked  to  with  so  narrow  an  eye  as  is  proper. 
It  appears  from  Mr.  Hume,  that  Charteris  liad 
lour  indictments  served  upon  him,  and  that  he 
put  in  a  printed  petition  stating  the  hardship 
of  hSs  case,  before  he  was  brought  into  Court 
for  trial,  praying  for  the  authority  of  the  Court 
to  »ll  upon  the  lord  advocate  to  declare 
what  was  the  course  he  meant  to  follow,  and 
upon  which  indictment  he  meant  to  allege  the 
coilt  of  the  prisoner.  The  answer  was  made 
by  the  public  prosecutor  as  to  the  one  upon 
which  he  meant  to  rest,  and  it  was  after  that 
tbat  the  trial  proceeded,*  and  the  Court  de- 
clared the  others  abandoned.  The  diet  of 
jBone  of  them  appeals  to  have  arrived.  But  if 
any  such  proceeding  as  this  was  to  be  attempt- 
edy  your  lordships  would  reauire  no  statute,  no 
recourse  to  books,  but  only  the  dictates  of 
your  own  consciences  to  know  what  you  should 
do,  as  I  have  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  in  my 
mind,  that  a  public  prosecutor  is  not  entitled 
to  vacillate  between  his  different  charges, 
but  tbat  the  service  of  a  second  must  preclude 
him  from  going  back  to  his  first. 

With  regard  to  the  practice,  I  am  bound  to 
say  with  your  lordshipis,  that  when  it  is  looked 
narrowly  into,  it  does  not  appear  to  me  to  rest 
upon  so  clear  and  indisputable  a  basis  as  that 
it  would  be  right  for  your  lordships  to  adopt 
it  at  once  as  the  rule  of  the  Court.    It  was  a 
fair  observation,  that  in  some  cases  a  panel 
might  wish  to  wave  this  or  oiher  objections ; 
and  in  the  case  of  Somerville  I  see  an  obvious 
ground  upon  which  he  wished  to  go  to  trial ; 
as  the  second*  indictment  being  cleared  of  the 
objection  stated  to  the  first,  he  had.  no  object 
to  ask  for  fifteen  days  more.    He  had  no  pal* 
pable  or  tangible  interest  in  vieyi^,  his  witnesses 
being  present,  and  he  might  have  suffered  pre- 
judice if  delay  had  taken  place.    Mr.  Clerk 
said  he  would  have  moved  for  delay  on  ac- 
count of  the  absence  of  four  witnesses  at  the 
first  trial,  but  they  were  present  at  the  last. 
He  mowedf  however,  for  what  wis  a  siv>jftan- 
tiat  interest;  namely,  the  expenses  of  the  first 
indictment,  but  did  not  notice  the  prcjprietjp 
of  doing  away  with  it  on  the  record  i    and 
there  was  an  opinion  c^ven,  that  the  question 
of  expenses  should  be  delayed  till  the  issue  of 
.the  second  trial.    I  am  clear,  therefore,  there 
'was  no  interest  in  that  case  to  insist  upon  the 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


objection,  which  would  have  merely  led  to  a 
fortnight's  delay.  This  same  consideration 
may  apply  to  other  cases,  and  it  is  better  to 
follow  the  straight  forward  course,  without 
eu tangling  ourselves  with  former  doubtful  cases 
not  precisely  in  point. 

Having  formed  a  clear  opinion^  that  there  is 
no  principle,  authority,  or  dictum,  to  induce 
us  to  think  that  tlie  inducus  had  not  run .  from 
the  period  of  service,  merely  from  the  circum- 
stance of  the  two  diets  having  occurred  on  the 
same  day ;  I  am  for  following  that  course  as 
to  which  we  have  so  clear  an  example  in  the 
conduct  of  a  lawyer  of  tlie  first  eminence,  I 
mean  Mr.  Duncan  Forbes,  who  expressly  con- 
sented that  the  diet  should  be  deserted  with- 
out prejudice  to  his  right  to  insist  on  the  new 
indictment  which  he  had  raised.  - 

Although  I  have  a  clear  opinion  that  the 
(nducUs  here  run  from  the  date  of  service,  in 
this  and  in  every  other  case,  if  a  person  accus- 
ed should  state  to  the  Court  reasonable  grounds 
for  delay,  I  would  attend  to  them.  I  am  now 
only  giving  my  opinion  upon  the  law. 

The  Court  then  paoMouvcEo  the  fol- 
lowing INTERLOCUTOa  : — 

**  The  Lord  Justice  Clerk  and  Lords- 
Commissioners  of  Justicary  having  resum* 
ed  consideration  of  the  objection  stated  in 
bar  of  trial  at  last  sederunt,  with  the  an- 
swer thereto,  minutes  of  search  as  to  the 
practice  in  similar  cases  given  in  in 
obedience  to  the  order  of  Court,  and 
heard  parties  procurators  further:  Find 
that  the  service  of  the  second  indictment 
during  the  currency  of  the  first  indictment 
was  competent ;  but  in  respect  that  his 
majesty's  advocate  has  judicially  declared 
that  he  has  abandoned  the  Hrst  indictment, 
desert  the  diet  of  that  indictment  without 
prejudice  to  the  Prosecutor  insisting 
against  the  panel  on  the  second  indict- 
ment as  accords :  Find  that  the  service  of 
the  second  indictment  upon  the  panel  on 
the  third  day  of  May  current,  being  fifteen 
free  days  before  the  day  of  compearance, 
gave  him  the  benefit  of  the .  legal  inducia 
and  •  therefore  repel  the  objection  on  that 
plea,  and  ordain  the  panel  to  plead  to  the 
second  indictment." 

(Signed)    **D.  Boyle,!  P.  D.'» 

Lard  Justice  Clerk. — William  £dgar,  are  yea 
guilty  or  not  guilty  ? 

William  Edgar, — Not  guilty. 

Mr.  C2^.— I  hope  you  will  permit  me  to 
say,  that  ^o  much  of  our  time  and  attention 
having  beei/  already  occupied,  it  would  be 
extremely  hard  upon  us  to  proceed  now  to 
argue  the  relevancy,  upon  which  we  have  a 
great  ,many  consid[erations  to  offer.  I  need 
not  suggest  a  particular  time  for  your  lordships, 
I  do  iiot  think  it  would  be  proper  to .  attempt 
any  encroachment  upon  your  lordships.  I  think 
you  cannot  go  on  with  the  trial  before  Monday 
next. 

T 


57  GEORGE  UI. 


C751 

*<The  Lord  Jiiitice  Qerk  and  Lords 

Commissioners  of  Justiciary  contmufs 
the  diet  against  William  £affar>  panel* 
till  Monday  next  at  ten  o*clodk  forenoon 
in  this  place,  and  ordain  paities,  witnesses, 
and  assizers,  and  all  cgncemed^  then  to 
attend>  each  under  the  pains  of  law,  and 


frMffAndrmM^Onl^ 


(876 


the  panel  in  the  vi^  tiig^  te  be  tul^ 
from  the  ba^  l)%c|(>  tp  the  C9>4e  of  **  *' 
hurgh." 


[See  tbf  lifgfX  €99^] 


700.  Proceedings  in  the  High  Court  of  Justici^y  »t  Edinburgh, 
on  two  successive  Indictments,  raised  by  hi3  Mso^ty'a 
Advocate,  against  Andrew  M*Kinley,  for  administer- 
ing unlawful  Oaths,  June  9nd — July  19th :  57  Geo.  IIL 
A.D.  1817.* 


COURT  OF  JUSTICIARY. 
JuHE  2y  1817. 

Rt  Hon.  DaM  Boyle,  Lord  Justice  Cleric. 
Lord  Hermand, 
Lord  GUUa. 
Lord  Pi(m%. 
Lord  RuUm, 

Omnfeljarikfi  Crtmm. 

Rt  Hon.  Alexander  Maamockk  of  Meadow- 
banky  His  Majesty*s  Advoeate  f  afterwards  a 
lord  of  Session  and  Justiciaiyy  with  the  title 
of  Lord  MeadowVank.J 

James  Wedderhum^  Esq.  Solicitor-General. 

If .  flome  DnawNonrf,  Esq.  Advooate-Depute. 

Comtelfor  the  Pwnd. 

John  Clerk,  Esq. 
Geo.  Cnautotm^  Esq. 
Tho,  T^kNRKm,  Esq. 
Frandt  Jefrev,  Esq. 
J.  P.  Grants  Esq. 
J.  A,  Murray^  Esq. 
Jomef  Momrieff',  Esq. 
Hemy  CoMum^  Esq. 

Lurd  A4voaUe. — Before  your  lordsbips  call 
this  diet,  I  have  to  state  to  the  Court,  that,  upon 
the  90th  of  March  last,  the  panel  was  served 
with  an  indictment  to  stand  trial  upon  the  5th 
9i  April.  To  that  indictment  he  was  never 
caUea  upon  to  plead,  and  a  new  libel  was 
afterwaras  raised  against  him,  the  diet  of  which 
weas  continued  on  different  oc^^ions. 

The  first  of  these  indictments  I  have  aban- 
doned ;  and  though,  according  to  my  own  un- 
derstanding of  the  import  of  the  precedents 
xrhich  have  been  laid  before  the  Court  in  the 
case  of  Edgar,  f  there  is  no  occasion  ibr  enter- 
ing this  on  therecord/yeti^have  no  objec- 
tions to  this  being  done,  if  it  be  desired. 


i«M«* 


*  See  the  preceding  case. 
t.See  the  preceding  casb. 


Lord  JutHce  Clerh^Y<mr  lordships  wi)l  just 
make  a  simiUr  order  here  to  that  m^e  in  t|e 
case  of  Edgair. 

The  (bUowtng  entry  was  thai  naade 
npon  the  record : — 

**  The  Lord  Justioe  Clerfc  and  Loidi 
Commissioners  of  Jnstieiary,  in  respect  of 
ndiat  is  above  represented,  desert  the  diet 
of  the  first  ittdictment  against  the  said 
Andrew  M^Kinky,  reserving  to  his  M»> 
jest's  Advocate  to  insist  upon  the  saooad 
indictment,  as  accords." 

loftf  Juitice  Cferfc.^Andrew  M^Klnlejr, 
attend  to  the  indictment  against  you  wluch  » 
now  to  be  read. 

''Andrew  M'Kinley,  present  prisoner 
in  the  Castle  of  Edinbnrgh,  yon  are 
indicted  and  accused,  at  the  instance  of 
Alexander  Maconochie  of  Meadowbank  his 
imesty*s  advocate,  for  his  miyesty's  in- 
.  terest :  That  albeit,  by  an  act  passed  in 
the  flfty-eecond  year  of  his  present  ma- 
jesty's reign,  intituled,  'An  act  to  render 
more  effectual  an  act  passed  in  the 
thirty-seventh  year  of  his  present  majesty, 
for  preventing  the  administering  or  takiiy 
unlawful  oaths,'  it  is  inter  oIm  enacted, 
''That  every  person  who  shall,  in  any  man- 
ner or  form  whatsoever,  administer,  or 
GSEUse  to  be  administered,  or  be  aiding  or 
assisting  at  the  administering  of  an  oath 
or  engagement,  purporting  or  intoiding 
to  bind  the  person  taking  the  saqie  to 
commit  any  treason  or  murder,  or  any 
felony  punishable  by  law  with  deatl^ 
shall,  on  conviction  thereof  by  due  course 
of  law,  be  adjudged  guilty  of  felony,  and 
suffer  death  as  a  felon,  withoot  benefit  of 
clergy.  And  further,  by  section  fonrth 
of  the  said  act,  it  is  enacted,  'Tha)i  persona 
aiding  and  assisting  at  the  administering  of 
any  such  oath  or  engagement,  as  aiforesaid, 
or  persons  causing  any  such  oath  or  evir 
gagement  to  be  admitilstered,  though  not 

S resent  at  the  adminiitering  UiereoC  MfjL 
e  deemed  principal  offmdto,  and  shall 


«7TJ 


fat  Admhuimkg  mUantfii  Oathi. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[aro 


be  tited  Itttbch;  ijo^, on oonviiSfioB  there- 
of hj  due  ctmrM  of  bw,  sMt  be  adjudged 
gailfJrtfffetony.aAd  sball  suffer  death  as 
nrioos^  wii^otii  btfoefit  of  deifr ;  altlioagb 
Ui#  penond  or  person  who  actually  admi- 
nitteted  snch  oath  or  engagement,  if  any 
sueh  there  shall  be,  shall  not  have  been 
triftd  Of  convicted."     And  further,  by 
AUkm  afatth  of  the  said  act,  it  is  enacted, 
''That    any    engagement  or    obligation 
^atsoever,  in  the  nature  of  an  oath, 
prnpordng  or  intending  to  bind  the  per- 
aoD   tsA(iog   the  same    to  commit   any 
Unnaon  or  murder,  or  any  fblony  punish- 
able by  Unr  with  death,  shall  be  ^med 
an  oath  wilhia  the  intent  and  meaning  of 
thin  acc^   in  wbaterev  fdrm  or  manner 
the  name  shall  be  administered  or  taken^ 
and  whether  tie  same  shall  be  actually 
administered    by    any  person  or  per- 
sons to  any  other  person  or  persons,  or 
tsften  by  any  other  person  or  persons, 
witbovt   any  adniiuistratlon  thereof  hj 
any  other  person  or  penkms:"    Yti  trite  tt 
y/wd  rf  veriijfg  that  yon  the  said  Andrew 
mUalay  are  guilty  of  the  said  crimes, 
^cr  of  one  or  more  of  thtth,  abtof,  ot  art 
Iftd  pari :  In  so  pae  as  l^f  the  said 
Aniitw  M'Kinley  did,  at  sacret  meetings, 
and  on  other  occasions^  at  Gla9g6W,  and 
in  ttw  Tidni^  thereof  in  the  course  of 
Ike  momlis  of  November  and  December, 
1816y  mtid  January  and  Pebtuaiy,  1817, 
wkkedly,  maliciously,  and  traitorously  ad- 
ttiilister,  or  cause  to  be  administers,  or 
did  aid  or  assiit  at  the  administering,  to  a 
peac  mmiber  of  pet«ons>  to  the  amount 
of  anwiftii'  hmfdt«chl^  an  daCh  or  engage- 
or  asi  o^igatibn  in  the  nature  c^  an 
r,  binding,  or  purporting  of  intending 
bJM,  the  persons  taking  the  same  to 
it  ttfeaMofty  whieh  oath,  engagement, 
or  oblikatiofi,  wa#  in  the  flowing  tetms, 
or  to  ue  following  purport : — **  in  awful 
pieseoce  of  God,  I^  A  B^  do  voluntarily 
swear,  that  I  will  persevere  in  my  en- 
deavonring   to  form   a   brotherhood  of 
affection  amongst  Britons  of  every  de- 
•emtiom,  who  are' considered  worthy  of 
oonftdence ;  and  that  I  will  pelsevere  in 
niy  endnavoms  to  obtalft  Ibr  all  tfav  peo^ 
pla  in  GMaft>  Britain  and  Ireland^  not  dis- 
mmliflwl  bjr  citmes  or  ineanvty;  tbede6> 
live  franchao^  at  th^  age  of  twenty-one. 
wf dr  frew-  nnd^  •e^fiad  rspiesentalion^  and 
annual  parliaments ;  and  that  I  will  sup- 
port ifan  sane  to  the  utmost  of  my  p6Wer, 
eilfaer  by  moial  or  physical  strength,  as 
^t»  one  BM^r^niret  And  I-  do  unrther 
swear,  that  neither  hopes,  fears^  rewards, 
or  pnniriMDonts^  shall  indnoe  me  to^  in^ 
aMU'  on^  Of '  giw-  evidenoa''  s^gatns^"  anjp 
member  or  neabers,  colleotivdy  or  indi- 
vtiadl^,  §af  any  act  or  eapteision.  done 
m'Wtmf  m  ^er  o«t^  in  this' or  simtiar  so* 
eiaiidis;  ^Buim  dv  punishuiettt  of  deaths 
to  be  iniicted^oviiNrby  anymenberor 


members  of  such  sodeties.    Slo  help  me 
God,  and  keep  me   stedfast:" — ^Wbich 
oath,  or  engagement,  or  obiication,  to  the 
fcv^gning  puroort,  did  bind,  or  did  pnr- 
piprt  or  intend  to  bind,  the  persons  taaing 
the  same  to  commit  treason,  by  effecting, 
by  pb^ical  force,  the  subversion  of  the 
estfliblisbed  government,  laws,  and  consti- 
tution of  this  kingdom,  and  especially  by 
obtaining  annual  partiaments  and  univer- 
sal suffrage  by  unlawful  and  violent  means. 
Aim,  MoaE  PAHTiGULABLT,  (1 .)  at  a  se- 
cret meetins  held  at  the  hoase  of  Hugh 
Dickson,   then  weaver   in  Abercromby 
sti^eet,  or  CaHon  of  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere 
at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate  vicinity 
thereof,  you  the  said  Andrew  M'KJnley 
did,  upon  die  SOth  di^  of  December, 
18t6,  or  upon  one  or  other  cf  die  days  of 
tlAt  month,  or  of  November  immediately 
nreceding,  or   of  January  imuMdiately 
following,  wickedly,  maliciously,  and  trai- 
torously administer,  or  Cadsif  to  ha  admi- 
nistered, or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  admi- 
nistering an  oalh,  or  engagemenfti  of  ob- 
ligation, in  the  teims  abo^  set  AMi,  or 
to  the  same  purport,  to  Petek*  Oibton. 
John  M^Lanehlane,  John  Cam||ieU,  and 
Hugh  Dickson,  all  present  prisoners  in 
the  Castle  of  Editfbnrgfa,  or  to  one  or 
other  of  them,  and  to   other  persons, 
whoee  names  are  to  the  prosecutor  un- 
known, the  said  oath,  or  eng^^ement,  or 
obligation,  to  the  said  purport,  binding 
the  persons  taking  the  lame  to  commit 
treason,  as  said  is.    Awn,  FuaTRsa,  (2.) 
yon  the  said  Andrew  M^Kinley  did^  Upon 
the  1st  day  of  Januarv,  1817,  or  on 'one 
or  other  or  the  dajrs  of  that  month,  or  of 
November  ov^DccemberinMiediaiely  pre- 
ceding, at  a  seeret  meotingvMd  in  the 
house  of  Williamr  Leggat,  <4umga4ceiper. 
King  street,  Tradestown,  in  the*  vicinity 
of  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or 
in  the  vicinity  thereof,  wickedly,'  ma- 
licio^y,  and  traitorously  admimMr^  or 
oanle  to  be  administerea,'  or  did  aid  or 
assist  at  the  administering^  an-  oath  or 
engagement,  or  obligation,  in  the^  tdrms 
above  set  ftnth,  or  to  the  same  purport, 
to  the  said  Peter  Gibeon^  John  M'LaUch- 
lane,  John  Campbell,  and  Hugh  Dick- 
son ;  as  also,  to  James*  M*£wan^  n&m  or 
lately  carding-master  at*  Humphrie's  'Mill, 
Gorbals  of  Glasgow,  and  M'Dowall  Bate, 
or  Peat,  now  or  totely  weaver  ih  Piccadilly 
street,  Anderstoa,  in  the  vicinity  of  Glas- 
gow, who,  conscious  of  their  guHt  inr  the 
premises,  have  al»ooaded  and  fled  from 
justice;  as  also^  to  John  Conneltoh^  or 
Congleton,  now  or  lately  cotton^inner 
in  Calton  of  Gtesgow,  or  to  one  or  other 
of  them,  and  to  other  persons^  whose 
nataes  are  to  the  prosecutor  unknown,  the 
said  oath,  or  engagement,  or  obligation, 
to  the  said  purport,  binding  the  persons 
taking  the  inme  to  commit  tieasoni-as'    ' ' 


a793 


57  GEOROE  III. 


2'rial  qfjijidrew  M^KiviUy 


[28a 


ii.  -  And,  fuathek,  (3.)  you.  the  said 
Andrew  M^Kialey  did,  upon  the  4th  day 
of  January y  1817,  or  on  one  or  other  of 
the  days  of  that  month,  or  of  November 
or  December  immediately  preceding,  at  a 
secret  meeting,  held  in  the  house  of  Neill 
Munn,  innkeeper  and  stabler,  in  Ingram 
street,  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow, 
or  in  the  vicinity  thereof,  wickedly,  mali- 
ciously^  and  traitorously  administer,  or 
cause  to  ,be  administered,  or  did  aid  or 
assist  at  the  administering,  an  oath,  or 
engagement,  or  obligation,  in  the  terms 
above  set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport, 
to  the  said  Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lauch- 
lane,    John    Campbell,    Hugh   Dickson, 
M*Dowall    Pate,    or    Peat,    and  James 
M'Ewan ;  as  also,  to  James  Hood  and  \ 
John  Keith,  both  present  prisoners  in  the  ' 
Castle  of  Edinburgh,  Andrew  Soraerville,  I 
John  Buchanan,  and  James  Robertson,  I 
all  now  or  lately  prisoners  in  the  tol-  ; 
booth  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one  or  other  of 
them,  and  to  other  persons  whose  names 
are  to  the  prosecutor  unknown,  the  said 
oath,  or  engagement,  or  obligation,  to  the 
said   purport,   bii^ding    the   persons  so 
taking  the  same  to  commit  treason,  as 
said  IS.     And,  fubtheii,  you  the  said 
Andrew  M'Kinley  did,  upon  the  5th  day 
of  February,  1817,  or  on  one  or  other  of 
the  days  of  that  month,  or  of  January  im- 
mediately preceding,  at  a  secret  meeting, 
held  at  the   house  of  John  Robertson, 
innkeeper  apd  stabler  ia  Gallowgate  of 
Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or  in  '• 
the  immediate  vicinity  thereof,  wickedly,  • 
maliciously,  and  traitorously  administer,  | 
or  cause  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid  , 
or  asnst  at  the  administering,  an  oath,  or  ! 
eagagementy  or  obligation,  in  the  terms  ' 
above  set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport,  to  ' 
the  said  James  Hood,  James  Robertson,  < 
Andrew  Sommerville,  and  John  Buchanan, 
as  also  to  James  Finlayson,  present  pri- 
soDer  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  or  to 
one  or  other  of  tbem,  and  to  other  persons, 
whose  names  are  to  the  prosecutor  un- 
known, .  the  said  oath,  or  engagement,  or 
obligation,  to  the  same  purport,  binding 
<he  persons  taking  the  same  to  commit 
treason,  as  said  is.  '  And  you  the  said 
Andrew  M'Kinley  having  been  present 
at  a  secret  meeting,  held  for  the  purpose 
of  administering,  or  causing  to  be  aa mi- 
nistered, the  said  oath  or  engagement,  or 
other  purposes  to  the  prosecutor  unknown, 
at  the  house  of  Alexander  Hunter,  change- 
keeper  in  the  Old  Wynd  of.Glasgow,  on 
the  22nd  day  of  February,  .1817,  and 
having  been  there  apprehended,  conscious 
of  your  guilt  in  the  premises,  did  assume 
the  ialsename  of  John  Brotherstone;  and 
httving  been  taken  before  Robert  Hamil- 
ton, Esquire,  Sheriff-depute  of  Lanark* 
shire,  you  did,  in  bis  presence  at  Glas- 
gow, oo  the  28th  day  of  February,  1817, 


and  on  the  11th  day  of  Maicb^  1817, 
emit  and  subscribe  two  several  declara^ 
tions;  and  having  been  taken  before 
Daniel  Hamilton,  Esquire,  one  of  the 
Sheriffs^ubstitute  of  Lanarkshire,  you 
did,  in  his  presence,  at  Glasgow,  on  the 
4th  day  of  March,  1817,  emit  and  sub- 
scribe a  declaration ;  and  having  been 
taken  before  Hu^h  Kerr,  Esquire,  one  of 
the  Sherifis-substitute  of  Lanarkshire,  you 
did,  in  his  presence,  at  Glasgow,  on  the 
5th  day  of  March,  1817,  emit  and  sub- 
scribe a  declaration;  and  having  been 
taken  before  James  Wilson,  Esquire, 
Sheriffs-substitute  of  the  county  of  Edin- 
burgh, you  did,  in  his  presence,  at  Edin- 
burgh, on  the  18th  day  of  March,  1817, 
emit  and  subscribe  a  declaration; — all 
which  declarations, being  to  be  used  in  evi- 
dence against  you  at  your  trial,  will  for  that 
Surpose,  be  lodged  in  due  time  in  the 
ands  of  the  Clerk* of  the  High  Court  of 
Justiciary,  before  which  you  are  to  be 
tried,  that  you  may  have  an  opportunity 
of  seeinff  the  same.  At  least,  times  and 
plapes  K>resaid,  the  said  oath  or  engage* 
ment,  or  an  oath  or  engagement  to  the 
same  purport,  binding,  or  purporting  to 
bind,  the  person  taking  the  same  to  com- 
mit treason,  as  said  is,  was  wickedly,  ma^ 
liciously,  and  traitorously  administered, 
or  caused  to  be  administered,  and  some 
person  or  persons  did  aid  or  assist  at  the 
administenng  thereof;  and  you  the  said 
Andrew  M'Kinley  are  guilty  thereof, 
actor,  or  art  and  part.  AU  whi<^  or 
part  thereof,  being  found  proven  by  the 
verdict  of  an  assise,  before  the  Loid  Jus- 
tice Genera],  the  Lord  Justice  Qerk,  and 
Lords  Commissioners,  of  Justiciary,  yon 
the  said  Andrew  M^Kinley  ought  to  be 
punished  with  the  JMuos  of  law,  to  deter 
others  from  cpmroitting  the  like  crimes  in 
all  time  coming. 

<<H.  Home  Drvmmokd,  A.  D." 

LIST  OF  WITNESSES.  * 

1.  Robert  HamUton^  Esquire,  sheriff-depute 

of  Lanarkshire* 

2.  Daniel    Hamilton^   Esquire,  one    of   the 

sheriffs-substitute  of  Lajiarkshire. 

3.  Hugh  Kerr,  Esquire,  one  of  the  sberiffii- 

substitute  of  Lanarkshire. 

4.  Jamei  THomptonf  clerk  to  John  Drysdale, 

sheriff-clerk  of  Lanarkshire. 

5.  .Matthew  Btarm^  clerk  to  Geoiige  Salmond, 

procurator-fiscal  of  Lanarkshire. 

6.  Jvhn  Letlky  clerk  to  the  said  John  Drya- 

dale. 
7*  Joteph  Body  writen  in  Glasgow. 
.  8.  Qeargjt  Salmondj  procurator-fiscal  of  La- 
narkshire. 
9.  Jamei  WiUon^  Esquire,  one  of  the  sberiffiH 
substitute  6f  the  county  of  Ediobnigb. 
10.  Archibald  Scottf  procurator-fiscal  of   tbe 
county  of  Edinburgh. 


Sfil] 


>- 


Oatht. 


A.  D.  IJB17. 


^99 


OirrtB^  writer^  Sheriff-clerk's  office, 
Edmbofffh. 
13.  .AfeMDHier  CaUpr,  sheriffofficer  in  Glas* 
gow. 

13.  Aluawler  Hmter^    dnnge-keeper,    Old 

Wynd  of  Glasgow. 

14.  Mmiom  I^Laren^  or  iii^Laddan^  now  or 

lately  serfant  to  the  said  Alexander 
Hunter. 

15.  Ji^M  Rohertton^  inn-keeper  and  stabler,GaU 

lowgate  Glasgow. 

16.  Ag'it$  Cam^Mly   wife  of  Thomas  Dow, 

steam-boiler  maker  and  smith  at  Gird- 
wood  and  Company's  found yy  in  Hu^cfa- 
esontown,  in  the  ?lcinity  of  Glasgow. 

IT.  Jimet  MaUtmlf  now  or  lately  sertant  to 
Neill  Munn,  innkeeper  and  stabler  in 
Jngram-streety  Glasgow. 

18.  AUton  Wikon^  now  or  lately  servant  to  the 
said  Neill  Munn. 

10.  Matthew  Fsfe,  spirit-dealer  in  Wilson- 
stieet,  Glasgow. 

20.  Jem  IBcjfd,  wiie  of  the  said  Matthew  Fyfe. 

31,  WiUiam  jLc^jgof,  change-keeper,  in  King- 
street,  comer  of  Centre-street,  Trades* 
ton,  in  the  .vicinity  of  Glasgow. 

S2.  John  MiteheUy  weaver,  residing  in  Wilkie*s 
Land,  Charles-street,  Calton  of  Glasgow. 

23.  AwA  Dichonf  present  prisoner  in   the 

Castle  of  Edinburgh. 

24.  F^gter  Qibwn^  present  prisoner  there. 

25.  John  AVIjacklime,  present  prisoner  there. 

26.  WUUam  Sm^mnif  present  prisoner  there. 

27.  John  CamfMl^  present  prisoner  there. 

28.  Jmma  Bioodf  present  prisoner  there. 

H.  HoM£  Drvmmokd,  a.  D. 

LIST  OF   ASSIZE. 

ComUif  nf  Edmburgh, 

Dmid  Grmf  of  Snipe. 
Jolm  Thammm  of  Bumhonse. 
Oturgi  J^rty^  grocer  in  Dalkeith. 
J^ictaiW  Mmchti^  merchant  there. 
JflMS  Mmit€r,  farmer,  Longside. 
Jmmt  VUiUe^  farmer,  Easter  Cowden. 
DaM  T/kwiatm,  farmer^  Wester  Cowden. 

County  of  Haddington. 

John  Andanon  of  Whitheugh. 
Tkoma$  Mitchell  of  Westburn  Mains. 
Charie$  Crawford^  farmer.  East  Fortune. 
Mark  TwmbuU,  fanner.  Upper  Bolton. 
Jmmee  WUeon^  farmer,  Bolton. 


Qnmty  of  Lmlithgow, 

WUUam  Wiihe  of  Magdalens. 
WiUiam  ShUUngjUno  of  Boghead. 
Andrew  MUcheUy  farmer  at  Kinneil  Kene. 
John  ftats^  farmer  at  Borrowstown. 
John  Thornton^  farmer  at  Inveravon. 

CUy  of  Edknbargh. 

Bkhard  Johmton^  banker  in  Edinburgh. 
Jame$  M^Kenzie^  goldsmith  there. 
Behert  Gfrean,  watchmaker  there. 
JloUrt  jS<^i<(pr,4ye^utter  there. 
William  NeilioHi  painter  there. 


I  Jomsf  Ynle^  baker  there. 
Andreio  Grtenon,  tailor  there. 
Patrick  Mainy  painter  there. 
John  Laudery  merchant  there. 
Samuel  HopperUmy  grocer  there. 
John  Brcwriy  merchant  there. 
Robert  Mitchell^  merchant  there. 
William  Lodchart,  tinsmith  there. 
John  Sinclair^  seed-merchant  there. 
William  Scott,  pewterer  there. 
Alexander  Johntton^  ironmonger  there. 
George  Gray,  baker  there. 
ThomoM  Edmonttoney  ironmonger  there. 
WUUam  Mttrray,  baker  there« 
John  Smith,  spirit-dealer  there. 
Thomas  Hunter,  merchant  there. 

ToumqfLeith. 

John  Sharp,  wine-merchant  in  Leith. 

Archibald  ipDowaU,  merchant  there. 

Jamei  Ojfihie,  wine-merchant  there. 

Robert  Strachan,  merchant  there. 
I  Robert  Sandermm,  cooper  there, 
i  Robert  Brunton,  mercnant  there. 

John  Colder,  grocer  there. 

D.  BOTLB. 

An.  GiLLiss.  ' 

_  '  •    « 

Gbo.  FBEOtJSMiir^ 

Lord  Juitice  Clerk. -- Andrew  M'Kinlef,; 
What  do  you  say  to  this  indictment  ?  Are  yotf 
guilty  or  not  guilty. 

Andrew  3iPKinley. — Not  guilty. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — Have  counsel  any  ob- 
jections to  state  to  the  relevancy  of  this  indict-' 
meot  ? 

Mr  CrMSloim. — ^My  lords,  it  will  be  in  the 
recollection  of  vour  lordships,  that  a  person  of 
the  name  of  William  Edgar*  ^am  lately  in»* 
dieted  at  your  bar,  upon  a  charge  pf  having  ad- 
ministered oaths  binding  the  takers  lo« commit 
treason,  against  the  statute  of  the  52^  of.  the 
king.  He  pleaded  not  guilty,  and  various  ob- 
jections were  stated  to  the  relevancy  of  ^he 
indictment.  Your  lordships  heard  a  debate 
upon  the  subject,  and  you  appointed  informal 
tions  to  be  given  in.  But  the  public  prosecutor 
deserted  the  diet  of  that  indictment,  and  served 
him  with  a  new  one. 

The  prisoner,  Andrew  M*Kinley,now  at  your 
bar,^  had  been  indicted  in  terms  precisely  the 
same  vrith  Edgar.  That  indictment  has  also 
been  withdrawn,  and  a  new  one  served,  which 
you  have  now  before  you. 

Your  lordships  will  recollect,  that  among  the 
objections  stated  to  the  relevancy  of  Edgar*s 
indictment,  it  was  pleaded,  that  it  involved  a 
charge  of  treason,  and  therefore  was  not  cog- 
nizable in  this  form  ;-^first,  became  the  .charge 
of  treason  was  not'Uud.in  the  major  proposition 
•f  the  indi<;tment ;  and,v  again,  because  your 
lordships,  proceeding  according  to  the  Spotnh 
form  of  trial>  could  not  try  that  offence- without 
the  intervention  of  a  grand  juiy,  and  without 


1 


*  Sea  the  preof^ding  case. 


J 


t8»j 


17 


III. 


tntd  ^Andrim  M*iaU^. 


Dm* 


aUowing  the  priMoer  a  pmlnplorjr  diidll»Ei|^ 
of  the  arrayyand  odl«r  privileges  cempe^etit  by 
the  law  of  England  to  persons  vwler  trial  ft>r 
hidb  treason. 

The  indictment  iR^idh  your  lordships  have 
just  heard  read  is  tfi  terms  somewhat  different 
from  that  in  Edgar's  case  which  has  been  with- 
drawn ;  and,  it  is  for  your  lordships  now  to 
consider,  whether  there  are  any  objections  that 
can  be  competently  stated  to  the  relevancy  of 
the  present  indictment ;  or  rather,  I  should  say, 
whether  any  one  objection  that  could  be  com- 
petently Ststed  to  the  lest  indictment,  may  not 
also  be  stated  here. 

Before  I  proceed  to  tftate  what  I  conceive  fo 
be  various  objections  to  the  relevancy  of  this 
indictment,  I  must  take  the  liberty  to  make 
one  preliminary  observation.  It  is  this — ^tbat, 
in  all  criminal  cases,  where  there  is  room  for 
construction,  every  thing  must  be  strictly  inter- 
preted in  fkvour  of  the  acciisedi  and  against 
the  prosecutor.  I  cannot  make  this  observation 
without  at  once  con^manding  the  assent  of  every 
body,  for  this  has  always  been  recognised  as  a 
sacred  principle  of  law;  but  if  we  look  at  many 
trials  at  fcnner  periods,  both  in  our  own  and 
in  the  neighbouriag  country,  we  shall  find,  that 
viMte  tids  maxim  was  admitted  in  words,  it  was 
denied  in  substaii<;et  and  fiiuered  away  by  dis- 
^nctioBs  and  refinements  that  rendered  it  ni>- 
gatory,  and  at  other  times  while  admitted  in 
Ukeory  in  its  full  extent,  it  was  overiooked  and 
forgotten  in  practice.  It  resembles  those 
truths,  in  morels,  which  we  repeat  till  they 
ceaae  to  have  any  influence  on  our  conduct. 
Ibe  uncertainty  of  human  life,  for  instance,  is 
always  in  our  mouths,  and  we  act  as  if  we  had 
a  grant  of  K!b  for  a  century.  Thus  there  are 
maxims  in  law  which  become  so  fomiliar,  that 
they,  lose  all  their  effect 

Permit  me,  therefore,  not  onlv  to  recal  the 
maxim  to  your  recoUeotion,  but  forgive  me,  if, 
in  a  few  words,  I  enforce  it.  Because  it  ap- 
pears trivial,  therefore  I  wish  to  insist  upon  it. 

The  foundation  of  this  maxim  is  obvious. 
X^en  in  the  dispensation  of  commutative  jus- 
tice, where  there  is  a  conflict  between  the  patri- 
monial interests  of  individuals,  you  know,  that, 
in  commoil  law,  some  cases  receive  a  libeml, 
and  others  a  strict  interpretation.  In  some 
cases  you  control  the  words  of  a  writing  by 
equity ;  and  in  others  you  take  it  according  to 
flk^  strict'  letter,  though  contra^  to  the  pre- 
sumed intention  of  parties.  Why  are  these 
different  rules  of  mterpretation  adopted? 
Merely  because  one  plea  is  fovourable  and 
another  the  reverse ;  because  one,  for  example, 
hifors  an  inconvenient  restriction  on  commerce, 
or  the  use  of  property,  or  one  party  is  Imra 
eapianeb^  while  the  other  is^tn  min»  vUumtb: 
On  such  slight  grounds,  3F0tt  hotd'youvsclve* 
entitled' to  apply  the  one  mode  of  eonstrudiotf 
or  tiie  other. 

If  that  be  the  eaee  in  civil  matters,  muoh  moie 
must  it  be  in  those  uibntalv  whope  jostloe^is 
called  upon  not  to  wield  the  balance  but  the 
swofd.   Tiieiv,  there'  is^^  w>  cottflict  or  oppo" 


sitlott  between  the  inlMit  oi  iltt  pM«Ees  U 
the  bar.  If  it  is  for  the  advantage  of  the 
prhwaer  that  there  should  be  a  striet  fcrterpi^*. 
tationin  all  cases,  it  is  ten  times  mora  for  the 
itaterest  of  the  puUic  proeieutor,  ev  valier  of 
the  community  which  he  ftpresemts.  The  ob- 
ject of  punishment  is  losi^t  becomes  ^hl;^ 
pemielous  if  inflicted  when  a  mend  poasibility 
of  innocence  remains,  either  because  the  charge 
is  ambiguously  expressed,  or  Ae  efvideine  hi 
support  of  it  is  inconclusive.  It  is  a  sacred 
rale,  that  every  one  avenue  shoidd  be  left  opitf 
to  which  innocence  may  have  oceasien  to  re- 
sort, thoujrti  by  it  guilt  may  bu  enabled  to 
escape.  &emmdmii0ti9hi§jufttAioketefttam 
per  tii^urmn  comiemmare ett  imieim ;  mmmUU 
error,  m  kocjbcmm. 

Accordingly,  from  the  first  dawn  of  juris- 
prudence, it  will  be  found  in  every  eriBsinal 
code.  It  forms  part  of  the  15>5ih  lam  of  the 
title  de  EeguHi  JuriM.  Inpoentdihm  imm  &e^ 
nignka  mterpreUmdum — a  treatise  Whidi,  I  will 
venture  to  say,  is  the  greaeest  body  oil  oott^ 
eentrated  wisdom  on  the  sal^edt  of  jarispm* 
denee  to  be  found  in  any  uninspisei  work. 

This  role  extends  to  the  l»w  or  statute  on 
which  an  accusatioa  is  laid—- to  the  iodietueiit 
on  which  the  triid  proceed»*-to  the  evidence 
led  against  the  prisoaer-^lO'  the  veedict  rt^ 
turned— and,  above  all,  if  tbo  corpaf  ddkH 
consists  in  the  u^ring  of  words,  it  extends  to 
the  construction  of  those  words. 

This  principle  of  constnictiotft  has  been  ao- 
Icnowleoged  ^;ain  and  agaiuby  tbelegiriaturei 
more  particulariv  in  the  law  of  treason,  whid^ 
you  are  now  called  upon  to  administer;  or,  at 
least,  which  bears  directljr  upon  the  indict^ 
ment,  the  relevancy  of  wmcb  you  are  now  to 
try.  You  know  mere  was  an  act  passed  in 
England  in  the  reign  of  EttabeUi  against 
clipping  or  defacing  Uie  coin.  It  is  the  5th  ol 
Elizabeth,  cap.  11,  which  prohibita  die  opo* 
rations  of  clipping,  4vashm^,  rounding^  or 
filing.  But  that  sutute  was  found  not  to. 
apply  to  any  other  mode  of  lessening  the  valnn. 
of  the  coin,  though  precisely  the  same  ii| 
effect;  and,  acco^in^y,  the  statute  of  the 
18th  of  Elizabeth,  cap.  1,  waa  made  against 
impairing,  diminishing,  fal8iiVin|,  scaling^ 
ano  lightening,  and  it  was  made  on  this  re^ 
markable  preamble  .w<»  Because  the  said  law,'* 
(5th  Elisabeth)  *^^ing  penal,  ought  to  bo- 
taken  and  expounded  strictly  according:  to  Uio 
words  thereof  and  the  like  offences,  not  by 
an^  equity  to  receive  the  like  punishment  or 
pains.''  Here  then  is  a  declaration  of  the 
legislature  itself,  in  a  statute  relative  to  high 
treasQtt^  enplaaiing  the  manner  in  iddth  soeh^ 
statutes  oughe  to  be^  construed. 

I  mav  likewise  call  your  attention  to  wMe^ 
the  author,  fros^whom  I.have  borrowed  this 
remark,  has  said  upon  the  construction  of 
penal  8lMMcs«  Sir  Wiffllam  Blnchstanoobl 
serves,  ^  Penal  stamtes-  senst  to  conslined- 
strictly.  Thus  the  statute^  1^  £di«sad>  VE  e^ 
13.  having  enacted  tfan*  tbosu  "^Ato-  k»  oofr> 
victed  of  stealing  ibr«is*'8lit(iUl^n9r  bnee^tiia 


f»T  AiftKMtUfing  unhnefiil  Ooiht. 


28|Sl 

benefit  of  clergy,  tl^e  jttdfes  conceived  that 
Ihia  did  not  extend  to  him  that  diould  ^eai  bnt 
one  kone,  and  the.rMof ft  piocttred  a  new  act 
fipjr  thai  parpofl#  in  tfce  following  yeac.  And, 
to  come  nearer  onr  own  times,  by  tbe  statale 
14  Geo.  II.  c.  6.,  stealing  sheep,  or  other  caUie, 
was  m«de  felony  vriilioQt  benefit  of  clergy. 
Bat  theso  general  words,  "  or  other  caule," 
heii^  looked  npon  as  much  too  loose  to  create 
^  capital  offence,  the  act  was  held  to  extend 
to  nothing  bnt  mere  sheep.  And,  therefore, 
in  the  next  sessions,  it  was  found  necessary  to 
O^ake  another  statute  15  Geo.  11.  c.  84.,  ex- 
tending the  former  to  halls,  cows,  oxen,  steers, 
buUocks,  heifers,  calves,  and  lambs,  by  nane/^ 

Thos,  yonr  lordships  will  observe,  that  even 
idpeie  words  wMBeiently  impropriate  in  th^r 
oidiiiaiy  sense  were  e^^>loyed,  yet  if  it  was 
poMible  to  take  the  offender  out  of  the  opersr 
tm  of  the  sftataHi  by  any  com^rnction  however 
rigorous,  that  construction,  though  not  con* 
spstent  with  the  probable,  I  may  say  the  mani- 
C^t  intention  of  the  legislature,  vfu  allowed. 
(cannot  five  a  more  striking  instance  of  the 
application  of  the  rule  which  I  am  endeaTOur- 
ng  to  enforce^  than,  this  which  is  borrowed 
from  tl^  law  of  England.  I  shall  afterwards 
caU  yoor  attention  to  some  detecminations  in 
OBI  own  law  to  the  same  eflSset. 

In  the  present  inMnce  it  if  obvious,  that 
the  application  of  the  principle  of  strict  con* 
atniction  is  imperatively  reqwed«  JFrs/,  be- 
cm«  this  is  a  p^oal  case ;  Searndfy^  because 
It  is  a  case  where  the  highest  penalty  of  the 
lav  may  be  inflicted;  TMfy,  becmie  the 
«vime  charged  consists  in  th«  use  of  words, 
npm  the  constmctioa  of  which  the  prisoner's 
fittedepends;  an4, i4^%, heeauie thoM words 
are  staled  to  have  been  used  not  by  a  peiaoti 
veil  educated,  and  critically  acijuainted  with 
IsogoagSb  but  by  one  who  is  m  the  kmest 
mtmt^m  of  lifie,  anc|  who  must  be  nres«med 
to  oe  totally  ignorant  of  the  force  ana  delkacy 
jQf  tenni. 

Having  n^e  these  obeervalionii,  let  m<)  caU 
jfour  attcp^on  to  the  m^or  pioposition  of  thiy 
ipdictn^en^  It  set«  forth,  that,  ''by  an  act 
passed  m  t|ie  fiflj-second  year  of  his  present 
pagjesty^  leig^  entithid,  '  Aa  act  to  render 
a^ore  e»BeUiai  an  act  passed  in  the  thistyr 
sev^th  year  of  his  prep^t  majesty,  lor  pv«* 
venting  the  administering  or  takina  unlawful 
.qmhs,'  it  is  inter  alia,  eaffctedy  *  'bat  eveqr 
person  whp  shall,  in  any  manner  or  form  whalp 
aoever^  administer,  or  caupe  to  be  adminialered^ 
OKbeai^ng  or.asiH%tiag  at  ^  administeiiQg 
Of  ano^.or  engag^iDenty  purporting  or  i»* 
lepcljipg  to  bi^  the  pcffson  tfiOng  tha  san^e  to 
coiDBAi^  miy  tmao|)  oj  mn^ei)  o^  any  feloagr 
pvt^ble  by  Utw  witli  dtsJh^  sha)l^  o»  cqu^ 
^o(m  thereof  by  d»e  o^mse  of  Uw,,  be.adr 
jirfged  guilty  o|^^,^  aiM  jwflSk  deiAj  m  a 
fdp^i,  vttW  benffh  And  then 

*T7. ^^  ^^  HPti<w  pf  tha.  ernes mk 
vhtch U.ia  unnep^asa^  for  me  |o  rMl. 


A.  D.  1917. 


tm 


•l  Cqm^9»i 


rwtm 


With  regard  to  this  proposition,  I  am  ready 
to  admit,  that,  in  point  or  form,  it  is  correct,) 
by  founding  on  and  quoting  the  words  of  the 
statute  on  which  the  accusation  is  laid.  It 
does  not  appear  to  me,  that  there  is  much 
room  for  interpretation  here.  If  there  be  xooMt 
for  any,  it  i«  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  words 
«  purporting  and  intending,'*  that  is,  whether 
the  legislature  means  the  intention  of  the  party 
administering  or  taking  the  oath,  or  the  in- 
tendment of  the  oath  itself.  I  apprehend  it 
must  be  clear  to  you,  without  my  saying  any 
thinff  upon  the  subject,  that  the  import  of  the 
word  **  intending,  is,  that  it  must  be  an  oath, 
the  intendment  of  which  is  to  bind  to  the  com» 
mission  of  the  crime,  and  that  it  is  of  no  con- 
sequence whether  the  person  who  administeia 
had  criminal  intentions  or  not,  provided  tlm 
intendment  of  the  oath  is  not  criminaL  If 
there  be  an  ambiguity  in  the  use  of  the  term* 
the  prisoner  must  have  his  choice  in  which 
sense  it  ^aU  be  taken.  But  there  is  no  api* 
biguity.  It  could  not  have  been  the  meaning; 
of  the  legislature  to  punish  the  secret  inteun 
turns  of  a  person  administering  such  an  oath; 
for  unless  that  intention  had  been  communi- 
cated,  the  offence  in  contemplation,  i^amdy, 
the  imposition  of  the  unlawful  ohiigfitioqy 
could  not  have  been  committed.  If  the  wocda 
of  the  oath  do  not  express  the  unlawful  ohli-* 
gatioa,  no  person  could  conceive  that  it.  wai^ 
undertaken;  and  if  it  was  not  undertakeiH.  i^ 
capital  punishment  could  not  be  meatnt  to  be 
inflicted  on  the  penon  who  intended  to  ad?T 
minister,  but  who  did  not  administer,  .an  eat|^ 
of  that  import. 

On  this  subject^  I  may  coutentmysel41^ 
recalling  to  your  reooUection  Mr.  Cleik.'a  obh 
aervations  upon  the  tenn  in  question.  In  tbft 
act  of  thf^  arthof  the  kin&  it  waa  the  ob^ 
jegt.  of  the.  leapislaitare  to  puniiii  a  ]9M«4«v 
m(tanovir„  and  therefore  the  words  esppleorelA 
are  different  from  those  of  the  staitote  on  whi«k 
the  present  indictment-is leitnded.  The^vAid% 
in  the  37tb  of  the  king»  aie^  purportiu^oa 
inUndefl  to  Viod,  the  pessivey  instead.  oTth* 
actiye,  participle  being  uaed*  Observe..  iImi 
differeni^e  of  the  phcaseotganr.  The  term.  ei»« 
ploy^hewi  is *' intfRndinft^not  ii«tflmdt4ji"  it 
r^^B.  to.ao  oalh.  having  the  inteodment  \m 
bind  tq  the  commission  of  the  cnmiu  Aid^ 
ae  I  have  akeady  remarhed,  it  is  plain  thffi 
unless.  t)M4  intsfpratalioii  was  meant  by  thu 
legislature,  the  punishment  which  I  hafe:.migN 
tinned  wpuld  not  have,  been  inflictqd,^"faa 
Wibire  would  have  been  the  offence*  if  the  adn 
ministrator  did  not  by  words.)  firmminjealg 
viltk^jthe  pas|y  taking  the  oath,  in  such  aiman- 
ner  the^  the;  takm  phonld.  hayi  a  s«aaettheC 
si|(ph an  obligation  vnas  imposed?  Itia neediest 
f<^  m^.to  insist  moxe.uponxthisr.sttbjea^;  ioK 
i^  l^dgar's  case>  lib.  SoUciter4ieom?i;^adiMl^ 
Ma.i^  vq^iitte.. purport  or  ^D^sai0nvof  ihg 
^mds  whMiAba  legislaiMye  had.in^?ieiKs  ai^ 
accordingly,  the  oaUi  is  reett(e4iiwTMiw  in  thie 
Midi^lV^;  a^  Ihe  enhmmpltai^  ie^  thatithe 


^87J 


57 


OGOUQB  III. 


Trial  ofAudrem  M'Kinhy 


r^ds 


' .  I  ha?e  bat  a  single  obserration  more  to  offer 
OD  this  inajor  proposition.  The-  oath  describ- 
ed is  otie  ^  ptirporttng  or  intending  to  bind  the 
person  taking* the  same  to  commit  any  treason.'* 
It  is  not  treason  in  general,  but  any  treason ; 
tiie  ivord  being  disjunctive,  and  referring  to 
ainy  one  of  the  different  treasons  known  in  law' 
I  shall  recur  to  this  afterwards. 

Let  us  see  next  what  is  the  minor  proposi- 
tioti  of  this  indictment: — "Yet  true  it  is  and 
of  verity,  that  you  the  said  Andrew  M^Kinley 
are  guilty  bfthe  said  crimes,  or  of  one  or  more 
of  tbeto,  actor,  or  art  and  part :  In  so  far  as 
you,  the  said  Andrew  M'Kinley  did,  at  secret 
meetings,  and  on  other  occasions,  at  Glasgow^ 
and  in  the  vicitiity  thereof,  in  the  course  of  the 
months  of  November  and  December,  1816, 
aifd  January  and  February,  1817,  wickedly 
maliciouslyy^  and  traitorously  administer,  or 
cause  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid  or  assist 
at'  the  administering,  to  a  great  number  of 
persons,  to  the  amount  of  several  hundreds, 
an  oath  or  engagement,  or  an  obligation  in  the 
nature  of  an  oath,  binding,  or  purporting  or 
intending  to  bind,  the  persons  taxing  the  same 
to  oomipit  treason." 

Your  lordships  will  recollect  the  objection 
whieh  we  Statea  to  the  former  indictment,  and 
which  you  thought  deserving  of  consideration. 
It  wiis,  that  the  indictment  involved  a  charge 
of  treason.  Now,  I  ask,  does  not  this  indict- 
ment involve  the  very  same  charge,  when  it 
sets  forth,  that  the  oath  was  wickedly,  felon- 
iously, and  irailorousltf  administered  ?  If  it 
were  set  forth,  that  a  person  had  been  guilty 
of.  carrying  off  an  article  feloniously,  and  a 
terdict  was  found  accordingly,  it  would  un- 

Suestionably  be  a  conviction  of  felony.  For 
le  same  reason  a  verdict  of  gnifty,  in  this 
cas4i  would  bo  a  conviction  of  treason.  The 
very  same  objection,  therefore,  which  occurred 
to  the  former  indictment,  on  this  ground,  oc- 
mirs  here  also.  It  is  true,  that  the  narrative  of 
the foiwer  indictment  was  fuller;  it  detailed 
a  number,  of  cirenmstances  respecting  the 
treason  alleged  •  to  have  been  committed ;  but 
it' was  not  on  the  narrative  that  our  objection 
rested,  for  if  tbat  had  been  the  case,  the  pro>- 
secutor  might  have  given  up  the  nerrative  as 
matter  of  explaifatioB  only,  which  he  was  not 
bound  to  prove,  and  the  defect  of  his  libel 
would  hate- been  «cuved.  The  objection  there, 
as'in  this  case,  rested  upon  the  circumstance, 
that  treason  was  a  suostantive  part  of  the 
Charge  in  the  minor  proposition,  which  could 
not  be  separated  from  it^  and  must  therefore 
rietessarily  go  to  proof. 

'  If  the  prisoner  was  convicted  under  this  M- 
M^'h%  would  be  oonvicted  necessarily  of  trea- 
soDy^without  the  presentment  of  a  grand 
jnryy — ^without  the  benefit  of  a  peremptory 
ekallett^ey-^without  anyone  privilege  whieh 
Uie  law  of  Engkmd,  as  oontradistinguished 
£roni  oar  comnion  la^^  in  criaiaal  matters; 
•eoforsontheaiciisecl.  • 
t.It  will  be^  fortef  attended  In^  that  this  is 
not  one  of  those  opes  in  whidi  the  lord  adro- 


cate  can  alter  his  charge  after  the  pnsoner  has 
pleaded.  If  a  person  be  accused  of  mnider 
his  lordship  may  restrict  the  libel  to  culpable 
homicide,  and  the  jury  may  convict  for  that 
offence,  though  culpable  homicide  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  indictment.  But  that  proceeds 
upon  the  ground  that  the  one  crime  is  of  the 
same  species  and  denomination  as  the  other. 
Where  the  crimes  are  generically  different,  it 
is  impossible  to  substitute  the  one  for  the  other. 
Thus,  in  1663,  in  the  case  of  Graham,  on  a 
charge  of  theft,  the  jury  brought  in  a  verdict 
of  reset  of  theft ;  but  it  was  found  that  no 
sentence  could  pass  on  that  verdict,  because 
reset  of  theft  is  a  crime  radically  different 
from  theft.  The  same  thing  happened  in  the 
case  of  Charles  Stewart,  in  1800.  Here  the 
public  prosecutor  has  charged  the  prisoner 
with  treason,  and  therefore  he  cannot  alter  his 
libel  into  a  charge  of  felony :  for,  if  that  were 
the  case,  the  prisoner,  as  Sir  George  Macken^ 
zie  observes,  might  come  to  the  bar  as  unpre- 
pared to  defend  himself,  as  if  he'  had  never 
been  served  with  an  indictment  at  all.  In  like 
manner,  Peddie  was  tried  at  the  circuit  at 
Perth  alternately  for  a  rape,  and  an  assauk 
with  intent  to  ravish;  the  jury  found  him 
guilty  of  assault  only ;  and  the  Court  of  Justi- 
ciary here,  to  whom  the  case  was  remitted, 
decided  that  no  punishment  could  pass  upon 
that  verdict.* 

If  your  lordships  were  of  opinion  that  this 
point  required  to  be  argued  upon  informations 
m  Edgar's  case,  there  is  the  same  necessity  for 
informations  here.  For  what  reason  the  pol>- 
lic  prosecutor  has  thought  fit  to  desert  the 
former  indictments,  -  and  to  serve  new  ones» 
containing  the  very  same  defect,  I  cannot 
divine.  Of  one  thing  I  am  certain,  that  the 
same  defect  does  exist,  and  that  the  merb 
omission  of  the  narrative  or  preamble,  cannot 
in  the  smallest  degree  change  the  substance 
of  the  charge. 

We  come  now  to  the  consideration  of  the 
words  of  this  oath,  which  we  are  told  purports 
or  intends  to  bind  the  persons  taking  it  to 
commit  felony.  There  are  four  clauses  in 
this  oath,  upon  each  of  which,  separately,  I 
shidl  beg  to  make' a  few  observations.  But, 
before  doing  so,  let  me  again,  entreat  you  to 
keep  in  mind,  and  to  apply  the  principles  with 
which  I  set  out.  You  have  seen  how  statutes 
were  interpreted,  though  composed  by  all  the 
wisdom  of  Parlioment,  and  when  it  must  be 
presumable  that  the  legislature  knew  the  force 
of  the  words  which  they  employed.  But  here 
you  have  men  in  the  lowest  situation  of  lifo^ 
using  words,  of  the  force  of  which  they  might 
not  be  aware ;  i  Jbrtiari,  therefore,  must  you 
construe  these  words  wi^  the  utmost  latitude 
in  favour  of  the  pritoner,  and  the  utmost 
strictness  agunst  the  prosecutor. 
•  I'fomierly  gave  some'  illustrations  upon  this 
Sttlljectftonf  the  law  of  Sngland;  permit  me 
now  to-  add  one  or  two  mm  our  own  law'. 

*  4  Hume,  308. 


989] 


for  Adm^uidering  unUxvifui  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[290. 


There  is  a  case  mentioned  by  Mr.  Hume,  io 
which  a  pefaon  of  the  name  of  Janet  Ramsay, 
when  precognosced,  emitted  a  declaration 
confessing  the  crime  laid  to  her  charge.  When 
brought  to  tna>y  she  pleaded  Not  Guilty;  but, 
besides  other  satis&ctory  evidence  her  de- 
claration was  laid  before  the  jury,  who  return- 
ed a  verdict  finding  her  guilty  "in  terms  of 
her  confession,"  meaning  undoubtedly  the 
declaration  which  she  emitted  when  precog- 
Dosced.  Yet  you  found  that  no  sentence  could 
pass  apon  thai  verdict,  because  the  prisoner 
had  not  confessed  the  crime  at  the  bar ;  and 
an  extrajudicial  declaration  of  guilt,  is  not, 
technically  speaking,  a  confession. 

But  take  a  case  more  nearly  resembling  the 
present.  When  a  person  is  accused  of  per- 
jury, the  prosecutor  must  establish  that  the 
oalL  sworn  is  contrary  to  the  truth ;  and  it  is 
the  province  of  the  Court,  in  judging  of  the 
relerancy  of  the  indictment,  to  determine 
whether  the  oath  is  reconcileable  to  the  truth 
or  not.  Kow,  I  entreat  your  lordships  to  ob- 
serve how  strictly  the  Court  has  been  in  use 
to  construe  the  words  of  an  oath  in  favour  of 
m.  prisoner,  attempting,  by  eyery  possible 
means,  to  remove  the  inconsbtency ;  and,  if 
it  can  be  removed,  the  libel  is  held  not  to  be 
relevant,  and  the  prisoner  cannot  go  to  trial 
upon  it.  In  support  of  this  observation,  I 
most  refer  to  Uie  learned  author,  so  6ften 
quoted.  "The  substance  of  the  crime,  and 
that  which  all  the  other  particulars  in  the  de- 
scription of  it  only  modify  and  limit  is,  that  a 
plain  falsehood  be  explicitly  and  wilfully 
affirmed.  For,  if  either  there  is  any  doubt 
about  the  true  state  of  the  fact,  or  about  the 
sense  in  which  the  panel's  words  are  to  be 
understood;  or  if  they  can  in  any  reasonable 
way  be  reconciled  with  the  truth,  or  with  an 
innocent  intention ;  or,  in  general,  if  it  is  not 
manifest  and  obvious,  but  matter  of  likelihood 
only,  and  of  inference  and  comparison  of 
many  particulars,  that  he  had  a  false  and  cor- 
rupt meaning,  this  shall  save  him  from  the 
accusation  of  perjury.  Indeed,  it  would  be 
▼ery  dangerous  to  convict  any  one  upon  such 
constructive  grounds ;  considering  the  imper- 
fection of  language,  and  the  still  more  imper- 
lect  use  which  so  many  persons  have  of  it,  and 
how  unequal  their  degrees  of  intelligence  in 
the  affairs  of  life,  and  even  their  degrees  of 
capacity  for  the  observation  of  facts."* 

There  is  not  one  of  these  observations  that 
would  not  apply  in  this  case,  where  you  have 
the  words  of  an  oath  to  construe,  just  as  in  a 
case  of  peijury.  Now,  observe  the  precedent 
to  which  Mr.  Hume  refers  : — "  This  scrupu- 
lous and  equitable  caution  was  in  particular 
observed  in  deciding  on  the  relevancy  of  the 
libel  against  Archibald  M'Killop.  This  man 
bad  been  a  witness  in  the  trial  of  certain  per- 
sons for  a  violent  deforcement  of  the  revenue 
officers,  and  )iad  given  a  testimony  which,  in 
many  points,  was  very  favourable  to  the  panels. 


VOL,  XXXIII. 


1  Hume,  12r. 


Among  other  things,  he  had  sworn  that  they 
addressed  the  revenue  officers  in  a  moderate 
and  inoffensive  manner,  ^  desiring  them  to  walk 
soberly,  and  to  make  no  disturbance.'  Now, 
in  this  article,  besides  others,*  he  was  charged 
with  peijury;  inasmuch  (said  the  libeD  as  it 
will  be  proved,  that  the  persons  accused  went 
violently  up  to  the  officers,  demanded  their 
arras,  and  threatened  to  blow  them  up  if  they 
resisted. .  It  was  pleaded  for  the  panel,  that 
the  two  assertions  were  not  absolutely  incon- 
sistent, for  that  in  swearing  to  the  one  sort  of 
address  and  course  of  behaviour,  he  did  not 
absolutely  exclude  the  other,  which  might  be 
used  at  a  different  period  of  the  fray,  and 
without  his  attending  to  it  at  the  time."  And 
the  Court  held  **  the  allegation  in  the  second 
article  of  the  said  indictment  charged,  in  these 
words ;— *  That  the  panel  swore,  that  at  the 
time  there  mentioned,  the  said  James  M'Kenzie 
desired  the  said  Alexander  Cook  and  Alexander 
Thomson,  to  walk  soberly  and  make  no  dis* 
turbance,'  not  relevant  and  refme  to  admit  the 
same  to  probation,*'  I  do  not  ask  of  your  lord- 
ships to  construe  the  oath  in  this  indictment 
more  strictly — the  mere  possibility  of  innocence 
induced  the  Court  to  hold,  that  peijury  was  not 
relevantly  charged. 

Let  me  intreat  you,  then,  to  apply  the  same 
principles  to  this  oath,  if  it  be  necessary  to 
apply  them.  I  say,  if  necessary ;  for,  I  state, 
that  if  you  were  to  construe  it  with  the  utmost 
latitude  against  the  prisoner,  with  the  same 
latitude  as  you  would  construe  a  last  will,  a 
marriage  contract,  or  any  other  document  the 
most  favoured  in  law,  it  will  not  yield  the  sens* 
ascribed  to  it  by  the  prosecutor. 

It  consists  of  four  clauses.  Let  us  consider 
each  of  them. 

The  first  is :  "I  will  persevere  in  my  en- 
deavours to  form  a  brotherhood  of  affection 
among  Britons  of  every  description,  who  are 
considered  worthy  of  confidence.''  Is  there 
any  thing  in  the  smallest  degree  blameable,  not 
to  say  treasonable,  in  tliis  7  May  not  a  brother- 
hood be  formed  of  any  set  of  persons,  vrithout 
.a  criminal,  without  a  treasonable  purpose? 
It  was  to  be  formed  of  persons  worthy  of  con« 
fidence ;  it  was  to  be  a  brother})ood  of  affection^ 
It  may  have  been  i  ntcnd  ed  to  have  been  criminal, 
or  it  may  have  been  intended  to  have  been  inno^ 
cent ;  but  there  is  nothing  in  the  purport  of 
these  words  which  can  be  interpreted  as  ex- 
pressing  a  design  of  forming  a  brotherhood  for 
improper  purposes.  Upon  that  clause  I  think 
it  unnecessary  to  say  a  word  more. 

Then,  what  is  the  second  clause?  "  That  I 
will  persevere  in  my  endeavours  to  obtain  f(5r 
all  the  people  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland, 
not  disqualified  by  crimes  or  insanity,  tHo 
elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of  twenty  one> 
with  free  and  equal  representation,  and  annual 
parliaments.''  As  the  law  stands  at  present, 
there  are  neither  annual  parliaments  noi  uni- 
versal suffrage ;  but  is  there  any  impropriety 
in  those  who  think  it  would  be  for  the  ad- 
vantage of  the  constitution  to  endeavour  to  ob- 

V 


3911 


£7  GEOKGE  III. 


Trial  of  Andrea  M*  Kinky 


(SSP2 


tain  theiD,  provided  they  do  so  aocordiDg  to 
law  }  It  is  impossible  for  a  xnomeDt  to  doubt 
that  it  1:1  lawful  so  to  do.  There  are  those  who 
think  that  an  alteration  of  this  kind — I  mean 
the  adoption  of  annual  parliaments,  and  uni- 
▼etsal  suffrage — would  be  a  fundamental  alte- 
ration of  the  constitution  of  Great  Britian ;  but 
you  know  that  it  is  laid  down  by  the  best  au> 
thoritiesy  that  there  is  no  law  so  fundamental 
that  it  may  not  be  innovated — no  principle  so 
fixed  that  it  may  not  be  changed.  Parliament 
iD%y  new-model  the  succession  to  the  Crown — 
it  may  alter  the  religion  of  the  country — ^il  may 
alter  its  own  constitution.  Parliaments,  for 
instance,  were  not  always  septennial.  There 
ie  no  doubt  that  annual  parliaments  and  univer- 
sal sufoige  may  be  obtained  in  a  legal  mode, 
in  the  same  manner  as  any  other  change,  by  a 
parliamentary  act ;  and  those  who  hold  these 
alterations  to  be  in  their  nature  injurious  to  the 
constitution,  never  doubted,  notwithstanding, 
that  they  may  be  competently  and  legally  in- 
troduced. In  what  respect  is  this  country  dis- 
tinguished from  every  country  upon  the  face 
of  the  earth,  but  that  every  subject  of  the  land 
nay  approach  parliament,  the  fountain  of  ab- 
solute jMower — ^may  suggest  alterations  in  the 
laws  or  the  country— and  may  press,  by  solici- 
tation and  argument,  the  adoption  of  measures 
which  he  supposes  to  be  advantageous?  It  is 
a  libel  upon  the  constitution  to  say  there  is  any 
crime  in  this  clause  of  the  oath,  provided  the 
endeavours  it  alludes  to  are  lawful. 

We  come  to  the  third  clause,  to  which  I  call 
your  attention  more  particularly,  as  it  was  a 
subject  of  much  argument  in  the  former  dis- 
cussion :  **  I  will  support  the  same  to  the  utmost 
of  my  power,  either  by  moral  or  physical 
strength,  as  the  case  may  require.''  In  this 
clause,  you  are,  for  the  first  time,  as  I  conceive, 
called  upon  to  exercise  the  power  of  interpre- 
tation. It  is  ambiguous  in  two  respects ;  and 
surely  it  is  not  surprising  that  persons  in  the 
situation  of  those  who  formed  this  brotherhood 
should  have  fallen  into  ambiguous  and  incorrect 
modes  of  expression. 

The  first  ambiguity  is  in  the  use  of  a  relative, 
without  any  means  of  discovering  the  antece- 
dent. '^I  will  support  Me  same:**  What  is 
the  same?  There  are  three  previous  things 
mentioned,  all,  or  any  of  which,  may  be  the 
antecedent.  How  are  you  to  choose  which  of 
these  is  the  antecedent  ?  If  it  be  of  importance 
to  the  prisoner,  which  it  is  not,  he  is  entitled 
to  choose  the  antecedent;  and,  if  any  one  of 
them  rendered  the  oath  innocent,  while  the 
others  inferred  guilt,  he  would  be  entitled  to 
choose  that  for  his  antecedent,  and  you  must 
adopt  the  innocent  interpretation.  Fortunately, 
however,  in  the  present  instance,  it  is  indif- 
ferent which  of  them  you  select,  for  they  are 
all  equally  harmless.  Let  us  try  them  one  by 
one.  The  leading  member  of  the  sentence  is, 
**  ir  will  persevere  in  my  endeavours  to  form  a 
brotherhood.''  That  brotherhood  may  be  the 
antecedent.  It  is  the  leading  object  in  the 
sentence ;  after  which  follows  an  obligatiou  to. 


do  certain  things ;  and  then  comes  the  engage- 
ment to  support  ike  tame,  signifying,  according 
to  that  construction  an  engxigement  to  support 
the  brotherhood.  That  will  not  infer  any  thing 
criminal ;  and,  at  all  events,  will  never  infer 
the  crime  chai^;ed  against  the  prisoner,  llie 
brotherhood  might  be  supportea  in  many  ways. 
When  illegally  attacked,  it  might  with  pro- 
priety be  defended ;  and  when  legally  attacked 
ny  the  magistrates,  the  defence  of  it,  though  it 
might  be  criminal  and  a  felony,  is  not  treason ; 
and,  therefore,  even  if  the  oath  were  to  support 
that  brotherhood  by  illegal  means,  that  would 
not  be  an  obligation  of  the  nature  charged  in 
the  minor  proposition ;  for  there  is  no  hstna  in 
supporting  a  nrotherhood  of  affection  among 
Bntons  of  every  description ;  at  alf  events  iti» 
not  the  crime  of  treason. 

Take  another  view. — ^He  says,  he  will  en- 
deavour **  to  obtain  the  elective  franchbe,  at 
the  age  of  twenty-one,  vtrith  free  and  equal 
representation,  and  annual  parilaments."  If 
you  do  not  take  the  leading  antecedent  in  the 
sentence,  according  to  ordinary  construction, 
you  should  take  that  immediately  preceding 
the  relative,  namely,  annual  parliaments  and 
universal  suffrage.  Is  there  any  thing  im- 
proper or  criminal  in  supporting  those  ?  Yoa 
can  support  nothing  not  in  existence;  they 
must  be  obtained  before  they  can  be  supported. 
If,  therefore,  you  take  the  first,  or  if  you  take 
the  last  members  of  the  sentence  for  the  ante- 
cedent, nothing  like  a  criminal  obligation  can 
be  extracted. 

Take  the  only  other  supposeable  antecedent, 
*^  I  will  persevere  in  my  endeavourt  to  obtain 
for  all  the  people  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland, 
not  disqualified  by  crimes  or  insanity,  the 
elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of  twenty-one, 
with  free  and  equal  representation,  and  annual 
parliaments.'^  Is  there  any  thing  criminal  in 
supporting  one's  endeavours  to  obtain  ?  It  in- 
fers a  solecism,  and  is  contrary  to  the  ordinary 
forms  of  speech.  To  support  endeavours,  is 
just  to  endeavour ;  and,  therefore,  if  there  be 
any  choice  as  to  these  antecedents,  tiiis  is  the 
one  that  ought  to  be  rejected.  But,  suppose 
these  ignorant  people  liieant,  ''  to  support  their 
endeavours  to  obtain  these  objects,"  where  is 
the  illegality  in  that  f  If  they  supported  their 
endeavours  in  a  lawful  manner,  it  is  what  every 
good  subject,  holding  these  opinions,  should  be 
inclined  to  do. 

But,  the  prosecutor  observes,  that  the  oath 
does  not  stop  at  supporting  the  endeavours,  but 
engages  to  *'  support  tlie  same  io  ike  tUmoii  rf 
my  power,  either  by  moral  orphyskal  strength^  m 
the  case  m^reguireJ*  Here,  it  seems  to  he 
thought,  that  the  sting  of  the  case  lies.— I  ask 
your  lordships,  when  a  person  comes  under  ati 
engagement  to  exert  all  his  endeaTOors,  or  to 
act  to  the  utmost  of  his  power  upon  any  one 
occasion,  how  that  en^gement  should,  in  fair- 
ness, be  construed.  The  construction  adopted 
in  every  case  is  this,  that  he  will  exert  his 
lawful  endeavours.  It  is  the  maxim  of  Uw,  as 
Mr.  Clerk  observed,  when  we  were  lasthere^ 


1 


Jiir  Adminisitrukg  uniawful  Oaths. 


A.  D.  iai7. 


[204 


id  Umtmm  facert  yoimiiiiii,  quod  de  jun  facere 
ptmiamtt.  There  is  no  obligatioo  ivhich  a  man 
undertakes  to  do,  in  this  or  any  vell-gOTemed 
couDtrfy  that  does  not  imply,  if  it  be  not  ex- 
pressed} that  irhat  he  engages  to  do  is  lawful. 
VoQ  mayezdade  that  presumption  by  declaring 
you  will  do  it  unlawnilly ;  but,  if  not  so  ex- 
cluded, it  is  always  understood. 

The  observations  which  I  have  made  on 
these  three  antecedents  separately,  apply  to 
them  all  when  taken  together ;  and  if  none  of 
them  singly  infers  ciiminality,  they  will  not  infer 
it  when  combined. 

But,  it  is  the  phrase  vhfnoal  ttrenfth  which 
seems  to  have  laid  hola  of  the  imagination  of 
the  public  prosecutor ;  and  he  seems  to  think 
that  the  mere  use  of  diat  term  necessarily  im- 
plies, that  a  rising  in  arms  was  in  contem- 
plation, and  that  the  persons  engaging  to  use 
their  endeavours  to  obtain  these  things,  were 
to  rise  in  rebellion  to  obtain  them.  The  lord 
advocate  imagiues  all  this,  merely  because  the 
term  ^'  physiod  strength"  is  introduced.—  But 
I  would  observe,  that  this  obligation  was  im- 
posed on  an  individual,  not  upon  a  body ;  and 
there  vras  no  such  thing  as  binding  him  to 
exert  his  endeavours  in  conjunction  with  the 
endeavours  of  others.  It  was  upon  each,  in 
his  individual  capacity,  that  an  ooligation  was 
imposed. 

But  that  is,  comparatively  speaking,  of  little 
consequence :  let  it  be  granted  that  it  was  a 
collective  obligation,  what  did  it  import?  Is 
it  that  they  shall  exert  their  physical  strength 
in  an  unlawful  way  ?  No ;  for,  according  to 
the  maxim  I  stated,  the  presumption  is,  that 
the  mode  vras  to  be  a  lawful  one.  Physical 
strength  may  be  exerted  in  twenty  ways  which 
are  lawful ;  and  therefore  you  are  to  infer  it 
was  to  be  lawfully  exerted  to  obtain  the  objects 
in  view. 

To  show  the  fallacy  of  any  other  construc- 
tion, let  us  look  a  little  into  the  nature  of  the 
alternative  obligation  to  exert  mortd  UrtnM. 
In  the  last  axgument  on  this  head,  it  was  fairly 
admitted,  that  an  obligation  to  endeavour  to 
obtain  these  objects  by  moral  strength  would 
not  have  been  in  the  smallest  degree  criminal, 
and  never  could  have  been  construed  to  in* 
fer  treason.  But,  you  must  observe,  that 
treason  may  be  committed  in  the  exercise  of 
moral,  just  as  well  as  in  the  exercise  of  physi- 
cal strength.  For  instance,  an  individual,  in 
order  to  obtain  these  objects  of  annual  parlia- 
ments and  universal  suffrage,  so  mach  desired 
by  the  brotherhood,  might  speak  or  write  ad- 
visedly, that  the  present  family  has  no  right  to 
the  crown — or  that  parliament,  without  con- 
sent of  the  crown,  is  not  entitled  to  alter  the 
succession ;  which  is  high  treason  under  the 
6th  of  queen  Anne.  But,  because  a  man  binds 
himself  to  endeavour  to  procure  annual  parlia- 
ments and  universal  suffrage  by  moral  strength, 
is  be  bound  to  commit 'these  or  any  other  trea- 
sons? That  would  be  a  construction  so  forced, 
that,  even  on  the  other  side  of  the  bar,  it 
would  not  be  listened  to  for  a  moment.  Why, 


then,  construe  the  obligation  to  exercise  phy« 
sical  stren^,  so  as  to  infer  that  it  was  to  be 
exercised  m  an  unlawful  manner?  The  one 
interpretation  is  as  much  strained  as  the  other. 
And  if  physical  strength  may  be  lawfttlly 
exerted,  tne  presumption  ought  to  be,  that  the 
lawful  exertion  of  it  was  in  the  view  of  the 
parties.  Or,  supposing  even  that  they  con- 
templated an  unlawful  act,  it  does  not  neces- 
sarily follow  that  they  contemplated  an  act  of 
treason. 

Physical  strength  might  be  exerted  lawfully 
to  obtain  these  objects,  by  forming  this  bro- 
therhood— by  collecting  its  members  together 
— by  defending  them  against  unjust  attacks, 
by  going  by  their  orders  over  the  country,  can- 
vassing members  of  parliament  for  their  votes, 
and  in  a  thousand  other  ways  which  may  be 
easily  figured.  And  It  might  be  unlawfully 
exerted  in  as  many  ways — in  resisting  the 
magistrates  coming  to  disperse  a  meeting — in 
rescuing  members  apprehended  by  law— in 
putting  members  of  parliament  under  durance 
or  restraint,  and  so  forth.  All  these  acts,  how- 
ever criminal,  and  amounting  even  to  murder 
and  felony,  would  not  amount  to  treason. 
Now,  because  physical  strength  might  possibly 
be  exerted  in  a  way  to  infer  treason,  are  you 
therefore  to  conclude  that  that  mode  of  its  ex- 
ertion was  necessarily  in  the  view  of  the  parties? 

Just  reverse  the  case,  and  see  how  you 
would  construe  an  engagement  to  prevent  in- 
novation. Suppose  a  set  of  gentlemen  inihe 
country — whose  politics  are  the  reverse  of 
those  of  the  prisoner — were  to  enter  into  an 
association,  and  bind  themselves  by  an  oath, 
to  support  septennial  parliaments  and  the 
elective  franchise,  as  now  established,  by  mo- 
ral and  physical  strength.  It  would  be  a  bold 
construction  to  call  that  treason.  Yet  it  is 
precisely  the  construction  employed  by  the 
pul^ic  prosecutor  in  this  case ;  for  a  man  may 
compass  the  king's  death  or  levy  war  against 
him  in  supporting  septennial  parliaments,  as 
well  as  in  endeavouring  to  obtain  annual  par- 
liaments. 

I  shall  call  your  attention  to  one  or  two  In- 
stances of  oaths  administered  every  day,  and 
see  how  the  principle  of  construction  con- 
tended for  by  the  lord  advocate  would  apply 
to  them.  You  know,  that,  when  a  soldier  is 
inlisted,  he  is  attested  by  a  magistrate,  and  an 
oath  is  administered,  which  is  prescribed  by 
the  Mutiny. act.  It  is  in  these  terms:  '^1 
swear  that  I  will  bear  true  allegiance  to  our 
sovereign  Lord  King  George,  and  that  I  will 
as  in  my  duty  bound,  defend  him  in  his  person, 
crown,  and  dignity,  against  all  his  enemies ; 
and  that  so  long  as  I  shall  remain  in  his  ma- 
jesty^s  service,  I  vrill  duly  observe  and  obey 
his  majestjr's  orders,  and  the  orders  qfthegene* 
rals  and  officers  set  over  me  by  his  majesty** 

Is  that  %n  obligation  to  obey  an  unlawful 
order  of  an  officer?  I  apprehend  it  is  not. 
You  will  not  go  nicely  to  work  in  discriminating 
between  right  and  wrong  where  the  duty  of  a 
common  soldier  is  concerned ;  but  where  an 


295] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  AttdrOB  M'Kinleif 


[396 


order  he  receives  is  plainly  illegal,  as  to  assas- 
sinate or  murder  a  man,  or  resist  a  civil  ma- 
gistrate, is  he  bound  to  obey  that  order  ?  No. 
The  terms  of  his  oath  extend  to  all  orders, 
but  you  will  apply  the  maxim,  id  tantumfacere 
potsumus  quod  dejurejacer^possumus.  In  swear- 
ing to  obey  all  orders,  the  oath  intends  lawful 
orders  alone.  You  will  recollect,  there  was  a 
trial  before  the  Court  of  Justiciary,  in  a  case 
where  a  soldier  had,  by  orders  from  his  officer, 
resisted  a  magistrate.  I  speak  of  the  case  of 
Ferguson,  in  1764.  He  was  condemned  by 
the  Court,  and  it  would  not  have  availed  him 
to  plead,  that  the  oath  administered  to  him 
when  enlisted,  bound  him  to  obey  every  order, 
whether  lawful  or  unlawful. 

I  formerly  mentioned  to  your  lordships  bow 
the  oath  of  abjuration  imposed  by  govern- 
ment required  to  be  construed.  It  binds  the 
parties  to  exert  all  their  endeavours  to  support 
the  king's  government  and  the  protestant  reli- 
gion. What  endeavours  ?  why  lawful  endea- 
vours surely,  not  by  committing  murder  or 
felony.  Construe  this  oath  as  you  construe 
those  oaths ;  let  the  general  terms  receive  the 
same  qualifications  in  both,  and  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  extract  a  treasonable  obligation. 

I  have  said  perhaps  too  much  on  this  point. 
Let  me  conclude  with  a  few  observations  on 
the  last  clause :  **  I  farther  swear,  that  neither 
hopes,  fears,  rewards^  or  punishments,  shall 
induce  me  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence 
against,  any  membef  or  members,  collectively 
or  individually,  for  any  act  or  expression  done 
or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  societies, 
under  the  punishment  of  death,  to  be  inflicted 
on  me  by  any  member  or  members  of  such 
societies.    So  help  me  God.'' 

Nobody  can  doqbt  that  it  was  a  misdemea- 
nor to  impose,  or  to  undertake  this  obligation ; 
but  this  is  not  the  question  at  present.  Your 
lordships  have  to  judge,  whether  this  is  neces- 
sarily an  obligation  to  commit  treason.  This 
SQciety  was  composed  chiefly  of  individuals  in 
the  lowest  stations  of  life,  ignorant  and  unin- 
formed persons,  who,  in  the  course  of  their 
discussions,  might  have  fallen  into  improper 
or  seditious  expressions.  It  was  natural  that 
the  members  ot  the  society  should  impose  an 
obligation  not  to  reveal  what  was  said,  lest 
any  of  their  number  should  be  convicted  of 
libel  or  sedition.  But  an  obligation  to  con- 
ceal such  imprudent  expressions,  or  even  not 
to  disclose  improper  acts  committed  in  the 
presence  of  a  person,  is  not  an  obligation  im- 
posed on  that  person  to  be  guilty  of  libel,  or 
sedition,  or  any  similar  crime,  far  less  is  it  an 
obfigation  upon  him  to  be  guilty  of  treason. 
Itrnay  be  a  misdemeanor,  but  it  is  not  that 
crime  which  your  lordships  are  now  called 
upon,  by  the  major  proposition  of  this  indict- 
ment, to  try ;  and  if  that  be  the  case,  it  is 
dear  that  the  libel  it  not  relevantly  laid. 

Take  the  oath  in  all  its  parts — apply  to  it 
the  ordinary  rules  of  interpretation — take  the 
words  >\iih  the  greatest  rigour,  or  the  greatest 
kiitude,  and  you  will  never  extract  that  sense. 


which  it  is  necessary  to  extract  from  them, 
before  you  can  have  a  relevant  charge  under 
the  statute. 

The  prosecutor  is  not  satisfied  with  reci- 
ting the  oath  in  his  minor  proposition,  he  gives 
a  commentary  upon  it,  and  it  remains  to 
be  considered,  whether  the  (tommentaryis  a 
fair  expression  of  the  import  of  the  oath ;  and, 
supposing  that  it  is,  whether  the  oath  so  con- 
strued amounts  to  a  treasonable  obligatioii. 
Af^er  reciting  the  oath,  the  libel  proceeds 
thus :  ^  Which  oath  did  bind,  ordid  purportor 
intend  to  bind,  the  persons  taking  the  same  to 
commit  treason  by  effecting,  by  physical  force, 
the  subversion  of  the  established  government, 
laws,  and  constitution  of  this  kingdom,  and 
especially  by  obtaining  annual  parliaments 
and  universal  suffrage  by  unlawful  and  violent 
means,'*  Is  that  a  fair  gloss  upon  the  words 
of  the  oath  ?  Do  they  signify  what  the  prose- 
cutor says  ?  Or  are  they  radically  and  essen- 
tially of  a  different  signification?  There  is  not 
one  word  in  the  oath  of  an  obligation  to  efiect 
any  thing,  or  to  subvert  any  thing,  if  by  sub- 
version you  mean  ought  else  than  a  lawlbl 
endeavour  to  alter  an  existing  law.  The  oath 
binds  the  taker,  ''to  persevere  in  his  endea- 
vours to  obtain  for  all  the  people  in  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland,  not  disqualined  by  crimes 
or  insanity,  the  elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of 
twenty-one,  with  free  and  equal  representation^ 
and  annual  parliaments."  Nothing  is  said 
here  of  the  government,  laws,  and  consti- 
tution of  the  kingdom;  or  of  any  laws,  ex- 
cept those  which  relate  to  the  duration  of 
parliament,  and  the  elective  franchise.  It 
Dinds  the  taker  to  subvert  nothing  by  physical 
strength,  not  even  the  laws  against  universal 
suffrage  and  annual  parliaments,  and  far  less 
the  established  government,  law^,  and  consti- 
tution in  general.  It  contains  no  obligatfon 
to  obtain  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
suffrage,  or  any  thing  else,  by  unlawful  and 
violent  means. 

It  binds  the  taker  to  support  one  of  three 
things,— or,  if  you  will,  all  the  three^ — by 
moral  and  physical  strength ;  but  this  obliga- 
tion must  be  qualified,  as  every  such  obliga- 
tion b  qualified,  in  ordinary  speech ;  otherwise 
all  human  affairs  would  be  thrown  into  confu- 
sion, and  language  would  become  the  instru- 
ment of  deception  and  error.  If  it  be  so  qua- 
lified, the  obligation  is '  confessedly  innocent. 
It  is  not  a  gloss  to  substitute  words  of  one 
import  for  words  of  a  totally  different  import, 
and  to  change  the  meaning  of  a  sentence -by 
the  interpolation  of  whole  clauses  which  tliey 
do  not  contain.  The  subjects  of  this  country 
would  be  in  a  dreadful  situation  indeed,  if 
they  were  exposed  to  a  capital  conviction  for 
the  use  of  words ;  in  construing  which  words 
the  prosecutor  might  substitute  and  interpo- 
late as  he  thought  fit,  until  he  found  a  meaning 
which  suited  his  purpose,  though  totally 
different  from  the  meaning  which  the  words, 
as  he  himself  recited  them,  naturally  and  pro- 
perly bore. 


397] 


Jiff  Adnamttarimg  untanfiU  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


Cade 


I  am  afraid  I  fiiUgne  your  locdshipsy  in  goiDg 
over  grounds  which  were  stated,  if  not  much 
commented  on,  before.  Bat  I  dow  come  to 
another  grounc^  to  which  I  must  particularly 
call  your  attention,  being  sensible,  that  the 
first  time  I  had  the  honour  of  bringing  it 
before  you,  it  was  imperfectly  a^ed.  After 
having  given  it  more  mature  consideration, 
and  weighed  the  authorities  touching  it,  there 
is  no  one  objeclion  to  this  indictment  on  which 
the  counsel  on  this  side  of  the  bar  rest  with 
more  security  and  confidence.  It  is  this, — 
that,  esio  the  words  of  this  oath  import  what 
the  public  prosecutor  says  they  import,  it  will 
not  make  a  relevant  charge ;  for  granting  that 
the  oath  binds  the  taker  to  do  all  that  the 
prosecutor  alleges,  I  maintain  it  is  not  an 
obligation  to  commit  treason. 

fiehre  entering  on  this  objection,  I  suppose 
it  will  be  conceded  to  me,  without  any  argu- 
ment, that,  in  an  indictment  under  this  statute, 
the  prosecutor  is  bound  to  specify  the  treason 
to  which  he  refers, — ^that  he  is  bound  to  state 
it  precisely,  formally,  and  technically.  If 
this  were  not  the  case,  there  is  not  a  more 
ensnaring  or  detestable  law  in  the  criminal 
eode,  bemuse  almost  any  oath  might  be  twisted 
into  an  unlawful  obligation,  and  the  prisoner 
wouM  come  to  the  bar  ignorant  of  what  he 
was  accused,  and  unprepued  to  defend  him- 
self. 

To  illustrate  this,  suppose  an  indictment 
for  administering  an  oath,  binding  the 
laker  to  commit  felony ;  and,  in  that  case,  I 
beg  leave  to  ask,  whether  the  prosecutor  would 
he  required  to  specify  the  felony  he  had  in 
view.  There  is  a  vast  variety  of  felonies, 
some  of  them  existing  at  common  law,  and 
others  introduced  by  statute.  Many  of  these 
are  complicated,  obscure,  and  undefined,  de- 
pending on  the  construction  of  revenue  laws, 
commercial  regulations,  and  the  mysteries  of 
trades  and  professions ;  now,  if  the  panel  was 
not  made  aware  of  the  felony  alluded  to  in 
the  indictment,  it  would  often  be  impossible 
for  him  to  conjecture  in  what  tlie  crime  con- 
sisted which  was  laid  to  his  charge.  Thus, 
svqppose  a  prisoner  was  indicted  for  adminis- 
tering an  oath  binding  the  taker  to  commit 
felony,  because  it  bound  him  to  carry  away  a 
certain  quantity  of  com  from  the  place  where 
it  was  deposited,  and  give  it  to  a  shipmaster. 
Here  the  felony  in  view  might  be  theft ;  or  it 
night  be  fraudulent  bankruptcy ;  or  it  might 
be  taking  com  from  a  storehouse,  where  it  was 
deposited  for  exportation,  contrary  to  the 
statute  ;*  or  it  might  be  holding  correspond- 
ence with  a  person  who  had  resided  in  France, 
contrary  to  the  non-intercouse  statutes .f  It 
will  not  be  contended,  that  the  prosecutor 
might  conceal  into  which  of  those  felonies  he 
meant  to  construe  the  oadi,  and,  consequently, 
deprive  the  prisoner  of  all  means  of  defending 
himself. 

*  it  Geo:  II,  c.  92. 

t  33  Geo:  UI,  c.  27;  34  Geo:  III,  c  9. 


Thecaseef  treason  is  perfectly  aaaloffotts.  It 
is  true,  there  are  not  so  many  treasons  as  felonies, 
but  there  are,  in  the  law,  at  least  ten  different 
treasons,  and  the  prisoner  is  left  altogether 
in  the  dark  to  which  of  these  the  lord  advocate 
alluded. 

The  statute  bears,  ''That  every  person  who 
shall,  in  any  manner  or  form  whatsoever,  ad- 
minister, or  cause  to  be  administered,  or  be 
aiding  or  assisting  at  the  administering,  of  any 
oath  or  engagement,  purporting  or  intending 
to  bind  the  person  ts^mg  the  sane  to  commit 
any  treason,'^  &c.  The  legislature  here  pnls 
the  term  disjunctively.  It  does  not  say  tseer 
son  in  general,  but  any  trtamm;  clearly  intend- 
ing, therefore,  that  the  prosecutor  should 
specify  the  particular  treason  which  he  asserts 
the  oath  bound  the  taker  to  commit.  Henoe 
I  infer,  that  nothing  but  a  tedinioal  descrip- 
tion of  the  treason  referred  to,  will  suffice  lo 
make  a  libel  under  the  statute  relevant.  It  is 
a  maxim  tn  crmtndEtftus  mm  Ikei  ^fogari,  and 
there  never  was  a  case  in  which  the  maxim  was 
more  applicable  than  the  present. 

Let  us  consider  the  treasons  actually  exist- 
ing in  the  law,  and  try  to  discover  to  which  of 
them  it  is  that  the  prosecutor  alludes,  in  the 
minor  proposition  of  this  indictment.  I  be- 
lieve you  will  find  the  attempt  akogether 
fraitless. 

The  first,  mentioned  by  Foster,  Blackstnne, 
and  other  writers,  is  compassing  the  king'a 
death.  It  is  not  laid,  that  this  oath  bound  to 
compass  the  king's  death,  nor  even  to  commit 
any  of  the  conunon  and  usual  overt  acts  whieh 
are  considered  as  evidence  of  compassing  the 
king's  death — for  example,  to  murder  the 
king,  or  to  put  him  in  durance.  I  shall  have 
occasion,  by  and  by,  to  direct  your  attention 
to  the  case,  that  an  overt  act  had  been  charged, 
that  you  may  consider  whether  that  would 
have  rendered  the  indictment  relevant.  At 
present  I  am  asking,  whether  the  proseeutor 
asserts  that  the  oath  bound  the  taker  to  commit 
that  species  of  treason  ? — Unquestionably  he 
does  not. 

The  second  treason  is,  to  violate  the  queen, 
or  the  king's  eldest  daughter.  It  wiU  not  be 
pretended  that  this  treason  was  in  view. 

The  third  is  to  levy  war  against  the  king  in 
his  realm.  The  prosecutor  does  not  assert 
that  that  obligation  was  imposed,  as  will  be 
evident  from  the  following  consideratione. 
To  constitute  this  treason  two  things  are  ne- 
cessary: 1st,  That  war  shall  be  levied:  llnd. 
That  it  shall  be  levied  against  the  king ;  or, 
what  is  held  equivalent,  that  it  shi^  be  levied 
for  a  public  purpose^  as  destroying  all  enclo- 
sures and  so  fortti. 

Was  this  an  oath  to  levy  war?  The  old 
writers  held,  that  war  could  not  be  levied, 
tmless  the  persons  engaged  to  levy  it  were 
arraved  modo  guenino;  unless  they  were  as- 
sembled with  ^  all  the  pomp  and  cireomstance 
of  war."  The  law  ts  so  laid  down  by  sir 
Matthew  Hale.  I  am  aware,  there  has  been 
a  relaxation  in  the  law  siece  that  period  i  end 


aim 


57  GEORGE  IIL 


TrMo/Anirtm  M^KhUey 


Hial  it  is  not  iMeesrarf  tint  the  penotis  tball 
be  so  ankied;  but  there  most  be  arisiDg  or 
insorrecdon  of  a  multitade;  and  a  few  tndi- 
▼idnals  assembled^  aimed  or  noarmedy  is  not 
letying  war. 

Sir  Michael  Foster  corrects  the  old  doctrine 
as  laid  down  by  sir  Matthew  Hale,  p%ge  206, 
first  folio  edition :  *^  Lord  Chief  Justice  Hale, 
speaking  of  such  unlawful  assemblies  as  may 
amount  to  a  levying  of  war  within  the  25th 
Edward  Srd^  taketh  a  difierence  between  those 
insurrections  which  have  carried  the  appear- 
ance of  an  army  formed  under  leaders,  and 
prorided  with  militaiy  weapons,  and  with 
drums,  colours,  ite.  and  those  other  disorderly 
tumultuous  assemblies  which  have  been  drawn 
together,  and  conducted  to  purposes  manifest- 
W  unlawful,  but  without  any  of  the  ordinary 
show  and  apparatus  of  war  before  men- 
tioned. 

**  I  do  not  think  any  great  stress  can  be  laid 
on  that  distinction,  it  is  true,  that  in  case  of 
levying  war,  the  indictments  generally  charge, 
that  the  defendants  were  armed  and  arrayed 
in  a  warlike  manner;  and,  where  the  case 
would  adroit  of  it,  the  other  cireumstances  of 
swords,  guns,  drums,  colours,  &c.  have  been 
added.  But  I  think  the  merits  of  the  case 
have  never  turned  singly  on  any  of  these  cir- 
cumstances.'' 

^  In  the  cases  of  Damaree  and  Purehase, 
which  are  the  last  printed  cases  that  have  come 
in  judgment  on  the  point  of  constructive  levy- 
ing war,  there  was  nothing  given  in  evidence 
of  the  usual  pageantry  of  war,  no  military 
weapons,  no  banners  or  drums,  nor  any  regular 
consultation  previous  to  the  rising.  And  yet 
the  want  of  those  circumstances  weighed  no- 
thing with  the  Court,  though  the  prisoner's 
•counsel  insisted  much  on  that  matter.  The 
number  of  the  insurgents  supplied  the  want  of 
military  weapons;  and  they  were  provided 
with  axes,  crows,  and  other  tools  of  Uie  like 
nature,  proper  for  the  mischief  they  intended 
to  effect. 


>Furor  arma  ministrat. 


^^  Sect.  1.  The  true  criterion  therefore  in 
all  these  cases  is,  quo  anbno  did  the  parties  as- 
semble. For  if  the  assembly  be  upon  some 
private  quarrel,  or  to  take  revenge  of  particu- 
iar  persons,  the  statute  of  treasons  hath  already  * 
determined  that  point  in  fevourof  the  sub- 
ject." 

And  aftenvards :  ^*  Sn^JTy  '^^  words  of 
the  first  clause  descriptive  ofthe  offence,  *  if  any 
man  ride  armed  openly,  or  secretly,  with  men 
of  arms,'  did  in  the  langu^pe  in  those  times 
mean  nothing  less  than  the  assembling  bodies  of 
men,  friends,  tenants,  or  dependants,  armed 
and  arrayed  in  a  warlike  manner,  in  order  to 
effect  some  purpose  or  other  by  dint  of  num- 
bers and  superior  strength.  And  yet  those 
assemblies  so  anned  and  arrayed,  if  drawn  to- 
gether for  purposes  of  a  private  nature,  were 
not  deemed  treasonable." 

Again^  *f  Sect.  11.   Upon  the  same  |trinci- 


[aoo 

pie,,  and  widiin  the  reason  and  equity  of  the 
statute,  risings  to  maintain  a  private  claim  of 
right,  or  to  destroy  particular  indosnres,"  and 
so  forth. 

^  And  upon  the  same  principle^  and  within 
the  same  equitv  of  the  statute,  I  think  it  was 
very  rightly  held  by  Awe  of  the  judges,  that  a 
rising  of  the  wearers  in  and  about  London  to 
destroy  all  engine4ooms,  &g." 

So  he  goes  on  to  the  end  of  the  chapter, 
stating,  that  though  wariike  apparatus  is  not 
necessary,  there  must  be  a  rising  in  order  that 
the  multitude  may  compensate  for  the  want  oC 
regular  array. 

The  second  requisite  is,  that  the  insurrectioB 
shall  take  place  in  order  to  accomplish  a  publie 
object.  It  is  no  levying  of  war,  if  one  noble^ 
man  rise  against  another,  to  bum  his  house  or 
destioy  his  inclosurirs,  for  these  are  private, 
not  public  objects. 

llie' case  of  lord  George  Gordon  vras  referred 
to  when  we  were  last  here.  There,  the  qnestioB 
was  not  whether  it  was  necessary  there  should 
be  an  insurrection  to  constitute  the  levying  of 
war,  but  whether  an  insurrection,  which  had  con- 
fessedly taken  place,  was  for  a  public  purpose. 
It  was  not  upon  the  first,  but  upon  the  secoad 
requisite,  that  the  doubt  arose.  It  was  con- 
tended, that  the  purpose  being  to  compel  par- 
liament to  repeal  a  statute,  was  not  a  poUic 
purpose ;  and  lord  Mansfield,  in  an  able  speech, 
says, — **  The  prisoner  at  the  bar  is  indicted 
for  diat  species  of  high  treason  whidi  is  cdled 
levying  war  against  die  king ;  and,  therefore,, 
it  is  necessary  you  should  first  be  informed 
what  is  in  law  levying  war  against  the  king,  so 
as  to  constitute  the  crime  of  high  treason, 
within  the  statute  of  Edward  3rd,  and,  perw 
haps,  according  to  the  legal  s^niification  of 
the  term,  before  that  statute.  Tnere  are  two 
kinds  of  levying  vrar  :^-one  against  the  pereoa 
of  the  king ;  to  imprison,  to  dethrone,  or  to 
kill  him ;  or  to  make  him'  change  measures,  or 
remove  counsellors ; — ^the  other,  which  u  said 
to  be  levied  against  the  majesty  of  the  king^ 
or  in  other  words,  against  him  in  his  regal 
capacity ;  at  when  a  muUUuJe  rite  and  attenwie 
to  attain  Iw  force  and  violeneef  aiigf  object  of  a  «e- 
nend  pidJicnahre;  that  it  levying  war  agauui 
the  nujettff  of  the  hmg  ;  and  most  reasonably 
so  held,  because  it  tends  to  dissolve  all  the 
bonds  of  society,  to  destroy  property,  and  to 
overturn  government;  and,  by  force  of  arms, 
to  restrain  the  king  from  reigning  according  to 
law. 

''  Though  the  form  of  an  indictment  for  this 
species  of  treason  mentions  drums,  trumpets, 
arms,  swords,  fifes,  and  guns,  yet  none  of  Uiese 
cireumstances  are  essential.  The  question 
always  is,  whether  the  intent  is,  by  force  and 
violence,  to  attain  an  object  of  a  general  and 
public  nature,  by  any  instruments,  or  by  dini 
of  their  numbert.  Whoever  incites,  advises, 
encourages,  or  is  any  way  aiding  toracik  a  mud" 
titude  to  attembled  with  suq^  intent,  though  he 
does  not  personally  appear  among  them,  or 
with  his  own  hands  commit  any  violence  iftiiat* 


901] 


Jar  AdmtMtslenng  unlawfid  Oaths^ 


A.  D.  1817. 


[3Wi 


wDCfv,  yet  he  is  equaUy  a  principal  with  those 
who  act,  and  guilty  of  high  treason.'** 

If  yon  will  go  on  to  the  end  of  the  learned 
judge's  speech,  you  will  find  the  question  was, 
whether  the' purpose  of  the  insurrection  was  a 
poblic  one,  and  consequently,  whether  the  war 
levied  was  against  the  king  or  not. 

Bat  there  is  nothing  in  the  oath  here,  even 
according  to  the  prosecutor's  interpretation, 
which  binds  the  teker  to  levy  war  at  aU — to 
rise  in  arms— or  to  assemble  tumultuously  for 
the  purpose  of  obtaining  any  object,  either 
pnblic  or  private. 

There  are  other  four  treasons-Hidhering  to 
^  king's  enemies— counterfeiting  the  great 
and  privy  seals — counterfeiting  the  coin — and 
slaying  the  chancellor  and  other  judges  in  the 
eiecntion  of  their  office.  These  may  be  passed 
over  in  silence,  for  it  will  not  be  pretended 
that  die  oath  alludes  to  them.  Neitner  can  it 
aUnde  to  the  treasons  relative  to  Papists — ^to 
the  debasement  of  the  coin — or  the  obstruc- 
tion of  the  Protestant  succession. 

Then  there  is  a  treason  which  was  intro- 
daeed  by  the  36th  of  George  3rd.  By  that  act 
it  is  made  treason  to  conspire  to  levy  war  for 
certain  purposes.  The  statute  says,  that  ^  if 
any  person  or  p^rsons'whatsoever,  shall,  within 
-  the  realm  or  without,  compass^  imagine,  invent, 
devise^  or  intend  death  or  destruction,  or  any 
bodily  harm  tending  to  death  or  destruction, 
maim  or  wounding,  imprisonment  or  restraint, 
of  the  person  of  the  same  our  sovereign  lord 
the  king,  his  heirs  and  successors ;  or  to  de- 
prive or  depose  him  or  them  from  the  style, 
noiumr,  or  kingly  name  of  the  imperial  crown 
of  this  realm,  or  of  any  other  of  his  majesty's 
dominions  or  conntries ;  or  to  levy  war  against 
hii  majesty,  his  heirs  and  successors,  within 
this  realm,  in  order,  by  force  or  constraint,  to 
compel  him  or  them  to  change  his  or  their 
neasnres  or  counsels,  or  in  order  to  put  any 
force  or  constraint  upon,  or  intimidate  or  over- 
awe both  Houses,  or  either  House  of  Parlia- 
ment; or  to  move  or  stir  any  foreigner  or 
sCraDger  with  force  to  invade  this  realm,  or 
any  other  of  his  majesty's  dominions  or  coun- 
tries, under  the  obeisance  of  his  majesty,  his 
heiiB  and  successors  ?  and  such  compassings, 
ioBaginalions,  inventions,  devices,  or  inten- 
cioiis,  or  any  of  them,  shall  express,  utter,  or 
declare,  by  publishing  any  printing  or  writing, 
or  1^  anv  overt  act  or  deed ;  l^ing  legally 
ooDvictea  thereof,  upon  the  oadis  of  two  law  Ail 
and  credible  witnesses,  upon  trial  or  otherwise 
eoDTicted  or  attainted  by  due  course  of  law, 
then  everysQch  penK>n  or  persons  so,  as  aforesaid, 
oflfending,  shall  be  deemed,  declared,  and  ad- 
judged to  be  a  traitor  and  traitors,  and  shall 
eniFer  pains  of  death,  and  also  lose  and  forfeit 
as  in  caaea  of  high  treason." 

We  may  lay  out  of  view  what  is  enacted  as 
to  devices  directed  against  the  king's  person, 
or  attempts  lo  depose  him.  The  only  part  of 
the  statute  to  which  the  prosecutor  can  allude, 

*  21  How.  St.  Tr.  644,  645. 


is  that  which  relates  to  a  compulsory  change 
of  the  king's  measures ;  or  to  the  intimidation 
of  the  Houses  of  Parliament.  But  your  lord- 
ships will  observe,  that  it  is  not  declared  trea- 
son by  the  statute,  to  alter  the  king's  counsels 
by  compulsion,  or  to  intimidate  the  parliament, 
but  to  lety  war  for  either  of  these  purposes. 
Now  this  indictment  does  not  set  fortn  that  the 
oath  libelled  on  contained  an  obligation  iolm/y 
war  for  these  or  for  any  other  purposes. 

But  the  lord  advocate  seemed  to  hint, 
on  a  former  occasion,  that  it  was  sufficient 
to  render  an  indictment  under  the  statute 
libelled  on  relevant,  if  he  set  forth  that 
the  oath  administered  containcNl  an  oblige^ 
tion  to  perform  an  act,  which  the  jury  should 
hold  an  overt  act  of  treason,  although  the  in- 
dictment did  not  specify  what  the  treason  was 
of  which  it  was  an  overt  act.  For  example,  he 
said  that  the  indictment  here  set  forth,  that  the 
oath  bound  the  taker  to  subvert  the  govern- 
ment by  physical  strength,  and,  in  particular, 
to  obtain  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
suffrage,  by  unlawtul  means ;  and  those  acts 
being  overt  acts  of  treason,  it  followed,  that 
the  charge  in  the  indictment  was  accurately 
laid.  But  I  ask  your  lordships,  if  this  doctrine 
be  well  founded?  Is  it  sufficient,  under  the 
statute,  to  libel  that  an  oath  was  administered, 
binding  the  party — to  do— what? — Not  to 
commit  treason,  but — to  do  an  act  which  the 
jury  shall  discover  to  be  an  overt  act  of  trea- 
son. An  overt  act  of  treason  is  that  which 
convinces  a  jury  that  treason  has  been  com- 
mitted ;  but  it  is  no  more  treason  in  the  eye  of 
law,  than  the  evidence  of  a  crime  is  the  crime 
itself.  If  the  charge  of  an  overt  act  of  treason 
were  equivalent  to  the  specific  charge  of  trea- 
son itself,  then,  instead  of  the  ten  or  twelve 
treasons  which  I  have  enumerated,  there  would 
be  thousands  of  treasons  in  the  law,  because 
there  are  a  thousand  acts  which  may  amount 
to  evidence  that  the  crime  was  perpetrated. 
This  would  be  to  let  in  the  whole  host  of  con- 
structive treasons,  which  ^rere  abolished  by  the 
statute  of  Edwaid  3rd.  No  oath  could  then 
be  administered,  which  might  not,  per  m^ 
furnish  a  relevant  charge  under  the  52nd  of 
the  king;  for  the  prosecutor  would  be  at  li- 
berty to  say,  that  although  no  particular  trea- 
son was  sonified  in  the  libel,  the  jury  would 
discover  th&t  an  overt  act  of  some  treason  or 
another,  fell  under  the  obligation  contained  in 
it.  This  would  be  replacing  the  law  in  ex- 
actly the  lame  situation  in  which  it  was  in 
England,  previous  to  the  statute  of  Edward 
3rd :  and  in  which  it  was  in  Scotland,  previ- 
ous to  the  union. 

What  was  the  defect  in  the  treason  law  of 
those  periods?  It  was  that  the  prosecutor 
char^  the  accused  with  meditating  or  per- 
forming an  act,  such  as  subverting  the  cod* 
stitution,  altering  fundamental  laws,  and  so 
forth,  which  he  thought  fit  to  denominate  trea- 
'  son ;  and  thus,  almost  any  act  might  be  con- 
strued into  treason.  These  constructive  tretk 
sons  were  abolished*  and  a  strict  and  ttehnicil 


^003       57  GGORGE  III, 


Trial  ofAnirem  M^Kiule^. 


C304 


defiottion  of  the  erima  substituted  in  their 
room;  and,  unless  a  person  is  accused  of  a 
treafon  so  defined,  the  accusation  is  good  for 
nothing.  The  prosecutor  Aust  specify  overt 
aeiSy  but  it  wiU  not  do  to  specify  them  alone ; 
be  must  further  aay  what  the  particular  treason 
is  which  be  means  to  prove  by  them.  In  like 
nanner,  in  this  case,  the  prosecutor  must  say 
not  merely  that  the  oath  libelled  on  bound  the 
taker  to  commit  an  overt  act  of  treason,  but 
what  the  particular  treason  was  which  it  bound 
bim  to  commit.  If  it  is  not  a  relevant  charge 
'Of  treason  to  assert  that  a  man  conspired  to 
subvert  the  constitution  by  physical  force, 
neither  can  it  be  a  relevant  charge  under  this 
Statute  that  he  administered  an  oath  binding 
tbe  taker  to  subvert  the  constitution  by  physi- 
cal force.  The  person  w(io  administered  the 
«ath  lOannot  be  dealt  with  more  harshly  than 
the  ilraitor  himself.  If  constructive  treasons 
are  abolished  as  to  the  one,  they  must  be 
idiolished  as  to  the  other  also.  The  law  must 
be  consistent  with  itself. 

I  need  scarcely  refer  your  lordships  to  his- 
torical illustration  in  support  of  what  I  have 
said  on  the  law  of  treason.  You  will  remem- 
ber that,  during  the  feeble  and  abject  govem- 
SMUt  of  Kichard  2nd,  certain  questions  were 
put  to  the  judges,  upon  which  they  delivered 
answers.  One  of  them  was  this.  A  statute 
had  been  made  which  had  been  supposed  to 
be  a  subversion  of  the  fundamental  law  of  the 
Jnagdom,  and  an  encroachment  on  the  royal 
»power ;  and  a  question  was  put,  by  command 
.l>f  the  king,  ^'  what  punishment  they  deserved 
that  compelled  the  -king  to  the  making  of  that 
statute?  Whereunto  the  judges  gave  answer, 
4hat  they  should  suffer  as  tmitors/'  There 
wsfe  other  eight  answers  that  do  not  bear  on 
the  present  question.  Nobody  will  deny,  that 
to  compel  the  king  to  consent  to  a  statute,  may 
be  an  overt  act  of  treason.  To  put  him  under 
>Sonstraint»  is  a  common  overt  act  of  treason. 
Bot  the  judges,  without  regavd  to  the  distinc- 
tion which  I  have  adverted  to,  and  confounding 
what  may  or  may  not  be  an  act  of  treason 
.aecoffding  to  circumstanoes ;  in  other  words, 
what  may  or  may  not  be  evidence  of  treason, 
.with  the  crime  itself,  they  pronounced  that  the 
persons  who  compelled  the  king  to  make  an 
improper  statute  were  guilty  of  treason.  Now 
I  will  read  what  sir  Matthew  Hale  (vol.  i, 
•p.  84.)  says,  with  regard  to  the  answer  so 
given  by  those  judges ;  <'  The  king  called  to- 
gether the  two  chief  justices,  and  divers  others 
of  the  judges,  and  propounded  divers  questions 
touching  the  proceeding  in  that  parliament, 
and  the  obtaining  of  that  commission;  and 
they  gave  many  liberal  answers,  and  among 
.tlie  rest,  '  Qnalem  posnam  mereotur,  qui  com- 

Sulerunt  sive  arctarant  regem  ad  oonsentieo- 
um  confectioni  dictonim  statuti,  ordinationis, 
etcommissionis?  Ad  qoam  questionem  una- 
nimit^r  respondenint,  quod  sunt,  ut  proditores, 
rneritb  puniendi.  Item  qualitSr  suni  illi  pu-» 
Hiendi,  qui  impediverunt  regem,  quo  minus 
potertkt  exeiosre  qyis  i|d  regalia  et  pmrogati- 


vam  suam  pertinoeruntF  Unanimit^r  etiam 
respondenint,  quod  sunt,  ut  proditores,  etiam 
puniendi,'  with  divers  other  questions,  and 
answers  to  the  like  purpose.''  That  is  the  very 
answer  I  read  from  the  State  Trials.  You  see 
what  he  says,  ''  This  extravagant  as  well  as 
extrajudicial  declaration  of  treason,  by  these 
judges,  gave  presently  an  universal  offence  to 
the  kingdom;  for  presently  it  bred  a  great 
insecurity  to  all  persons :  and  in  the  next  ^^^ 
\ivnsuicraitmopufificationis  11th  R.  2nd,  there 
were  divers  appeals  of  treasons,  by  certain 
lords  appellors,  wherein  many  were  convict  of 
high  U'eason,  under  general  words  of  accroack' 
mg  rot^alpotoery  tubvertitig  the  realm,  &c. :  and 
among  the  rest,  those  very  judges  that  thus 
liberally  and  arbitrarily  expounded  treason  in 
answer  to  the  king's  questions,  were,  for  that 
venr  cause,  adjudged  guilty  of  high  treason, 
and  had  judgment  to  be  hanged,  drawn,  and 
quartered,  though  the  execution  was  spared  ; 
and  they,  having  led  the  way,  by  an  aroitrary 
construction  of  treason  not  within  the  statute, 
they  fell  under  the  same  fate  by  the  like  arbi- 
trary construction  of  the  crime  of  treason." 
And  he  adds  again, 

*'  Now,  although  the  crime  of  high  treason 
is  the  greatest  crime  against  faith,  duty,  and 
human  society,  and  brings  with  it  the  greatest 
and  most  fatal  dangers  to  the  government, 
peace,  and  happiness  of  a  kingdom  or  state, 
and  therefore  is  deservedly  branded  with  the 
highest  ignominy,  and  subjected  to  the  greatest 
penalties  that  the  law  can  inflict ;  vet,  bv  these 
instances,  and  more  of  this  kind  that  might  be 
given,  it  appears,  1.  How  necessary  it  was, 
that  there  suould  be  some  fixed  and  settled 
boundary  for  this  great  crime  of  treason,  and 
of  what  great  importance  the  statute  of  25th 
£.  3rd  was,  in  order  to  that  end.  2.  How 
dangerous  it  is  to  depart  from  the  letter  of  that 
statute,  and  to  multiply  and  enhance  crimes 
into  treason  by  ambiguous  and  general  words, 
as  accroaching  of  royal  power,  nwveriing  qfjw- 
damental  laws,  and  the  like  ;  and  3.  How  dan- 
gerous it  is,  by  construction  and  analogy,  to 
make  treasons,  where  the  letter  of  the  law  has 
not  done  it ;  for  such  a  method  admits  of  no 
limits  or  bounds,  but  runs  as  far  as  the  wit  and 
invention  of  accusers,  and  the  odiousness  and 
detestation  of  persons  accused  will  carry  men.^ 

The  venerable  author  here  declares,  that  all 
accusations  of  this  kind,  such  as  encroaching 
on  the  royal  power,  or  subverting  the  funda- 
mental laws  of  the  realm,  are  too  vague  as 
charges  of  treason ;  and  that  the  answer  which 
those  judges  gave  is  worthy  of  the  highest  re- 
probation, and  was  given  in  opposition  to  the 
statute  of  Edward  3rd.  He  never  speaks  upon 
the  subject,  throughout  the  whole  course  of  his 
work,  without  animadverting,  in  terms  equally 
severe*  on  the- conduct  of  those  judges.  At 
page  266,  he  s^ys,  that  *'  although  the  statutes 
of  Richard  are  repealed  as  to  the  new  treasops 
which  they  introduced,  yet  still  they  are  of 
force  and  efficacy  to  the  damning  of  those  ex« 
travagant  opinions  and  declaraticms.^    Now  I 


3051 


Jbt  AdtumtUring  utdawfiA  Oath*. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[306 


entreat  your  lordships  to  turn  to  the  present 
il^dictment,  aod  see  what  it  is  that  the  public 
prosecutor  calls  upon  you  to  declare  to  be  trea- 
son in  this  case.  One  would  suppose  he  had 
purposely  used  the  very  terms  which  sir  Mat- 
thew Hale  has  branded  with  his  stigma. 
**  Which  oath,  or  engagement,  or  obligation, 
to  the  foregoing  purport,  did  bind,  or  did  pur- 
port or  intend  to  bind  the  persons  taking  the 
same,  to  commit  treason,  by  effecting  by  phy- 
sical force,  the  subversion  of  the  established 
goTemment,  laws,  and  constitutioQ  of  this 
kingdom." 

Are  you  not  here  called  upon  to  declare, 
that  subverting  the  realm*  or  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  realm,  is  treason  ?  Are  you  not 
called  upon  to  enhance  an  act  into  treason  by 
ambigoous  and  general  words?  When  his 
lordship  requires  you  to  find  this  indictment 
relevant,  he  requires  you  to  make  the  very 
same  answer  which  the  English  judges  did  in 
the  reign  of  Richard  2nd,  and  which  sir  Mat- 
Aew  Hale  so  strongly  reprobates — ^an  answer, 
•n  account  of  which  one  of  those  unhappy 
fudges  was  dragged  to  the  gibbet,  and  aU  of 
them  held  up  to  the  execration  of  posterity. 

I  may  illustrate  this  proposition  in  another 
way  more  fiuniliar  to  your  lordships,  by  re-» 
€erring  to  our  own,  instead  of  the  English  law. 
)f  r.  Hume  expresses  himself  in  the  following 
words : — ^"  I  have  said  in  the  second  place  that 
a  libel  is  not  good,  unless  it  give  such  an  ac- 
count of  the  criminal  deed  as  may  distinguish 
Ifaia  particular  charge  from  all  other  instances  of 
the  same  sort  of  crime,  and  thus  bring  the 
panel  to  the  bar,  sufficiently  informed  of  that 
whereof  he  is  accused ;  otherwise  the  purpose 
would  not  be  fulfilled,  which  the  law  enter- 
tains,  in  ordering  the  panel  to  be  served  with 
a  copy  of  his  libel,  ana  allowing  him  so  many 
days  to  mak&  preparation  for  his  defence.  In 
confirmation  of  this  rule,  M'Kenzie  has  rightly 
appealed  to  that  statute  respecting  the  crime 
of  ibrestalling,  which  allows  an  offender  in  this 
sort  to  be  indicted,  generally,  as  known  and 
leputed  to  be  a  common  forestaller,  without 
any  more  specif  detail  of  his  transgression ; 
thus  plainly  implying,  that  such  a  course  of 
accusation  is  contrary  to  the  tenor  of  our  com- 
mon law,  and  is  justifiable  only  under  the  au- 
thority of  a  positive  enactment.  It  is  certain, 
accoiuingly,  with  respect  to  any  article  of 
dittay,  which  is  stated  quite  at  large,  without 
any  reasonable  specification  of  the  time,  place, 
or  manner  of  the  thicg  which  is  alleged  to  have 
heett  done,  that  the  panel  cannot  be  put  on 
hia  defence  against  it.*" 

Now  I  should  like  to  know  what  species  of 
tieason-^in  the  words  of  Mr.  Hume,  "  what 
tort  of  the  crime,*'  the  lord  advocate  had  in 
yn»Wj  under  the  description  of  6ffectin^,  by 
phyaiqal  force,  the  subversion  of  the  estabbshed 
government. 

To  obtain  ahnual  parliaments  and  universal 
iiifirage  by  violent  and  unlawful  means,  may 

*  3  Comm.  310. 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


be  overt  acts  of  compassing  the  king's  death* 
or  of  levying  war,  or  of  conspiring  to  levy  war 
to  obtain  an  alteration  of  the  law.  If  the 
public  prosecutor  may  have  in  view  tliree  dif- 
ferent treasons,  distinct  from  each  other,  how 
is  it  possible,  according  to  Mr.  Home,  that  this 
can  he  a  relevant  indictment,  when  it  does  not 
specify  which  of  them  he  had  in  view  ?  This 
argument,  you  will  observe,  is  distinct  from 
the  other.  Formerly  I  argued,  that  to  libel  an 
overt  act  of  treason,  is  not  to  libel  treason ; 
now  I  contend,  in  addition  to  that  plea,  that 
to  libel  treason  is  insufficient,  unless  the  sort 
or  species  of  the  treason  is  also  laid.  And 
whatever  holds  with  regard  to  a  libel  for  trea- 
son, necessarily  holds  with  regard  to  a  libel 
for  administering  an  oath  binding  to  commit 
treason. 

But  there  is  one  consideration  more,  to  shew 
you  the  extreme  danger  of  admitting  charges 
of  constructive  treason ;  and  it  is  this,  that  the 
facts  here  represented  as  overt  acts  of  treason, 
do  not  in  reality  amount  to  treason,  or  afford 
any  evidence  of  the  existence  of  treason.  In 
truth,  the  law,  the  constitution,  and  the  govern- 
ment, may  be  subverted  by  violent  means,  and 
yet  no  treason  be  committed.  It  is  no  matter 
that  the  case  is  not  very  probable ;  it  is  quite 
sufficient  for  my  present  purpose,  that  it  is 
merely  possible.  Suppose  the  case,  that  an 
individual  robs  the  Bank,  and  bribes  parliament 
to  make  the  government  despotic,  where  is  the 
lawyer  who  will  affirm  this  to  be  treason  under 
the  25th  Edward  3rd  P  Suppose  that  an  in- 
dividual compels  a  judge,  by  violence,  to  grant 
criminal  warrants  for  arresting  illegally  certain 
members  of  parliament,  in  consequence  of  which 
they  are  prevented  from  voting  against 
universal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments. 
This  is  not  levying  war  to  put  constraint  upon 
parliament,  under  the  36th  6f  the  king ;  for  the 
act  of  an  unarmed  individual,  as  we  shall  suppose 
him,  caunot  be  the  levying  of  war.  Yet  nere 
the  constitution  is  overturned  by  violent  and 
unlawful  means,  without  the  commission  of 
treason.  These  are  examples  to  show  the 
danger  of  departing  from  the  salutary  principle 
of  the  law  of  England,  that  where  treason  is 
charged,  it  shall  be  accurately  specified.  If 
you  depart  from  that  principle,  and  find  the 
present  indictment  relevant,  you  overturn  the 
whole  law  of  treason — you  let  in  all  the  con- 
structive treason  which  existed  before  the  25th. 
of  Edward  the  3rd  and  the  security  which  the 
subjflbts  of  this  kingdom  deriwd  from  that  ex- 
cellent statute  will  be  destroyed. 

One  circumstance  I  had  nearly  forgot  to 
mention.  It  is  only  another  instance  of  the 
extreme  inaccuracy  with  which  this  indictment 
is  framed.  It  was  pointed  out  the  last  time  we 
were  before  your  lordships ;  but  the  public 
prosecutor  has  not  corrected  the  error.  The 
terms  of  the  oath,  as  he  has  stated  it,  in  the 
third  clause,  are,  **  and  that  I  will  support  the 
same  to  the  utmost  of  my  ppwer,  either  by 
moral  or  physical  iireneth,  as  the  case  may  re- 
quire;''  and  yet,  when  he  comes  to  mention  the 

X 


JTOTJ 


57  GCOROE  m. 


Iriai  afAndrOo  StlOidtjfk 


C30» 


rmport  of  the  oath,  in  the  subsequent  part  of 
the  indictment,  he  says  the  obligation  was,  to 
use  physical^/brcf .  Now,  you  see  he  does  not 
do  this  ^carelessly  or  unintentionally;  for  he 
repeats  it  after  his  attention  had  been  expressly 
called  to  It  by  the  prisoner  and  by  your  lord- 
ships; and  his  doing  so  is  just  saying  he  thinks 
himself  entitled  to  substitute  one  word  for 
another,  although  they  are  of  an  import  ma- 
terially different.  If  he  is  to  be  indulged  with 
that  liberty,  it  is  in  Tain  to  talk  of  construction 
at  all,  for  he  may  make  any  oath  signify  ^at 
he  pleases.  Strength  and  force  are  undoubtedly 
two  different  things,  as  was  well  illustrated  by 
Mr.  Clerk  on  a  former  occasion.* 

The  grounds  then,  I  go  upon,  are  these. 
Finty  I  maintain  that  this  is  an  accusation  of 
treason,  which  cannot  be  tried  in  the  present 
form.  Secondly,  That  the  obligation  contained 
ki  this  oath,  with  the  exception  of  a  misde- 
meanor,  does  not  infer  any  thing  criminal ;  and 
that  even  if  it  did,  it  does  not  necessarily  infer 
any  thing  treasonable.  Thirdly,  That  the 
leaning  which  the  prosecutor  extracts  from 
the  oath,  is  not  the  meaning  that,  by  any  fair 
construction,  it  can  bear.  And  Lastly,  Sup* 
posing  it  did  bear  his  meaning,  that  the  acts, 
which  he  says  amount  to  treason,  do  not 
amount  to  it.  The  indictment  is  altogether  er- 
roneous; -the  obligation  whidi  it  affirms  the 
4ath  imposed,  is  not  affirmed  to  be  a  specific 
ti^ason  properly  defined ;  and,  in  fact^  it  may 
be  no  treason  at  all. 

-  There  is  another  objection  to  this  indictment 
of  a  nature  a  little  more  subtle,  and  which 
fests  on  a  principle  of  the  law  of  England  ap- 
plicable to  this  statute.  If  you  give  leave  to 
ine  of  my  brethren  to  address  you  on  the  sub- 
ject, that  objection  may  be  stated  to  you  with 
more  effect.  On  a  former  day,  your  lordships 
stated  that  it  was  your  rule  to  allow  several 
counsel  for  the  panel  to  speak  in  succession  at 
the  commencement  of  the  argument  on  the 
relevancy  ;  and  it  is  because  I  am  not  so  well 
qualified  to  do  justice  to  this  point,  that  I 
would  rather  devolve  it  on  another,  who  is 
more  conversant  in  English  law.  The  objec- 
tion rests  on  two  or  three  propositions.  It  is 
well  established  in  common  law,  that  felony 
merges  in  treason;  and  when,  from  the  evidence 
ita  a  trial  on  a  charge  of  felony,  treason  appears 
to  have  been  committed,  the  trial  cannot  pro- 
ceed for  the  felony.  Now  here,  the  conclusion 
of  the  broseeutor  is,  that  the  oath  was 
trmtcrouJy  aidministered ;  and  the  oveit  act 
refers  to  an  oath  which  would  in  itself,  if  ad- 
ministered or  taken,  amount,  uecordaig  to  the 
proieeutcr,  to  the  crime  of  high  treason.  It  is 
no  answer  to  say,  that  the  statute  here  enacts 
that  an  oath  binding  to  commit  treason  should 
be  held  to  be  felony ;  for  this  reason,  that  it  is 
dnother  principle  of  the  law,  that  whereShe 
legislature  declares  a  certain  act  to  be  felony, 
it  shall  be  held  not  to  have  been  treason  before 
the   statute.     There  might  be   many*  oaths 


■MB 


See  the  preceding  eayev 


I  Inndingto  commit  treasoswlndi  oatliB  mig^t  be 
taken  without  the  taker  actually  conumtting 
treason  by  so  swearing.  An  oath  to  levy  war 
for  destroying  stocking-frames,,  may  not  be 
treason,  whereas  other  oaths  binding  to  commit  a 
treason,  in  the  very  act  of  administration  or  of 
taking,  form  treason  of  themselves.  The  legis* 
lature  might  have  in  view  only  the  species  of 
oaths,  which  binding  to  commit  treason,  do- 
not,  in  the  administrating  of  them,  infer  the 
commission  of  treason.  Another  rule  is,  that 
where  there  are  two  statutes  relative  to  any 
matter,  and  the  one  does  not  repeal  the  other,, 
they  must  be  interpreted  so  that  the  one  nsay 
be  consistent  vrith  the  other.  Statutes,  there- 
fore, as'to  treason,  which  have  passed  since  the 
statute  of  Edward  3rd,  must  be  construed,  if 
possible,  so  as  to  be  consistent  with  the  latter. 
This  limits,  therefore,  the  statute  of  the  Mndi 
of  the  king,  to  those  oaths  only  which  are  ad-* 
ministered  witliout  the  commission  of  treason, 
at  the  time  of  administration ;  and,  in  common 
sense,  it  could  not  otherwise  be  interpreted 
without  endangering  the  whole  fabric  of  the> 
constitution.  What  would  be  the  consequence 
were  the  case  otherwise  ?  A  person  adminisNT 
tering  an  oath,  the  very  administration  of 
which  is  treasonable,  might  be  protected  fronr 
a  prosecution  for  treason,  by  an  indictment 
bemg  served  ujf)on  him  under  the  statute.  It 
is  plain,  therefore,  that  this  statute,  in  so  for  as 
treason  is  concerned,  can  only  apply  to  oaths 
binding  to  that  species  of  treason  in  whiob 
the  taking  of  the  oath  is  not  of  itself  treason. 
These  principles  will  be  illustrated  more  at 
length  to  you  by  Mr.  Grant,  and  supported  by 
authorities. 

Upon  an  these  grounds  taken  together,  we  sub- 
mit that  this  indictment  is  as  objectionable  as 
the  former,  and  that  the  prisoner,  therefore, 
should  be  dismissed  from  tne  bar. 

Lord  Jtatice  Ocr^.— Before  Mr.  Clerk  is 
precluded  from  making  any  observations  o» 
the  subject,  I  think  it  right  to  direct  bis  attes- 
tion  to  a  circumstance  which  has  occurred  te 
the  Court,  as  deserving  the  ponsideratien  of 
boUi  parties.  In  reference  to  all  the  four  par- 
tieukur  charges,  as  to  the  administration  of  this 
alleged  unlawful  oath,  this  indicttpeat  con- 
clndes  in  these  words : — **  The  said  oath,,  or 
engagement,  or  obligation  to  the  said  purport, 
binding  the  persons  taking  the  same  to  commit 
treason,  as  said  is.*'  These  are  not  the  words 
used  ie  the  conclusion  of  that  part  of  the  in* 
dictment  which  follows  the  recital  of  the  ottdi : 
"  which  oath,  or  engagement^  or  obligatioe'to 
the  foregoing  purport;  did  bind,  or  did  purport 
or  intend  to  bmd,  the  persons  taking  the  same 
to  commit  treason,  by  effecting,  l^  physical 
force,  the  subversion  of  the  established  goveiiK* 
ment,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this  ktogd4un> 
and  es{)eciallv  by  obtaining  annual  parliament* 
and  universal  stmrage,  by  unlawfbl  and  violent 
means.*'  In  the  four  .particular  instances  of 
the  administration  of  the  oath  specified  in  the 
indictment,  neitbes  ^  purpotting,''  nor  **  in* 


909] 


inlaitofd  Oaths. 


A.  a  1817. 


Imduig,'*  tre  mentioned,  which  are  the  words 
of  the  statute. 

I  tlunk  it  right  to  bring  this  under  the  ob* 
aenratioD  of  the  bar.  Ibe  objection  was  al- 
ready in  your  lordship's  yiew. 

Mr.  GfWit, — ^If  in  a  case  of  this  extreme 
anxietjy  my  attention  could  be  directed  to  any 
thing  personal  to  myself,  I  should  certainly 
leel  under  the  greatest  embarrassment,  in  ad- 
dressing your  lordships,  after  the  speech  which 
you  have  just  heard.    I  cannot,  however,  on 
the  present  occasion^  feel  the  least  concern  for 
any  thing  that  belongs  to  myself.    Not  Only  is 
this  case  one  of  great  anxiety,  as  it  involres 
the  lives  of  the  unfortunate  men  who  are  to  be 
tried  for  the  crimes  which  are  charged  in  this 
indictment;   but  I  regard  it  as  one  of  the 
createst  importance  in  point  of  law.    It  is,  so 
far  as  I  know,  the  first  case  in  which  the  Court 
of  Justiciary  in  Scotland  has  been  called  upon 
to  decide  on  a  question  of  treason,  according 
to  the  principles  of  the  law  of  England  re- 
garding treason,  which  were  imported  (if  I  may 
use  the  expression)  into  this  country  imme- 
diately after  the  act  of  Union  between  England 
and  Scotland. 

I  am  bound  to  believe  that  your  lordships 
are  conversant  with  the  English   authorities 
«pon  this  subject,  because  you  are  bound  to  ad- 
minister the  law  according  to  these  authorities ; 
and,  therefore,  when- 1  refer  to  them,  and  when 
I  address  to  your  lordships  the  same  sort  of 
itfgument  which  I  should  address  to  the  courts 
elsewhere,    I  am   aware,   that   not   only  no 
apology  is  necessary  for  doing  so,  but  that  it 
is  my  bounden  duty  so  to  do,  because  these 
are  authorities  in  the  law  of  Scotland.    When 
I  say  this,  I  do  not  mean  to  assort  so  un- 
reasonable a  proposition  as  that  it  can  be  ex- 
pected from  your  lordships  that  you  should  be 
as  intimately  acquainted  with  the  phraseology 
of  this  part  of  the  law,  and  with  the  cases  by 
which  Jt  is  governed,  as   you  are  with   the 
phraseology  and  esta'bUshed  practice  of  the  law 
of  Scotland,  as  it  applies  to  the  cases  which 
generally  come  before  you. 

Therefore,  when  I  request  your  attention  to 
Ac  alignment  which  it  is  my  duty  to  state  to 
.you,  I  am  aware  that  I  demand  of  your  lord- 
ships an  attention  to  a  subject  with  which  you 
cannot  bl  so  thoroughly  familiar  as  you  are 
with  any  other  branch  of  the  law  which  you 
administer;  and  I  am  also  but  too  sensible, 
that  I  am  not  capable  of  either  explaining  or 
supporting  my  argument  in  the  manner  which 
the  deep  importance  of  the  case  demands. 

I  am  b6und  to  perform  my  duty  in  the  best 
manner  I  can ;  but,  I  confess,  I  feel  an  un- 
common degree  of  anxiety  on  the  subject,  be- 
cause, having  considered  it  with  die  utmost  at- 
tention of  which  I  am  capable,  I  am  satisfied, 
in  my  own  mind,  that  I  cannot  fail  in  esta- 
blishrag  the  propositions  which  I  have  to  an- 
nounce, except  from  a  want  of  that  talent  for 
eiplanatioB  and  expontion  which  the  subject 
reqmres. 


[310 


I  have  to  lay  down  certain  propositions;  in 
supporting  which,  I  hope  that  though  I  shall 
have  occasion  to  refer  to  several  authorities,  I 
shall  not  have  occasion  to  quote  them  at  such 
leneth  as  to  occupy  very  much  of  your  time; 
and  I  am  the  more  disposed  not  to  eucroach 
jpon  it,  as  your  attention  must  be  exhausted 
from  what  you  have  heard,  and  as  I  have  tlie 
disadvantage  of  addressing  you  after  so  able 
and  luminous  a  speech  as  that  which  Mr. 
Cranstoun  has  just  aelivered. 

I  am  first  to  maintain,  what  I  think  will  be 
conceded,  that,  'whether  this  oath  do  or  do  not 
^to  the  commission  of  treason,  is  a  question  qf 
JEngUth  law.  ^  *       »  ./ 

1  shaU  next  state  to  youi'  lordships,  and  I 
think  I  shall  satisfactorily  prove  to  you,  that  it 
isamaxim,  in  the  law  qf  England,  that  an^tqf 
liigh  treason  cannot  be  tried  as  a  felony. 

I  shall  then  state  to  your  lordships,  that  thk 
opplies  still  more  rirongfyto  cases  tried  in  Scot^ 
landr^ioT,  whereas,  in  England,  a  case  amount- 
ing to  high  treason  upon  the  evidence,  cannot 
be  tried  as  a  felony,  and  no  judgment  can  be 
given  upon  such  a  case,  but  the  person  ac- 
cused is  entitled  to  be  acquitted  upon  such  a 
trial,  although  the  form  of  trial  in  cases  of 
felony  does  not  differ  so  essentially  from  that 
m  cases  of  high  treason  as  it  does  in  Scotland 
^how  mu6h  more  strongly  must  this  apply  in 
Scotland^  where  the  whole  form  of  your  pro- 
cedure in  cases  of  treason  is  distinguished  by 
a  positive  statute,  from  your  forms  in  trials  for 
other  crimes.    By  a  positive    statute,   your 
lordships,  sitting  as  you  are  now,  cannot  try 
an  offence  which  amounts,  according  to  the 
statement  of  the  public  prosecutor,  to  high 
treason,  by  the  machinery  which  you  are  now 
employing—you  cannot  try  it  on  the  indict- 
ment of  the  lord  advocate.    You  can  try  it 
only  on  the  indictment  of  a  grand  jury,  and 
by  that  course  and  form  of  proceeding  which 
would  be  pursued  by  the  court  of  KingVbench 
in  England. 

Then,  I  shall  submit,  that  this  is  your  situa- 
tion at  present,  unless  it  can  be  shewn  that  there 
umv  thing  in  thU  act  of  the  52nd  qf  the  Kinsr, 
wh9ch  has  abrogated  that  rule  of  the  common  law, 
and  repealed  that  statute;  and,  I  think,  I  shall 
satisfy  your  lordships,  that  there  is  nothing  in 
this  act  of  Parliament  that  does  so  abr^ate  the 
common  law,  or  repeal  that  statute.  There  is 
nothing  in  this  act  from  which  we  can  infer 
that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  legislature  to 
do  either :  on  the  contrary,  it  is  impossible  to 
infer  from  this  act  any  such  intention  without 
the  greatest  absurdity;  and  the  greatest  in- 
justioe  and  wrong  would  be  introduced  by  so 
doing. 

If  I  make  out  these  propositions,  I  shall 
succeed  in  shewing  to  your  lordships  that  this 
is  not  a  relevant  indictment;  and  that  it  is  not 
a  relevant  indictment,  not  only  because  it  does 
not  sufficiently  specify  and  charge  any  treason, 
but  because  the  public  prosecutor  is  in  this 
dilemma,  that,  if  it  does,  he  cannot  try  the 
oiTeDCe  in  this  shape.    I  desire  him  to  take  his 


311 J        57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  Andrew  M'Kinley 


r3i3 


^hoice  of  the  two  propositions.  lie  cannot 
maintain  both.  Either  this  which  the  oath 
bound  to  do  is  charged  as  treason  or  not — it  is 
either  a  relevant  charge  as  such,  or  not.  It 
will  not  be  said  it  is  relevant  to  charge  it  as 
treason  without  words,  which  in  their  ordinary 
meaning  amount  to  a  description  of  some 
treason.  Then  I  say,  if  they  do  not  amount 
to  a  description  of  a  treason,  the  libel  is  irrele- 
vant, upon  the  grounds  which  my  friend  Mr. 
Cranstouo  has  stated.  If,  upon  the  other 
hand,  the  prosecutor  says,  that  the  specific 
treason  is  here  sufficiently  alleged  and  set 
forth,  I  desire  him  to  say,  by  what  law  he  can 
try  tins  offence  in  this  Court  by  this  mode  of 
proceeding. 

Without  going  over  again  the  argument  of 
my  learned  friend,  which  I  should  only  weaken 
by  attempting  to  resume  it,  I  must,  in  support- 
ing my  ovra  views  of  the  case  for  the  sake  of 
the  argument,  suppose  that  he  has  failed  in  his 
proposition.    My  intention  is,  to  direct  you  to 
the  other  branch  of  the  dilemma.    If  this  in- 
dictment does  imply  a  charge  of  treason,  al- 
though the  specific  words  which  we  say  ought 
to  be  in  the  indictment  are  not  used;  then  we 
ask.  What  sort  of  treason  or  overt  act  of 
treason  do  they  charge  ?    It  is  said,  that  this 
oath  was  administered  to  a  great  number  of 
persons,  to  many  hundreds   or  thousands — 
that  it  was  traitorously  administered  to  them 
— and  bound  these  many  hundreds  of  persons 
to  commit  treason,  *'  by  effecting,  by  physical 
force,  the  subversion  of  the  established  govem- 
ment,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this  Idngdoro ; 
and  especially  by  obtaining  annual  parliaments 
and  universal  suffrage,  by  unlawfiil  and  violent 
means.''    If  this  means  any  treasoq,  whatever, 
it  can  only  mean  the  compamng  and  imagining 
the  king's  death ;   or  the  treason  mentioned  in 
the  36th  of  the  king — ^levying  war,  in  order  to 
compel  his  majesty  to  change  his  measures,  or 
to  constrain  one  or  both  houses  of  parliament. 
Now  the  compassing  and  imagining  to  levy  this 
war,  is,  by  the  act  of  the  36th  of  the  king, 
declared  to  be  a  treason.     The  administering 
this  o^th,  then,  to  give  the  prosecutor  his  own 
way,  would  be  an  overt  act  of  such  compass- 
ing, or  of  compassing  the  king's  death.    If  so, 
it  is  an  overt  act  of  treason,  and  cannot  be 
tried  as  a  felony.   (I  would  request  of  you,  my 
lords,  if  I  fail  in  any  part  of  the  argument 
which  I  am  maintaining  to  make  myself  intel- 
ligible, to  intimate  to  me  when  I  do  so;  for  I 
wisli  to  take  up  as  little  time,  and  to  render 
myself  as  intelligible  as  possible.)    I  say  it  is 
a  known  rule  of  the  law  of  England,  that 
felony  merges  in  treason — that  treason  drowns 
felony,    {f  a  person  is  accused  of  felony,  and, 
upon  the  evidence,  it  comes  out  to  be  an  overt 
act  of  treason,  be  must  be  acquitted  upon  that 
trial.    He  cannot,  by  the  law  of  England,  be 
convicted  upon  an  indictment  of  felony,  where 
the  crime  amounts  to  an  overt  act  of  treason. 
This  is  a  maxim  in  the  law  of  England,  of 
to  ancient  a  date,  that  it  is  difficult  to  find  it 
in  the  more  modern  authors^  in  other  than  gene 


ral  terms,  because  it  is  a  proposition  which  ni>- 
body  has  ever  ventured  to  dispute.  If  we 
turn  to  the  Year-Book  31  Hen.  6th.  we  find 
that  the  greater  offence  drowns  the  less — ^And 
this  is  a  general  maxim.  For  instance,  tres- 
pass is  extinct  in  felony.  Suppose  goods  are 
taken,  and  an  action  of  trespass  is  brought  for 
them,  if,  upon  the  evidence,  it  appears  that  the 
crime  amounts  to  felony,  the  prisoner  roust  be 
acquiVlted  of  the  trespass,  because  the  felony 
drowns  the  trespass — the  trespass  merges  in 
the  felony ;  and  he  must  be  acquitted  of  the 
trespass  and  re-indicted  for  the  felony.  The 
Year-Book  31  Hen,  6th.  15,*  says,  "It  was 
agreed  that  in  case  of  a  robbery,  the  person 
robbed  shall  not  have  an  action  of  trespass  for 
the  goods,  for  the  trespass  is  extinct  in  the 
felony,  et  ornne  magus  trahit  ad  se  minus,*' 
Where  an  action  of  trespass  was  brought  by  a 
husband  for  beatiug  his  wife,  whereby  she 
died ;  the  action  vras  found  not  to  lie,  because 
the  crime  was  a  felony.f  The  policy  of  the 
law  is  stated  by  Mr.  Justice  Jones  in  Dawkes 
r.  Coveneigh.t  "If  the  party  robbed  may 
have  his  election,  either  to  indict  the  felon,  or 
to  have  his  action  of  trespass ;  this  would 
prove  very  dangerous.''  And  the  Chief  Jns* 
tice  Roll  gives  the  same  reason.  Many  felo- 
nies would  thus  be  smothered'.  By  the  law  of 
England,  your  lordships  know,  these  are 
popular  actions.  Where  there  are  popnlar 
actions,  persons,  from  many  motives,  would 
indict  for  the  lower  offence.  But  the  law  says. 
No.  If  the  evidence  shew  that  a  greater  sort 
of  offence  has  been  committed  than  that  which 
is  charged,  the  person  tried  must  be  acquitted 
on  the  indictment  for  the  lesser  offence,  and  he 
must  be  re-tried  for  the  greater  offence,  and 
the  prosecutor  shall  not  have  power  to  choose 
the  tower,  so  as  to  dispense  with  a  trial  for 
the  higher. 

You  are  aware,  my  lords,  that  treason,  by 
the  law  of  England,  is  not  confined  to  what 
we  commonly  call  treason.  It  consists  of  two 
sorts,  high  and  petit  treason.  Petit  treason  is 
the  murder  of  a  husband  by  his  wife,  or  a 
master  by  his  servant.  It  has  been  decided, 
where,  upon  an  indictment  of  murder,  it  came 
out  to  be  a  case  of  petit  treason,  that  the  per- 
son must  be  acquitted  on  that  indictment,' 
because  the  felony  is  merged  in  th\e  petit  trea- 
son. If  this  is  the  case  as  to  petit  treason, 
still  more  must  it  be  so  as  to  high  treason. 

I  am  aware  that  Mr.  Justice  Foster  (as  to 
whose  opinion  I  shall  speak  presently)  doubts 
the  authority  of  the  case  in  which  this  was 
said  to  be  determined ;  and,  he  says,  that,  be- 
cause petit  treason  and  murder  are  of  the 
same  nature,  and  petit  treason  is  considered  in 
law  only  as  an  aggravated  species  of  murder, 
the  murder  shall  not  be  merged  in  the  petit 
treason.  But  what  does  he  say  he  would  do 
himself?    Does  he  say  he  would  direct  a  ver- 

♦  Quoted  in  Bro.  Ab.  145,  voce  Trespass, 
t  Huggins'  Case,  4  Jac.  1 ;  2  Ro.  Ab.  557. 
J  Sty.  247, 


3]  3  J 


far  AJbrnnidtring  unla»/kl  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


1314 


diet  of  guilty  of  murder  on  sach  lodictmcDt  ? 
Ue  says>  that  be  would  not  direct  an  acquittal 
for  fear  the  acquittal  of  the  petit  treason 
might  be  pleaded  against  a  new  indictment  for 
murder;  out  that  be  would  discharge  the  jury 
of  the  indictment  altogether,  and  would  direct 
a  re-indictment  fm  the  petit  t^ason ;  for  that 
a.  prisoner  is  entitled,  when  treason  is  charged 
against  him,  to  the  forms  and  privileges  of  a 
treason  trial,  his  peremptory  challenges,  two 
witnesses,  &c.  &c.  And,  therefore,  says  the 
judge,  I  would  discharge  this  indictment,  and 
I  would  again  direct  an  indictment  for  the 
petit  treason. 

There  is  not  a  case  in  the  books,  of  a  rer- 
did  boring  been  pronounced  for  murder  when 
the  ^tB  amounted  to  petit  treason.  I  have 
not  found  such  a  case  alluded  to;  but  I  find 
the  above  opinion  of  this  judge  as  to  the  case 
of  petit  treason,  which  is  only  an  aggravated 
species  of  homicide.  When  other  authori- 
ties say,  generally,  a  person  charged  with  the 
lower  crime  should  be  acquitted,  that  judge 
says,  he  would,  in  the  case  of  pietit  treason, 
dischaige  the  jury.  He  does  not  say  he  would 
desire  him  to  be  acquitted  for  the  reason  I 
have  stated;  but  he  says,  though  the  two 
crimes  are  the  same  in  substance,  petit  treason 
b^ng  an  aggravated  species  of  murder,  he 
would  not  put  the  culprit  to  his  trial  where  the 
prosecutor  ought  to  nave  indicted  for  petit 
treason,  and  Sie  prisoner  is  entitled  to  that 
mode  of  trial  which  is  appointed  for  every 
qiecies  of  treason. 

All  these  arguments  apply  more  strongly  to 
high  treason  than  to  petit  treason.  It  is  trae, 
in  high  treason,  the  penalty  is  greater^— the 
forfeitures  are  different.  But  so  they  are  in 
petit  treason.— In  the  case  of  a  woman,  the 
judgment  in  petit  treason  was,  that  she  riiould 
be  burned  to  deaih.  fiut  the  principle  is, 
that  on  account  of  the  odiousness  of  the  crime 
of  high  treason,  the  attention  of  government 
to  put  it  down  is  more  excited,  than  with  re- 
gard to  other  crimes :  and,  in  proportion  as 
Siis  operates  on  one  side  to  increase  the  pen- 
alty, the  law  watches  over  the  pasoner  on 
the  other,  and  gives  him  peculiar  privileges  in 
his  trial. — And  the  judges  hold  themselves 
'hound  not  to  balance  between  the  two  classes 
of  cases — they  l^old  themselves  bound  to  ex- 
ecute the  law  a:t  it  stands ;  and  they  think 
that  the  law  has)udged  wisely,  and  that  it  is  a 
great  advantage  to  the  prisoner  that  he  should 
be  tried  according  to  the  mode  of  trial  ap- 
pointed by  the.  law,  though  it  be  attended 
with  the  dtfadvantage  of  greater  punishment 
in  the  event  of  his  guilt  being  established. 

On  this  subject,  I  think,  I  need  do  nothing 
more  than  shortly  cite  some  authorities  to  vour 
lordships.  First,  I  shall  cite  a  case  where 
there  vras  a  trial  for  murder;  and  the  cir- 
cumstances having  amounted  to  petit  treason, 
the  prisoner  was  acquitted,  ana  a  trial  was 
ordered  for  the  petit  *  treason.  That  case  is 
mentioned  in  the  State  Trials,  vol.  6th,  in  the 
cascof  Coke  andWoodbume.  Ilwasaease  tried 


in  1718,  and  cited  by  the  prisoner  Coke  in  his 
defence.*  It  was  said  to  nave  occurred  at  the 
assixes;  and  on  a  conference  with  all  the 
judges,  an  acquittal  was  directed,  and  the 
culprit  was  re-indicted  for  petit  treason,  con- 
victed, and  executed.  I  need  go  no  further 
to  shew,  that  if  the  facts  had  amounted  on  an 
indictment  of  murder,  or  other  felony,  not  to 
petit  treason,  but  to  high  treason,  an  acquit- 
tal must  have  been  directed.  In  a  case  in 
Dyer's  Reports,  page  50,  a,  a  general  pardon 
having  been  granted,  of  all  treasons  and 
felonies,  with  the  exception  of  murder,  it  was 
found,  that  petit  treason  was  not  within  the 
exception,  but  within  the  pardon. 

I  observe  that  the  counsel  for  the  Crown,  in 
the  case  of  Coke  and  Woodburae,  three  of 
them,  very  learned  persons,  admitted  that  the 
case  cited,  as  decid^  in  1712,  was  good  law. 
They  admitted,  that  the  killing  a  husband  or 
a  master  could  not  be  tried  on  an  indictment 
of  murder,  because  a  different  and  distinct 
offence.  The  Chief  Justice  did  not  deny,  but 
seemed  to  admit  this  as  good  law.  Whether 
that  case  had  been  so  decided,  was  a  qoestioD 
of  fact ;  and  you  will  observe  that  this  case  of 
Coke  and  Woodbume,  in  which  it  was  cited, 
was  tried  in  1721,  between  eight  and  nine 
years  after  the  opinions  of  all  the  judges  in 
the  case  cited,  were  supposed  to  have  been 
given;  so  that  it  is  not  easily  conceivable,  that 
if  there  had  been  any  error  m  point  of  fact,  it 
would  not  liave  been  noticed.  But,  having 
mentioned  this  case,  it  is  proper  to  take  notice 
of  a  passage  in  Mr.  Justice  Foster's  second  dis- 
course on  Crown  Law,  page  326.  It  is  as  follows : 

**  While  the  case  of  the  King  against  Svran, 
reported  before,  was  depending,  and  before 
the  second  bill  was  preferred,  a  question  was 
made,  whether  Swan  could  be  convicted  on 
the  indictment  for  murder,  if  it  should  come 
out  in  evidence  that  he  was  servant  to  the 
deceased  at  the  time  the  fact  was  contrived  or 
committed?  and,  consequently,  that  this 
offence  was  petit  treason.  * 

*"  There  is  a  case  cited  (6  State  Tr.  224 .)» 
in  tlie  printed  trial  of  Coke  and  Woodbume' 
which  (if  Much  case  there  ever  vhu)  hath,  as  iar 
as  the  authority  of  it  goeth,  determined  that 
question.  At  the  summer  assizes  at  borches« 
ter,  1712,  a  woman  was  indicted  before  Mr. 
Justice  £yre,  for  the  murder  of  another  wo- 
man; upon  evidence  it  appeared,  that  Ihe 
person  murdered  was  her  mistress,  which 
made  the  crime  petit  treason.  The  Judee 
directed  this  matter  to  be  specially  found; 
and,  upon  conference  with  all  the  Judges,  it 
was  holden,  she  ought  to  be  acquitted  upon 
this  indictment,  as  she  accordingly  was,  and 
was  afterwards  indicted  for  petit  treason,  and 
convicted  and  executed.  This  case  is  not  to 
be  found  in  any  report  printed  or  MS.  that  I 
have  met  with,  or  heard  of;  nor  have  I,  upon 
a  strict  inquiry,  met  with  any  footsteps  of 
such  case,  among  the  minutes  of  proceedingg 

•  16  How,  St.  Tr.  84. 


8151 


ffl  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ofAnireiA  M'Kmkif 


rsia 


on  the  Cfown  side,  in  tbe  cOQoty  where 
the  caae  is  supposed  to  have  arisen,  though 
tiie  minutes,  from  1708  to  1722,  have  been 
earefullj  searched.  For  these  reasons,  and 
what  is  suggested  in  the  marginal  note,  I  con- 
clude that  no  such  case  ever  existed.  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Hale  is  very  full  and  express  on 
tbe  other  side  of  the  question :  that  a  person 
who  is  guilty  o^  petit  treason  may  be  indicted 
•f  murder,  for  it  is  a  species  of  murder ;  and 
a  pardon  of  murder  pardoneth  petit  treason." 

1  quote  this  passage  for  the  purpose  of 
•hewing^  that  the  learned  Judge's  only  difficul- 
ty was,  that  petit  treason  was  a  species  of 
murder;  but  he  never  c^uestioned  that,  gene* 
rally  speakiUg,  any  mmor  offence  should 
Qierge  in  the  greater  on^  of  treason. 

Then  he  goes  on  to  say,  ^  But  though  I  am 
satisfied,  that  the  law  considereth  petit  treason 
and  murder  as  one  offence,  differing  only  in 
mrcumstance  and  degree  ;«yet,  whether  it  may 
be  advisable  to  proceed,  upon  an  indictment 
for  murder,  against  a  person  plainly  appear*- 
ing  to  be  guilty  of  petit  treason,  is  a  matter 
that  deserveih  great  consideration,  and  pro- 
bably determined  the  attorn^-general  to 
prefer  a  fresh  bill  for  petit  treason  m  Swan's  * 
case;  for,  though  tbe  offences  are,  to  most 
purposes,  considered  as  substantially  the  same, 
yet,  as  there  is  tome  difference  between  theiti 
with  regard  to  the  judgment  that  is  to  be  pro- 
nounced upon  a  conviction,  and  &  very  mate- 
rial one  vrith  regard  to  the  trial,  a  person 
indicted  for  petit  treason  being  entitled  to  a 
peremptory  chaUenge  qf  35, 1  think,  if  the  pro- 
secutor be  apprised  of  the  true  state  of  the 
case,  as  he  may  be  if  he  useth  due  diligence, 
be  ought  to  adapt  the  indictment  to  the  truth 
of  the  fact. 

<'  But  if,  through  a  mistake  on  the  part  of 
the  prosecutor,  or  through  the  ignorance  or. 
inattention  of  the  officer,  a  bill  be  preferred 
as  for  murder,  and  it  shall  come  out  in  evidence 
that  the  prisoner  stood  in  that  sort  of  relation 
to  the  deceased  which  rendereth  the  offence 
petit  treason,  I  do  not  think  it  by  any  means 
advisable,  t6  direct  the  jury  to  give  a  verdict 
•of  acquittal;  for  a  person  charged  with  a 
crime  of  so  heinous  a  nature  ought  not  to  have 
the  chance  given  him,  by  the  <Jourt,  of  avail- 
ing himself  of  a  plea  of  auterfbits  acquit. 
In  such  a  case,  I  should  make  no  sort  of 
difficulty  of  discharging  the  jury  of  that 
indictment  and  ordering  a  fresh  indictment 
for  petit  treason.f  In  this  method  the  pri- 
soner will  have  advantage  of  his  peremptory 
challenged,  and  the  public,  justice  will  not 
suffer.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  in  case  of 
an  indictment  for  petit  treason,  if  it  be  proved 
that  the  defendant  killed  the  deceasea  vritb 
Auch  circumstances  of  malice  as  amount  to 

murder,  but  the  relation  of  servant,  &c.  is  not 

■  ■■  ■'     ■■-  ■  ^~^^—  ■'" 

•l8How.  St.Tr.  1198. 
.  t  See  the  case  of  Penelope  Edwards,  cordm 
Lawfenoe^  J.  6  CkUw.  Btim^  467,  ed>  of  1620; 
iKufi.  695 


proved,  I  have  no  sort  of  doubt  that,  on  suck 
an  indictment,  tbe  defendant  may  be  found 

Jfuilty  of  murder,  and  acquitted  of  tbe  treason, 
or  murder  is  included  in  every  charge  of  petit 
treason,./^toic^  proditorie  et  ex  malitid  pr^ea^i* 

taid  MUaDRAVIT." 

Upon  this  it  may  be  observed.  First,  that 
although  Judge  Foster  considers  murder  and 
petit  treason  offences  of  the  same  nature,  so 
much  so,  that  on  an  indictment  for  petit 
treason,  a  verdict  may  be  found  for  murder, 
yet  the  greater  advantages  afforded  by  law  to 
the  prisoner  on  the  trial — ^the  peremptory 
challenge  of  35  of  the  jury — tlie  requiring  two 
witnesses — and  other  circumstances— entitle  a 

Erisoner  to  be  indicted  for  petit  treason,  if 
is  offence  actually  amount  to  that  descrip- 
tion ;  and  if  it  do  amount  to  that  description, 
and  so  comes  out  in  evidence,  but  through 
mistake,  or  ignorance,  or  inattention  of  the 
prosecutor,  the  indictment  is  preferred  as  for 
murder,  the  prisoner  is  entitled  to  have  that 
indictment  dismissed.  Secondly,  If  petit 
treason  were  to  be  considered  as  a  distinct 
and  higher  species  of  offence,  it  is  clear,  in 
Judge  Fosters  opinion,  there  would  be  no 
doubt  whatever  but  the  prisoner,  under  such 
circumstances,  must  be  acquitted. 

But  there  are  abundant  authorities  to  shew 
that  this  has  ever  been  the  doctrine  of  the  law 
of  England.  Thus,  in  the  Year-Book,  S. 
Henry  7th  10.  where  there  was  a  question 
about  an  accessary  in  the  harbouring  one 
guilty  of  treason  (your  lordships  know,  that 
in  felony  there  may  be  accessanes  by  the  law 
of  England,  but  in  treason  they  are  all  prin- 
cipals). Chief  Justice  Hussey  says,  "  l^ere 
can  be  no  accessary  in  treason ;  tbe  receiving 
a  traitor  cannot  be  only  a  felony,  but  is  treason 
et  in  catu  ibidem,*^ 

Thus,  Saccombe's  case,  33.  Henry  8th  is 
thus  reported  by  Lord  Chief  Justice  Dyer.* 
^*  A  woman  had  poisoned  her  husband,  which 
offence  is  made  treason  about  the  31st  Henry 
8th  (22d  Henry  8th.);  and  by  the  general 
pardon  granted  by  parliament  in  32nd  Heniy 
8th  this  « offence  was  pardbned.  Now  the 
son  had  brought  an  appeal  against  the  wife  ; 
the  question  was,  whether  this  appeal  lies,  and 
some  thought  that  because  the  offence  is  made 
treason,  it  mergeth  each  lesser  crime  as  the 
crime  of  murder,  which  was  before  at  common 
law,  and  so  the  offence  is  no^  punishable  as 
murder,  but  as  treason,  and  so  no  appeal  lies. 
But  aome  were  of  a  contrary  opinion,  &c. 
But  the  opinion  of  the  judges  was,  that  the 
appeal  was  not  maintainablo/'  And  the  re- 
porter refers  to  the  case  3  H  •  7.  above  stated. 

And  in  Coke's  report  in  the  cases  of  par- 
dons, 29th  Elizabeth  f  it  is  laid  down,  ''  If 
murder  or  petit  treason  be  made  high  treason, 
thereby  the  murder  or  petit  treason  is  ex- 
tinct, for  high  treason  doth  drown  every  less 

offence.'' 

■^— ^— <■—         1.11        .     1— ..— ^iM.^wf.1*—— 

•  Dy .  50, «. 
'|*6rRep.  13^6* 


arr\ 


Jot  Aimiiaiiknmg  'wAeltffA  Ooths. 


A.  O.  1817. 


D318; 


And  Judge  Foster^  niiMe  opinioD  that 
murder  is  not  memd  in  petit  treason  I  hare 
already  noticed,  referring  to  Saccombe's  cafse, 
which  I  have  jnst  read  to  yonr  lordships  from 
the  report  of  my  Lord  Chief  Justice  Dyer,  and 
denying  its  aothoiity  to  prove  that  murder  is 
nexged  in  petit  treason,  expressly  founds  on 
it  as  an  aathority  to  shew  that  all  inferior  fe" 
lenies  are  merged  and  extingoished  in  the 
ofience  of  high  treason;  and  that  when  an 
oflence  amounts  to  high  treason,  a  trial  for 
fieiony  is  i»an«d. 

I  read  from  the  same  dissertation  I  have 
already  quoted. 

**  Theve  is  a  case  in  Dyer,"  says  the  learned 
judge,  **  wUch  has  been  thought  to  fevour  the 
opinion,  that  the  crime  of  murder  is  merged  in 
petit  treason ;  and  that  a  pardon  of  treason 
discharged  it,  notwithstandmg  the  ezceptioo 
of  murder ;  but  that  case  proveth  nodiing  like 
it.  A  wife,  about  the  3l8t  Henry  8th  poi- 
soned her  husband.  Then  came  a  general 
pardon,  by  which  treason  was  pardoned,  but 
with  an  exception  of  wilfol  murder.  The 
heir  brought  an  appeal  of  murder  against  the 
wile,  and  it  was  adjudged  that  the  appeal  did 
not  lie.  This  case  doth  not  prove  that  mur- 
der is  merged  in  petit  treason,  but  that  both 
murder  aiui  petit  treason  were  merged  and 
extinguished  m  the  offence  of  high  treason ; 
for  at  Aat  time,  by  virtue  of  the  22nd  Henry 
8tb,  all  wilful  poisoning  was  high  treason,  and 
being  so,  the  appeal,  not  being  saved  by  the 
act,  was  barred  whether  the  treasoa  had  been 
pardoned  or  not.'** 

I  mention  these  caftes  to  shew,  that  the  doc- 
trine of  the  law  of  England  is,  that  the  minor 
ofieooe  merges  in  the  higher  offence.  I  need 
not  trouble  your  lordships  with  further  au- 
thorities upon  this  subject.  I  think  what  I 
have  stated  is  suflBcieot  to  prove  tl^e  general 
ufroporition,  that,  by  the  common  law  of  Eng- 
land, all  feloities  merge  in  the  offence  of 
high  treason ;  and  that  an  act,  amounting  in 
its  circumstances  to  high  treason,  cannot,  by 
the  law  of  England,  be  tried  as  a  felony* 

But  I  would  now  beg  to  call  your  attention 
Jto  this,  which  I  think  very  material  in  the  pre*-' 
sent  case ;  that  the  argument  is  stronger  iQ 
Scotland,  under  the  act  of  queen  Anne,  uan  in 
England  under  the  common  law.  You  know, 
dkat  by  the  act  of  queen  Anne  f  whidi  was 
passed  after  the  Union,  and  under  powers  re- 
served in  the  act  of  Union,  the  whole  law  of 
England,  upon  the  subject  of  treason,  has  been 
imported  into  Scotland.  The  mode  of  trial  has 
been  imported — and  od  this  subject  Aete  are 
two  clanses  to  be  adverted  to.  One  is  per- 
Bnssive  to  the  queen,  and  her  heirs,  who  may 
direct  a  commimion  of  oyer  and  terminer,  to 
try  treason  in  Scotland.  The  other  is  impera- 
tive, and  requires  your  lordshipd  in  this 
Court  to  inquire  of  all  treasons  in  the  same 
manner  as  the  Court  of  King's-bench/   The 


♦  Post.  Cr.  Iaw  325»      +  7  Anne,  c.  21. 


third  faction  enacts,  That  the  ^  Justice  Court 
of  Scotland  shall  have  fiiU  power  and  anthori^s 
and  ers  Acnefty  reqwtd  to  inquire  by  the  oathft 
of  twelve  good  and  lawful  men  of  me  county^ 
shire,  or  stewartry,  where  the  respective  courts 
shall  sit,  of  all  high  treasons  and  misprisions  oC 
high  treason  committed  within  the  said  county^ 
&C.;  and  thereupon  to  proceed,  hear,  and  de^ 
termine  "  (that  is,  they  aie  regnarad  to  proceed^ 
hear,  and  determine)  ^'the  said  offences 
whereof  any  person  shall  be  indicted  before 
them,  in  such  manner  as  the  Court  of  Queeh*»« 
bench,  or  the  justices  of  oyer  and  terminer  ia 
England,  may  do  by  the  laws  of  England.'' 

So  that  here  is  a  pdsitive  statute  requiriiw 
this  Court  to  proceed,  and  determine,  accor£ 
ing  to  the  forms  of  the  King's-bench  in  Eugi 
land.  And,  it  will  be  conceded,  tlmt  unless 
there  are  words  in  this  act  of  the  fi2nd  of  the 
king,  sufficient  to  repeal  the  former  enactment, 
it  is  not  competent  to  this  Court  to  inquiry 
into  cases  of  treason,  in  anv  other  way  thanr 
the  courts  of  England  would  inquire.  The 
words  are  imperative.  The  first  clause  might 
be  interpvetea, '  as  if  a  trial  itaight  take  place 
according  to  the  ancient  forms ;  but  as  to  th^ 
second  clause,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it 
demands  a  contrary  interpretation.  > 

It  were  a  waste  of  time  to  say  a  word 
further  upon  tlie  subject,  to  prove  to  your 
lordships  thai  the  rule  of  the  common  law  of 
England  as  to  trials  for  treason,  and  the  regn« 
latiqns  of  the  statute  as  to  such  triab  in  Sooti 
land,  are  as  I  have  stated;  And  it  would  be  ^ 
still  greatier  waiste  of  time  to  attempt  to  show^ 
after  this  statute  of  queen  Anne,  that  if  any 
treason  appear  upon  the  evidence,  you  connol 
proceed  otoerwise  than  according  to  the  forma 
of  the  law  of  En^and,  in  cases  oi  treason. 

We  come,,  therefore,  to  this  aimple  questioB. 
Does,  this  act  of  the  52nd  of  his  majesty,  on 
which  the  indictment  is  laid,  aimount  to  an  sJbm 
rogation  of  that  rule  of  the  common '  law  of 
which  I  have  spoken,  or  to  a  repeal  of  this  act 
ef  queen  Anne?  But,  it  is  a  rule  that  acts  of  par<» 
liament  shall  be  interpreted  according  to  the 
rules  of  the  common  law ;  and  my  lonl  Coke 
says,  that,  in  particular  cases,  the  words  of  an 
act  tha\\  be  restricted  in  order  to  bring  them 
within  the  rule  of  the  common  law.  lliere  is 
no  necessity  for  that  here,  where  there  are 
two  acts  of  parliament,  and  no  words  in  the 
second  repealing  the  first.  If  the  words  of 
the  second  can  admit  a  construction  leaving 
the  fonner  free  to  operate,  it  is  necessary  so 
to  construe  it.  It  is  necessary  for  the  Crown 
counsel  to  show,  either  that  there  are  words  in 
the  52nd  of  the  king,  that  repeal  the  act  of 
queen  Anne,  or  that  that  act  of  the  52nd  of  tlie 
king,  cannot  receive  effect  without  such  virtual 
repeal — ^tbat  the  evil  which  the  act  was  made 
to  control  and  remedy,  could  not  be  controlled 
and  remedied,  unless  you  were  ta interpret  the 
act  as  repealing  eo  much  of  the  act  ot  queen 
Anne. 

If  I  can  show,  there  is  nothing  in  this  act  of 
the  5Snd  of  the  king>  in  its  fullest  and  most 


310] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


THal  ofAndrm  MyKivky 


[320 


ample  interpretation — ^in  the  purposes  it  em- 
braceSy  or  in  contemplation  could  embrace — 
nothing  that  in  the  least  interferes  with  the  act  of 
queen  Anne,  or  the  regularmodeof  yourinqaiiy 
in  any  case  of  treason— then  you  are  bound  to 
give  to  this  act  of  the  52nd  of  his  majesty,  no 
other  interpretation  than  is  consistent  with  the 
act  of  queen  Anne,  a  statute  which  is  funda- 
mentally connected  with  the  constitution  of 
Ihis  country.  No  act,  that  is  introduced  for 
the  benefit  of  the  subject,  is  to  be  held  re- 
pealed, but  by  the  express  words  of  some 
subsequent  act — still  less  is  an  act  to  be  so 
repealed,  which  is  a  fundamental  law  of  the 
country.  The  law  of  queen  Anne  is  as 
much  a  part  of  the  act  of  Union,  as  if  it 
had  been  inserted  in  it.  It  was  passed  in 
consequence  of  a  power  reserved  by  the  act  of 
Union*  It  is  an  act  upon  which  the  liberty  and 
the  safety  of  the  subjects  of  this  country  de- 
pend, in  cases  in  which  the  Crown  may  bring 
them  to  trial  for  the  highest  state  offence.  It 
is,  therefore,  a  fundamental  part  of  the  law  of 
the  country. 

•  For  a  particular  purpose,  that  of  putting 
down  local  disturbances  in  England,  this  act, 
the  62nd  of  Jthe  king  was  passed ;  and  you  are 
called  upon  by  the  Crown  counsel,  to  give  this 
act,  intended  for  this  purpose,  containing  no 
words  of  repeal  of  the  act  of  Anne,  nor  incon- 
sistent with  its  provisions,  an  interpretation 
which  is  to  subvert  the  form  of  trial  for  treason 
in  this  country.  You  cannot  listen  to  the  pro- 
position for  a  moment. 

Let  us  see  what  the  52nd  of  the  king  goes 
to.  Its  preamble  is :  ^  Whereas  an  act  pass- 
ed in  the  37th  year  of  the  reign  of  his  present 
BMijesty,  intituled,  An  act  for  more  effectually. 

Ereventing  the  administering  or  taking  of  un- 
iwAil  oaths:  And  whereas,  it  is  expedient 
that  more  effectual  provisions  should  be  made 
as  to  certain  oaths ;  be  it  therefore  enacted,*' 
fee. 

The  intention  of  the  act  is  the  same  with 
that  of  the  37th  of  the  king,  and  it  onlv  ex- 
tends its  provisions  further.  If  you  refer  to 
the  37th  of  the  king,«chapter  123,  you  will  see 
what  is  the  preamble  of  that  act — you  will 
there  see  the  foundation  of  both :  '^  Whereas 
divers  wicked  and  evil-disposed  persons  have 
of  late  attempted  to  seduce  persons  serving  in 
his  majesty's  forces,  by  sea  and  land,  and 
others  of  his  majesty's  subjects,  fcom  their 
duty  and  allegiance  to  his  majesty,  nnd  to  in- 
cite them  to  acts  of  mutiny  and  sedition ;  and 
have  endeavoured  to  give  effect  to  their  wicked 
and  traitorous  proceedings,  by  imposing  upon 
the  persons  whom  th^  have  attempted  to  se- 
duce the  pretended  obligation  of  oaths  unlaw- 
fully admmistered ;  be  it  enacted,"  &c.  Both 
acts  have  the  same  object,  and  arise  out  of  the 
same  mischief.  In  the  37tb  of  the  king,  this 
is  declared  to  be  the  attempts  of  evil-disposed 
persons,,  to  seduce  persons  serving  in  the 
forces,  and  others,  to  mutiny  and  sedition.  In 
the  52nd  of  the  king,  the  object  and  the  mis- 
chief are.  declared  to  be  the  same  as  in  the 


former  act.  Reference  is  expressly  made  in 
the  preamble  to  that  former  act,  and  it  is 
added,  "  Whereas  it  is  expedient,  that  mora 
effectual  provisions  should  be  made  as  to  cer- 
tain oaths.*' 

So  that  both  acts  proceed  upon  a  view  of 
the  legislature,  to  repress  the  attempts  of  per- 
sons setting  about  to  excite  others  to  mutiny 
and  sedition;  and  the  penalty  for  both  admi- 
nistering and  taking,  by  the  first  act,  is  the 
same;  viz.  transportation.  In  the  second  act, 
the  odrnvrntening  is  death,  without  benefit  of 
clergy.  That  is  the  difference  between  the 
two  acts.  The  52nd  of  the  king,  leaves  the 
persons  tMng  the  oath  to  the  punishment  of 
the  37th  of  the  king ;  but  extends  the  punish* 
ment  of  adminutermg  to  death.  And,' as  to  the 
37th  of  the  king,  are  you  to  hold,  it  was  the 
intention  of  the  legislature  to  enable  the 
courts  to  try  those  Kuiltv  of  a  treasonable  con- 
spiracy, as  guilty  of  a  relony,'punishable  with 
transportation?  I  ask,  if  it  is  possible  to  con- 
ceive that  it  was  the  intention  of  the  legisla- 
ture to  abrogate  the  law  of  queen  Anne  in  this 
instance?  We  are  to  gather  the  intentions 
of  the  legislature  from  the  preambles  of  the 
acts,  and  we  may  throw  light  on  them  by  the 
history  of  them  when  passed.  We  see  the 
preambles — we  know  the  circumstances  in 
which  they  were  passed  —  we  know  the 
object  and  intention  of  the  legislature  in 
framing  them.  And,  from  these  considera^ 
tions,  and  transportation  being  the  penalty 
enacted,  X  ask,  are  you  to  be  told  it  was 
the  intention  of  the  legislature  to  repeal  the 
material  cUusjS  of*  the  act  of  queen  Anne,  as 
to  trials  for  high  treason  ?  I  say,  tl^at  cannot  be 
maintained  for  a  moment  by  any  lawyer  de- 
siring to  have  the  reputation  of  common  sense. 
It  cannot  be  maintained,  that  either  of  the  acts 
(that  of  the  37th,  or  of  the  52nd)  was  intended 
to  have  any  such  effect.  According  to  the 
prosecutor's  interpretation  of  the  acts,  taking 
an  oath  to  murder  the  king,  might  be  tried  as 
a  common  felony, — as  a  felony  to  be  punished 
by  transportation  only.  And  can  an  oath  to. 
commit  the  highest  species  of  treason  tliat 
would  have  the  effect  of  overturning  the  whole 
government — an  oath  to  commit  the  roost  atro- 
cious of  all  crimes— was  it  the  intention  of  the 
legislature  to  repeal  the  act  which  considers 
these  deeds  as  the  highest  species  of  treason — 
(o  repeal  that  act,  and  to  make  the  taking 
of  such  oaths — and  to  make  such  conspira^ 
cies,  a  transportable  felony?  It  cannot  be 
maintained  for  a  moment.  Then  what  are  the 
words  of  this  act,  that  the  prosecutor  makei 
such  a  construction  of  it,  as  to  th^  intention' of 
the  legislature,  and  that  without  express  words, 
of  repeal  ?  I  state  confidently,  that  the  statute, 
founaed  on  in  the  indictment,  cannot  be  held 
to  have  repealed  the  statute  as.  to  trial^.  of 
treason :  and  there  is  an  end  of  the.  \ybole 
foundation  of  the  argun^ent,  that  we  can  in-, 
vestigate  this  trial  in  the  shape  and  form,  in 
which  it  is  prosecuted. 

I. apprehend,  ^^at,  iu  interpreting  this,  act, 


m^ 


Jot' Administering  titdatofut  Oaths, 


A.  D.  1817. 


[332 


tQ  f^.^  ^  retates  to  t&e  question,  whether 
H^  n&9on  ^ti  within  it,  we  musi  again 
KaTl  recoiiise  to  the  law  of  England ;  because 
'aloD^  with  the  introduction  of  the  general  law 
of  treason  jntb  Scotland,  we  must  hold,  that 
the  legislatuTe  introduced  the  whole  law  of 
England,  as  applicable  where  treason  is  in 
question.  The  question,  therefore,  Whether, 
m  sound  construcUdn,  this  act  applies  to'  a 
case  of  treaison?  is  a  question  of^interpreta- 
tion  not  merely  by  the  law  of  Scotland,  but 
Ify^  tH'e  law  of  England ;  and  you  will  see  at 
<^nce,  that,  if  there  were  a  difference  in  the 
niode  of  interpretation  b^  the  laws  of  the  two 
coiuitries,  the  rules  of  interpretation  in  the 
English  law,  and  aot  those  in  the  law  of  Scot- 
Uuid,  must  lie  f<Alowed.  There  it  no  differ- 
ence in  thie  mode  of  interpretation  by  the  two 
laws.  Bnt,  I  know  that,  in  the  law  of  Eng- 
land,  it  is  most  distinctly  laid  down,  that  sub- 
septet  acts  of  parliament  are  to  be  so  expound- 
ed, chat  they  may  not  contradict  former  acts, 
^rhich  they  do  not  contain  express  Words  to 
lepeal.  Inus,  in  Roll's  Reports,*  an  61^ 
book  in  Norman  French,  th^  phraseology  of 


the  reason  of  the  common  law  giveth  gneat 
light;  and  the  judges,  as  much  as  may  be, 
follow  the  rule  thereof. 

I  would  desire  of  your  lordships  to  apply 
to  the  52n4  of  the  king  this  rule,  and  to  inter* 
pret  it,  as  far  as  may  be,  agreeably  to  the  rule 
of  the  common  law,  on  the  one  side  ^  and  to, 
the  statute  of  Anne,  on  the  other  side ;  and 
see  if  they  may  subsist  together/' 

It  so  hapjpens,  that  this  is  not  the  first  oc- 
casion (there  having  been  many  instances^  in 
which  acts  have  been  passed,  enacting  into 
ifelonies,  circumstances  that  appear  very  muck 
like  overt  acts  of  treason ;  and  lord  Coke,  in 
his  exposition  of  the  law  of  treason,  has  tliese 
words  referred  to  by  Qale :  **  that  the  passing 
an  act,  making  an  offence  felony,  is  held  to  be 
a  judgment  of  parliament  that  it  was  not 
treason." 

'  I  would  call  ^our  lordshins'  attention  to  aiv 
act  of  parliament,  which  so  tar  as  I  know,  has 
never  oeen  repealed,  3  lien.  7th.  cb.  14» 
which  recites,  ^Forasmuch  as  by  quarrels 
nii^e  to  such  as  have  been  in  great  authority, 
p&ce,  and  of  council  with  kings  of  this  realm 


which  is  abundantly  quaint,  it  is  laid  dovrn  as  hath  ensued  the  destruction  of  the  kings  and 
a  general  rule,  ** Leges fosteriores  priores  amtrd'  the  undoing  of  this  realm ;  so  as  it  hatli  ap- 
rids  ^rcgmitJ*  But,  it  is  said,  ''This  cannot  peared  evidently,  when  comjMSSing  pf  tM 
be  by  ambiguous,  and  general  wpr^s.''  And, 
li  iB^  added,  '^  When  two  general  statutes  are 
mai^e^and  fMie  contradicts  the  .other,''  (U  is 
meant  to  sajr^alvpatently  contradicts), /Vboth, 
if  ^ey  can  be,  snaH  be  so  expoimdisd  that  the 
tme^inay  not  ccptiadict  the  other.  ^  And  .a  sub- 
nc^jiient  act,  wtuch  can  be  reconciled  with  Uijb 
former,  ihaU  noi  be  a  repeal  of  it.^  Api  in 
Owh^ns's  Digest,  under  the  word  parliament, 
iL  d.  tne  Teamed  ^uthor,  treating  of  what  shall 
be' a  repeal  of  a  statute,  sa^s,  '*  A  subsequent 
act  which  may  be  reconciUd  with  a  former 
sh^  not  be  a  repeal  of  it.'^t  And  he  refers 
to  a  passage  in  lord  Coke's  Reports,  whic|k  I 
shaQ  presently  read.  And  he  says,  "  Every 
statute  ought  to  be  expounded,  not  according 
io  the  letter^  but  according  to  die  intent,"  re- 
ferring to  Roll  and  Plowdeo.  And  below, 
"The  preamble  is  a  good  means  for  collecting 
tde  intent.'*  '^So  the  ground  and  cause  of 
the  making;  of  a  statute  explabs  the  intent." 
An^^  <«So  a  statute  ought  to  be  construed 
accoi^ing  to  the  reason  aiid  rule  of  the 
comnibo  law,''  referrin(^  again  to  Plowden. 
Ai^, ''So  a  case,  ont^of  the  mischief  intended 
to  De^  remedied  by  a  statute,  shall  be  construed 
iol^'pfai  of  the  purview,  though  it  he  within 


death  c^f  such  as  were  of  the  ains'a  true  sub- 
jects was  had,  the  destruction  of  the  prince 
was  imagined  thereby ;  and  for  the  most  part, 
it  hath  grown,  and  been  occasioned  bv  envy 
and  malice  of  the  king's  own  household  ser^ 
vant^,  as  now,  of  late,  soch  a  thing  was  likely 
to  have  ensued ;  and,  forasmuch  as,  by  the 
law  of  this  land,  if  actual  deeds  be  not  had, 
tiiere  is  no  remedy  for  sucb  faUii  comnassingf, 
imaginations,  and  cpnfed^^cies,  bad  ag^qst 
any  lord,  or  any  of  the  ^king's  coi|ncil,  or  any 
of  the  king's  great  officers  in  bis  houaehold«  as 
steward,  treasurer,  ancl  comptroller,  and  so 
great  inconveniences  might  en^ue,  if  such 
unffodly  demeaning  slioul?  notbe  straitly  pu- 
nished before  that  actual  dee^  were  done." 
Then  it  enacts,  **  Tliat  if  any  servant,  admitted 
to  be  the  king's  servant,,  sworn,  ^  and  his  name 
put  into  the  chequer-roU  of  his  household,  kc. 
make  any  confederacies,  compassings,  conspi- 
racies, or  imaginations  with  any  person  o^ 
{>ersons,  to  destroy  or  murder  the  king,  or  any 
ord  of  Uiis  realnu  or  other  person  sworn  to  the 
king'js  council,  &c.  that  the  said  offence  be. 
judged  felony ;  and  the  misdoers  to  have  judg*^ 
ment  and.  execution,  ail  felons  attainted  ought 
to  have  by  the  common  law."    Any  servant  of 


.^.^*i^.  P-.  ^i>  ■>4»»>8f  f>^  M  «^tute  of 
^Qofter,  by  wl^ch  an  action  of  waste  is  givep 

tlW^^^f?^^^  holdeth  by  law  of  England,-' 
tpifptiirten)  .''or  otberwise  for  term  of  life.*' 
say^  '^AlDeiL  the  assignee  of  the  tenant  bir 
tne  e6axtj^  is.  within  the  letter  of  this  law, 
yet  ho  action  bt  waste  shall  be  brought  against 
the  assignee,  for  in  construction  of  statutes, 

'  •Vol.2, p. lib.    tVot5,318,ea.6fldSil 

vol/xxiii. 


i^ipords  of  the  statntfs".  and  be  quotes  lord    the  king,  entering  into  a  conspiracy  to  destroy 
'^^'^^  ^nd  liififi  p.  33^    Aiid  lord  Coke,  'or  muider  the  king,  qr  any  lord  of  this,  realm, 
^'^1      -    *.        .4  »  shalllje  judged  guilty  of  feiony,  and  the  bene- 

fit of  dergy^  even  is  not  excluded. 

So  here  is  an  act  of  jparl)ainant,  deolaring»- 
that  any  of  the  king's  hoiis^old,  who  sbaU 
conspire  to  murder  him,  may  be  punished 
with  transportation.  What  is  the  observation, 
of  my  lord  Coke  upon  this  statute  I  He  says, 
^  to  destroy  or  murder  the  kin^. .  By  this  act, 
it  exprettly  tgspeareih^  by  the  judgment  of  thfy 
whole  paraSmentj  that  besides  the  confederacy, 
Y  ♦ 


33a>      ^  GEORGE  tIL 


TtitA  ^Awdr«»  M*KU^ 


[$•4 


conspiracy,  or  imagination,  there  mast  be 
some  other  overt  act,  or  deed  tending  there- 
nnto,  to  make  it  treason  within  the  statute  of 
25th  £dw.  3rd.  And  thertfore  the  bare  con" 
Jkderact/f  compaumg^  compiracyf  or  magmaiSanf 
by  wordi  onfy,  it  miuk  feior^  by  thii  act.  But, 
it*  the  conspirators  do  provide  any  weapon,  or 
other  thing,  to  accomplish  their  devilish  intent, 
thUy  and  the  Hke^  0  an  overt  act  to  make  d  trea- 
son." So  that,  though  the  words  are  so  gene- 
ral, that,  under  the  act  of  Hen.  7,  a  person 
might  be  indicted  of  felony  for  conspiring  the 
death  of  the  king,  it  had  never  entered  into 
the  head  of  lord  i^oke,  that,  if  this  were  mani- 
fested by  an  overt  act,  felony,  and  not  trea- 
son, tiouid  be  the  relevant  charge.  On  the 
contrary,  he  expressly  says,  that,  in  order  that 
a  prosecution  may  take  place  upon  that  statute, 
ft  is  necessary  that  the  act  charged  be  not 
treason. 

Now,  an  oath  administered  to  500  persons, 
binding  them  to  levy  war  against  the  aing,  to 
control  him,  and  oblige  him  to  change  his 
measures,  or  to  control  parliament,  is  an  overt 
act  of  a  trea56n  created  by  the  36th  ^of  the 
king.  '  In  this  respect,  I  cannot  distinguish  the 
case  of  the  statute  of  Henry  Tdi  from  the  pre- 
sent ;  and  if,  under  the  law  of  Henry  7th  a 
man  who  had  entered  into  a  conspiracy  to 
murder  the  king,  coold  not  be  tried  for  a 
transportable  felony,  neither  could  he  under 
the  prt'sent  statute  be  so  tried,  having  admi- 
nistered such  an  oath.    * 

Lord  Hale  says,  ''Regularly,  words,  unless 
committed  to  writing,  are  not  an  overt  act 
within  the  statute  of  Edward  3rd,  and  the  reason 
given  is,  because  they  are  easily  subject  to  be 
mistldcen  or  misapplied,  or  misrepeated  or 
misunderstood  by  the  hearers.  And  this  ap- 
pears, by  those  several  acts  of  parliament, 
which  were  temporary  only,  or  made  some 
words  of -a  high  nature  to  be  but  felony.  The 
statute  of  3  Hen.  7thcapil4,  makes  conspiring 
the  king's  death  to  be  felony ;  which  it  woula 
not  have  done,  if  the  bare  conspiring,  without 
an  overt  act,  had  been  treason.'' 


In  like  manner,  this  act  of  the  52nd  of  the  I  the  act  of  parliament,  and  it  would  be  an 


king,  makes  the  administering  of  an  oath 
binding  to  commit  any  treason  or  murder,  or 
any  felony  punishable  by  law  with  death,  a 
felony ;  which  it  would  not  have  done,  if  the 
administering  of  that  oath  had  been  an  overt 
act  of  hiffh  treason. 

And  that  proposition  includes  this  other, 
that  if  there  be  circumstances  attending  the  ad- 
roinij>tering  which  constitute  high  treason, 
tlien  it  would  not  be  a  felony  wirhin  this  act. 
If-  my  leaimed  friends  will  Help  me  out  of  this 
dilemma  h  shall  be  obliged  to  them.  It  is  an 
implied  judgment  of  parliament,  that  the  act, 
yftmch  k  makes  a  felony,  is  not  an  overt  act  of 
treason ;  and,  if  an  act  of  pariiament  is  pro- 
duced,  which  makes  that  a -felony,  which  would 
otherwise  be  an  overt  act  «f  treason,  the  in- 
ference is,  that  these  words  of  the  act  are  to 
receive  a  limited  interpretation.  I  apply  this' 
to  the  act  of  the  52nd  of  the  king,  and  say, 


that  it  can  have  reference  to  those  nstanoes 
only  which  are  short  of  overt  aicts  of  hig^ 
treason.  The  administering  of  an  oith  not 
amounting  to  an  overt  act  of  high  treason, 
may  be  a  felony  within  this  act,  but  not  othe^- 
wise,  because  parliament  cannot  be  presumed 
to  have  intended  to  make  that  felony  which 
vras  treason ;  and  no  overt  act  of  high  treason 
can  come  vnthin  the  act  as  a  felony.  It  can- 
not be  at  once  a  treason  and  a  felony. 

My  lord  Hale,  in  treating  of  the  question, 
how  far  subsequent  statutes  are  to  be  taken  as 
interpreting  the  statute  of  Edward  3rd,  and  ex- 
plaining, by  the  judgments  of  the  legislature, 
what  facts  are,  or  are  not,  overt  acts  under  that 
statute,  has  this  passage:  '^The  statutes  tst 
and  2nd  Philip  ana  Mary  c.  3.,  Ist  Ed.  6.  c.  12., 
23rd  Eliz.  c.  2,  making  sevend  offences  felony, 
have  this  wary  clause,  '  The  same  not  being 
treason  by  statute  25th  Ed.  3rd,'  '*  and  he  says, 
''Enacting  an  offence  to  be  a  felony,  is  a 
great  evidence  that  it  was  not  treason  before, 
and  a  judgment  of  parliament  in  point ;  for  it 
cannot  be  thought,  that  it  would  make  that  less 
than  treason,  which  was  treason  by  25th  Ed. 
3rd.''  Where  lord  Coke  wishes  to  shew,  that  a 
particular  act  cannot  be  an  overt  act  of  treason, 
he  thinks  it  sufficient  to  shew,  that  the  legis- 
lature has  treated  it  as  a  felony. 

I  fear  I  have  trespassed  too  long  on  your 
lordships' attention.  I  would  apply  what  I  nave 
stated  to  the  present  case,  and  I  need  not  take 
up  much  more  of  your  time.  I  would  api^y 
this  reasoning  to  the  act  of  parliament  in 
hand ;  and  I  maintain,  that  there  are  but  these 
two  mo4es  of  construction  here — Either  the 
act  was  meant  to  apply  only  to  those  oadis 
binding  persons  to  commit  treason,  the  admi- 
nistering or  taking  of  which  oa^s  does  not 
constitute  an  overt  act  of  treason, — ^I  aav, 
either  this  necessary  restriction  of  the  words 
is  to  be  adapted  in  their  construction — or 
else,  there  is  one  other  alternative,  and  it  must 
be  held,-  that  the  statute  of  the  52nd  of  the 
king  repealed  the  acts  of  Edward  Srd  and  queen 
Anne.    There  is  no  third  way  of  interpreting 


insult  to  the  understanding  of  ihe  Court,  to 
argue  which  you  should  adopt — whether  yon 
should  take  that  construction,  which  makes  the 
act  provide  for  the  emergency  forwhidi  it  was 
passed,  and  leaves  untouched  the  statute  of 
Anne,  which  was  introduced  for  the  safety  of 
the  subject — ^whether  you  shsdl  adopt'  that 
construction  which  unites,  vrith  the  remedy  for 
the  |;rievance  in  the  view  of  the  legislatore  in 
passmg  the  act,  the  leaving  the  valaable  pro- 
visions of  former  statutes  untouched— or  whe* 
ther  voK  IhaU  take  the  ofoosile  oonstmcdon, 
which  would  rep^  the  whole  of  these  laws, 
and-  would  introduce  into  the  law  regardillg 
treason,  a  rule  which  would  be  opprostve  to 
the  subject,  and  unsafe  to  the  sovereign,  by 
reducing  to  a  transportable  felony  an  overt 
act  of  treason. 

There  is  a  clause  in  the  acts  of  pariiament, 
of  the  37th  and  52nd  of  the  king,— the  list 


for  AiminiUrntg  taHamful  OatA*. 


3351 

dauae  d  these  acts,— in  the  foUowing  terms : 
''ProTided  also,  and  it  is  hereby  aeclared, 
that  any  person  who  shall  be  tried  and  ac- 
quitted, or  convicted  of  any  offence  against 
this  act,  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  indicted,  pro- 
aecnled,  or  tried  again  for  the  same  offence  or 
6ct,  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of  high 
treason ;  and,  that  nothing  in  tnis  act  contain* 
cd  shall  be  construed  to  extend  to  prohibit 
any  person  guilty  of  any  offence  against  this 
act,  and  who  shall  not  be  tried  for  the  same  as 
an  offence  against  this  act,  from  bi'ing  tried  for 
the  same  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of  high 
treason,  in  s^h  manner  as  if  this  act  had  not 
beennuide.'*  ^  conceive,  that  it  is  from  loosely 
interpreting  this  clause,  that  there  was  a  no- 
tion entertained  by  some  persons,  that  there 
is  something  in  it  which  opposes  the  construc- 
tion I  have  put  on  the  other  clauses.  You 
will  observe  the  very  same  clause,  which  is 
in  the  statute  of  the  62nd  of  the  king,  is  in 
die  act  of  the  37th  of  the  king;  which  last 
mentioned  act  regards  the  intentions  of  the 
parties,  as  well  as  the  purport  and  intend- 
ment of  the  oath,  and  whicn  makes  the  ad- 
ministering, as  well  as  the  taking,  of  the  oath 
oolj  a  transportable  felony.  The  clause  is 
in  the  one  as  well  as  the  other  act.  Let  us 
see— It  is  first  said,  ^  That  any  person  who 
shall  be  tried  and  acquitted,  or  convicted  of 
any  offence  against  this  act,  shall  not  be  liable 
to  be  indicted,  prosecuted,  or  tried  again  for 
the  same  offence  or  fetct,  as  high  treason,  or 
misprision  of  high  treason  ;** — let  us  see,  if 
there  be  not  a  case  consistent  with  our  in* 
terpretation,   which  renders   this    enactment 


•  A.  D.  1817. 


[326 


Sappose  a  person  to  be  brought  to  the  J)ar, 
under  this  very  ch^e.  which  is  here  stated 
against  the  prisoner,  for  adroinisterinjr  or  taking 
an  oath  binding  to  the  commission  of  high  trea- 
son, bat  by  the  levying  of  a  war,  other  than 
thai  particnlar  sort  of  war  described  in  the 
statute  of  the  36th  of  tlie  king.  It  is  laid 
down  by  all  the  authorities,  that  the  conspir- 
ing to  levy  war  generally  is  not  an  overt  act  of 
treason.  The  conspiring  the  death  of  the 
king  is  a  treason^  and  the  actual  killing  of 
the  king  cannot  be  prosecuted  as  a  munier, 
but  most  be  prosecuted  as  an  dvert  act,  testi- 
fpng  an  intention  to  put  the  king  to  death. 
Conspiring  to  levy  war  is  mtf  treason — the 
levying  of  war  itself  it  treason.  Then  comes 
the  statnte  of  the  36th  of  the  king,  which  de- 
clares the  compassing  or  imagining  the  levy- 
ing of  war  for  certain  purposes,  as,  to  con- 
stxain  the  king,  or  either  or  bt>th  houses  of  par- 
liament shall  be  considered  an  overt  act  of 
treason.  The  meaning  of  this  oath,  then,  if 
It  be  not  mere  words  which  mean  noting, 
was  to  bind  a  number  of  persons  to  leyv  war, 
and  this  to  constrain  the  king,  or  either  or 
both  houses  of  parliament,  and  this  amounts 
to  an  overt  act  or  treason  under  the  statute  of 
the  36th  of  the  king,  and  cannot  be  tried  as 
aCdofiy. 

'Suppose  war  levied  for  the  purposes  pro--^ 


fessed  by  those  unfortunate  persons  who-  as- 
sumed the  name  of  Luddites ;  for  the  purpose 
of  destroying,  in  the  town  of  Nottingham  and 
its  vicinity,  particular  pieces  of  machinery 
used  in  the  knitting  of  stockings.  To  destroy. 
stocking*frames,  or  any  particular  pieces  of 
machinery,  in  any  particular  place  or  dis- 
trict,, is  neither  levying  war  under  the  statute' 
of  Edward  3rd,  nor  under  the  36th  of  the 
king.  Suppose  they  had  levied  war — suppose 
they  had  conspired  to  levy  this  sort  of  war — 
it  would  not  be  treason.  It  could  only  be 
tried  under  this  act,  which  makes  it  feldny. 

Suppose  a  person  accused  of  felony,  under 
this  act,  for  aaministering  oaths,  to  levy  such 
sort  of  war  as  is  treason  under  the  act  of 
£dvrard  3rd,  but  the  con^irmg  to  levy  which 
is  not  treason;  and,  suppose  him  to  be  ac- 
quitted— and  suppose  war  afterwards  levied' 
by  those  with  whom  he  had  conspired ;  then, 
by  the  law  of  England,  vrithout  the  last  clause' 
in  this  act,  he  might  be  tried  over  again  for 
treason,  thoqgh  he  had  been  acquitted  on  the' 
trial  for  felony.  It  was  necessary  to  insert 
this  clause,  or  else  this  evil  would  have  arisen.' 
The  legislature  were  aware,  when  they  en-' 
acted,  that  the  administering  of  an  oath  to 
commit  treason  should  be  felony,  that  it  ap-' 
proached  near  to  an  act  constituting  high 
treason;  and  they  therefore  declared  that^'. 
though  it  should  happen  afterwards  to  be  dis- 
covered that  it  amounted  to  high  treason,  if 
this  did  not  appear  at  the  time  of  a  trial  for' 
the  administering  as  a  felony,  the  administra- 
tor should  be  entitled  to  plead  the  acquittaL 
That  was  equitable. 

Suppose  a  person  convicted  of  the  minor 
offence  of  taking  the  oath,  and  sentenced  to' 
transportation ;  the  act  declares  he  shall  not 
be  again  tried  for  this  minor  offence,  though 
it  may  have  involved  him  in  high  treason.  It 
is  a  reasonable  object  to  attribute  to  the  legis- 
lature, the  intention  of  putting  by  this  law  the 
subjects  of  this  country  in  safety,  and  prevent- 
ing them  from  being  oppressed  by  the  officers 
of  the  crown. 

The  legislature  have  in  their  view,  that,  in 
cases  of  treason,  the  counsel  of  the  crown  are 
employed,  and  great  pains  taken  to  convici 
the  accused — that  the  minds  of  the  jucy,  too, 
are  likely  to  be  poisoned  with  prejudice  against 
them.  The  legislature,  therefore,  where  there 
is  a  charge  of  treason,  give  different  rules  and 
afford  different  safeguaras,  from  those  in  com- 
mon cases  of  felony ;  and,  is  it  reasonable  that 
ibis  act  of  parliament,  made  for  a  particular 
purpose,  should  be  held  to  deprive  the  sub- 
ject of  these  safeguards  ? — or  can  it  be  held 
that  great  treasonable  offences  may  be  com- 
mitted, and  only  punished  by  transportation  ? 
You  see  how  the  judges  proceed  in  such  a  case 
in  England.  If  a  person  be  indicted  for  felony 
and,  either  upon  the  face  of  the  indictment, 
or  otherwise,  it  appear  to  the  judges  that  the 
act  charged  is  treason,  they  would  desire  the 
indictment  to  be  vrithdrawn.  and  an  indict- 
ment for  treason  to  be  preferred.    Suppose 


^m 


57  GEORGE  III. 


the  trial  proceeds  without  anj  snch  oljectiou, 
andy  on  the  evidence,  treason  is  found  to  have 
been  committed,  the  judse  discharges  the 
jury  of  that  indictment.  Judgd  Foster  says, 
1  will  not  give  a  chance  of  acquittal,  but  *I 
win  discharge  the  jury,  and  will  give  the  pri- 
soner the  benefit  of  the  mode  of  trial  appoint- 
ed for  cases  of  treason. 

What  is  the  result  of  an^opposite  con3trac- 
tion  of  the  act?  It  is  this.  All  actions  are 
popular  in  £ngland.  Persons  accused  by  an^ 
one  of  the  people  of  conspiring  to  commit 
treason,  must  be  broiight  before  a  grand  jury 
— ^but,  according  to  the  prosecutor^s  construc- 
tion of  this  act,  tney  may  be  guilty  of  treason, 
and  yet  be  tried  in  the  ordinary  way,  and  as 
only  guilty  of  a  felony.  An  accomplice  may 
indict  them  under  tl^ese  acts,  and'  those,  who 
ought  to  be  capitally  punished  for  treason, 
may  be  transported  for  seven  years  as  for  an 
inferior  felony. 

I  submit  upon  all  these  Tie^  the  prose- 
cutor's construction  cannot  be  put  upon  this 
act.  Felonv  merges  in  treason ;  and  i(  in  an 
indictment  tor  felony,  the  prosecutor  make  a 
charge  of  treason,  or  if  the  (acts  of  the  case 
turn  out  and  appear  on  the  fividence  to  be 
treason,  you  cannot  proceed  in  the  trial  for 
felony ;  neither  by  the  rule  of  the  common  law 
of  England,  nor  by  the  statute  of  Anne  referred 
tp.  There  are  no  words  in  the  act  59od  of  the 
king,  which  go  to  repeal  the  the  act  of  Anne, 
or  iibro^te  the  common  law.  The  interpr^ 
tatjon  given  by  the  prosecutor  would  involve 
the  acts  in  contradiction '  and  absurdity,  and 
ascribe  views  which'cannot  be  ascribed  to  the 
Isgislgtiire.  I  submi^  that,  according  to  my 
construction,  the  act  is  consistent  with  die  re- 
medy for  the  eyil — with  the  intention  of  the 
legislature — ^with  common  sense — ^and  vrith 
sound  construction  of  law> 

I  may  have  stated  some  things  at  too  great 
length  and  some  at  too  little.  I  was  anxious  to 
explain  my  view  of  this  case;  and  in  so  doing 
I  have,  I  fear,  trespassed  too  long  on  your 
lordships  time  and  attention. 

Lord  JfuOee  Cl&k. — The^  is^  no  occasion 
for  an^  apology  at  all. 

Mr,  Clerk, — An  important  objection  to  the 
Indictment  has  been  noticed  by  the  Court, 
with  respecit  to  which,  it  has  been  asked  by 
your  lordsl^ips,  *  wfaejLh^r  the  counsel  for  the 
prisoner  have  a  wish  to  argue  it?  I  beg  leave 
to  offer  a  few  obsifervations  upon  the  point. 

The  objection  is^  that  the  allegations  in  the 
indictment  do  not  describe  tjiat  offence,  which 
is  prohibited  by  the  act  of  parliament,  and 
ibat  therefore  the  indictment  is  irrelevant  ^nd 
inept^  The  crime  described  }n  fh%  sUtute,  is 
the  administering  an  oath  or  engagement, 
furporting  or  intfindu^  to'bio4  tlie  person 
taking  the  same,  to  commit  any  treason,  ^. 
But  the  prisoner  is  not  charged  with  an  pffence 
so  described ;  the  charge  gainst  him  in  the 

•FWein^p.^.  •       ; 


Trial  ofjfndmp  M^Kinky  {jggg^ 

minor  proposition  of  the  lndic|9ieilt  being, 
that  be  administered  an  oath  or  ehgagem^i,. 
binding  (not  purporting  to  bind)  the  peraon9. 
taking  the  same  to  commit  treason.  Thus 
tbere  is  a  manifest  difference  between  the 
statutory  offence  and  that  which  Is  cjiargurf  in 
tlie  indictment. 

To  administer  an  oath,  ffurporfuig  or  igf^pvf' 
mg  to  bind  the  person  t^ing  the  same, Is  i^ 
act  highly  criminal,  and  accordingly,  it  I9  hjf 
the  statute  punishable  with  death.  'Sdi  tne 
allegation  against  the  panel  charges  him  with 
an  act,  which  is  not  punishable  by  the  statute, 
in  which  no  such  offence  is  mentioned,  tn 
all  probability  no  statute  will  ever  be'  made, 
declaring  that  which  is  charged  against  the 
prisoner  in  this  indictment  to  be  punishable 
with  death,  or  with  any  other  punishment  op 
penalty  whatever.  But,  at  all  events,  the  pro- 
secutor has  totally  failed  in  this  indictasent  to' 
describe  the  statutory  offence.  Indeed,  the 
prosecutor's  description  of  the  crime  sup*' 
posed  to  have  been  committed  defeats  it^if, 
by  containing  a  plain  and  direct  contradic^on 
in  its  terms.  He  alle^  that  the  prisoner 
administered  an  oath,  Unditig  the  persons  tak* 
ing  tihe  same  to  commit  treason.  Tios  allq;^- 
tion  pre-supposes  that  a  person,  takins  an  oath 
to  commit  high  treason,,  is  txituify  hotmd  \fj 
such  ^  oath,  which  is  an  evident  absurdity. 
An  oath  may  be  bindinir  where  its  obligatiofi 
is  to  do  a  thing  that  is  legal  or  mnooetU  ;  bat 
no  obligation  or  binding  enga|en|ent  can  ever 
result  from  ah  oath  to  commit  &gh  treason,^ 
or  an  oath  to  commit  any  other  crime.  I^oVidy 
can  be  hotrnd,  by  the  most  tremendous  oath, 
to  violate  every  previous  obligation  and  en- 
gagement he  has  come  ni^der.  4s  the  pro* 
secutor  describes  the  offence,  thereibrey  no 
such  offence  could  exist;  and  the  statement  «€ 
it  is  a  contradiction  in  terms,  in  so  fiur  as  it 
supposes  the  par^  taking  the  oath  to  be  boond 
by  Sk  aU^tance^  without  which  he  could  not 
commit  high  treason;  and  supposes,  at  tlio 
same  time,  that  he  was  90^  bmmd  by  bis  alle- 
giance, but  actually  bonnd  by  the  c^4h  whidi 
he  took.  Such  an  absurdity  as  thi^  can  never  be 
sustained  in  any  criminal  chaj^e,  or  ^^eed  in 
any  legal  proceeding;  and  mud|i  less  jcan  it 
be  sustained  i|i  a  charge  vipon  which'  tbp 
accused  party  is  to  be  tri^  for  his  life.' ' 

But,  thou^  the  absurdity  were  less  evident 
than  it  is,  the  objection  to  the  terms  of  the  charge 
is  insurmountable,  upon  the  plain  and  simple 
fact  that  the  averment  of  the  prosecutor  does  not 
charge  the  prisoner  with  the  statutory  offi^oe.  It 
would  indeed  have  been  very  extraorduaa'nr,  if 
the  legislature,  in  describing  an  cifi^ce  of  so 
high  a  nature  as  to  be  pu^Ubable  with  death, 
had  fallen  into  the  absuidiiy  which'  bS4  crept 
into  tliis  indictment.  The  statute  does  ppt 
assert,  or  acknowledge  the  pb^ibiUty  of 
admioisterin;^  or  taking  m  na^y  S^  .if;nx^f^ 
enough  to  ^91^  the  person  taking  it  Iq  iDfnMIHt 
Ipeh  treason,  or  to  commit  njnrd^,  m  ai)^ 
other  crime.    On  the  contrary,  it  is  cle^^  j||^- 


90^] 


far,  Aiwa$i/d*n»g  wiZBtg^  Oalikt, 


A.  Ik  \X\1. 


capo 


ti9 A  ofLth  is,  to  all  intents  and  porppses  wbai- 
soever,  d^tftitote  of  lundiog  force.  The 
crioiiDalitj  contenplatied  i;D  the  statute,  ia  that 
cl  Tiolatiogy  bj  the  tota}  perrersion  and  mU- 
ujglipatioD  of  a  solemnity,  the  obli|^atiop8 
i^db  hjnd  n^^  to  each  other  in  apaety— a 
Tiolation  of  the  most  dangerous  Datorejjperpe- 
t{ff^  ]bx  ^  i90*t  widred  mean^  To  ad- 
Btpifter  an  |iMUh«  fwfpor^w  <'''  io^en^uv  to  bind , 
tpe  person  )^ing  the  saine  to  commit  any 
treason  or  murder,  is  a  wicked  and  dangerous 
^olsytipn  of  th^  most  sacred  engagements, 
though  ll  cannot  alter  them.  This  isthe  statutory 
crimp  ;  \mt  as  no  such  crime  is  charged  in  the 
indicti]»ent,  t)ie  oljection  suggested  on  the 
bejich  Is  petfiKtlj  well  foundedT 

JU^  J}riama^.'-\\,  is  now  my  doty  to  snb- 
mlt  to  ^oor  lordships,  some  remarks  upon  the 
Other  We  of  the  question ;  and,  after  the  long 
discussion  which  has  already  taken  place,  upon 
almost  the  aame  indictment  as  that  now  under 

Sdr  Tiew.  and  after  the  ample  time  which  you 
Te  bad  for  private  consideration  ot  the  sub* 
ject  now  before  you,  I  do  not  feel  myself  palfed 
qpon  to  enter  so  much  at  large  into  the  case, 
asotberwise  I  might  have  done.  Indeed,  there 
ffere  aome  argqments  used  upon  the  other  aide 
cif  die  bar  of  which  ][  fhall  omit  aU  notice  as 
not  appeving  to  me  to  hare  any  intimate  con- 
nection with  the  points  at  issue^  or  to  be  likely 
to  inflqence  the  ultxinate  decision.  But  there 
ase  others  which  are  of  gnat  importance  ;  and 
to  these  X  shall  at  once  proceed. 

The  first  and  gnsat  point  that  appea^a  to  me 
fiv  yjinr  loidiibip's  coii|ideration«  a*^  the  con-, 
strif ct^dn  ai^d  n^eaniqg'  pf  this  oath ;  for,  \inl^ 

the  sf^\>^  (he  mewing .iq!ch|<^l>  ^®  W^  VP<^ 
it,  it  18  Vi|)^^^jfes;isary  |o  Miy  a  ragle  wm  npp^ 
ttiy  pth^r  part  of  this  indictinent.  By  what 
rple  pf  constrpctiop  then,  are  wja  to  find  out  the 
veaning  of  ^e  oath?  Are  we  to  tiike  the 
literal  inieaniiig  of  the  words,  or  to  put  a  more 
Ipfero/  ooofiroction  upon  them?  I  ani  no^ 
itfiraid  of  any  of  the  rniym  of  construction  that 
may  be  adopted  on  the  other  aide  of  the  bar; 
bnt  I  snppqse  it  is  nnnecessaiy  for  me  to  say 
any  ibing  as  to  ^l^icnX  meaning  of  the  wocda, 
as  this  ml  obyioosly  bear  but  one  interpreta- 
tion; and  this  is  not  the  mode  my  learned 
friends  have  had  recourse  to.  tiet  us  then  take 
the  plain  meaning  and  sense  of  the  oath,  and 
pot  opon  it  thai  meaning  which,  in  the  common 
intercourse  of  )ue,  is  put  upon  yrordis ;  and,.  I 
hare  no  hesitation  in  saying,  that  tins  is  the 
mle  of  cqnatruction  jby  which,  in  my  6piniqn> 
the  oath  should  be  tried.  Itie  counsel  on  the 
other  side  have  employed  great  ingenuity  in 
a^^tUnppting  to^constme  Uie  oath,  and  have  tslen 
m  eovM  which  no  man  of  common  sense,  in 
the  ordtD^  affufs  of  life,  would  have  hit  upon. 
1bey.ha.Te  endeavtHnpad  to  construe  out  of  the 
qath,  a  reaerf ation  of  illegality,  that  is,  of  illegal 
anea^res, '  for  the  prpfecution  ,of  the  ol^epts  in 
view  lnr,t$oiie  hound  by  the  bath.  .  They  assert, 
tha^ w^en  this oafh  vaiidceD; jOu^JDM^fUdjiD 

w«  w^^wiloo*  to  Wmm^xImMfim^ 


in  Tiew  were  meantto-he  iiecpsipMfbied  by  all 
legal  methods,  but  not  by  any  illegal  methods, 
and  they  say,that  ypnrlorqsbips  are  called  upon 
to  give  this  construction  an4  meaning  to  the 
oath.  Upon  the  other  hand,  \  snbmit  that  there . 
is  no  reservation  pf  illegality  within  the  com* 
pass  of  this  oath.  The  oath  is  general,  and  has 
no  lesiervations ;  it  extpnd^  to,  and  indudes  all 
methods  neces^ry  for  the  accomplishment  of 
the  ends  in  view,  whether  by  moral  or  physic^il 
strength. 

In  constniing  the  meaning  of  the  oath,  in  a 
question  of  relevancy,  you  will  take  into  view, 
,  not  the  mere  meaning  of  the  words  of  the  oath 
itself,  bnt  al^  all  the  circumstances  vnder 
which  it  is  libelled  tf^at  the  oath  >ras  adfiuais-. 
ten^  and  tal^n. '  It  is  libelled,  that  the  o^th 
w^  Mnfcke^ly^  m)lu49l^y»  ^<^  traitorously  ad- 
ministered; and  iniported  an  ohlig^ion  tp. 
cbn^mit  treason. '  If  the  oaM^  nroy  mean '  wjuit 
the  pirosecntor  aays  it  does,  as  he  li^eU  thfit 
the  act  Tfas  done  wickedly,  maliciously,  and 
t^aitorotisly,  I  have  to  submit  ^at  the  charge 
is  relevant,  and  ihat  the  prosecutor  is  not 
bound,  in  this  sti^  of  the  process,  to  shew  thaf 
thb  is  of  necessity  the  meaning  of  the  qath. 
He  is  entitled  to  stimd  upon  this  frpond,  that, 
if  the  oath  may  mean  what  he  says  it  does ;  and 
my  bear  the  meaning  with  whioi,  in  Ubie  indict- 
ment, he  says  it  wai  administered  ancl  taken, 
you  are  bound,  libelled  as  it  is,  tp  give  it  ^e 
construction  which  the  prosecutor  says  it  bears, 
to  the  effect  of  sendin(|;  the  charge  to  a  jnry. 
It  will  ultimately  remun  for  the  jury  to  decLde 
as  to  the  guilty  purpo^. 

But  this  u  not  the  naked  case  before  your 
lordships.  There  arp  other  circumatancea . 
which  are  not  to  be  lost  sight  of  in  construing 
this  oath.  Your  lordships,  in  looking  at  the 
indictment,  will  see  that  the  oath  was  ad- 
ministered at  wrti  mHtimp;  a  material  cir- 
cumstance in  considering  the  views  and  inten- 
tions with  which  it  was  aaminiftered.  You  will 
remember,  that  the  society  or  conspiracy  which 
was  in. view  of  theperso'nawho  adojunisteredand 
toi»k  this  oatli,  was  one  of  a  very  extensive  nature, 
including  a  brotherhood  of  Britons  of  vrtiy 
description ;  and  that  the  oath  was  actually  ad* 
ministered  to  several  hundred  persons.  These 
are  remarkable  features  of  the  case,  that  the 
oath  was  so  extensivel^r  administered,  and  that 
the  object  of  the  association  was  so  unlimited. 
It  is  iho  set  forth  in  the  indictment,  that  this 
oath  has  been  administered  to  persons  who, 
conscious  of  their  guilt  in  the  premises,  have 
absconded  and  fled  from  justice ;  and  this  is  a 
circumstance  relevant  to  pass  to  an  as|nze,  and, 
likeall  the  othef  circumstances  libelled,  must  be 
taken  for  sranted  as  true  fay  your  lordships  in 
Judging  of  the  relevancy. 

The  taking  of  any  oatn  pf  secrecy  is,  of  itself 
a  presumption  o(  guilt;  and  a  secret  purpose 
of  any  kind  is  a  presumption  against  the  paneL 
1  know, .that  other  oaths  i^ere  alluded  to  py  the 
opposite  counsel ;  and,  as  an  instance  of  inno- 
cence t^tith  regard  io  the  objects  of  them,  those 
53KJgi;ej9p^|ipitf        9^.  ,  HiQh  I  Whmit,  that- 


3311        S7  GEORGE  III. 

I  am  correct  in  stating  the  general  role,  and 
that  these  form  an  exception.  Freemasonry 
is  an  old  |>iece  of  folly»  at  least ;  and»  it  is  not 
only  notorious  that  Freemasons  have  nothing 
to  conoealy  but  it  has  been  ascertained  by  ex- 
perience, that  mischievous  consequences  have 
not,  in  this  country,  foUovred  from  the  oaths 
of  secrecy  of  that  institution.  But,  though 
there  may  be  secret  oaths  of  an  innocent  de- 
scription, the  presumption  is  against  them,  and 
particularly  against  such  an  oath  of  secrecy  as 
the  present,  under  the  awful  sanction  of  death ; 
for  it  seems  to  hare  been  a  standing  rule  of  the 
conspiracy  to  murder  all  informers. 

The  attempts,  however,  to  shew  that  the  oath 
might  be  quite  innocent,  appeared  at  length  to 
be  abandoned,  and  a  distinct  admission  was 
made,  that  the  administerine  or  taking  of  this 
oath  is  a  ^misdemeanor;**  oy  which,  I  sup- 
pose, was  meant  (for  the  word  has  no  technical 
meaning  here)  something  criminal  at  common 
law,  though  not  in  the  highest  degree.  Now, 
if  it  be  criminal,  in  what  can  the  criminality 
consist  but  in  the  treasonable  purpose  and  pre- 
paration ?  There  is  plainly  no  other  wicked  or 
unlawful  purpose  in  view. 

The  oaths  of  allegiance,  of  supremacy,  and 
others,  were  alluded  to  by  Mr.  Cranstoun,  who 
ingeniously  argued,  that,  according  to  our 
principle  of  construction,  the  administration  of 
these  oaths  might  be  held  to  imply  an  obliga- 
tion to  commit  treason.  But  the  question  here 
is  not  what  extraordinary  constructions  the  in- 
genuity of  learned  men  may  put  upon  what 
may  be  placed  before  them.  The  question  is, 
What  would  a  man  of  common  sense  think 
upon  the  subject,  did  it  come  before  him  in 
any  ordinary  transaction  of  life  f  Such  fanciful 
illustrations  are  little  to  the  purpose.  But  I 
happen  to  have  here  a  specimen  of  another 
oath,  the  striking  similarity  of  which  to  the 
present  cannot  fail  to  Attract  'particular  atten- 
tion. It  was  the  foundation  of  all  that  con- 
spiracy in  Ireland,  which  afterwards  ended  in 
open  rebellion  against  the  government;  and 
your  lordships  wUl  see  how  the  terms  of  the 
oath  cited  in  the  indictment  tally  with  the 
terms  of  the  oath,  or  test,  as  it  was  called, 
which  I  am  now  about  to  read :  **  In  the  awfiil 
presence  of  God,  I,  A.  B.  do  voluntarily  de- 
clare, that  I  will  persevere  in  endeavourmg  to 
form  a  brotherhood  of  affection  among  Irishmen 
of  every  religious  persuasion ;  and  that  I  will 
persevere  in  my  endeavours  to  obtain  an  equal, 
mil,  and  adequate  representation  of  all  the 
people  of  Ireland.  I  do  further  declare,  that 
neither  hopes,  fears,  rewards,  or  punishments, 
shall  ever  induce  me,  directly  or  indirectly,  to 
inform  on  or  give  -evidence  against,  any  mem- 
ber or  members  of  this  or  similar  societies,  for 
any  act  or  expression  of  theirs  done  or  made, 
collectively  or  individually,  in  or  out  of  this 
society  in  pursuance  of  the  spirit  of  this  ob- 
ligation."^   I  hear  one  of  the  opposite  counsel 


Trial  ofAnirm^  M'KinUy 


r333 


*  See  the  trial  of  Finney  for  high  treason, 
5  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  1075,  in  which  the  aboTe 
oath,  or  test,  was  given  in  evidence. 


remark,  that  this  oath  contains  no  oblifption  to 
commit  treason ;  but,  I  do  not  know  with  what 
view  the  remark  is  made,  unless  it  be  to  mark 
the  contrast  between  the  oath  which  introduced 
the  Irish  rebellion  and  all  its  terrible  conse* 
quences,with  that  more  atrodons  oath  now 
under  consideration. 

Hie  terms  of  the  oath  in  the  indictment  are 
now  so  well  known  to  your  lordships,  that  I 
need  not  point  out  the  particular  differencea 
between  the  two  oaths. 

What  the  prosecutor  says  is,  that  this  oath 
means  to  bind  the  person  taking  the  same  to 
commit  treason ;  and  it  is  objected,  that  be 
has  not  told  your  lordships,  on  the  face  of 
the  indictment,  what  species  of  treason  the 
taker  of  the  joath  is  bound.to  commit.  Heie  I 
must  request  your  lordships'  attention  to  what 
appeared  to  me  to  be  apalpable  fallacy  in  the 
opposite  argument.  The  case  was  aU  along 
pleaded  by  the  learned  gentleman,  as  if  the 
prosecutor  had  been  chargine  the  panel  with 
the  crime  of  treason  itself.  Now  there  is  no 
charge  of  treason  ;  but  a  charge  of  administer- 
ing an  unlawful  oath — an  oath  binding  to 
commit  treason,  which  object  of  the  oath  must 
indeed  be  libelled,  otherwise  thereis  norele-' 
vant  charge.  But  the  indictment  is  not  to  be 
construed  as  if  it  had  been  libelled  that  treason 
was  actually  committed ;  nor  is  such  a  specifi- 
cation of  treason  to  be  required  as  if  it  had 
been  charged  as  the  offence  of  which  the  panel 
is  accused,  and  for  which  he  is  brought  to  trial, 
and  not  merely  as  existing  in  intention.  The 
essence  of  the  relevancy  is  what  the  panel  dU^ 
not  what  Ae  had  m  rHern ;  of  which,  no  more 
can  be  told  than  what  the  oath  itself  reveals. 
Any  thing  else  is  an  inference  in  law,  which 
can  add  nothing  to  the  relevancy.  Now, 
although  the  prosecutor  has  not  drawn  an  in- 
ference in  law  from  the  facts,  he  has  told  your 
lordships,  not  only  the  acts  done,  but  all  that 
he  knows  of  the  acts  which  the  parties  bound 
themselves  to  commit.  He  tells  what  the  facts 
are,  which,  it  is  the  infierence  in  law,  if  done, 
would  have  been  treason.  But  in  judging  of 
the  relevancy,  you  are  not  merely  to  judge 
whether  the  prosecutor  is  riffht  in  his^inference 
from  the  facts ;  your  lordships  will  go  to  the 
oath,  and  draw  the  conclusion  in  your  own 
minds.  At  the  same  time,  I  have  no  hesita- 
tion in  saying  here,  that  the  kind  of  treason 
which  the  parties  bound  themselves  to  commit, 
is  plainly  that  of  levying  war  against  the  king. 
I  shall  presently  speak  more  particularly  to 
the  treason,  and  will  show,  that  the  treason 
which  the  oath  bound '  to  commit  is  that  now 
alluded  to. 

Before  leaving  the  oath,  I  may  make  some 
further  remarks  upon  what,  with  such  ingenuity 
and  force,  was  stated  by  Mr.  Cranstoun.  In- 
stead of  taking  the  whole .  oath  into  view,  he 
divided  it  into  four  parts,  and  drew  separate 
conclusions  from  all  those  parts-^a  rule  of 
construction  quite  out  of  the  question.  It 
mi^t.be  as  well  pleaded  to  a  jury,  in,a  case 
of  circamstantial  evidence,  that  they  are  to 


aaal 


MHUnffid  Oathi, 


A.  D.  1817. 


[334 


of  each  drcunistance  by  itsdf.  In  con* 
ftniug  theoath.  Air,  Cranstonn  set.  oot  with 
statingf  that  a  brotherhood  of  afiection  is  an 
innoccDty  suod  even  a  laudable  object,  and 
somewhat  qpaintly  added :  ^  That  it  is  a  plei^ 
sant  thing  for  brethren  to  dwell  together  in 
unity.'*  This  may  be  veiy  ingenious,  but  I 
say,  with  deference,  that  it  is  tnfling  with  the 
case,  to  make  such  remarks  to  your  lordships. 
The  oath  is  not  to  be  torn  piece-meal.  The 
meaning  is  to  be  drawn  from  a  fair  considera- 
tion of  the  whole  of  it.  I  might  as  well  take 
each  wor4  or  letter  of  the.  oath  indiTidually, 
ai&d  say,  that  erenr  word  or  letter  taken  by  it^ 
self  is  not  criminal,  as  thus  break  it  into  parts, 
and  argue  upon  each  without  reference  to. the 
rest.  Not  that  I  think  his  conclusions,  even 
93  he  took  the  clauses,  were  justified  by  the 
clauses  themselves.  I  cannot  admit  any  such 
thing — but  I  protest  against  this  way  of  con- 
struing the  08th,^or  construing  any  thing. 
.  It  was  said,  founding  upon  the  pther  aigu* 
ment,  the  reservation  of  illegality,  that  we  may 
petition  for  annual  pariiaments  and  univers^ 
suffrage— that  these  objects  may  be  accomplish- 
ed by  lawful  means — and,  from  this,  the  con- 
clusion was  drawn,  that  there  was  nothing 
illegal  done  or  intended.  But  the  question  is, 
whether  the  end  can  justify  any  means  that 
mav  be  employed  in  obtaining  it.  It  b  the 
viount  mlamt  which  we  charge  as  criminal,  and 
these  are  left  totally  out  of  view,  in  the  argu- 
ment on  the  other  side  o(  the  bar. 

Then  the  word  ^  strength ''  is  taken  up,  and 
a  eoostmction  is  £^ven  to  it  to  show,  that  the 
term  in  the  oath  was  applicable  to  an  indivi- 
doal  and  not  to  a  number  of  *  individuals. 
Tbere  the  learned  gentleman  lost  sight  of  the 
beginning  of  the  oath,  where  the  brotherhood 
is  mentioned.  From  this,  however,  and  the 
whole  context  of  the  oath,  I  apprehend  it  to 
1>6  perfectly  clear,  that  in  considering  the 
meaning  of  the  word  **  strength,'*  we  are  not 
to  apply  it  to  an  individual,  but  to  as  many  as 
could  be  brought  to  join  in  this  society  or 
conspiracy. 

On  the  whole,  I  must  confess  that  I  have 
not  been  able  to  discover  the  distinction  be* 
tween  force  and  strensth  in  this  oath.  It 
would  have  conveyed  the  same  conclusion  to 
my  mind,  if  the  one  word  had  been  employed 
asw«ll  as  the  other.  Physical  strength  has 
just  as  plain  and  obvious  a  meaning  where  it 
stands,  as  any  words  can  have.  It  is  not  an 
nnoommoii  expression  among  the  lower  orders 
of  politicians ;  and,  I  am  afraid,  the  idea  is 
perfectly  familiar  to  them.  Now,  notorietv  is 
as  good  a  rule  of  construction  as  could  be  bad 
recourse  to.  It  was  said,  that  grammatical  nice- 
ties areout  of  place  here,  and  that  strict  rules  of 
criticism  would  be  misapplied  in  interpreting 
the  language  of  such  a  man  as  the  panel  at  the 
bar.  I  pmectly  approve  of  the  remark.  I 
wish  the  oath  to  be  taken  in  the  meaning 
which  men  in  the  lower  ranks  of  life  would 
apply  to  it.  Strength,  i^  it  here  stands,  can 
mean  nothing  else  than  the  means,  the  power. 


or  fDioe  to  be  employed  against  the  obstacle  or 
oontraiy  force  that  might  stand  in  the  waj  of 
the  accomplishment  of  the  objects  in  view, 
whatever  they  inight  be;  and  the  united 
strength  of  numbers  is  plainly  meant. 

Supposing  it  were  possible  to  put  such  a  con- 
struction upon  the  words  as  that  contended  for 
on  the  other  side  of  the  bar^  let  us  see  the  effect 
of  it — ^let  us  attempt  to  insert  such  unambigu- 
ous words  as  would  unquestionably  give  the 
oath  what  they  say  is  the  meaning  of  it :  and 
by  a  fairer  test  it  cannot  be  tried. — ^Tbus : 
*'  But  I  bind  myself  to  do  nothing  contrary  to 
law,  or  to  attempt  anything  by  force  against 
any  subsisting  right ;"  I  ask  whether  if  these 
words  were  stuck  into  the  middle  of  this  oath, 
they  would  not  stultify  it,  and  make  it  quite 
contradictory,  and  palpably  absurd. 

A  great  deal  was  said  about  the  presump- 
tion in  favour  of  the  innocence  of  the  panel. 
This  is  a  common  topic  of  declamation ;  but, 
I  must  confess,  I  never  could  understand  the 
presumption  of  the  innocence  of  a  panel.  I 
am  aware  that  the  omu  probatuU  lies  upon  the 
prosecutor,  and  that  if  he  fail  to  make  out  his 
case,  the  panel  must  be  assoilzied ;  but  I  see 
no  room  for  a  presumption  of  any  sort,  but 
^hat  arises  from  the  want  of  contrary  proof; 
and  I  know  of  no  such  doctrine  in  any  work 
upon  the  criminal  law  of  Scotland.  The  fact 
is,  that  in  a  question  of  relevancy,  there  is 
rather  a  presumption  of  guilt;  or,  to  speak 
more  correctlv,  an  assumption  of  the  truth  of 
the  libeL  Every  thing  is  supposed  to  be 
wickedly  and  maliciously  done,  as  libelled  f 
and  the  question  is,  supposing  all  this  proved 
as  charged,  does  it  infer  a  punishment  in  law  ? 
as,  otherwise,  it  is  impossiole  to  allow  a  proof 
of  what  is  alleged. — 1  misht  argue,  that  the 
presumption  is  against  the  man  who  takes 
such  an  oath  as  that  libelled,  which  even  my 
learned  friends  admit  to  be  contrary  to  law, 
and  a  punishable  offence,  though  not  of  the 
description  set  forth  in  this  indictment ;  and 
that,  from  the  very  circumstance  of  the  panel 
having  taken  such  an  oath,  the  onus  lies  no 
longer  with  the  prosecutor  to  prove  his  guilty 
purpose,  but  with  the  nanel  to  reconcile  his 
conduct  to  innocence  if^  he  can.  But,  upon 
any  view  of  the  subject,  I  should  like  to  know 
what  presumption,  or  what  rule  or  principle 
calls  for  such  a  construction  as  that  put  upon 
the  oath.  Is  it  the  protection  of  innocence,  or 
that  *'  iffue  of  public  duty  "  that  was  spoken  of 
in  tlie  last  debate,  or  any  laudable  principle 
under  the  sun,  that  makes  it  necessary  to  do 
such  violence  to  language  and  common  sense, 
to  suppress  the  truth,  or  to  pervert  the  plain 
'sense  and  fair  meaning  of  any  thing  ? 

I  shall  now  beg  l^ve  to  request  your  lord* 
ships'  attentiop  to  what  the  persons  adminis* 
tenqg  and  taking  thb  oath  bound  themselves 
to  do ;  and,  I  have  to  Submit,  that  it  is  plain, 
from  all  the  authorities  upon  treason,  that  the 
accomplishment  of  universal  suffrage,  when 
carried  into  effect  by  the  force  of  numbers,  is 
treason,  by  levying  war  against  the  king.    It 


iMf^]     57  o£X)fiefe  ki. 


TfM  tfAfOfti^  M'Khtty 


Isait 


fSdd,  tiflhch  mA(t  dtit  srdbitetfor  a  siidgle  day 
ilHtfe^  iQcb  a  s^^stetii  df  thingpi^  io  the  present 
dredinfftanc^  df  this  eitensiye  eibpire.  The 
accompHshtil^fat  of  aiiy  public  ptiiport  h^ 
Violence  i«  treasbh;  btit  to'  a<kM>tDmii8h  tini- 
Tennll  sdftrag«  bjr  vloleiicey  is  nndoabtedly 
t  d6^til;tioii  of  thfe  Cbnstitutidii  itsdf.  I 
db'  not  b^tietd  that  ihkte  is  H  differndbe 
dl^on^  injr  of  the  ^r^t  anthoritiet  upon 
tfafs  pblMt.  Id  lookrag  fl:it  authorid^  I 
natttfdly  had  reconrsie  to  soine  of  the  late  toals 
lor  treitfioh  in  Eofrland,  to  see  how  the  judges 
th6re  laid  doii«n  thb  latjlr  in  such  cates.  Loitt 
LoKghbohHigh;  in  the  case  of  Lord  Oeorge 
Gorddtt,  said,  ^<  I  am  peculiarly  hiippy  that  I 
ath'  euatpl«d  totftate  the  law  on  the  shbiect, 
not  ftom  any  rtetisonings  6r  deductions  of  my 
oWn,  whidh  are  liable  to  error^  and  in  which  a 
change  or  inaccuracy  of  elpression  might  be 

StoductiTe  of  mudi  mischief;  but  from  the 
ht  authotitr,  ftom  which  my  mouth  only  will 
be  employed  in  pronouncing  the  law,  I  shall 
State  it  to  ydu  in  the  word^  of  that  great  able, 
and  learhed  jhdge,  Mr.  Justice  Foster,  that 
true  friend  to  th^  libertiesjof  his  country.'^    I 

Sttote  this,  to  show  to  what  authorities  the 
English  judges  hare  tecouhie,when  consideriuff 
questions  of  this  kind.  At  the  end  of  this  trial, 
ue  same  law  wai  liud  down  by  lord  Mansfield; 
but  I  shdl  fitst  reid  the  passage'  firom  Foster 
ilimself.  Pait  of  it  was  alreddy  read  by  the 
kaf^ed  gentleman  opposite,  bift,  as  he  stopped 
Idabtly  where  I  vrished  him  to  go  on,  I  snail 
bt^  dnd^r  the  Necessity  of  riding  the  whole.  I 
f^u  At  ydur  lordships'  att^fttion  to  the  miantier 
in'  which  F6!itet  differii  from  th^  opinion  6f 
Hale,  on  the  very  point  on  Whidi  Hale's  au- 
thority luts  been  so  much  rested  on  in  the  pre- 
seht  case,  and  for  which  he  hlu  been  caued 
the  '<  great  father  of  the  law  of  treasons." 
Ilale*!)  opinion  does  not  appear  to  me  to  be 
qiiofed  as  so  completely  conclusive  on  the 
question  by  the  great  authorities  in  England ' 
as  is  done  here.  They  have  recourse  to  more 
recent  expositions  of  the  law. 

•<<Lord  Chief-Justice  Hale,*'  says  Foster,t 
''speakiuff  of  such  unlawful  assemblies  as  may 
amount  to  a  levying  of  war  within  the  25  Eliza- 
beth, c.  3,  taketh  a  difference  between  those 
insurrections  which  have  carried  the  appear- 
ance of  an  army,  formed  under  leaders,  and 
Srovided  with  military  weapons,  and  vri th 
rums,  colours,  Sdc.  and  those  other  disorderly 
tumultuous  assemblies,  which  have  been  drawn 
together,  and  conducted  to  purpcMies  mani- 
festly unlawful,  but  without  any  of  the  ordi- 
nary shew  and  apparatus  of  war  before  men- 
tioned. 

*'  I  do  not  think  any  great  stress  can'  be 
laid  on  that  distinction.  It^s  true  that,  in 
case  of  levyiogqf  war,  the  indictments  gener^ly 
charge,  that  the  defendants  wei^  armed  and 
arrayed  in  a  warlike  manner;  and,  where  the 
case  would  admit  of  it  the  other  circumstances 


•  «i  Hdw.  St.  Tr.  490,       t  Cr.  L;  208: 


cif  s#6rds;  guiis^drums,  colout^  &t.  h&Ve  bee<i 
added.  Buty  1  thkk,  M  mmk  of  the  cai^ 
hk^^  ubver  mrned  singly  on  any  of  tfaidie  cif- 
cutnstances. 

'*Iti  the  ctes  6t  Damatfeeand  PUrchlise;, 
Which  M  the  bst  printed  caSes  that'  have 
come  hi  jUdgmchit  on  the  poiht  of  cbnstrocUve 
levyidg  war,  thdte  was  nothing  given  in  evi« 
denc^  of  the  usuid  pageantry  of  war; — ^no 
mititaiy  weapons — nb  burners  br  drums — ^nor 
any  regular  consultation  previomr  to  the  rising. 
And  yet  the  wihit  of  th'ose  circtimstanc^ 
weighed  nothing  with  the  Court;  thbugh  the 
priboner*8  codnsd  ItisUfted  mucH  oU  that  malf- 
ter.  Tttif  number  of  the  insurgents  supplied 
dib  Want  of  ddlitaty  Weapons;  and  they  were 
provided  With  axies,  crows,  and  other  tools  oT 
the  like  natdric,  proper  for  the  mischief  thej 
intended  to  eifect : 


M 


Mt  e^v^^r    aev ^^Hv  ^^P^vwwvv  Vwv 


''Sect.  1.— The  tra^  criterion,  therefore,  in 
all  these  cases,  is  9110  ardiitQ  did  the  parties 
assemble  f  For,  if  the  a^lembly  be  upon  ad- 
count  of  some  private  quarrel,  or  to  take 
revenge  of  particular  persons,  the  statute  of 
treasons  hatti  already  determined  that  point  in 
favour  of  the  Subject.'' 

**Sect.  3.  (p.  21d.)— But  every  ihsurrec- 
tibn  which,  in  judgment  of  law,  is  ^intended 
agaihst  the  person  of  the  king,  be  it  to  de- 
throne or  imprisod  htm — or  to  oblige  him  to 
alter  his  measures  ^t  government — or  to  re^ 
movfc  evil  councillors  from  about  liim — ^Uiet^ 
risings  all  amount  to  levying  war  within  die 
Statute;  wK^er  attended  with  the  pomp  and 
circumstanbesofopenwkrofno.  And  every  con* 
spiracy  to  levy  vrar  for  these  purpose!l,  though 
not  treason  within  the  clause  of  levying  war, 
is  yet  an  otert  aift  within  the  other  clause  oT 
compassing  the  king's  deiith.  For  those  pur- 
poses cannot  be  effected  by  numbers  and  open 
force  without  manifest  ddnger  to  his  person. 

^Sect  4. — Insurrections,  in  order  to  throw 
down  all  enclosures,  to  alter  the  established 
law,  or  change  religion,  to  enhance  the  price 
of  all  labour,  or  to  open  all  prisons ;  all  risings 
in  order  to  effect  these  innovations,  of  a  piiS- 
lic  and  general  concern,  by  an  armed  force, 
are,  in  construction  of  law,  high  treasoiu 
within  the  clause  of  levying  war.  ror,  though 
they  are  not  levelled  at  the  person  of  the  king, 
they  are  asainilt  his  royal  majesty ;  and,  be- 
sides thbyhaVe  a  direct  tendehcy  to  dissolve 
all  the  bonds  of  society,  and  to  destroy  all 
property,  and  allgov^i'nment  tbb^  by  numbers^ 
and  an  armed  force  1  Insurrections  likewise 
for  redressing  national  grievwices,  or  for  the 
expulsion  or  foreigners  in  general,  or  indeed ' 
any  single  nation  living  here  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  king,  or  for  the  reformation  o^ 
re&l  or  imaginary  evils  of  a  pithlie  naiuret  ani 
In  which  the  insureents  haibe  no  nedal  ihtertst; 
riflings  to  effect  Uiese  ends  by  U)rce  and  nunh- 
bers,  are,  by  construction  of  law,  within  Uie 
clause  of  levying  war; 'for  they  are  levelled  at 
the  king^a  cto^  Imd  royal  dignity,'^ 


S^7J 


for  jUmittiiienwg  unlamfid  0kth9. 


A.  D.  1«17 


f  • 


isst 


PtartheTy  lA  tpfeakiaf  of  Um  case  of  DaiMre* 
Pdichase,  fcromriy  meataoiied,  h«  sayn, 
(p.  »15) '^  Ufdn  tka  trial  of  DtnwiMk  tlM  oMes 
reteved  to  oolbrek  in  seotioiit  4tli  ind  5lhy 
wore  cited  at  tha  bar;  -ood  aQ  the  judges  pre- 
aoiu  wore  of  opiinoo,  that  the  prisoaer  was 
guilty  of  the  high  treason  charged  upon  him 
m  tho  tndictment.  For  hero  was  a  rismg  with 
«B  aTowod-  intention'  to  domoliah  all  meeting- 
hottaca  in  general;  and  this  intent  they  car- 
nod  into  enooiition  as  fiir  as  they  wore  able. 
K  the  aaoeting  houses  of  the  protostant  dis- 
aanteta  had  toen  erected  and  supported  in 
daBanco  of  ^  law,  a  rising  to  destroy  such 
honsos  in  general,  would  have  fidlen  under  the 
ralea  laid  down  in  Keiling,  with  regard  to  the 
donaolishing  ail  bawdy-houses.  But  since  the 
»oeting-h<wses  of  piotestant  dissenters  aze^ 
by  the  Tolevalion  act,  taken  under  the  pro- 
tection of  the  law,  the  insurrection,  in  the 
present  case,  was  to  be  considered  as  a  public 
dedanUson  by  die  rabble  against  that  act,  and 
an  attempt:  to  render  it  ineflReotual  by  mimken 
md  ofm  firoe- — Accordingly,  Onmaree  was 
Ibund  gnilty,  and  had  iudgment  of  death,  as 
in  eases  of  high  treason. 

Thcae  were  the  passages  oooted  as  anthoritiea 
by  lord  Loughborough  in  the  trial  I  have  men- 
tioned. And  in  the  charge  to  the  juiy  by  load 
Mansfield,  at  the  close  of  the  trial,  a  summary 
of  the  same  doctrine  is  very  clearly  laid  down. 
^ There  are  two  kinds  of  levying  war;  one 
against  ^  person  of  the  king ;  to  imprison, 
to  dethrone,  or  lo  kill  him ;  or  to  malie  him 
change  measniea  or  remove  counsellors — ^the 
other,  which  is  said  to  be  levied  aaainst  the 
BM|esty  of  die  king,  or,  in  other  words,  against 
him  in  his  royal  capacity;  as  when  a  multi^ 
tnde  rise  and  assemble  to  attain  by  force  and 
violence  any  object  of  ageneral  publicnature,  that 
is  levying  war  against  the  majesty  of  the  kina ; 
and  moot  reasonably  so  held,  because  it  tends 
to  dissolve  all  the  bonds  of  soeiety,  to  destroy 
property,  and  to  overturn  government,  and,  by 
HNce  of  arms,  to  restrain  ue  king  from  reign- 
ing according  to  law. 

**  Insarrections,  by  force  and  violence,  to 
raise  the  price  of  wages,  to  open  all  prisons, 
to  destroy  meeting-houses,  nay,  to  destroy  all 
brothels,  to  resist  the  execution  of  militia 
laws,  to  throw  down  all  enclosures,  to  alter 
the  established  law,  to  change  religion,  to  re- 
dress grievances  real  or  pretended,  have  all 
been  held  levying  war.  Many  other  instances 
aigbt  be  put  Lokd  chie^justice  Holt,  in  sir 
John  Friend's  case  says,-^^  If  ^persons  do  as- 
aeaable  themselves,  and  act  vrith  force  in  oppo- 
smon  to  aome  law  which  they  -think  inconvo- 
■tent,  and  hope  thereby  to  get  it  repealed, 
thii  ia  levyfog  war  and  treason.*  In  the  pre- 
aentcaae,  it  does  not  rest  upon  an  implication 
that  Iher  hoped,  hyoppoeitidn  to  a  law,  to  get 
itiepeaMd;  but  the  proeecution  proceeds  upon 
the  direct  ground  that  the  oliject  was,  by  force 
and  violence,  to  compel  the  legislature  to  re- 
peal a  law :  and  thererore,  ^thout  any  doubt, 
I  tell  you  the  joint  opinion  ol«is  all,  that  if  this 

VOL.  XXi&II.  ^ 


multitttde  assembled  with  intent,  by  aots  of 
force  and  violenoa,  to  compel  the  legislalnre 
to  repeal  a  law,  it  is  high  titaaon.  Tbodgh 
the  form  of  an  indictment  for  this  species  of 
treason  mentions  drums,  trumpets,  aras^ 
swords,  fifes,  and  guns^  yet  none  of  iheae  cir- 
cumstances are  essential.  7^  funtkm  efaajfS 
ii,  wketktt  tke  mtmt  u  6y  ./orca  end'tMoies^ 
to  ettotn  en  object  of  a  gemBrtU  mnd  pubUe 
terej^  any  imtmmenUf  or  by  dmt  ofikeir 

In  like  manner,  segeant  Hawkins  thus  ex* 
presses  himself:-—'*  Those,  also^  who  make  afi 
insurrection  in  order  lo  redress  a  public  grie- 
vance, whether  it  be  a  real  or  pretended  one, 
and  of  their  own  authority  attempt  with  force- 
to  redress  it,  are  said  to  levy  war  against  the 
kin|,  although  they  have  no  direct  design 
against  his  person,  inasmuch  as  they  insolently 
invade  his  pierogative,  by  attempting  to  do- 
that  by  private  authority,  which  he  by  puhlie* 
justice  ought  to  do,  which  manifestly  tends  to 
a  downright  rebellion ;  aa  where  great  num* 
hers  by  force  attempt  to  remove  certain  persona 
flrom  the  king ;  or  to  lay  violent  hands  on  a 
privy  counaellor;  or  to  revenge  themselvee 
against  a  magistrate  for  executing  his  oflfot ; 
or  to  bring  down  the  price  of  victoals ;  or  to 
reform  the  law  or  religion;  or  to  pull  down  all 
bavdy-houses ;  or  to  remove  all  enclosures  in 
general,  &c.  But  where  a  nomber  of  men 
rise  to  remove  a  grievance  to  their  prtvato  in- 
terest, as  to  puU  down  a  particular  enclosure, 
intrenching  upon  the  common,  Ice.  they  are 
only  rtoterSb" 

I  am  not  afraid  to  place  beside  all  these 
great  names  our  own  authority,  Mr.  Hume,  in 
whose  work  you  will  find  a  most  luminous  and- 
accurate  summary  of  tha  doctrine  which  I 
have  now  been  quoting  from  the  English  an* 
thors.  Mr.  Hume f  says,  **  In  the  construction 
of  law,  the  levying  of  war  against  the  king  ianot 
understood  in  those  insurrections  only  which 
have  immediate  relation  to  the  person  of  his 
majesty,  as  if  the  object  be  to  dethrone  or  im- 
prison him,  or  to  drive  him  out  of  the  realm, 
or  to  cause  him  alter  his  measures,  or  to* 
remove  evil  counsellors  from  his  presence.  It 
equally  embraces  nil  those  risuigs,  which* 
though  not  aimed  directly  at  the  person  of  Uie 
king,  are  however  against  hij  rojral  majesty, 
that  is,  against  his  crown  or  royal  dignity, 
asainst  his  prerogative,  authority,  or  office. 
Under  this  description,  according  to  all  autho> 
rities,  falls  an  insurrection  for  any  of  these 
objects, — to  reform  the  established  law^  reli- 
gion, or  political  constitution  of  the  land ;  ot 
to  obtain  redress  for  national  grievenoes,  whe- 
ther real  or  imaginary.  For  though  they  b« ' 
real,  the  la#  and  government  of  the  realmi  aa 
tong  as  they  subsi^  cannot  know  any  thing  of 
this  course  of  correcting  them,  nor  mahe  an- : 
count  of  it  as  ai\y  other  than  rebellion  against 
the  king,  who,  as  head  of  the  stato,  is  bound 

to  prevent  all  such  forcible  interference  of  * 

■  ■    ■  ■  — ^— ^^^ 

*  21  How.  St.  Tr.  644.      f  ^  Comm.  437. 
Z 


3391 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ofAndrgw  M'Kinl^ 


[340 


private  person!  with  bis  own  fuDCtionti  or 
those  of  the  legisUoire  power.*' 

By  all  tbe  aulboritieSy  the  same  rules  of  law 
are  clearly  and  distinctly  laid  down,  and  they  are 
quite  applicable  to  the  present  case.  The 
treason  which  the  oath  binds  those  taking  it 
to  commit,  if  the  public  purpose  in  view  bad 
been  carried  into  effect,  tis.  the  establishment 
of  universal  sufiirage,  by  force  and.  violencoi 
•     would  have  been  levying  war  against  the  king. 

A  passage  was  quoted  from  lord  Hale  by. 
the  learned  gentlemim,  in  disapprobation  of 
an  expression  in  the  indictment,  ^  the  sub- 
version of  the  established  government,''  as. 
being  too  vague  for  a  charge  of  treason.  But, 
it  would  not  escape  your  observation,  that  he 
read  only  three  lines,  and  left  out  the  subse- 
quent part  of  the  passage  in  the  indictment, 
which  is  the  example  and  explanation  of  what 
he  did  read,  and  contains  every  specification 
that  is  possible  in  the  circumstances  of  the 
case.  The  statement  in  the  indictment  is, 
<5  which  oath  or  engagement,  or  obligation  to 
the  foregoing  purport,  did  bind,  or  did  pur- 
port or  intend  to  oind,  the  persons  taking  the 
same  to  commit  treason,  by  effecting,  by  pby- 
aical  iorce,  the  subversion  of  the  established 
goYernment,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this 
kinffdom,  siiid  ttpeciaUy  by  obtainmg  anmud 
parSameiUt  and  unhenal  tuffrage  by  untmofid 
and  vioktit  meam.*^ — As  to  the  word  force,  it 
was  introduced  merely  to  express  our  con- 
ception of  the  meaning  of  the  oath,  and  to 
shew,  that  we  understand  tirength,  where  it 
stands,  to  include  every  meaning  that  any  per- 
son could  suppose  to  be  contained  in  force^ 
had  it  been  there;  and  it  is  for  your  lord- 
ships to  say  whether  we  are  right  or  not. 

There  is  another  part  of  the  indictment  to 
which  an  objection  was  made — the  passages 
at  the  end  of  each  specific  charge,  which,  it  is 
said,  are  not   exactly  in  terms  of  the  ex-, 
pressions  of  the  statute.    The  truth  is,  those 
clauses  are  altogether  mere  surplusage.   There 
is,  besides,  a  previous  reference  to  the  gene- 
ral clause  at  tne  commencement  of  the  indict- 
ment. •  /'  Administer  or  cause  to  be  admin- 
istered, or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administer- 
ipg,  an  oath,  or  engagement,  or  obligation, 
.  tn  the  terms  above  ut  forth,  or  to  the  tame  pur- 
pffrt.**    Bnt,'  above  all,  there  is  a  most  distinct 
reference  in  the  phrase,  **at  taid  it,**  which, 
takes  back  the  attention  to  the  whole  preced- 
ing generali^.    This  is  the  general  mode  of 
expression  where  many  instances  of  a  crime  [ 
charged  are  stated — **  at  taid  it,**  being  added 
to  etich  instance  that  is  .given.    Forgery  and 
uttering  forged  notes,  for  example,  are  charged 
in  a  general  clause  at  the  beginning  of  an 
indictment,  and  then  particular  instances  are. 
g}ven  in  much  shorter  terms,  referring  to  the . 
.  preceding  generality;  and,  unless  this  is  done, 
what  precedes  must  be  totally  useless,  and. 
mere  surplusage.    Now,  you  will  observe,  the 
general  charge  is  the  only  one  in  which  the 
oath  appears,  and  reference  must  be  made  to 
the  clause  containing  the  oath  in  which  the 


words  of  the  statute  are  exactly  .repeated. 
9ut,  in  any  point  of  view,  it  never  was  thm 
doctrine  of  our  law  to  require  the  repetittoa 
of  the  precise  same  techniod  terms  as  are  used 
in  the  major  proposition.*  The  act  of  par- 
liament libelled  on,  contains  references  in  this 
manner,  from  one  claniie  to  another. 
.  There  is  another.part  of  the  indictment  to 
which  I  am  surprisea  the  opposite  counsel  did 
not  make  an  objection  similar  to  that  to  which 
t  am  now  speaking.  It  is  in  what  is  called 
the  '*  at  least"  clause,  where  the  word  itOend 
does  not  occur.  But  the  answer  is,  that  the 
word  is  of  little  Tslue  to  the  prosecutor  in  the 
present  case,  where  the  express  meaning  is  lo 
clear;  and,  at  all  events,  the  attention  most 
be  carried  back  to  what  precedes  by  the 
words,  *'  at  taid  it,"  ^  The  said  oath  or  en- 
gagement,*' also,  implies  the  whole  of  what 
goes  before.  But,  in  case,  this  answer  should 
not  be  satisfactory,  I  beg  leave  to  read  an 
opinion  delivered  from  the  chair  of  this  Court 
by  your  loidship's  predecessor,  in  the  case  of 
M*Iotyre,  and  others,  tried  for  house-break- 
iug,  in  1809 ;  and  his  lordship  did  no  more 
than  illustrate  the  doctrine  laia  down  by  Mr. 
Hume.  I  read  from  Buchanan's  reports,  page 
84.  In  addressing  the  jury,  the  learned  judge 
said  :  **  It  was  formerly  held,  that  if  the  public 
prosecutor  did  not  succeed  in  proving  the 
whole  train  of  circumstances  stated  in  the  in- 
dictment, the  jury  could  not  convict  the  pri- 
soners. This  was  felt  to  be  a  great  evil; 
since,  in  a  long  and  minute  statement,  it  was 
very  often  found,  that  a  few  particulars  were 
not  reached  by  the  evidence;  and  therefore 
the  act  was  passed,  which  declares  it  sufficient 
for  the  public  prosecutor  to  set  forth  in  his 
indictment,  that  the  panels  were  guilty  actors, 
or  art  and  part ;  not  tying  himself  down  to 
prove  the  whole  specific  detail  of  the  fticts, 
but  simply,  that  the  panels  were  special  actors 
of  the  crime,  or  art  and  part,  that  is,  accessary 
to  it  by  participating  in  it,  or  giving  assistance 
either  before  or  after  the  commission.  But 
there  is  nothing  in  the  %^t  which  says  in  what 
part  of  the  indictment  this  charge  shall  be 
brought  forward.  It  is  usual  indeed,  to  state 
it  in  that  part  of  the  indictment  mentioned 
by  the  prisoner's  counsel ;  but  if  not  stated  in 
the  first  part,  it  must  come  in  the  last  part — 
in  the  clause  beginning  with  *  at  least.'  But 
if  it  be  stated  in  the  first  part  of  the  indictment 
as  accompanying  the  direct  chaige,  it  is  un- 
necessary to  repeat  it  in  the  latter  part.'' 
From  this  it  appears,  that  the  indictment 
would  be  perfectly  relevant  without  this  dause 
at  all ;  and,  on- the  other  hand,  if  this  clausn 
be  correct,  it  will  supply  every  other  defect 
of  specification  in  the  indictment..  In.  short, 
it  is  here  entirely  for  the  benefit  of  the  prt^ 
secotor.    Hume,  Vol.  3.  412,  &c. 

One  part  of  the  case  still  remains  unnoticed ; 
that  new  view  of  it  pleaded  by  Mr.  Grant. 
I  am  not  sure  that  I  was  successful  in  obtain- 

•  3  Hume  304- 


S41] 


Jqt  Administering  unUmful  Onihi. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[342 


faig  a  dutioct  conoeption  of  the  bearing  of 
gre^  {Mm  of  that  argument.  Bat  I  must 
haxaid  one  or  two  remarks  opon  it  before  I 
sit  down. 

The  first  remark  I  shall  make  is  sufficiently 
obTioos,  that  it  was  quite  contradictory  of  the 
argument  held  by  Mr.  Cranstoun,  who  main- 
tained that  there  is  no  treason  in  the  case ; 
and  your  lordships  are  reduced  to  the  ne- 
cessity of  rejecting  the  one  or  the  other. 
That  pmnt  of  view  I  need  not  enlarge  upon. 

Your  lordships  will  next  observe,  that  this 
statute,  upon  which  the  indictment  is  founded, 
is  not  an  English  statute.  It  is  a  Scottbh 
statute  Jto  all  intents  and  purposes,  when  be« 
fore  your  loidsfaips  in  this  Court ;  and  I  cannot 
oonoeive  by  wtasit  operation  you  can,  in  inter- 
preting  this  Scottish  act,  introduce  a  rule  of 
the  common  law  of  England.  I  may  ha?e 
miacoDceiTed  the  leanned  gentleman's  argu- 
ment ;  but  I  must  state  fairly  the  impression 
which  it  left  upon  my  mind.  Yon  will  ob- 
serve, that,  in  this  act,  there  is  an  express 
clause  extending  it  to  Scotland,  and  providing 
how  it-is  to  be  carried  into  effect  here.  '<  Pro- 
vided also,  that  any  offence  against  this  act, 
if  committed  in  Scotland,  shall*  and  may  be 
piosecttled,  tried  and  determined,  either  before 
the  justiciary  Court  at  Edinburgh,  or  in  any 
of  the  circuit  courts  in  that  part  of  the  united 
kii^om."  And  then  follows  the  clause, 
^  Inat  any  person  who  shall  be  tried  and  ac- 

3ttitted,  or  couficted  of  any  offence  against 
lis  act,  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  indicted,  pro- 
secuted, or  tried  again  for  the  same  offence  or 
bcc  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of  high 
treason ;  and  'that  nothing  in  this  act  con- 
taiaedy  shall  be  construed  to  extend  to  pro- 
hibit any  person  guilty  of  any  offence  against 
this  act^  and  who  shall  not  be  tried  for  the 
tame  as  an  offence  against  this  act,  from  being 
tried  for  the  same  as  high  treason,  or  mis- 
prision of  high  treason,  in  such  manner  as  if 
this  act  had  not  been  made.*'  How  it  is  'pos- 
sible to  get  over  these  clauses  of  the  act  I 
know  not.  From  this  last  clause  it  clearly 
i^ypears  to  have  been  in  the  view  of  the  legis- 
lature, to  make  punishable  under  this  act  a 
crime  that  might  have  been  punishable  as 
treason.  Now,  if  punishable  here,  it  must  be 
by  our  common  forms,  and  cannot  be  other- 
srise.  The  statute  ef  queen  Anne,  in  cases 
of  high  treason,  extended  to  Scotland  the 
Eogli^  statute  law  of  high  treason,  and  re- 

Slatcd  the  fonns  for  trials  for  high  treason; 
t  it  did  not  introduce  any  general  principle 
of  the  common  law  of  England  for  the  inter- 
pretation of  Scottish  acts  of  parliament*  If 
this  bad  been  a  trial  for  high  treason,  that  act 
wosid  have  required  us  to  have  recourse  to 
die  statute  of  Edward  3rd ;  but  this  is  a  trial 
of  a  Scottish  law  offence ;  and  it  is  impossible 
to  nmintaSn  that  the  statute  of  queen  Anne,. 
hj  implicatioD,  abolished  the  common  law  of 
Iwotland  as  to  Scottish  law  offence— off<Qnces, 
pwtape,  of  a  totally  different  description  from 
By- what  rule  of  law  then' are  you 


to  proceed  in  applying  this  act  against  the  ad- 
ministration of  uniawfttl  oaths  but  by  the  law 
of  Scotland? 

.Your  lordships  do  not  require  to  be  re- 
minded, that  it  is  possible  to  try  primes  by  a 
lower  denomination  than  the  highest  by  which 
they  may  be  tried.    It  happens  daily,  in  the 

{>ractice  of  this  Court,  that  the  prosecutor  se- 
ects  a  lower  denomination,  notwithstanding 
the  panel  might  be  tried  for  a  higher  offence. 
There  is  another  rule  of  the  law  of  Scotland 
which  sets  the  matter  at  rest — that  in  no  case 
whatever  can  there  be  a  second  trial  for  the 
same  crime.  That  is  not  the  case  in  England. 
A  man  may  there  be  tried  over  again  for  the 
ftict,  under  a  different  denomination  of  crime'; 
so  that  it  cannot,  under  any  view  of  the  sub- 
ject, be  prejudicial  to  the  panel  to  be  tried 
under  this  act,  as  he  can  never  again,  upon 
any  pretence,  be  called  to  account  for  the 
same  fiicts  charged  against  him  in  this  indict- 
ment. This  principle  shows  how  useless  the 
principle  of  the  law  of  England  contended  for 
would  be  in  our  Courts,  and  how  inapplicable 
to  our  practice. 

In  the  cases  of  sedition  tried  in  1794,  I 
rather  think  in  the  trial  of  Skirving,  it  was. 
laid  down  by  several  of  the  judges,  and  ad- 
mitted at  the  bar,  that  some  of  the  acts  charged 
amounted  to  treason,  and  yet  they  passed  to 
the  jury  in  a  charge  of  seaition.  Ihe  objec- 
tion was  not  indeed  pleaded  at  the  bar,  but 
the  fact  was  in  the  view  of  the  judges,  and , 
particularly,  if  I  mistake  not,  mentioned  by 
lord  Abercrombie,  and  the  Lord  Justice 
Cleric.*  It  did  not  therefore  pass  unnoticed, 
and  yet  the  judges  and  lawyers  of  those  days 
saw  no  objection  to  let  the  charges  go  to  a 
junr. 

I  dare  say  I  have  omitted  many  things  which 
I  ought  to  have  stated.  But  there  is  a  great 
part  of  the  argument  on  the  opposite  side  of 
which  I  purposely  omit  to  take  any  notice,  as 
not  beiuff  at  all  material  to  the  points  at  issuer 
or  at  all  likely  to  affect  the  result  of  the  case 
in  this  Court ;  in  particular,  a  good  deal  of 
general  discussion  and  remarics  on  the  general 
nature  of  your  lordships'  duty  in  the  nresen^ 
case,  as  being  different  from  your  Juty  in 
common  pases.  T  trust,  my  lords,  I  have  said 
nothioff  Uiat  can  tend  to  introduce  into  the 
proceedings  of  this  place,  the  tone  or  cha- 
racter of  political  discussion ;  ■  but  I  cannot 
help  remaning,  that  some  things  have  been 
saia  on  the  other  side  of  the  bar  of  rather  too 
popular  a  nature,  addressed,  as  they  have  been, 
to  the  unbiassed  ears  of  your  lordships ;  -and 
(though  I  am  confident  they  proceeded  f^om 
the  best  and  purest  motives),  intended,  as  I 
must  suppose  they  were,  unless  it  is  admitted 
that  they  were  foreign  from  the  purpose,  to 
■influence  the  grave  deliberations  or  the  judges 

*^  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  512,  511 ;  see  also, 
Muir*s  case,  ibid.  235;  Palmer's  case^  ibid. 
291 ;  Margaret's  case,  ibid.  623,  626 ;  Sin- 
clair's case,  ibid.  796»  799,  800. 


$4SZ       SI  GEOitGK  lU. 


TrM  ^AitJrtm  M'Kinkjf 


"»44 


of  a  supreme  Court  of  jiietieey  before  wlioin  a 
oaestioD  is  at  stakey  affecting*  oq  the  one  hand, 
tne  life  of  a  fetlow-creature,  aad^  on  the  other, 
the  safety  of  the  state  : — *'  fuoi  ck  odiOf  ivm- 
$itiif  tr^  atque  mmrianrdiAf  vtcmm  cue  detet.** 

Lord  Advocate. — As  I  have  no  wish  to  tres- 
IMSS  unnecessarily  on  your  lordships'  time,  nor 
to  push  any  case  further  than  it  will  fairly  bear, 
1  content  myself  with  remarking,  that  I  think 
nvery  thing  has  been  said  that  is  requisite  to 
satisfy  you  that  this  indictment  is  relevant; 
and  I  do  not  feel  myself  called  upon  to  take 
up  the  time  of  the  Court  longer. 

Mr.  Clerk. — ^My  lords,  I  am  happy  to  think, 
that  I  shall  not  occupy  so  mudi  of  your  time 
■8  would  have  been  necessary,  if  my  learned 
friend  on  the  other  side  had  not  left  untouched 
a  great  part  of  the  argument  that  has  been 
•tated  for  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  by  the 
counsel  who  spoke  before  me. 

It  seems  to  me,  that  Mr.  Dnimmond  has 
not  sufficiently  attended  to  the  true  nature  of 
the  question  before  the  Court.  The  tendency 
of  a  great  deal  of  his  argument  was  to  show, 
that  the  oath  libelled  on  by  the  prosecutor 
.cannot  be  understood  in  an  innocent  sense,  or 
in  any  sense  consistent  with  the  innocence  of 
parties  to  it.  These  are  propositions  which 
4he  prisoner  need  not  coot^ict  in  this  trial, 
as  it  is  not  now  incumbent  upon  him  to  show 
Uttt  the  alleged  oath  was  altogether  free  of 
^  guilt  or  criminality.  On  the  contrary,  the  pro- 
'  secutor  must  establish  against  it  the  species  of 
criminality  imputed  in  the  indictment.  It  is 
evident,  that  an  act  or  deed  may  behighljrcrir 
minal,  though  it  does  not  infer  the  guiH  oi 
high  treason;  and  that  a  great  deal  of  guUt 
may  be  incurred  by  an  oath,  although  it  does 
sot  purport  or  intend  to  bind  the  person  taking 
it  to  commit  the  crime  of  high  treason*  The 
prosecutor  insists,  that  the  purposes  of  the 
oath  were  criminU ;  and,  possibly,  he  might 
jMve  said  a  great  deal  more  than  he  has  said 
to  the  sai^c  effect.  But,  it  cannot  be  allowed, 
that  wherever  any  crime  at  all  has  been  com- 
.mitted,  that  must  be  the  crime  of  high  treason. 
The  prosecutor  did  indeed  enlarge  a  good 
deal  u]|)on  the  enormUy  of  the  crimes  intended 
by  the  oath.  But,  in  the  present  case,  there 
ie  no  question  about  the  enormity  or  any  other 
l^t  toan  the  guilt  of  high  treason..  The  spe- 
eies,  and  not  ue  enormity  of  the  crime,  is  first 
lo  be  oontidered.  The  greatest  atrocity  at- 
tending a  crime  which  is  not  treason,  will  not 
eonvert  it  into  treason. 

I  must  aUso  take  notice,  that  my  learned 
friend,  in  his  endeavours  to  magnify  the  guilt 
of  this  oath,  had  recourse  to  a  new  doctrine, 
eipressing  at  the  least  his  own  doubts,  as  to 
the  legal  presumption  of  innocence  in  favour 
of  a  prisoner  on  his  trial,  and  even  denying 
that  there  is  any  such  presumption.  But  even 
.this  extraordinary  doctrine,  though  it  were 
ioand,  woiUd  not,  by  depriving,  ibe  prisoner 
4^  th^  legal  advantages  of  nis  deSinoe,  convert 
the  enme  alleged,  how  aggravated  soever^  into 


a  crime  of  a  di£brent  spteies  not  alleged,  or 
change  the  sort  of  criminality  appearing  from 
the  oath  now  in  question,  into  a  criminality  of 
a  different  species,  not  Appearing  from  the 
oath.  But  I  am  amased  at  the  boldness,  as 
well  as  at  the  novelty  of  denying  the  legal  pea* 
sumption  in  favour  of  innocence,  which,  till 
now,  I  never  heatd  disputed ;  and  I  never  wee 
present  at  any  criminal  trial  in  which  it  wae 
not  admitted,  either  in  express  teims,  or  hgr 
evident  impUcation,  in  every  argument  eft 
either  side  in  the  proceeding. 

It  may  be  admitted,  however,  that  the  oath, 
though  it  is  not  liable  to  the  unfounded  end 
imaginary  construction  averred  bv  the  pnhiie 
prosecutor,  was  mischievous  and  ^oHnal  ta 
lU  tendency  ;  insomuch,  that  tite  partiee  to  il 
mieht  have  been  punished  with  some  severity, 
under  an  indictment  accurately  setting  fordi 
the  true  nature  of  the  offence.  But  the  poblip 
prosecator,  instead  of  bringing  the  merits  eC 
the  case  to  a  fair  trial,  in  which  it  is  probable 
that  the  general  good  wishes  of  the  community 
would  have  attended  him,  has  not  only  charged 
the  prisoner  with  a  treasonable  int^t,  but,  ia 
the  support  of  this  unteiiable  hypothesis,  hee 
imputeo  even  to  such  parts  of  die  oath  as  are 
evidently  innocent,  or  at  least  entirely  free  of 
treason,  the  whole  atrocity  of  that  offenee. 
This  attempt  is  hardly  a  subject  for  argument. 
Neither  the  endeavours  to  form  a  brotherhood 
of  affection,  nor  the  endeavours  to  obtain  uni- 
versal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments,  nor  die 
secrecy,  were  treasonable  in  themselves.  Some 
of  the  objects  in  view  were  even  legal  and  Ma» 
nocent.  A  brotherhood  of  affection  is,,  if  I 
understand  it^  at  least  innocent,  and  it  may  be 
a  useful  and  meritorious  institution.  A  pins 
for  obtaining  universal  suffrage  and  annnal 

Sirliaments,  is  held,  by  manv,  to  be  ineape* 
ient  in  its  nature,  while  others  think  it  not 
only  expedient,  but  absolutely  necestaiy. 
That  endeavours  majr  be  legally  used  for  ob- 
taining such  a  change  in  the  Uiw  of  pariiasient» 
will  not  be  denied  by  any  person  who  undefw 
stands  what  is  meant  by  the  statement.  And 
though  vei^  illegal  means  may  be  used  for  pie* 
ducing  so  important  a  diange,  it  does  not  fol* 
low,  either  that  every  means  iised  for  that  pofw 
pose  are  illegal,  or  mat  the  means,  if  iUegel* 
must  necessarily  be  treasonable.  A  resolotiea 
of  s^recy  would  not  have  been  illegal;  aad> 
though  I  readily  allow  that  an  otik  of  secreej 
was  at  least  questionable,  tlie  absurdity  ii 
charging  it  as  a  treason,  or  as  being  an  oatk 
to  commit  treason,  must  be  manifest. 

I  must  repeat,  that  without  anjr  prwodice  t* 
the  prisoners  defence  against  this  indiclmest, 
it  may  be  supposed,  that  the  oaih  had  an  iUa* 
gal  or  criminsl  intent.  The  question  upon  the 
nature  of  the  oath  is  not,  whether  it  impoite 
an  obligation  of  an  illegal  or  arimiml  natwt  ? 
but  whether,  as  it  is  recited  in  the  indietmeni^ 
it  is  an  oath  purporting  or  intendrng  to  liaed 
tbe  person  uking  ikie  same  tot  winmit  iMI 
crime  of  hifl[h  treason  ?  Hm  ir.  tbe  piope^  jiiMe 
of  the  qaesuoo,  which  oit^t  te  be  k^  siMdily 


us] 


Jw  AdmbtUtering  unhnnfid  Oaihi. 


A.  D.  181 


i* 


[340 


in  view.  And  bete'il  mtty  be  observed,  tbftt 
the  meaning  of  the  oath  cwi  only  b«  discorered 
from  he  own  terms;  ftnd  thift»  as  the  true 
meaning  is  disputed,  the  same  rules  of  inter- 
pretalioo  must  be  apfrfied  that  are  applicable 
m  other  oases,  to  ascertain  the  *  meaning  of 
voids ;  keeping  alwajfs  m  view,  not  only  the 
IMeral  roles  of  interpietatioD,  but  those  rules, 
the  operation  of  which  is  more  confined,  and 
which  l^>ply  mofe  particolarly  to  words  in 
which  a  eriminal  iiite&t  is  alleged. 

la  such  h  qoeetiofi  as  this,  thb  prisoner  is 
•atitled  to  expect,  that  suspicions  and  con- 
jselmns  tie  to  be  laid  tmt  of  consideration ; 
andespeciaRy  ^MSb  which  do  not  originate 
from  the  terns  of  the  oith  itself,  but  from*  ei« 
tnoraeus  eircamstanoes,  or  allegations  as  to 
the  views  of  the  person  who  administered,  or 
the  petaoii  who  tdok'  il^  or  those  connected,  or 
alleged  to  be  eonneeted  with  them  in  the  same 
mMMitaiiingt.  Fdr  if  the  oath  is  an  offence  in- 
dietabte  on  the  statute,  it  is  so  indictable 
merely  in  respect  of  its  own  proper  meaning, 
er  the  meaning  of  its  words,  and  not  in  respect 
of  any  talent  io  the  parties  to  il,  or  their  sop- 
poeed  confederates,  not  appearing  from  the 
wmds  of  the  oath,  and  lar  less,  can  saspidons 
er  coQJeetnres  as  to  the  mtent  of  such  persons, 
bft  admitted  under  this  indicHment.  IRiataik 
eath  tadictable  under  the  statute,  purports  or 
miends  to  bind  the  persons  taking  the  same  to 
eemmit  the  crime  of  high  treason,  may  be 
proved  in  two  if  ays ;  either  by  the  plain  and 
iiseet  words  of  the  oath,  where  it  binds  the 
party  dearly  and  unequivocally,  to  do  that 
which  it  is  high  treason  to  do ;  or  where  it 
binds  them  to  do  that,  which,  by  plain  and 
teneoaable  inference,  is  an  overt  act  of  treason. 
Bm,  as  anspicioiis  and  conjectures,  drawn 
from  drcnmstances  that  aie  extraneous  to  the 
onth,  are  inadmissible  ander  an  indictment  on 
the  sCatnte,  so,  by  parity  of  reasoning,  it  is 
cqiaaUy  dear,  that  suspicions  or  conjectures, 
aven  wheta  they  are  drawn  from  the  words  of 
the  aalk,  and  from  nothing  else,  are  inad^ 
aumible.  For  it  mast  be  proved,  and  not 
nseraly  saspaeted  or  oonjecfnred,  from  the 
teiue  of  the  oalh^  that  it  purports  an  obligation 
to  commit  high  treisoo.  Demonstration  is  re- 
ly and  net  mere  suspidon  or  oonjectttu'e ; 
■a  not  limited  bjf  the  truth,  but  get 
tlienMies  of  human  mgenuityr  Wherever 
admitted,  the  conclusion  mast  be 
and  arbitrary.  This  is  npt  authorised 
by  the  statute  Kbelled  on;  which  mflexiUy 
fcqnirea  an  oath  purporting  or  intendmg  to 
bind  the  person,  taking  the  same  to  commit 
tfaaaoB,  and  thus  evidently  requires  a  certainty 
•rising  from  the  terms  of  the  oath,  urithoot  a 
aiztare  of  guesses,  suspicions,  or  conjectures, 
htm  plansible  soever  they  may  be.  - 

And  farther,  it  may  be  remarked,  thai  if 
aaftaittty  is  required  as  to  this  import  or  mean- 
ing of  tl«  oath  it  is  not  sufficient  to  allege 
agiimit  the  prieener,  dui  an  oath,  in  such 
wmump  nmgr  Mre  been  misuid^fatood  by  the 
|fefHNi  tHMig'  tt^  end  aupposod  to  be  an  obli* 


gstkm  to  commit  high  treason,  though  it  really 
was  not  so.  For  ignorant  or  illiterate  persons 
may  very  easily  misconceive  the  meaning  of 
words;  and  even  those  who  are  better  iw- 
formed,  may  so  misconstrue  them,  as  to  think 
their  meaning  is  bad,  when,  in  reality,  it  ii 
innocent ;  or,  if  the  meaning  is  criminal,  t4 
think  it  is  treasonable,  when  it  is  not  treason* 
able,  and  when  no  .such  meaning  was  in  the 
mind  of  other  persons  to  whom  the  woids  weire 
used.  Under  an  indictment  of  this  kind^ 
therefore,  whether  against  the  party  who  ad- 
ministered, or  against  the  party  who  took  the 
oath,  the  misunderstanding  or  misconstriAstaon 
of  oUier  persons  can  signify  nothing.  It  ought 
to  be  considered,  whether  the  terms  of  the 
oath  do  necessarily  and  unavoidably  nuirport 
an  obligation  to  commit  high  treason  ;  and  die 
prisoner  is  even  entitled  to  mmntain,  dial  if 
the  oath  can  be  understood  in  any  otlier  sens^ 
with  a  probability  that  it  wai  so  understood 
by  him,  or  by  the  person  taking  it,  there  was 
no  obligation  to  commit  high  treason,  such  at 
the  statute  means,  and  there  is  no  relevancy 
in  this  indictment. 

And  this  may  be  inferred  even  from  tho 
terras  of  the  indictment  itself,  in  which  it  it 
alleged,  that  the  oath  was  administered  wick- 
edly, malieioosly,  and  strange  to  say,  traitor^ 
cum/.  The  terms  wickedly  and  mdictotislyit 
were  necessary  to  denote  the  ciimind  qnthty 
of.the  act,  or  the  wicked  intent  of  the  accused  ; 
and  they  exemdiiy  the  principle,  that  no 
person  is  to  be  neld  as  a  criminal,  where  he 
acted  without  a  criminal  intent. 

Iv  this  case  it  is  not  alleged  against  the 
prisoner,  that  there  was  any  treasonable  or 
other  wicked  purpose,  or  indeed  any  particular 
purpose  in  view,  when  the  oath  was  adminie« 
teradl.  No  treasonable,  or  seditious,  or  other* 
wise  illegal  assodation  is  so  much  as  men« 
tioned  or  hinted  at  in  this  indictment.  Tba 
allegation  of  the  public  prosecutor  is  confined 
as  it  ouffht  to  be,  to  the  nature  of  the  oath  itself; 
the  words  of  which  are  set  forth  as  being  su^ 
fident  evidence  of  their  own  criminality,- 
without  the  aid  of  extraneous  drcuihstances. 
Here,  then,  the  prosecutor  is  at  issue  with  the 

Srisoner,  upon  the  question,  whether  this  oathr 
oes  plainly  and  neoessarily  import  an  obHga«« 
tion  to  commit  hi^  treason,  or  is  equally 
criminal  with  an  obligation,  in  terms  exprese 
mid  direct,  to  compass  the  death  of  the  king  ; 
to  levy  war  against  him ;  or  in  any  other  terms, 
expressing,  without  ambiguity,  an  obligation 
to  commit  high  treason,  or  to  commit  a  crtmia 
that  is  punishable  in  terras  of  this  act  of  pM^ 
liament.  That  the  oath  contains  no  iAich  oIn 
ligation,  in  express  or  direct  terms,  is  suf- 
ficiently obvious.  And  it  is  only  by  a  forced 
and  unnatural  construction  of  the  words,  that 
the  prosecutor  has  attempted  to  make  out, 
that  there  is  in  the  oath,  not  an  express  obU^ 
gation  to  commit  high  treasois,  for  that  seemw 
te  be  oat  of  the  question,  bat  anoUi^tion  to 
he  ooUnctM  firom  siippotfitiMte  4f  itnplicitioo 
and  piakufapcioa  darivM  from  diilM|it  parte 


847] 


57  GEOUGB  III. 


Trial  of  Andrew  M^KMey 


[34S 


of  tb€  oatfay  in  whichy  hoi  merely  a  wicked 
inteot,  but  the  most  wicked  of  all  intents  on 
the  part  of  the  prisoner  is  taken  for  granted, 
without  any  evidence  or  any  reason  whatever. 
This  is  not  dealing  fairly  with  a  question  of 
this  kind.  Admitting  that  all  the  words  of 
thia  oath  are  to  be  taken  into  consideration, 
and  combined,  where  they  are  capable  of  being 
combined,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining 
whether  there  exists  in  tne  whole,  or  any  part 
of  the  oath,  -a  criminal  intent,  of  that  species 
that  is  alleged  in  the  indictment ;  it  is  evident 
that  the  conclusion  for,  or  against  the  prisoner, 
ought  to  be  gathered  from  the  reasonable  in* 
ferences  or  presumptions,  and  not  from  ex- 
ftglfented  suppositions  of  wicked  intention,  for 
which  there  is  no  foundation  in  the  terms  of 
the  oath. 

But  if  this  is  the  nature  of  the  question  be- 
fore the  Court,  it  seems  to  be  of  some  impor- 
tance to  remark,  that  a  decision  upon  the 
relevancy  of  the  indictment  is  in  truth  a  de- 
cision upon  the  merits  of  the  case,  if  it  shall 
be  proved  that  the  prisoner  did  actually  ad- 
minister the  oath ;  for  your  lordships  cannot 
sustain  the  relevancy  of  the  indictment  without 
being  of  opinion  that  tbe  oath  purports  and  in* 
tends  as  the  prosecutor  says  it  does. 

Your  lordships  will  therefore  pause  before 
you  pronounce  an  interlocutor  sustaining  the 
relevancy  of  this  indictment ;  for  by  so  doing, 
you  just,  in  so  many  words,  give  your  opinion 
that  the.  oath  has  had  the  bad  meaning  assigned 
to  it,  anKi  can  have  no  other  meaning.  In 
other  words,  you  pronounce  a  verdict  against 
the  panel — and  yet  it  must  remain  a  question 
for  tne  jury,  if  it  shall  be  proved  that  the  oath 
was  administered — Whether  the  words  of  the 
oath,  imported  the  statutory  offence  or  not  t 
In  every  other  case,  you  sustain  the  relevancy 
of  an  allegation,  of  which  the  import  is  clear 
and  unequivocal ;  but  by  following  a  similar 
course  here,  you  confirm  the  prosecutor's  inter- 
pretation of  an  act,  In  itself  ambiguous,  to  say 
the  least  of  it ;  and,  in  fact,  exhaust  the  main 
question  as  to  the  guilt  of  the  panel 

And  therefore,  unless  your  lordships  shall 
be  satisfied  that  the  oath  necessarily  imports 
the  obligation  alleged,  you  must  reject  the  in- 
dictment upon  the  relevancy.  For,  if  the  oath 
do  not  necessarily  import  an  obligation  to 
commit  high  treason,  tne. panel  administered 
that  oath  without  being  guilty  of  the  crime 
alleged  against  him. 

And  uoder  these  circumstances,  the  judg- 
ment of  your  lordships  ought,  according  to  the 
common  rules,  to  be  in  favour  of  the  prisoner. 
Where  there  is  any  doubt,  it  operates  m  favour 
of  the  panel.  He  is  presumed  to  be  innocent 
until  he  is  proved  to  be  guilty ;  and  that  pre- 
sumption opemtes  upon  every  doubtfol  case. 
In  dubOi  benigttiora  ^referenda  ntM.  And 
(bis  maxim  applies  very  'strongly  to  the  con- 
struction of  woids  alleged  to  be  of  a  criminal 
nature.  My  learned  friend  applied  it,  vritfa  his 
usual  ability,,  to  vthe  words  in  tne  oath  respect* 
ing  the  plan  of  brotherhood,  annual  elections, 


and  universal  suffrage,  and  the  support  of  thaw 
objects  by  physical  strength. 

We  are  told  that  these  parties  had  very 
criminal  purposes  in  view ;  and  therefore,  it  is 
to  be  presumed  that  nothing  innocent  was  in 
the  oath.  But  I  can  never  admit  the  justice 
of  such  reasoning.  Where  a  project  or  en- 
gagement of  any  sort,  which  does  not  of  itself 
import  that  violence  is  to  be  used,  is  to  be 
supported  vrith  the  whole  of  a  man's  power, 
innuence,  and  even  strength,  it  is  to  be  under- 
stood, unless  there  are  plain  words  from  which 
the  contrary  should  be  inferred,  that  it  binds 
him  only  to  use  his  utmost  lawfol  endeavours, 
and  for  a  lawful  object.  Upon  the  principles 
of  the  prosecutor  in  this  case,  any  engagement 
whatever  may  be  construed  as  an  obligation  to 
commit  treason. 

After  reciting  the  terms  of  the  oath  in  this 
indictment,  the  prosecutor  proceeds  to  pot  n 
construction  upon  them  which  is  evidently 
fiuilty.  It  is  faulty  in  many  respects.  Thfr 
allegation  is,  that  the  oath  purports  an 
obligation  to  commit  high  treason.  And  how 
is  the  supposed  high  treason  to  be  committed  ? 
'*  Bv  effecting,  by  physical  force,  the  subversion 
of  tne  established  government,  laws,  and  con- 
stitution of  this  kingdom,  and  especially,  by 
obtaining  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
suffrage,  by  unlawftil  and  violent  means.*' 
This  is  the  allegation.  The  relevancy  of  this 
part  of  the  indictment  stands  upon  the  natur* 
of  that  allegation. 

Now,  in  cases  of  high  treason,  the  averment 
must  be,  that  a  certain  speoj/Sc  iremtm  was  com- 
mitted— it  is  not  sufficient  to  say  generally 
that  high  treason  was  committed.  This  pro« 
position  cannot  be,  and-  it  has  not  been  dis- 
puted where  the  crime  of  high  treason  itself  is 
charged.  But  we  are  told  that  this  is  not  a 
trial  for  high  treason.  This,  however,  is 
nothing  at  all  to  the  purpose,  for  the  ratio  iegm 
is  equally  applicable  here,  as  in  trials  for  high 
treason.  Supposing  this  were  a  trial  for  high 
treason,  the  averment  in  the  indictment  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  oath  would  not  be  sufficient, 
because  it  does  not  describe* any  particular 
species  of  high  treason — ^it  merely  describes 
a  common  law  treason,  which  was  abolished 
by  the  statute  of  Edward  8rd.  Ever  since  that 
salutary  act  was  passed,  treason  has  stood 
entirely  upon  statute.  Every  prosecution  for 
treason  must  be  founded  upon  a  particular 
statute>-and  it  must  set  forth,  specifically,  the 
nature  of  the  treason  that  is  charged. 

And,  although  this  is  not  a  trial  for  high 
treason,  but  a  prosecution  against  the  panel 
for  having  administered  an  oath  for  commitiing 
high  treason,  it  is  evident  that  the  panel  is  in 
the  same  case  as  if  it  were  a  trial  for  high 
treason.  For,  if  justice  requires  that  the 
treason  shall  be  specified  in  a  trial  for  treason, 
the  same  principle  must  require,  that  in  n 
charge  that  a  criminal  oath  was  administered, 
the  nature  of  the  crime  to  which  the  oath  refois 
must  be'stated^  for  otherwise  the  accused  has 
no  notice  as  to  the  nature  of  the  crime  for  which 
he  is  btought  to  trial. 


3491 


Jitr  AdminiUtriiig  unlaxvfid  Oaiks. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[350 


If  it  had  bcfn  an  obligatioo  to  commit 
Kurder,  would  it  b«re  been  sufficient  to  tvf, 
that  it  was  an  obligation  to  commit  a  felony  ? 
Certainly  not.  And  here,  since  it  is  said  to  be 
an  oath  binding  to  commit  high  treason,  the 
panicttlar  kind  'of  high  treason  ought,  for  the 
same  reason,  to  be  specified,  as  there  are  many 
difierent  kinds  of  treason. 

So  far  we  get  on  in  our  way,  then. — The 
kind  of  treason  that  was  to  be  committed  should 
have  been  specified,  for  treasons  ate  distin- 
gDtihable  from  one  another,  as  much  as  murder 
from  robbenr,  or  any  other  fek>n]r.  He  who 
compasses  the  death  of  the  kins,  is  guilty  of 
ooe  species  of  treason;  he  who  levies  war 
against  him,  is  guilty  of  another  kind  of 
treason.  In  the  indictment  beibre  us,  we  have 
no  distinction  of  treasons ;  we  have  just  an 
allegation  of  an  obligation  to  commit  treason. 
The  indictment  does  not  mention  any  one  of 
the  statutory  treasons. 

A  complaint  was  made  of  my  learned  friend, 
that  he  read  only  the  general  words  of  the 
danse  in  the  indictment  which  comes  after  the 
recital  of  the  oath,  and  not  the  special  words 
whidi  follow.  They  say  he  read,  '*  Which  oath, 
or  engagement,  or  obligation  to  the  foregoing 
pprport,  did  bind,  or  did  purport  or  intend  to 
una,  the  persons  taking  the  8ame>  to  commit 
treason,  by  effecting  by  physical  fbri^e,  the 
subversion  of  the  established  government,  laws 
and  constitution  of  this  kingdom."  And  they 
say,  that  he  should  have  added,  **  and  especially 
by  obtaining  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
snffiage,  by  unlawful  and  violent  means." 
Bot  &e  omission  was  altogether  immaterial. 
The  omitted  words  do  not  contain  a  charge  of 
any  specific  treason. 

It  may  be,  that  the  treason  meant  by  the 
poblie  prosecutor  was  the  levying  war  against 
the  king.  Bot  still  it  was  necessary  to  let  us 
know  by  the  indictment  that  such  was  the 
prosecutor's  meaning,  for  the  oath  does  not 
so  /eiplain  itself,  as  to  import,  with  certainty, 
an  obligation  to  commit  any  crime  known  tn 
tbe  law. 

The  words  in  this  part  of  the  minor  propo- 
sitioo  do  contain  little  more,  and  nothing  dif- 
ferent from  the  old  charges  of  treason,  which 
were  long  ago  abolished  by  act  of  parliament, 
S5th  .of  I^^imrd  3rd.  The  charge  of  a 
oomnon  law  treason  is  not  known  at  the  pre- 
vent day :  and  we  little  expected  to  have  found 
such  a  one  in  any  indictment  before  your  lord- 
shipa.  To  prove  this,  we  referred  to  the  au- 
thority of  sir  Matthew  Hale.  Among  other 
angularities  in  Mr.  Home's  argument,  he  de- 
nied that  this  was  an  authority. 

Mr.  Dnmummd, — ^You  are  mistaken,  I  did 
not  say  so. 

Mr.  C/frfc.— I  think  you  termed  his  vrork  a 
£salty  performance;  and  said  he  was  very 
little  to  be  followed  in  a  question  of  this  kind, 
and  yet,  that  he  was  the  person  whom  we  called 
the  great  father  of  the  treason  Uw.  It  is  hardly 
worth  while  to  inform  your  lordships,  that  Mr, 


Home  is  mistaken  as  to  the  work  of  which  he 
speaks.  Hale's  Summanr  of  the  Fleas  of  the 
Crowir,  .is  nota  book  of  authority.  But  his 
History  of  the  Pleas  of  the  Crown  is  a  different 
woTk,  and  of  the  highest  authority.  Mr.  Home 
founded  his  observation  on  a  passage  in  the 
report  of  sir  John  Wedderbum*s  case  in  Judge 
Foster's  work.  But  if  he  had  read  the  veiy 
next  sentence,  he  would  have  seen  the  distino-> 
tion  pointed  out  between  the  summary  and  the 
history.  I  shall  take  the  liberty  of  reading  a 
passage  from  the  original  preface  to  the  History 
of  the  Pleas  of  the  Crown. 

^Some  years  ago  there  was  published  a 
treatise  intituled  Pleas  of  the  Crown,  by  sir 
Matthew  Hale ;  but  this  was  only  a  plan  of 
this  work,  containing  little  more  than  the  heads 
or  divisions  thereof,  concemine  which  the 
editor,  in  his  preface,  expresseth  himself  thus: 
He  (our  author)  hatn  written  a  large  work, 
intituled  an  History  of  the  Pleas  of  the  Crown, 
wherein  he  shows  what  the  law  anciently  was 
in  these  matters ;  what  alterations  have  from 
time  to  time  been  made  in  it ;  and  what  it  is 
at  this  day.  He  wrote  it  on  purpose  to  be 
printed,  finished  it,  had  it  all  transcribed,  for 
the  press  in  his  life-time,  and  had  revised  part 
of  it  after  it  was  transcribed.^ 

I  understand,  that  a  vote  desiring  the  ex- 
ecutors of  Hale  to  print  the  great  work  on  the 
Pleas  of  the  Crown,  to  which  we  have  referred^ 
was  pa:ised  by  the  House  of  Commons  after 
his  oeath,  a  most  honourable  testimony  eer* 
tainly  to  the  author.  And  Judge  Foster  himself, 
talking  of  an  argument  of  Hawkins,  calls  him 
"  a  good  modern  vrriter  on  the  crown  law,  the 
best  we  have  except  Hale.''  I  need  say  no- 
thing more  to  support  the  authority  of  Hale ; 
and  if  I  were  in  any  other  place  where  his 
work  is  better  known,  it  would  be  unnecessary 
to  shew  that  be  is  the  first  of  all  authorities 
in  questions  of  treason.  His  opinion  has  been 
over-ruled  in  one  or  two  points ;  but  his  au- 
thority is  of  the  highest  class. 

It  is  true,  that  in  the  history  of  comnea  law 
treasons,  we  find  chaiges  of  accroaching  the 
royd  power,  and  other  vague  chams  of  trea* 
son,  such  as  that  now  before  us.  But  all  theye 
haye  been  long  exploded.  There  have  been 
no  such  charges  |Heferred  during  the  last  or 
present  century. 

It  is  yery  remaricable,  that  in  one  of  the 
instances-^a  most  singular  instance— in  which 
a  charge  of  that  kind  vras  made,  and  carried 
into  effect— I  mesm  upon  the  trial  of  the  great^ 
earl  of  Strafford,*  who  vras  charged  with^  this 
general  common  law  treason,— «n  endeavour 
to  subvert  the  fundamental  laws— so  yioltnt 
was  the  House  of  Commons,  so  timid  the 
House  of  Lords,  and  so  weak  the  Sovereign, 
that  a  bill  vras  passed  charging  him  almost  in 
the  same  terms  mat  are  employed  by  the  pub- 
lic prosecutor  in  this  case.  The  bill  of  attain* 
der  states,  that  the  Commons  have  **  impeached 

Thomas,  eari  of  Strafford,  of  high  treason,  for 

—     i_  .  ■         ■       ■■'        —  - 

♦  3  How.  St.  Tr,  1881. 


t61i        ^7  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  o/Andriem  M^Kinky 


tut 


endeaToariDg  to  sulivert  the  ancient  uid  fan- 
damentftl  lawi  and  govennnent  of  hii  iuajesty*t 
raaliiiaof  England  and  IraUmd;  and  tcT  intro- 
duce an  arlntrary  and  tyrannical  ffOTemment 
againi t  law,  in  the  said  kingdoms/  Ice.* 

And  the  act  of  parliament  for  rerersing  the 
attainder^t  proceeds  in  the  recital:  ^Whereas 
nomas,  late  earl  of  Strafford,  was  impeached 
of  high  treason,  upon  pretence  of  endea? ouring 
to  sttbTert  the  fundamental  laws,  and  called  to 
a  public  and  solemn  arraignment  and  trial, 
l^i^re  the  peers  in  pariiament,  where  be  made 
a  particular  defence  to  every  article  objected 
against  him,  insomuch  that  the  turbulent  party 
l£ea  seeing  no  hopes  to  efiect  their  anjost 
designs,  by  any  ordinary  way  and  method  of 
pro<»eding,  did  at  last  resoWe  to  itiempt  4he 
destruction  and  attainder  of  the  said  earl,  by 
an  act  of  parliament,  to  be  therefore  purposely 
made,  to  condemn  him  upon  accumulative 
treason,  none  of  the  pretended  crimes  being 
treason  apart,  and  so  could  not  be  in  the 
whole,  if  they  had  been  proved,  as  they  were 
iiol." 

I  need  enlarge  no  further  on  this  subject. 
Your  lordships  see  that  lord  Strafford  was  at- 
tainted on  common  law  constructive  treason, 
expressed  and  described  in  the  same  vague 
terms  as  in  this  indictment,  and  contrary  to 
the  statutes;  and  that  the  reversal  proceeded 
oil  the  ground  of  the  illefulity  of  sucn  charges. 

It  if  therefore  impossible  to  sustain  this 
part  of  the  indictment.  It  should  have  been 
oetter  expressed,  h:id  it  been  a  charge  of  trea- 
son; and  where  the  charge  is,  that  an  oath 
was  administered  to  commit  treason,  the  treason 
must  be  described  as  specifically  as  where  trea- 
son itself  is  prosecuted.  There  is  no  difference 
between  the  two  cases.  Where  a  trial  is  for 
high  treason,  the  treason  must  be  described. 
If  the  trial  be  for  administering  an  oath  to 
oommit  high  treason,  the  panel  is  in  danger  if 
y6U  do  not  describe  the  treason,  or  if  you  de- 
scribe it  as  a  common  law  tveason.  Is  he  not 
in  the  same  danger  as  to  the  folouy,  that  he 
would  have  been  as  to  the  treason  itself  f 
The  same  equity  applies,  and  the  same  regu- 
lacHy  of  proceeding  is  due  to  him  in  both  cases. 


The  reason  is,  it  is  necessary  that  the  panel 
should  have  notice  of  the  crime  that  is  to  b# 
charged  aniast  him.  The  ^aigeof  admlnis« 
taring  an  oath  to  commit  treason,  should  spe- 
cify the  treason.  If  a  full  description  of  wbal 
is  charged  against  a  panel  is  not  given,  he  hat 
nothing  to  put  him  on  his  gnard.  I  need 
hardly  enforce  this  upon  your  lordships*  eon* 
sideratton;  it  has  been  so  long  established  by 
practice,  that  the  prosecutor  must  detail  in  thle 
indictment  every  diing  he  knows. 

The  prosecutor  has  not  done  soliere.  Ha 
has  given  no  account  of  tlie  carpm  deUeti  in 
this  case.  It  is  only  suted  generally  to  b«  the 
administering  an  oath  binding  to  commit  trea- 
son. He  should  have  set  forth  the  kind  of 
treason  in  legal  terms,  so  that  my  client  might 
understand  it.  And,  in  point  of  fact,  we  sup* 
posed  it  to  be  another  sort  of  treason  that  was 
meant,  and  not  that  which  Mr.  Home  DruoH- 
mond  has  told  us  it  is. 

I  submit  lo  your  lordships,  that  this,  instead 
of  being  a  description  of  treason,  is  just  one' 
of  those  loose  constructive  allegations  that  the 
law  has  reprobated  for  many  centuries. 

What  is  the  oonstmction  I  Let  us  look  at 
the  oath  again.  This  oath  is  held  by  tiie 
public  prosecutor  to  be  an  oath  to  commit 
violence.  Unless  it  is  an  oath  to  commit  vio- 
lence, be  knows  he  has  no  case.  It  is  held  by 
the  public  prosecutor,  to  be  an  oath  to  com- 
mit violence  by  attacking  others;  and  not 
merely  to  use  strength  in  defence  against  the 
attacks  of  others.  I  am  sure,  that  does  not 
appear  upon  the  face  of  the  oath.  It  says,  I 
will  support  the  saine,  either  by  moral  or  phy- 
sical strength;  but  it  does  not  purport  to  bind 
any  body  to  employ  strength,  eitlier  lawfoUy 
or  unlawfully,  in  attacking  other  persons. 
But  the  public  prosecutor  takes  all  this  to 
granted,  that  the  strength  to  be  used  is  not 
merely  to  be  used  in  defence,  but  also  in 
attacking  others.  It  is  not  laid  in  the  oath, 
whether  the  physical  strength  is  streogUi  of 
body,  or  strength  of  mind,  or  the  strength 
which  arises  fi^m  wealth,  or  from  numerous 
friends,  connexions,  or  dependents.  No  ex- 
planation is  given  as  to  what  sort  of  physical 


¥ou  may  remove  the  oath  from  the  treason    strength  it  is.    But  it  is  taken  for  granted  by 


by  many  steps*  Suppose  a  charge  made,  that 
one  sent  another  to  administer  an  oath  to  a 
third  person,  or  that  there  were  several  soch 
steps,  tUl  at  last  you  cane  to  the  charge  that 
ao  oath  to  commit  high  treason  was  adminis- 
lered,  are  you  not  under  a  necessity  at  least  to 
describe  what  was  done  ?  It  is  all  one  whe- 
ther you  are  to  l>e  tried  for  committin|^  the 
criaie,  or  for  sending  ai^other  to  commit  it 
Hfd  the  oath  been  to  commit  murder,  the 
nurder  must  be  set  forth  ta  the  same  way  as 
in  an  hidictment  for  murder ;  had  it  been  to 
commit  theft — in  the  same  way  as  in  an  i»* 
dictment  f^r  theft;  and  the  same  reason  ap» 
pKes  in  all  the  cases. 

•  S  How.  St.  Tr.  1518. 

t  Stat.  18  k,  14  Car.  S,  e.  39. 


the  public  prosecutor  that  it  means  strength  of 
body.  It  is  further  taken  for  granted,  that  this 
strength  is  to  be  used  in  combination  with  that 
of  other  persons,  although  there  is  not  Uie 
least  groond  for  that  construction  of  the  oath ; 
for  it  is  the  oath  of  a  person  in  the  singular 
number,  and  there  is  no  reference  in  it  to  any 
exertion  of  strength  in  combination  w^  other 
persons. 

It  is  taken  for  gn^ntedj  that  this  phyiioal 
strength  or  force  is  to  be  employed  not  only 
where  it  maybe  law^Uy  employed,  but  also 
where  It  must  be  unlawnilly  employed;  and 
this,  as  a  propositioB  necessarily  ariaing  froni 
the  terms  of  the  oath  when  you  take  th« 
diftrent  dausee  altogether.  The  oath  of  se^ 
ccecy,  it  is  said,  is  intended  to  cover  unlawful 
purposes;  these,  it  ia  next  inforred,  most  hm 


3531 


Jbr  Admnitlering  unlaiufid  Oatht. 


A.D.  1817. 


[334 


violent,  ireasonabley  not  purposes  of  defence, 
byt  of  attack — ^not  by  one  individiial,  but  by 
a  great  comblnatloa  of  persons,  whose  attacks 
would  amount  to  the  specific  treason  which  is 
comioitted  by  levying  war.  Further,  it  is 
taken  for  granted,  that  the  prisoner,  along 
with  the  supposed  persons  to  be  engaged  with 
him,  are  to  use  the  aims  of  war,  though  there 
lis  nothing  in  the  words  of  the  oath  to  justify 
that  poUuiatum.  The  oath  is  cau tiously  worded, 
and  you  will  not  have  the  worse  opinion  of  it 
for  that.  The  moral  and  physical  strensth  are 
to  be  used  as  the  case  shall  require ;  and  e?eiy 
thing  U  to  be  taken  for  granted  upon  these 
words.  It  is  to  be  taken  for  granted,  that  the 
case  would  require  the  employment  of  moral 
and  physical  strength;  that  not  only  physioal 
strength  was  to  be  used,  if  the  case  lawfully 
required  it,  but  if  it  required  it,  unlawfully. 
In  short,  there  are  about  fifty  different  con- 
stmctions,  all  in  this  way  taken  for  granted,  in 
order  to  make  out  this  to  be  an  oath  to  oom* 
mit  treason. 

Task  your  lordships,  then,  whether  this  is 
not  a  constructive  treason  that  is  alleged  l^ 
the  public  prosecutor,    more  violent,   more 
uncandid,  more  unjustly  alleged,  than  ever 
was  alleged  against  lord  Strafford,  or  any  in- 
dividual who  ever  suffered  the  greatest  injus- 
tice.   Could  such  an  allegation  ever  have  oeen 
supported  at  any  period  of  the  English  go- 
vemment?    €^n  any  one  case  be  pointed  out, 
in  whidi  so  many  constructions  were  necessary, 
so  many  malignant  ^purposes  to  be  taken  for 
granted,  in  oraer  to  make  out  treason  i    The 
oath  may  be  highly  criminal ;  but  the  question 
ii^  whether  it  is  so  to  the  extent  of  being  an 
obligation  to  commit  treason  ?    It  is  not ;  and- 
tberefi:>i]B,  the  indictment  of  the  prosecutor  is 
irrelevant. 

Two  other  points  to  which  I  have  not 
hitherto  adverted,  are  of  considerable  import- 
ance in  the  present  case. 

It  is  hardly  necessary  for  me  to  enforce 
what  was  stated  to  your  lordships  by  Mr. 
Grantywith  respect  to  the  proceedings  upon 
this  trial,  on  the  supposition  that  the  indict- 
ment involves  a  charge  of  treason.  I  shall 
aasiime  the  differetit  points  that  were  stated 
tjr.Mr.  Grant.  They  were  stated  from  the 
&ig^h  law  books ;  and  no  answer  or  contra-* 
diction  has  been  given  to  them.  Let  us  there- 
iMe  see  the  ln£Brence  to  be  fairly  drawn  from 
his  aj)giinient. 

It  is  true,  this  is  not  a  trial  for  treason ;  but 
if  n  charge  of  high  treason  ■  is  implied  or.  in« 
velTed  sn  theindictaaifent,  it  is  a  case  which 
moat  be  tried, aoeprding  to  the.  treason  laws^  if 
«  sanilar  case  would  o»  tried  in  England  ac- 
cor£i^|  ^  these  laws.  For  the  treason  laws 
in  both  countries  being  the,  same,  every 
ceee  vllieh  bas  the  benefit  of  these  laws  in 
^gUodf  'fi|ist  h«iva  the  benefit  of  the  same 
l^wa  in  Scotland.  -Xodeny  this  proposition, 
ie  to  deny  thai  the  treason  laws  are  the  same 
ifa  the  two  couiitries.    The  law  of  treason  has 


p  imported  (if  I  may  use  the  expression)  i 


from  England  into  this  country.  It  may  have 
its  advantages  and  disadvantages.  I  shall  not 
say  iliat  the  law  administened  by  your  loid- 
ships'  predecessors  was  not  as  good  as  the  law 
of  England  as  to  treason.  It  is  enough  to 
say  it  was  different ;  and  that  it  was  consider- 
ed to  be  for  the  benefit  of  the  two  kingdons 
that  their  laws  should  be  the  same  on  all  points 
ef  treason. 

Mr.  Home  did  not  seem  to  nndeistand  what 
we  have  to  do  with  tliat  Uw.  Your  lordships, 
however,  will  understand  this.  The  law  of 
Edward  3cd,  and  all  the  other  laws  concerning 
treason,  I  apprehend,  necessarily  come  to  be 
considered  by  your  lordships,  in  consequence 
of  the  act  of  parUament  declaring  in  broad 
terms,  that  the  law  of  treason  shall  be  the  same 
in  both  countries.  We  must  therefore  inquire, 
when  a  crime  is  charged,  whether  it  is  con- 
nected with  treason.  A  charge  of  theft  is  not 
connected  with  it.  But  here  is  a  charge  of 
administering  an  oath  to  commit  high  treason. 
That  certainly  has  some  connection  with  trea- 
son itself.  But,  in  consequence  of  the  terms 
of  the  act  of  jparliameot  on  which  the  tndict't- 
ment  is  raised,  you  are  authorised  to  go  on 
with  the  trial  of  the  statutory  crime.  But  sup^ 
pose  high  treason  is  charged,  or,  in  making 
inquiry  into  the  terms  of  the  iiidictment,  it  is 
found  to  involve  a  direct  charge  of  high  trea->> 
son,  you  have  been  told  from  good  authority; 
that,  if  brought  into  the  Court  of  KingVbench, 
the  Court  would  Observe  that  there  was  a 
charge  of  high  treason,  and  that  the  party 
should  be  tried  in  the  way^  and  according  to 
the  form  of  trials  for  high  treason.  I  ask  your 
lordships  if  it  is  possible  to  dispute  that  such 
is  tfie  rule  of  the  law  of  England ;  and  it  can- 
not be  disputed  that  the  rule  is  also  part  of 
the  law  of  high  treason  in  this  country ;  for 
the  law  declares  that  treason  shall  be  tried 
and  punished  in  the  same  way  in  the  two 
countries. 

According  to  my  friend,  Mr.  Home,  it  It 
neither  to  be  tried  nor  punished  here  as  in 
England.  Itrif,  he  says.  This  indictment  is 
to  be  tried  by  your  lordships  according  to  your 
ordinary  forms  of  procedure ;  and,  Secmtdly^ 
The  crime  is  not  to  be  tried  or  punished  as 
high  treason.  But,  if  the  law  of  England  has 
bcien  truly  stated  to  me,  you  will  consider  the 
diarge  bsought  before  yott  as  one  of  high  trea- 
son, Jmd  .follow  the  same  course  as  would  be 
adopted  by  the  Court  of  Kins's-bench.  If  you- 
are  not  bound  to  do  so  in  this  case,  in  what 
case  would  you  be  bound  to  do  so  ?  What 
applies  to  one  case  of  high  treason,  must  apply 
to  another. 

Then,  supposing  the  general  rnle  to  be,  that 
the  charge  or  an  inferior  crime  most  merge  iti- 
a  charge  of  high  treason,  let  us  see  how  it  ap*' 
pears  that  the  crime  charged  in  the  indict-* 
ment  does  not- merge  in  high  treason;  lam- 
assuming  treason  as  alleged ;  and  I  shall  shdw 
you  that  it  is  alleged  in  this  indictment. 

By  the  apt  of  the  52nd  of  the  king,  it  is  de- 
olared,  that  the  administering  an  oath  pur* 

2  A 


355] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


7Vm/  tfAnirm  M*Kideii 


C356 


porting  to  bind  penons  to  commit  treason 
%\k'dXi  b«  a  felony,  and  punished  as  such.  If 
the  general  rule  is,  that  the  lesser  cnme  merges 
in  the  treason,  the  lesser  crime  of  administer- 
ing the  unlawful  oath  should  merge  in  the 
treason  in  every  case,  where  the  crime  alleged 
amounts  to  treason.  But  there  are  many  cases 
ill  which  the  crime  alleged  does  not  amount  to 
treason,  and  there  are  therefore  various  cases 
to  which  the  act  of  the  52nd  of  the  king  ap- 
plies ;  for,  although  the  statute  declares  the 
criminal  act  of  administering  an  oath  binding 
to  commit  treason,  to  be  punishable  as  a 
felony,  without  benefit  of  clergy;  yet,  in  a 
subsequent  part  of  the  act,  it  is  declared,  that 
if  not  tried  and  punished  as  a  felony,  it  may  be 
tried  and  punished  as  a  treason.  This  is  de- 
clared by  the  last  clause  of  the  statute. 

An  oath  may  be  administered  purporting  to 
bind  to  commit  high  treason,  without  necessa- 
rily involving  the  person  so  administering  the 
oaiii  in  a  charge  of  high  treason.  There  are 
many  ways  of  committing  high  treason.  An 
oath  that  purports  to  bind  to  commit  high 
treason,  does  not  necessarily  involve  the  crime 
of  treason  itself.  So  that  here  there  may  ap- 
pear two  sorts  of  cases  to  which  the  act  may 
or  may  not  apply.  There  may  be  the  case  of 
an  oath  administered,  purporting  to  bind  to 
commit  treason,  and  no  treason  at  all  be 
chargeable  against  the  parties;  and  another 
case,  in  which,  such  an  oath  being  administer- 
ed, the  very  administration  of  the  oath  is  an 
act  of  high  treason.  Tliere  ave  cases  of  both 
sorts,  and  it  would  be  endless  to  enumerate 
them  all. 

The  law  of  England  must  be  administered 
in  all  cases  of  treason  tried  in  Scotland. 
When  a  crime  is  charged  against  an  individual 
under  a  lower  denomination,  and  it  appean 
from  tlie  facts  as  stated  in  the  indictment,  or 
from  the  evidence  in  the  course  of  the  trial, 
that  the  case  is  one  of  treason,  the  crime  of 
the  iower  denomination  which  is  charged, 
merges  in  the  crime  of  high  treason.  I  cannot 
make  that  point  clearer  than  it  has  been  made 
by  Mr.  Grant,  and  I  do  not  mean  to  argue  it 
again.  It  seems  to  be  part  of  the  law  of  Eng- 
land as  to  oi/  crimes,  and  it  is  htrt  the  law  as 
to  the  crime  of  treason.  In  our  law,  this  is 
not  die  case  as  to  oMer crimes  than  treason; 
and  we  have  many  instances  iii  whidi  offences 
are  tried  by  lower  denominations,  which 
might  have  been  tried  under  higher  deno- 
minations. 

Here  a  difficulty  meets  us  which  may  be 
soon  disposed  of.  We  are  told,  that  though, 
Jby  the  law  of  England,  this  merging  takes 
place,  yet  that  the  law  of  Scotland  is  other- 
wise; and  we  are  asked.  What  have  we 
to  do  with  the  law  of  England  here  ?  Are  we 
not  to  follow  our  own  law?— We  do  follow 
our  own  rules  except  in  cases  of  treason.  If 
ive  are  asked,  what  have  we  to^,  do  with  the 
law  of'  England?  I  answer,  we  have  to 
do  with  it,  because  it  is  our  law  of  treason. 

And  here  I  beg  leave  to  remind  your  lord- 


ships of  the  well-known  decisionB  in  the  civil 
court  on  the  plea  of  prescription  founded  on 
the  Endish  statute  passed  in  the  31st  year  of 
queen  Elizabeth.  It  had  formeriy  been  de- 
cided by  the  Court  of  Session,  not  long  after 
the  Union,  that  the  31st  of  Elizabetli  was  no 
part  of  the  law  of  Scotland,  and  that  the  Hmitai- 
tion  of  penal  actions  in  the  case  of  usury  could 
not  be  pleaded  on  it.  Afterwards,  it  vras  de- 
cided, that  the  31st  of  Elizabeth  operated  as  .a 
limitation  to  these  penal  actions;  but  tfaie 
Court  had  again  returned  to  its  first  opinion, 
and  decided  against  the  limitation*  But,  last 
of  all,  the  Court,  in  various  cases  that  occurred 
some  years  ago,  found  that  the  English  statute 
vras  to  be  considered  as  a  part  of  the  law  of 
Scotland,  and  was  pleadable  as  a  limitation  of 
penal  actions  founded  on  the  act  of  queen 
Anne  against  usury.  One  of  these  judgments 
vras  affirmed  in  the  House  of  Lords  in  the  year 
1S14,*  and  so  the  law  is  settled. 

Here,  then,  was  an  English  statute  which 
originally  had  no  effect  in  Scotland,  and  which 
could  not  have  been  pleaded  in  any  Scots  penai 
action,  if  the  act  of  queen  Anne  had  not 
made  it  a  part  of  the  law  of  usurj  in  Scotland 
as  well  as  in  England.  It  was  introduced  as 
part  of  the  Scots  law  with  mudi  difficulty, 
contrary  to  former  decisions,  by  a  sort  of 
equitable  implication,  without  direct  words. 
And  vet  we  are  told  by  the  public  prosecutor, 
in  this  case,  that  the  most  express  words, 
giving  us  the  benefit  of  the  English  law  of 
treason,  contained  in  a  statute  which  must  be 
considered  as  part  of  the  treaty  of  Um'on  be- 
tween the  two  kingdoms,  are  to  have  no  effect 
at  all.  For  it  is  manifest,  that,  according  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  public  prosecutor,  we  have 
not  the  benefit  of  the  English  laws  of  treason 
in  any  one  of  those  cases,  in  which  the  public 
prosecutor  charges,  under  a  denomination 
lower  than  that  of  high  treason,  a  crime  of  so 
high  a  nature  that  it  merges  in  treason.  In 
other  words,  the  public  prosecutor  may  charge 
the  most  odious  offences  under  any  denomina- 
tions he  pleases ;  and,  though  the  cnarges  really 
amount  to  treason,  the  accused  has  no  benefit 
from  those  laws,  which,  in  every  age,  have 
been  held  so' necessary  to  protect  him  against 
a  charge  of  high  treason. 

Your  lordships  will  attend  to  anothier  part  of 
this  statute  of  the  52nd  of  the  kin|r^  fh>m  wUdi 
it  will  be  plain  to  you,  that  it  must  have  been 
the  intent  of  the  enactment,  that,  in  the  case 
either  of  the  inferior  crime  stated  in  that  act,' 
of  a  felony  with  benefit  of  clergy,  punishable 
«by  transportation  :  or,  of  the  higher  crime  of 
felony  vrithout  benefit  of  clergy,  punishable 
by  death,  the  true  meaning  of  the  act  is,  that 
the  inferior  crime  should  merge  in  treason 
wherever  it  appears.  Suppose  an  express  and] 
positive  oath  taken  to  kill  the  king,  or  ,to 
commit  any  other  horrible  treason,  and  an 
overt  act  committed,  if  you  were  not  to  bold 

*  SuTtees  and  others,  AppellantS| .  v.  Allan, 
Respondent,  3  Dovo.  254, 


•. 


357] 


far  Admiitttltring  unlatofiil  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


r368 


thpt  the  inferioi  crime,  the  felony  of  taking  the 
€«th»  merged  in  the  higher  crime  of  treason,  it 
would  be  in  the  power  of  the  lord  advocate,  if 
a  friend  of  the  aelinquenty  to  sate  him  from 
a  trial  for  the  treason,  by  inflicting  upon  him 
only  the  punishment  of  transportation.  Is  it 
to  be  supposed,  for  one  moment,  that  it  was 
the  intent  and  meaning  of  the  act,  that  a  per- 
son tmly  guilty  of  the  most  enormous  crime 
that  could  be  committed,  should  be  entitled, 
by  such  a  manoeuvre,  to  escape  the  penalty  of 
high  treason?  It  is  not  conceivable.  A 
fr^ndly  prosecution  might  be  brought  upon 
this  act  of  parliament  in  order  to  save  a 
tiaitor^s  life.  It  is  usual  to  speak  of  such  a 
statute  as  this  with  reference  to  people  of  a 
low  description.  But  an  offence  might  be 
coD^itted,  under  this  act,  by  men  of  the 
great^  importance  in  the  land;  and,  sup- 
positkg  that  every  thing  that  was  said  of  the 
ttye^House  Plot,  or  any  the  most  treasonable 
ID  oiir  history,  should  be  realized,  and  circum- 
stances ten  times  more  aggravated  should 
occur,  is  it  to  be  conceived  that  the  friends 
of  such  parties  should  be  able  so  far  to  pro- 
tect them,  as  to  have  their  punishment  made 
only  transportation  ?  To  state  such  a  thing  is 
so  absurd  that  you  will  not  listen  to  it. 

If  such  is  not  the  construction  of  the  act  as 
to  the  taker  of  the  oath,  it  is  impossible  to  put 
that  coDStroctionas  to  the  administrator  of  it — 
for,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  it,  the 
saaie  words  are  used  as  applicable  to  both. 
They  are  both  impan  cam— only,  that  as  to  the 
one  the  penalty  is  death,  and  as  to  the  other, 
tnasportataon.  And,  therefore,  upon  this  ar* 
gument  alone,  I  should  be  entitled  to  say,  that 
u  the  admiaistrator  of  the  oath  is  charged  with 
twaiOtt,  he  is  entitled  to  be  tried  by  the  treason 
hnr. 

There  is  another  circumstance  to  be  noticed. 
There  is  a  clause  at  the  end  of  the  act  which 
says,  that  if  a  party  should  be  tried  under  this 
aci,  and  should  be  acquitted,  he  should  not  be 
liable  to  be  i^n  prosecuted  under  the  act  for 
treason.  It  is  not  enough  that  he  is  brought 
onder  trial — be  must  be  convicted  or  acijuitted. 
That  is  a  stroag  circumstance,  as  shewing  the 
tme  meaniiig  m  this  act.  , 

The  act  is  extremely  for  the  benefit  of  the 
paad  IB  so  for  as  he  IS  only  the  taker  of  the 
oaJiL  Let  us  see  how  it  stands,  if  he  were  the 
administrator,  I  am  sure  there  is  no  difference 
aft  an  botweeu,the:'penaliy  of  treason,  and  of 
feiorar.  without  the  benefit  of  cler^.  It  is 
much  th#  same  thing  to  a  man  whether  he  be 
luuiged  for  treason  or  for  any  thing  else.  The 
paoMbaent  is  death,  and  there  is  nothing  more 
to  be  said  about  it.  But  there  is  a  difference, 
whether  a  man  is  to  be  tried  for  treason  or  for 
Moinr.  Where  he  is  to  be  tried  upon  the  act,  it 
is  hmd  that  he  is  not  to  be  tried  by  the  treason 
law.' '  He  is  hot  entitled  to  the  great  benefits 
diat  follow  from  the  forms  of  trial  for  treason. 
It  is  inore  difficult  to  convict  for  treason,  than 
for  a^y  thing  else.  In  this  part  of  Great  Bri- 
tain ibe  diffeience  is  not  to  great  at  first  tight 


between  the  two  modes  of  trial,  because  here 
(of  which  the  present  trial  is  an  illustripus  ex- 
ample), the  panel  has  every  benefit  of  counsel ; 
and,  by  our  law,  although  almost  superseded 
in  some  instances,  there  must  be  two  witnesses 
in  order  to  establish  a  fact.  I  am  sure,  that, 
in  England^  the  benefit  of  being  tried  by  the 
treason  law  roust  be  great.  At  the  Old  fi»iley 
twenty  or  thirty  may  be  tried  in  a  short  time 
for  felonies,  and  a  trial  last  only  ^ve  minutes. 
A  man  there  may  be  sent  to  the  gallows  before 
he  knows  his  trial  has  commenced.  Does  it 
make  no  difference  to  him,  whether  he  is  tried 
in  that  method,  or  with  all  the  benefit  of  coun- 
sel— and  by  a  process  under  which  where  the 
greatest  struggles  are.  made  for  the  prisoner — 
from  all  which  circumstances  he  has  a  much 
greater  chance  to  escape  ?  Does  it  make  no 
difference  to  him  in  this  country  that  he  can 
be  indicted  only  by  a  grand  jury — that,  when 
he  comes  to  be  tried,  he  has  peremptory  chal- 
lenges—4uid  thati  af^er  all,  the  jury  so  selected 
must  be  unanimous  before  he  can  be  convicted? 
No  man  in  his  senses. would  hesitate  in  his 
choice,  between  such  a  trial,  and  the  ordinary 
form  of  trial,  however  well  regulated  it  may 
be.  In  fact,  the  advantage  of  the  treason  laws 
in  Scotland  is  still  greater  than  it  is  in  Eng- 
land, for  persons  who  are  accused  of  treason- 
able practices.  Nor  need  I  enlarge  on  a  pro- 
position so  completely  self-evident.  There  is, 
therefore,  the  greatest  hardship  to  the  prisoner, 
in  being  deprived  of  this  mode  of  trial ;  and 
the  provisions  of  the  law  for  his  safety,  in  a 
trial  for  treason,  must  not  be  lost  sight  of  iu 
the  present  question. 

Under  these  circumstances,  I  contend,  that 
if  there  is  a  charge  of  treason  here,  the  trial 
ought  to  go  forward  according  to  the  formali- 
ties provided  for  trials  for  treason  in  this 
country. 

It  is  said,  there  is  no  trial  for  treason  here. 
The  prosecutor  in  saying  so  betrays  incon- 
sistency. There  may  be  many  oaths  to  commit 
treason,  which  are  treason  of  themselves ;  and 
does  not  the  charge  in  this  indictment  import, 
not  merely  that  an  oath  was  administered  of 
the  nature  of  an  obligation  to  commit  treason, 
but  that  an  oath  was  administered  that  was  in 
itself  treasonable?  I  do  not  say  that  the  oath 
itself  was  treason,  or  an  oath  to  commit  trea- 
son. I  htive  been  ^ying  the  contrary — that  it 
was  not  an  oath  to  commit  treason,  and  I  think 
it  is  far  less  an  oath  to  commit  treason  by 
levying  wa^  against  the  king.  But,  as  it  is 
stated  and  expressed  in  the  Indictment,  the 
prosecutor' is  not  entitled  to  say  it  was  not 
treason.  He  charges  it  bs,  tre^onable  on  the 
face  of  his  indictment,  and  is  he  entitled  to  say 
he  was  mistaken  ?  We  cannot  let  him  off  in 
this  way — for,  firttf  he  tells  your  lordships  that 
this  oath  was  administered ;  Secondfy^  that  it 
was  an  oath  binding  to  commit  treason ;  and 
then,  by  way  of  explanation,  he  adds,  that  he 
means  treason  by  levying  war.  Look  at  the 
words  in  the  indictment  itself.  If  treason  is 
cjharged  at  all,  it  is  such,  that  either  to  admi- 


3^9] 


57  GEORGE  HI. 


.Trial  of  Andrew  Af'Kinkjf 


[360 


nidter  or  take  an  oath  to  commit  it  under  the 
circumstances' alleged,  is  itself  treason.  It  is 
a  treason  under  the  36th  of  the  king.  The 
facts  here,  and  the  treason,  are  so  loosely  de>* 
scribed,  that  it  is  merely  a  common  law  trea- 
son ;  but  can  any  other  meaning  be  put  on  the 
prosecutor's  statements,  than  that  there  was 
not  merely  an  oath  to  commit  high  treason, 
faiit  that  there  was  a  conspiracy  to  levy  war 
against  the  king,  for  the  purposes  expressed  in 
the  36th  of  Geo.  3rd  ?  and  therefore  the  charge 
is  treason.  I  thought  I  could  have  spoken  to 
this  point  in  fewer  words,  otherwise  I  would 
not  have  troubled  tou  with  it  at  all.  But, 
upon  the  whole  of  this  case,  the  prosecutor 
most  withdraw  his  charge,  otherwise  you  must 
deal  with  it  as  a  treason  according  to  the  law 
of  England. 

Mfl^t  remains  is  the  other  objection,  (K>inted 
out  by  your  lordships ;  and,  I  apprehend,  no 
a Biwer  whatever  has  been  made  on  the' part 
of  the  public  prosecutor  to  that  objection. 
It  oannot  bo  answered.  I  stated  formerly, 
-that  an  allegation  of  an  oath  *  bindtnff  the 
penons  taking  it  to  commit  treason,  is  an 
absurd  allegation,  because  no  oath  can  bind  a 
man  to  commit  treason.  But,  further,  it  does 
not  state  the  crime  declared  to  be  punishable 
by  the  statute,  nor  that  mentioned  in  the  major 
proposition  of  the  indictment.  It  agrees  with 
neither.  The  words,  ''as  said  is,"  will  never 
eure  such  a  monstrous  absurdity.  What  are 
we  told  in  answer  to  this?  First,  your  atten^ 
tion  was  drawn  to  the  **  at  least "  clause, 
where  it  is  said,  that  the  oath  is  one  *' purport- 
ing to  bind.'^  The  statute  says,  ''  purporting 
or  intending ;"  and  thus,  the  **  at  least  clause 
U  also  .bad.    So  much  the  worse  for  the  in- 

I  dictinent;  and  1  do  not  see  why  Mr.  Drum- 
mend  should  have  bestowed  so  much  time 
i)4>on'that  claase.  But,  how  does  he  cure  the 
other  objection  ?  '  He  says  that  it  is  to  these 
words,  *^*  the  skid  oath,  or  engagement,  or  oh^ 
ligdtioB,  to  the  saip  purport,  binding  ihe  per^ 
uons  taking  the  ^ame  to  commit  treason,  as 
said  is  ;'f  and  that  these  words  are  surplusage. 
I  deny  they  are  surplusage.    That  is  the  veiy 

'  argument  that  has  oeen  so  often  over-ruled  in 
cases,  where  ^n  entail  ha^  been  found  insuf- 

-  iicieitt,  iu  consequence  of  the  defect  in  the  re- 
solutive clause.  In  the  case  of  Tillicoultry,* 
and  many  other  cases,  the  prohibitory  clause 
was  estpressed  in    the  most   ample  manner 

•   against  selling,  contracting  debt,  and  altering 

the  order  ef  succession.    But  the  resolutive 

clause  proceeded  jn  some  such  form  as  this, 

'  h  In  case  of  contrav^tion,  /either  by  contract"' 

.  ing  •debt,  or  altering  the  order  of  succession, 
the  contravener  is  to  forfeit  the  estate;"  by 
.  "^H^ch  form  ^f  words,  the  case  of  selling  was 
Omitted'  ia  the  resolutive  qlaiuse;  and  there 
was  no  ^solutive  clause  applicable  to  selling. 
And  thus  the  heir  of  entan  could  not  be  pre- 
^M(ed  from  selling  the  envied  estate.  Against 

*  Ja^.  1799:  afilrme4  Jtrae  Moi;  Fac. 

Cell.  No.  99. 


this  conclusion,  it  was  argued,  that  tbe  resoJu* 
tive  clause  contained  general  words,  which 
were  sufficient;  and  that  the  words  '' either 
by  contracting  debt,^  <cc.  were  surplusage. 
But  the  Court  of  Session,  and  the  House  of 
Lords,  held  that  tbe  words  were  not  surplusage; 
and,  accordingly,  that  the  resolutive  clause  ap- 
plied only  to  contracting  debt,  and  altering 
the  order  of  succession,  and  not  to  selling.  It ' 
was  held  that  a  resolutive  clause,  declaring 
that  contravention,  either  by  contracting  debt, 
or  altering  the  order  of  succession,  was  not  a 
resolutive  clause  in  the  case  of  selling,  although 
the  general  words  in  the  clause  would  have 
been  good,  if  its  meaning  had  not  been  re- 
strained by  the  words  which  followed,  either 
by  contracting;  debt,  &c.  which  necessarilv  had 
the  effect  to  limit  the  operation  of  the  clause, 
and  to  make  it  inapplicable  to  selling.  In 
like  manner,  there  are  words  in  this  indictment 
which  would  have  been  sufficient,  if  they  bad 
not  been  restrained  by  the  words,  ^  binding 
the  persons  taking  the  same  to  commit  treason ; 
and,  in  the  **  at  least "  clause,  there  are  general 
words  which  might  have  been  good,  if  they 
had  not  been  restrained  by  the  previous  words 
in  the  indictment,  and  by  the  words,  **  as  said 
is,''  which  necessarily  restrain  the  meaning  of 
the  other  words,  and  confine  it  to  the  meaning 
expressed  in  the  previous  branches  of  the  minor 
proposition. 
I  here  conclude  my  remarks  upon  this  case. 

LordJmtkt  CMc-^Aher  having  heard  very 
able  arguments,  for  seven  hours  ajod  a  haif,  I 
wish  to  know  what  course  of  procedure  ap- 
pears to  your  lordships  proper  for  us  to  follow. 

Lord  Hermand, — When  any  difficulty  occurs 
in  this  Court,  it  has  always  been  the  practice 
to  order  informations.  I  think  there  is  the 
strongest  reason  to  take  all  the  assistance  we 
can  in  this  case.  I  give  no  opinion  at  pcesent 
upon  it.  J  wish,  however,  more  attention 
paid  to  what  was  stated  on  the  other  side  of 
the  bar.  His  majesty's  counsel  might  have 
said  more.  Some  of  the  counsel  find  them- 
selves in  a  new  situation  in  this  case.  I  do 
find  myself  so.  When  I  was  young  at  the  bar^ 
I  read  many  books  of  English  law ;  bu^  since 
I  sat  upon  the  bench,  I  never  had  occai»oa  to 
resort  to  them.  If  I  give  an  opinion  ageinat 
the  panel  in  this  case,  it  nmst  be  upon  strong 
grounds  that  I  do  so. 

Lord  Gilliei. — I  concur  in  the  course  of  oro- 
ceeding  suggested  by  lord  Hermand.  One 
objection  appears  to  me  to  be  fatal  to  the  in- 
dictment; tnat  which  was  noticed  by  your 
lordship.  In  the  part  of  the  indictment,  where 
the  act  charged  should  be  set  forth  in  the  mosi 
particular  manner;  where,  if  there  was  any 
mistake  in  the  preceding  part,  it  should  have 
been  corrected ;  where  every  thing  should  be 
full  and  accurate,  the  oath  ii  not  libelled  as 
purporting  or  intending  to  bind,  but  the  oath  is 
said  to  be  one  binding  to  the  commiasion '  of 
treason.    I  have  heard  no  answer  made  to  this 


9«l] 


fiit  Admituttmng  mHUttofid  Oatht. 


A.  D.. 1 817. 


[9«2 


objection.  I  must  take  the  wordt  of  the  act, 
Irom  which  there  is  here  a  material  deTiatioD. 
The  word  ^  binding,''  may  either  mean,  bind- 
ing in  law  and  morsdity  to  commit  treason — 
fHsich  conld  nerer  be  meant,  being  an  absur- 
dity;  or  that  the  oath  binds  m  termunt  to  the 
commission  of  treason.  Bat  it  appears  to  me, 
that  the  words  in  the  oath  do  not  expressly 
bind  to  commit  treason.  In  these  circum- 
stances, I  should  wish  the  Court  to  give  its 
opinion  on  this  objection  before  ordering  in- 
mrmations.  Whatever  your  opinion  may  be 
on  the  other  points,  this  objection  probably 
appeals  to  your  lordships  as  it  does  to  me,  to 
be  &tal  to  the  indictment.  I  gire  no  opinion 
at  present  on  the  other  points. 

liord  Piiwnlfy, — ^I  am  mndi  in  the  situadon 
of  lord  Gillies.  I  should  wish  informations, 
or  time  to  consider  the  aigument  of  to-day, 
before  giving  my  opinion  on  it.  Bu^  it  ap- 
peals to  me  clear,  that  the  indictment  is  liable 
to  the  objection  whidk'  was  stated  by  lord 
Giliies,  and  also  to  that  which  was  argued  by 
Mr.  Cranstoun,  viz.  that  it  charges  that  the 
oath  was  iraUonnufy  administered. 

The  use  of  the  term  **  binding,''  instead  of 
**  purporting  or  intending  to  ^  bind,"  appears 
to  me  to  form  an  objection  fiital  to  the  indict- 
Bient.  That  clause  m  the  indictment  does  not 
appear  to  be  surplusage,  though  I  thought  so 
at  first;  It  is  not  necessary,  in  the  minor  pro- 
pcvition  of  an  indictment  to  repeat  the  majOr ; 
It  18  not  necessary,  when  motder  is  charged, 
and  the  hctM  aie  stated  by  which  the  mnrder 
is  .mada  out,  to  add  ^  whereby  the  murder 
was  eommiuod."  That  would  be  surplusage. 
This,  however,  is  not  a  repetition  of  the  major 
piopositioii— it  is  a  substitution  of  words 
which  do  not  amount  to  the  crime  stated  in 
the  major  proposition,  and  it  is  therefore  in- 
aocorate.  It  does  tfierefbre  appear  to  ine 
that  the  indictment  is  liable  to  uom  objection, 
and  it  is  not  upon  that  point  that  I  wish  for 
informatioa,  but  upon  the  other  arguments. 

Lord  JZcston. — ^I  think  the  objection  spoken 
to  is  a  good  one. 

Lord  AchoeaU.^1  will  undoubtedly  serve  a 
seir  indictment;  and  the  informations  may  be 
ordeied  vpon  the  new  indictment. 

JjordJmtiet  Ckrkj^l  have  not  heard  the 
objection  obviated ;  and  it  appears  to  me  to 
be  &tal  to  the  indictment.  I  go  at  present 
upon  tfie  distinction  which  was  noticed ;  for 
here  the  question  is  not  fairly  raised  as  to  the 
lekvaacy  on  the  general  grounds.  The  words 
employe  in  the  minor  proposition  eo  to  a 
limitation  not  warranted  by  the  act  of  parlia- 
nent.  I  am  not  called  to  say  what  is  the 
oifect  of  an  oalh  that  Innds  a  person  to  commit 
treason.  I  am  called  to  give  my  opinion  on 
an  oath  which  is  averred  to  purport  or  intend  to 
bind  a  person  to  commit  treason.  You  h%ve 
pol  before  you  an  act  of  parliament  that  makes 
it  criminal  to  bind  to  commit  Jreaifon ; '  but 
you  have  a  statute  which  lo^^s  it  criminal  to 


administer  an  oath  purporting  or  intending  to 
bind  to  commit  treason;  ana,  therefore,  it  is 
impossible  for  the  public  prosecutor  to  say, 
here  was  an  oath  administered  on  four  different 
occasions,  binding  to  commit  treason.  Ibat 
is  not  the  offence  which  it  was  the  purpose  of 
this  act  to  provide  against.  I  have  heard  no 
answer  to  this  objection,  and  therefore  it  is 
difficult  to  order  informations  on  this  indict- 
ment. 

If  the  public  prosecutor  mean  to  charge  only 
the  capital  felony  mentioned  in  this  act  of  par- 
liament, he  must  employ  language  applicable 
to  that  capital  felony  alone,  and  tne  word 
^  traitorously"  ought  not  to  be  used  in  Uiis 
indictment.  It  ought  not  to  be  in  it,  in  order 
to  raise  the  question  which  we  are  called  upon 
to  try. 

I  own  the  jpart  of  the  case  upon  which  I 
should  wish  tor  information,  is  that  as  to  the 
positive  averment  as  to  the  rule  of  the  law  of 
England. 

If  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner  are  right,  in 
stating  what  would  be  the  rute  qf  construction 
in  England,  and  in  affirming,  that,  on  this 
occasion,  the  English  rules  and  forms  must 
be  adopted,  they  must  show  this  in  a  manner 
to  enable  us  decidedly  to  form  our  opinions  on 
the  subject.  We  do  wish  for  erery  aid  and' 
assistance,  if  we  are  to  be  toU  Uutt  sudi  a 
mode  of  proceeding  would  be  adopted  in  the 
court  of  King's-bench,  and  that  it  is  our  duty 
to  follow  the  same  mode  of  proceeding  on  this 
trial.  'When  we  are  called  upon  to  give  our 
opinions  upon  the  oath,  we  must  proceed  upon 
the  general  principles  of  construction,  as  to 
the  import  of  the  terms  of  it.  I  fairly  confess, 
my  difficulty  is  on  the  point  which  I  have  last 
mentioned. 

Lord  GUliet. — I  wish  the  informations  to  be 
foil,  upon  all  the  branches  of  the  case.    . 


The  proceedings  of  the  Court  were  eatered 
on  the  record  in  the  following  terms. 

**  His  majesty's  advocate  represented, 
^  that,  since  the  service  of  the  indictment 
above  mentioned,  tie  had  raised  and  exe- 
cuted a  new  indictment  against  the  panel ; 
'  the  diet  whereof  also  stawfe  adjourned  to 
this  day.  He  therefore  moved  their  lord* 
ships  to  desert  the  diet  of  the  first  indict- 
ment, reserving  to  him  to  insist  upon  the 
second  indictment  as  accords.^' 

**  The  lord  justice-cleik,  and  lord  com- 
missioners of  justiciary,  in  respect  of 
what  is  above  represented,  desert  the  diet 
of  the  first  indictment  against  the  said 
Andrew  M'Kinley,  reserving  to  his  ma- 
jestv's  advocate  to  insist  upon  the  second 
indictment,  as  accords. 

(Signed)    p.  Boyle,  I.  P.  D." 

And  the  second  indictment  being  call- 
ed, and  ^  the  panel  being  interrogated 
thereupon,  he  answered.. AipI  GttUiy**' 


3(tSl       ^7  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  Andrew  M*Kimley 


[364 


After  parties  proc«ratois  had  been  faeaixl 
at  very  great  length,  upon  the  teleYancy 
of  the  indictment. 

His  majesty's  adyocate  moTed  the 
Court  to  desert  the  diet  of  the  present  in- 
dictment pro  loco  et  tempore,  as  he  meant 
to  serve  the  panel  with  a  new  indictment. 

*'  The   loitl  justice  clerk,  and    lords 
commissioners  of  justiciary,  in  respect 
of  what  is  above  represented,  desert  the 
diet  against  the  panel  jro  Uxo  et  tempore, 
(Signed)    D.  Boyle,  I.  P.  D." 

Thereafter  a  petition  was  presented  to 
the  said  lords,  in  the  name  of  nis  majesty's 
advocate,  craving  a  warrant  for  recom- 
mitting the  said  Andrew  M'Kiolev  to  the 
castle  of  £dinbQr|;h,  till  liberated  in  due 
course  of  law,  which  was  granted  accord* 
ingly. 


m^ 


COURT  OP  JUSTICIARY. 
JuHB  23|  1817. 

Freient, 

Rt.  Hon.  IXrvid  Boyif ,  Lord  Justice  Clerk. 
Lord  Harmtmd. 
Lord  GiUle$. 
Lord  PiimUly* 
Lord  Rett&H. 

Comudjbr  the  Crown. 

Rt  Hon.  Alexander  Maconoekk  of 'Meadow- 
bank,  His  Majesty's  Advocate  f afterwards  a 
lord  of  Session  and  Justiciary,  with  the  title 
of  Lord  Meadowbank.l 

Jamee  Wedderbum^  Esq.  Solicitor-General. 

H.  Home  Drummcnd,  Esq.  Advocate-Depute. 

Countel/or  the  Panel. 

John  Clerkf  Esq. 
Geo.  Cranstoun^  Esq, 
Tho.  Thomson,  iaq. 
Francit  Jeffrevy  Esiq. 
J.  P.  Granty  Esq. 
J.  A.  Mtamnf,  Esq. 
James  Moncrieffy  Esq. 
Henry  Cockbumy  Esq. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — Andrew  M'Kinley, 
attend  to  the  indictment  against  you  which  is 
now  to  be  read. 

''Andrew  MlUnley,  present  prisoner 
in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  you  are 
indicted  and  accused,  at  the  instance  of 
Alexander  Maconochie  of  Meadowbank  his 
majesty's  advocate,  for  his  majesty's  in- 
terest :  That  albeit,  by  an  act  passed  in 
the  fifty-second  year  of  his  present  ma- 
jesty's reign,  intituled, '  An  act  to  render 
more  effectual  an  act  passed  in  the 
thirty«seventh  year  of  his  present  majesty, 
for  preventing  the  administering  or  taking 
unlawful  oaths,'  it  is  inter  aUa  enacted, 
''That  every  person  v^ho  shall,  in  any  man* 
ner  or  form  whatsoever,  admioiitori-  or 


cause  to  be  administered,  or  be  aiding  or 
assisting  at  the  administering  of  .any  oath 
or  engagement,  purporting  or  intending 
to  bind  the  person  taking  the  same  to 
commit  any  treasoh  or  murder,  or  any 
felony  punishable  by  law  with  death, 
shall,  on  conviction  thereof  by  due  course 
of  law,  be  adjudged  guilty  of  felony,  and 
suffer  death  as  a  felon,  without  benefit  of 
clergy."  And  further,  bv  section  fburth 
of  the  said  act,  it  is  enacted,  "That  persons 
aiding  and  assisting  at  the  administering  of 
any  such  oath  or  engagement,  as  aforesaid, 
ana  persons  causing  any  such  oath  or  en- 
gagement to  be  administered,  though  not 
S resent  at  the  administering  tfiereot,  shaU 
e  deemed  pripcipal  o&ndera,  and  shall 
be  tried  as  such ;  and,  on  conviction  there- 
of by  due  coucse  of  law,  shall  be  adjudged 
suilty  of  felony,  and  shall  suffer  death  as 
felons,  without  benefit  of  clergy ;  although 
the  persons  or  person  who  actually  admi- 
nistered such  oath  or  engagement,  if  any 
such  there  shall  be,  shall  not  have  been 
tried  or  convicted."  And  further,  by 
section  sixth  of  the  said  act,  it  is  enacted, 
"That  any  engagement  or  obligatioa 
whatsoever,  in  the  nature  of  an  oath, 
purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the  per- 
son taking  the  same  to  commit  any 
treason  or  murder,  or  any  felony  t>uni8h- 
able  by  law  with  death,  shall  be  aeemed 
an  oath  within  the  intent  and  meaning  of 
Uiis  act,  in  whatever  form  or  manner 
the  same  shall  be  administered  or  taken, 
and  whether  the  same  shall  be  actually 
administered  by  any  person  or  per- 
sons to  any  other  person  or  persons,  or 
taken  by  any  other  person  or  persons,  with- 
out any  administration  thereof  by  any  other 
person  or  persons :"  Yet  true  it  is  ahd 
OF  VEBiTY,  that  you  the  said  Andrew 
M'Kinley  are  guilty  of  the  said  crimes, 
or  of  one  or  more  of  them,  actor,  or 
art  and  part:  In  so  far  as,  you,  the  said 
Andrew  M'Kinley  did,  dt  secret  meetings, 
and  on  other  occasions,  at  Glasgow,  and 
in  the  vicinity  thereof,  in  the  course  of 
the  months  of  November  and  December, 
1816,  and  January  and  February,  1817, 
wickedly,  maliciously,  and  feloniously  ad- 
minister, or  cause  to  be  administered,  or 
did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administering,  to  a 
great  number  of  persons^  to  the  amount 
of  several  hundreds,  an  oath  or  engage- 
ment, or  an  engagement  or  obligation  in 
the  nature  of  an  oath,  purporting  or  in- 
tending to  bind,  the  persons  taking  the 
same  to  commit  treason,  hj  obtaining  an- 
nual parliaments  and  universal  suffrage 
by  physical  strength  or  force,  and  thereby 
effecting  the  subversion  of  the  established 
government,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this 
kingdom,  by  unlawful  and  violent  means ; 
which  oath,  or  engagement,  or  engage- 
ment or  obligation,  in  the  nature  of 
aa  oath,  was  in    the  following  terns. 


3651 


Jixr  Aimimtenng  vnimj^l  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


1366 


or  to  the  fDllowing  purport: — " In  awful 
presence  of  God,  I,  A  B,  do  voluntarily 
swear,  that  I  will  penevere  in  my  en-  , 
deavoaring  to  fonn  a  brotherhood  of 
affection  amongst  Britons  of  every  de- 
scriptionj  who  are  considered  worUiyof 
confidence ;  and  that  I  will  persevere  in 
my  endeavours  to  obtain  for  all  the  peo- 
ple in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  not  dis- 
qualified ,b^  crimes  or  insanity,  the  eke- 
tive  franchise,  at  the  age  of  twenty-one, 
with  free  and  equal  representation,  apd 
annual parliamen  ts ;  and  tbati  will  support 
the  same  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  either 
l>ymoTai  or  physical  strength  (or  force), 
as  the  case  may  require ;  And  I  do  farther 
swear,  that  neither  hopes,  £eai8,  rewards, 
or  punishments,  shall  induoe  me  to  in- 
form on,  or  gi^re  endence  against,  any 
member  or  members,  ooUectively  or  indi- 
vidually, for  any  act  or  expression  done 
or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  so- 
cieties, under  the  punishment  of  death, 
to  be  inflicted  on  me  by  any  member  or 
members  of  such  societies.  So  help 
me  God,  and  keep  me  stadfast:" — 
And  more  particularly,  (1.)  at  a  secret 
meeting  held  at  the .  house  of  Hugh 
Dickson,  then  weaver  in  Abercromby- 
street,  or  Gallon  of  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere 
at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate  vicinity 
thereof  you  the  said  Andrew  M'Kinley 
did,  upon  the  20th  day  of  December, 
1816,  or.upon  one.or  other  of  the  days  of 
that  month,  or  of  November  immediately 
preceding,  or  of  January  immediately 
following,  wickedly,  maliciously,  and  felo- 
niously administer,  or  cause  to  <  be  ad- 
ministered, or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the 
administering  to  Peter  Gibson,  John 
M'Lauchlane,  John  Campbell,  and  Hugh 
Dickson,  all  present  prisoners  in  the 
Castle  of  Edinburgh,  or  to  one  or 
other  of  them,  and  to  other  persons, 
whose  names  are  to  the  prosecutor  un- 
known, an  oath,  or  engagement,  in  the 
terms  above .  set  forth,  or^  to  the  same 
purport,  or  an  engagement,  or  obligation 
m  the  nature  of  an  oath,  in  the  terms 
above  set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport. 
And  fiarther,  (2.)  you  the  said  Anarew 
M'Kinley  did,  upon  the  1st  day  of 
January,  1817,  or  on  one  or  other  of 
the  days  of  .  that  month,  or  of  Novem* 
ber  or  December '  immediately  »  prece- 
dio^^  at  a  secret  meeting,  held  in  the  house 
of  William  l^egaat,  tbea  change-keeper, 
KinMtreet,  Xmfistown,  in  the  vicinity 
of  Glasgow,  or.  .elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or 
in  the  vicinity,  thereof,  wickedly,  <  ma*" 
liciously,  and  feloniously  administer,  or 
cause  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid 
or  assist  at  the  administering,  to  the 
said  Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lauch- 
lane,  John  Campbell,  and  Hugh  Dick- 
son ;  as  atw,  to- James  M^Ewan,  now  or 
lately  carding-master  at  Ilurophrie's  Mill, 


>  / 


Gorbals  of  Glaigow,  and  M'Dowall  Pate, 
or  Peat,  now  or  lately  weaver  in  Piccadilly 
street,  AndetBton,  in  the  vicimty  of  Glas- 
gow, who,  consdoiui  of  their  guilt  in  the 
premises,  liave  absconded  and  fled  from 
justice;  as  also,  to  John  GonneHon,  or 
Cottgleton,  now  or  lately  eetton-^pinner 
in  Calton  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one  or  other 
of  them,  aod .  to  oth^  persons,  whose 
names  are  to  the  proseeuior  unknown,  an 
oath  or  engagement,  in  the  .terms  above 
setioith,  or  to  the  same  purport,  or  an 
engagement,  or  obUi^'on,  in  the  nature 
of  an  oath,  in  the  terms  above  set 
forth,  or  to  the  same  purport.  And 
further,  (3.)  you  the  said  Andrew 
M'Kinley  did,  upon  the  4th  day  of 
January,  1817,  or  on  one  or  other  of 
the  days  x>(  that  month,  or  of  November 
or  December  immediately  preceding,  at  a 
secret  meeting,  held  in  the  house  ofNeill 
Munn,  then  inn-keeper  and- stabler,  in 
Ingram-street,  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at 
Glasgow,  or  in  the  vicinity  thereof,  vrick- 
edly,  maliciously,  and  feloniously  admi- 
nister, or  cause  to  be  administered,  or  did 
aid  or  assist  at  the  administering,  to 
the  said  Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lauch-  ' 
lane,  John  Campbell,  Hugh  Dickson, 
M^Dowall  Pate,  or  Peat,  and  James 
M'Ewan;  as  also,  to  James  Hood  and 
John  Keith,  both  present  priaoaers  in  the 
Castle  of  Edinburgh,  Andrew  Sommerville, 
John  Buchanan,  and  James  Robertson, 
all  now  or  lately  pris<mers  in  the  toW 
booth  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one  or  other  of 
them,  and  to  other  persons  whose  names 
are  to  the  prosecutor  unknown,  an  oath 
or  engagement,  in  the  t^rms  above  set 
forth,  or  to  the  same  purport,  or  an 
engagement,  or  obligation,  in  the  nature 
of  an  oath,  in  the  terms  above  set  forth, 
or  to  the  same  purport.  And,  fub- 
TKjBfi,  you  the  said  Andrew  M'Kinley 
did,  upon  the  5th  day  of  February,  1817, 
or  on  one  or  other  of  the  davs  of  that 
month,  or  of  January  immediate!  v  preced* 
ing,  at  a  secret  meeting, -held  at  the 
r  house  of  John  Robertson,  then  innkeeper  ' 
jmd  stabler  in  Gallowgate  of  Glasgow, 
or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  im- 
mediate viciniw  thereof,  wickedly,  mali- 
clottsly,  and  feloniously  administer,  or 
«ause  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid  or 
assist  at.,  the  administering  to  the  said 
James  Hood,  James  Robertson,  Andrew 
$ommerviIle,  and  John  Buchanan,  as  ateo 
to  James  Finlayson,  present  prisoner  in 
the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  or  to  one  or  other 
of  them,  and  to  other  persons,  whose 
names  are  to  the  prosecutor  unknown, 
an  oalh  or  engagement,  in  the  terms  above 
set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport,  or  an 
engagement  or  obligation  in  the  nature 
of  an  oath,  in  the  terms  above  set  forth, 
or  to  the  same  purport.  And  you  the  said 
Andrew  M^Kinley  having  been  present, 


367J       ^7  GEORGE  III. 


TrM  of  Andrew  M* 


[366 


« 

together  with  all  or  part  of  Ae  ptenons 
above  deigned,  at  a  secret  meeting,  held 
for  the  imrpoee  of  admiDistehng,  or  caiu- 
ing  to  be  adminbtered,  the  said  otdi  or 
engagement^  or  for  other  purposes  to'  the 
proseentorimknowni  at  the  hbnse  of  Alex- 
ander Hunter,  then  change-keeper  in  the 
Old  Wynd  of  Glasgow,  on  the  32nd  day 
of  Febmaiy,    IdlT,    and  hating'  been' 
there  appvdiended,   cohecioos  of  your 
cuilt  in  the  premises,   did  assume  the 
false  name  of  John  Brothentone;    and 
hanring  been  taken  before  Robert  Hanil- 
ton.  Esquire,  Sheriff-depute  of  Linaik- 
shire,  you  did,  in  hb  preseface,  at  Glas- 
gow, on  the  S8thdayofFebruaiy»18l7, 
and  on  the  11th  day  of  March,  1817, 
emit  and  subscribe  two  several  declara- 
tions;   and  baring  been  taken  before 
Daniel  Hamilton,  Esquire,  one   6f  the 
Sherifi-substitute    of   Lanarkshire,  you 
.  did,  in  his  presence,  at  Glasgow,  on  the 
4th  day  of  March,  1817,  emit  and  sub- 
scribe a  declaration;  and  baring  been 
taken  before  Hugh  Kerr,  Esquire,  one  of 
the  Sheritib-substitute  of  Lanarkshire,  you 
did,  in  his  presence,  at  Glasgow,  on  the 
5th  day  of  March,  1817,  emit  and  sub- 
scribe a  declaration;    and  baring  been 
taken   before    James   Wilson,   &quire, 
Sherifi^-eubstitnte  of  the  county  of  Edin- 
burgh, you  did,  in  his  presence,  at  Edin- 
bu^  on  the  18th  day  of  March,  1817, 
emit  and  subscribe  a  declaration ; — all 
whichdeclarations,beingtobe  used  in  eri- 
'dence  against  you  atyour  trial,  will  for  that 
purpose,  be  lodged  in  due  time  in  the 
hands  of  the  Clerk  of  ihe  High  Court  of 
Justiciary,  before  which  you  are  to  be 
tried,  that  you  may  hare  an  opportunity 
of  seeing  the  same.    At  least,  times  and 
plaees  fotesaid,  the  said  oath  or  engage- 
menty  or  an  oath  or  engagement  in  the 
foregoing  purport,  or  an  engagement  or 
obligation  in  the  nature  of  an  oath,  in 
the  terms  abore  set  forth,  or  to  the  fore- 
going purport,  purporting  or  intending  to 
bind  the  persons  taking  the  same,  to  com- 
mit treason,  as  said  is,  was  wickedly,  ma- 
liciously,   and  feloniously  administered, 
or  caused  to  be  administeied,  as  aforesaid ; 
and  some  person  or  persons  did  aid  or 
assist  at  the  administering  thereof;    and 
you  the  said  Andrew  M%nley  are  guilty 
of  the  said  crimes,  or  of  one  or  more  of 
them,  actor,  or  ait  and  part.  All  whidi,  or 
part  thereof,  being  found  proren  by  the 
rerdict  of  an  assize,  before  the  Lord  Jus- 
rice  Genera],  the  Lord  Justice  Clerk,  and 
Lords  Commissioners  of  Justiciary,  you 
the  said  Andrew  M'Kinley  ought  to  be 
punished  with  the  pains  of  law,  to  deter 
others  from  committing  the  like  crimes  in 
all  rime  coming. 

^<H.  Home  Drummond,  A,  P." 


LIST  -OP  WIT1I£SSES. 


'1.  Robert  BamiUon^  Esquire,  sheriff-depute 

of  Lana^hire. 
2.  Dmid   Hmuli&n,   Esquire,  one   Of  the 

sheriffif-substitute  of  Lanarkshire. 
8*  fli^A  JCerr,  Esquire,  one  of  the  sberifi- 
sttbetituteof  Lanarkshire. 

4.  Jomst  Ihomfmm,  derk  to  John  Drysdale, 

sheriflMeric  of  Lanarkshire.  ^ 

5.  Maithem  B»-iu,  derk  to  George  Salmond, 

procurator^fiscal  of  Lanarkshire. 

6.  Jo£i  LaUe,  clerk  to  the  said  John  Drya- 

dale. 

7.  Joitph  Reidf  writer  in  Glasgow. 

8.  Cfeor^  Sabmmi^  procurator-fiscal  of  La- 

narkshire. 

9.  Jama  WiUon,  Esquire,  one  of  the  sherifis- 

substituteof  the  county  of  Edinbur^. 

10.  Archibald  ScUt^  procurator^scal  of  the 

county  of  Edinburgh. 

11.  Jama  Cirrie,  writer,  Sheriff-clerk's  office, 

Edinburgh. 

12.  Alexander  Colder,  sheriff-officer  in  Glas* 

gow. 

13.  Alexander  EmUrj  now  or  lately  change- 

keeper,    Old  Wynd  of  Glasgow. 

14.  Marian  McLaren,  or  M^Lachtan^  now  or 

lately  serrant  to  the  said  Alexander 
Hunter. 

15.  John  Roberistmf  now  or  lately  inn-keeper 

and  stabler,  Gallowgate  Glasgow. 

16.  Agnes  Campbdi,  wife  of  Thomas  Dow, 

now  or  lately  steam-boiler  maker  and 
smith  at  Girdwood  and  Company's 
foundry  in  Hutcheson-town,  in  the 
ricinfty  of  Glasgow. 

17.  Janet  Rentoulj  now  or  lately  serrant  to 

Neill  Munn,.  now  or  lately  inn-keeper 
and  stabler  in  Ingram-street,  Glasgow. 

18.  Alison  IFtboii,  now  or  latdy  serrant  to  the 

said  NeiU  Munn. 

19.  Matthew  I^e,  now  or  lately  spirit-dealer 

in  Wilson-street,  Glasgow. 

20.  Jean  Boyd^  wife  of  the  said  Matthew  Fyfe. 

21.  WUHam  Leggot,  now  or  lately  change- 

keeper,  inking-street,  comer  of  Centre- 
street,  Tradeston,  in  the  ricinity  of 
Glasgow. 

22.  JiAn  Miiehell,  wearer,  now  or  lately  re- 

siding in  Wilkie's  Land,  Charles-street, 
Calton  of  Glasgow. 

23.  Eugh  Dichon,  present  prisoner  in  the 

Castle  of  Edinburgh. 

24.  Peter  G^Ason,  present  pris6ner  there. 

25.  John  M*Lachlaney  present  prisoner  there. 
28.  Jamei  JFlmloyMm,  present  prisoner  there« 

27.  John  Campbell,  present  prisoner  there. 

28.  Jamei  Hood,  present  prisoner  there. 

29.  William  Stmnon,  lately  prisoner  in  the 

castle  of  Edinburgh,  and  now  or  lately 
change-keeper  in  Main-street,  Anden- 
ton,  in  the  ricinity  of  Glasgow. 

H.  HoMB  DauMiioiiD,  A,  D. 


309] 


for  Mmmiaering  unlituffiii  Oaths.  A.  D.  1817.  [370 

cussion'took  place.  There  is  some  Tariation 
between  fthe  present  and  the  former  indict-^ 
mentSy  bnt  the  crime  charged  in  them  is  one 
and  the  same ;  and,  therefore^  the  resolution 
then  formedi  your  lordships  will  now  carry  into 
effect,  by  ordering  informations  on  the  relenmcy 
of  the  indictment. 


LIST  OF   ASSIZE. 


Qnmiy  rf  Edmbm^gk. 


Gray  of  Snipe. 
Jokm  ThomMcn  of  Burnhonse. 
George  Jeffrey^  grocer  in  DaJkeith. 
JUcAorrf  Mmciet,  merchant  there. 
Jemet  Muiter^Amer^  Longside. 
Jmmei  NibHe,  fanner,  Easter  Cowden. 
D&md  Tlkfmon^  farmer^  Westei  Cowden. 

County  of  Haddington* 

John  Andenon  of  Whitburgh. 
Tkomat  Jlfi<dbetf  of  Westbams  Mains. 
Okaries  Crmrford^  farmer,  Bast  Fortune. 
Mmrk  TvrnmdL,  fiurmer.  Upper  Bolton. 
Jemtt  WUmm,  farmer,  Bolton. 

OnmJty  ofLmUthgout 

WUtiam  WiOde  of  Magdalens. 
WUHam  SkUim^^  of  Boghead. 
Andrew  MUckeli,  farmer  at  Kinneil  Keiie. 
Ms  Ran,  himer  at  Borrowstown. 
Jofen  Thommmy  fiirmer  at  Inneravon. 

€%  of  EdhAnrgh. 

Bith&rdJoknstmy  banker  in  Edinbuigh. 
Jeme$  M*Kensae,  goldsmith  there. 
Robert  Great,  watchmaker  there. 
Baberi  SUdery  dye-cutter  there.    • 
WUHam  Neilton,  painter  there. 
Jama  TnUy  baker  there. 
Andrew  Gfiemm,  tailor  there. 
Patrick  Mmn^  painter  there. 
Jalbi  Laadery  merchant  there. 
Samuel  Qopperton,  grocer  there. 
Mm  BrowHy  mercluuit  there. 
Bobert  MUckeil,  merchant  there. 
WUliam  Zjockhart,  tinsmith  there. 
John  Sinciair^  seed-merchant  there. 
WUliam  Scotiy  pewterer  there. 
Aknmkr  JobnUonj  ironmonger  there. 
George  Graj/y  baker  there. 
'Thomm  Edmonstonef  ironmonger  there. 
William  Mmrayy  baker  there. 
Join  Smithj  spirit-dealer  there. 
Tkam  Hunter^  merchant  there. 

ToumofLeUh. 

JoAn  Skarpy  wine-merchant  in  Leith. 

Ardnkdd  3d^DowaU,  merchant  there. 

Jmmt  O^viey  wine^merchant  (liera. 

^R^bert  ^trackan,  merchant  thew. 

BMibtrt.Sandenonf  cooper  there. 

MBberi  Brunlonf  merchant  tbere. 

Jobn  Colder,  grocer  there. 

D.  BoYii- 
Geo.  FEaouisoir. 
David  Douoxas. 

Urd  Aiitke  CMr.— What  do  you  say  to 
ibk  indictment  ?  Are  you' guilty  or  not  guilty 
<>f  the  charges  contained  in  it? 

'  Andrew  JH'Ktnley.—^oi  guilty. 

Lord  JufiHee   Clerk.'^ynitn  the  case  was 
fcnnerty  b«ffore  us,  a*;full  and  very  able'dis- 
VOL  XXXIU. 


Jjfrd  Advocate. — I  think  it  proper  to  state, 
that  my  object  is  to  bring  this  case  before. a 
jury  as  speedily  as  possible;  and  knowing, 
from  what  was  formeny  thrown  out,  that  when 
an  interlocutor  should  be  pronounced,  your 
lordships  would  direct  informations  shouM  be 
given  in,  I  have  had  the  information  for  the 
crown  prepared,  and  actually  printed,  and  it 
will  be  ready  to  be  thrown  off  without  delay. 
For  the  purpose  of  despatch,  and  in  order  that 
no  delay  mi^y  take  place  in  bringing  on  this 
trial,  I  crave  your  loraships  to  direct,  that  the  in- 
formation for  the  panel  shall  be  ready  within  a 
short  time  from  tms  date. 

Lord  Juitice  Clerk, — As  there  was  a  very 
full  ai;gument  on  the  relevancy  in  the  case  of 
Edgar,  where  the  indictment  was  similar  to 
the  indictment  served  on  this  panel ;  and,  as 
(lie  second  pleading  followed  out  the  same  ar- 
gument as  tne  first,  we  can  have  no  difficulty  in 
ordering  the  informations  to.  be  given  in  at  an 

early  period. 

« 

Mr.  Cockbitm, — Mr.  Moncrieff,  notwith- 
standing his  numerous  avocations,  has  under- 
taken to  write  the  information  for  the  panel. 
In  fixing  the  period  for  giving  in  the  inrorma- 
tions,  you  will  consider  he  has  not  yet  seen  the 
paper  given  in  for  the  other  party.  The  )ast 
diet  was  about  three  weeks  ago ;  so  that  the 
prosecutor,  knowing  the  nature  of  his  indict- 
ment, has  virtually  had  three  weeks  to  prepare 
his  information.  Therefore,  as  three  weekii 
have  been  taken  by  the  crown  counsel,  you  must 
give  us  an  equal  period  to  prepare  the  informa^i^ 
tion  for  the  panel. 

Lord  Jtutiee  Clerk. — ^The  indictment  was 
served  three  weeks  ago. 

Lord , Advocate. — ^Your  lordships  will  also 
observe,  that  the  parties  heard  each  other's 
pleadings.  I  am  happy,  both  for  the  sake  of 
the  panel  and  the  law,  that  Mr.  Moncrieff  is  to 
write  the  information  on  the  other  side.  But, 
if  Mr.  Moncrieff  cannot,  from  his  other  avoca- 
tions, accomplish  his  task  within  a  short  period, 
there  are  other  seven  counsel  for  the  panel,  of 
the  fint  eminence  at  the  bar,  and  surely,  by 
this  gr^at  band  of  counsel,  the  paper  might  be  - 
prapacid  without  delay. 

Mr.  Coek^um. — If  each  took  a'page'in  turn, 
it  might  soon  be  done.  There  are  three* 
counsel  fpr  the  Crown,  and,  from  the  statement 
we  have  beard,  I  presuroe.each  may  have  take»^ 
a  week  in  the  preparation  of  their  paper.  But, 
as  Mr.  Moncrieff  is  himself  to  write  the  whole 
of  the  information  for  the  panel,  three  weekt 
must  be  given  to  him. 

2  B 


S71J 


57  GEORGE  IIL 


Triul  ^Andmi  M^KUhy 


ECtt 


Mr,  SoUeU0t  G«iMrf£.— Tkeie  tie  «igbt 
oouBsel  for  the  paotl,  and  when  they  mIbcI  a 
particaUr  one  mm  amoAg  thamsalTes  to  write 
the  informatioDj  they  are  not  entitled  to  get 
delay  on  aocoant  of  ihe  nvmerous  avocationa 
^  the  counsel  so  fleeted*  Ihe  circumstance^ 
flierefore,  of  that  counsel's  avo^tions,  cannot 
be  listened  lo  as  any  excuse  for  asking 
dMay  ia  ^preparing  die  infomitkni  far  the 
panel. 

Lord  HcrmandL— I  cannot  distinguish  be- 
tween one  counsel  and  another  in  doing  his 
duty. 

Lot4  JvUk»  Oark^-li  this  were  Ae  fim 
lime  of  ordering  informationt  on  the  in^otment 
yonr  lordshipe  would  naturally  give  ibll  and 
competent  time  to  prepare  tliem.  But  this  case 
stands  ▼ery  particvlariy  situated.  We  have 
had  most  rail  and  able  debates  irpon  the  rele- 
vancy; buty  from  the  impertance  of  the  casei 
you  thought  it  right  to  have  the  aognment. 
stated  in  writing.  The  Court  does  not  wish 
more  verbal  discussion ;  and,  the  oniyqaestion 
is,  now  that  the  diet  has  arrited,  'What  is  a 
competent  time  to  give  fcnr  preparing'  the  in- 
formation  P  Die  panel  has,  again  and  again, 
been  brought  here,  from  circumstances  friiich 
we  could  not  help;  and -we  are  not  to  allow 
fhe  case  to  be  pratracted.  Let  the  information 
for  the  panel  oe  given  in  ten  days  hencci  or 
this  day  forlnight. 

Mr.  Coelcftum.— From  Mr.  Moncrieff'ii 
situation,  that  b  giving  him  no  time  at  all. 
He  cannot  begin  before  Wednesday,  as  he  has 
not  seen  the  other  parties*  pleadings.  Four 
or  five  days  must  pass  before  he  does  so,  and 
tfien  he  has  not  four  or  five  days  to  write. 

Lord  Bsnnanir— It  is  a  very  difierent  thing, 
after  hearing  these  pleadinss,  to  write  the  infcv- 
nation,  from  what  it  would  have  been  had  thew 
not  taken  place. 

LordJmHee  Clarfe.— The  former  debate  has 
l^ten  taken  in  short  imod,  and  furmsbed  to  the 

judges. 

Lord  GiUia4 — ^The  shortest  time  p^blc 
should  be  fixed  qpon. 

Lord  Bemusuft-'I  think  Chat  better  far  the 
panel. 

Lord  GiUies. — ^We  are  to  consider  the  in* 
farmations  this  day  fortnight.  If  we  find  that 
inconvenient^  by  a  short  minute,  the  conside- 
ration can  be  delayed  till  the  Wednesday  fol- 
lowing. 

Mr.  Coe^Ebam.— Is  it  to  be  this  day  fortnight 
or  three  weeks  r  The  trial  might  be  poatponed 

a  week. 

'  Lord'&ittaes.-^Theeonifetion  offhe'witaiestes 
a(hkd  jQiy  should  be  oettsidered. 

r 

.  Lord  Jmtkc  C2er/c»— 1  have  no  wish  to  pxess 
]%y  own  .qpiiliOBy  if  any  of  f  Ofir  4oBdihipa 

differently. 


Lord  Jtefton. — ^I  think  ten  days  snAdent  to 
allow  for  the  information ;  but  I  have  no  ob- 
jections to  logger  tisDC  being  gomted.  I  have 
no  objection  to  an  indulgence  to  Wednesd^ 
fortnight  on  both  sides. 


IKTERLOCVTOB. 

^  The  Loid  Justice  Clerk  and  Lodb 
(>auttissiQiiers  of  Justiciary^  esdain  pw 
ties  procurators  to  give  in  informations 
upon  the  relevancy  of  the  indictment,  to 
the  Clerk  of  Couit,  in  order  tobe  rei^HPd^; 
the  prosecutor  to  give  in  his  iaifanDMlioft 
on  or  before  'Biursday  neict,  and  the  pas- 
curators  far  the  panel  to  give  in  Jus  iura^ 
mation  on  or  before  \S^  ninth  d^«C 
July  next — Continue  the  diet  against  the 
panel  till  Monday,  ihe  14th  day  of  the 
said  month  of  JiUy,  and  ordain  all  oon* 
cemed  to  attend,  eadi  under  die  paios  ef 
law ;  and  the  pand,  in  the  mean  Uaie,  l» 
be  carried  back  to,  the  Castle  of  £diB> 
burgh." 


June  26, 1817. 
INFORMATION 


Fon 


ALEXANDER  MACONOCHI£,  Eaq^^ 

Meadowbankf  hk  Mt^u^s  AAwtate^ 

for  Atf  Mi^yt  wiare^y 

AGATK8T 

ANDREW  M'iUNLEY,  pwienl  JV-tmer  w 
the  Cmtk  of  EdMmgh^VvaxX. 

After  hearing  counsel  a  second  thne  * 
on  the  relevancy  of  tike  cbar^  against  the 
panel,  tlie  first  argument  m  the  case  of 
WiUiiUn  Edgar  hi^ng  been  equalfy  ap- 
plicable to  the  present,  your  tordships  has 
still  expressed  a  vrish  to  have  an  oppoiw 
tunity  of  considering  a  written  plaawing 
before  delivering  your  opinions.  It  wis 
then  suggested,  that  it  would  be  better  to 
serve  the  ponieliwith  a  new  indictment^ 
before  writing  Ihe  informations,  in  conse-. 
quence  of  some  veri)al  objections  to  tiie  * 
indictment,  then  depending,  wbsdt  lad 
occurred  to  -the  Coort.  fhe  course 
pointed  out  by  your  lordships  bas 
accordingly  been  followed.  Tne  ^iet 
of  the  former  indictment  having  'been 
deserted,  another  was  immediately  served; ' 
and  an  interiocutor,  ordering  informations, 
was  then  pronounced  f ;  in  obedience  to 
which,  this  paper  is  presented. 

After  the  comdenUionr  that  ins.  I^pi 
already  given  io  the  case,  the  ptoseoator 
cannot  flatter  himself  with  ihe  hope  iiC.> 
staling  any  new  views  of  Uie  subject  that 

are  likely  to  appear  of  mndi  importance* 

■     t  ■  ....  ■     *»» 

*  June  2, 1817.      tJun€23^18U. 


•731 


fir  AdmimiHrJHg  wtibtmfii  Oatlu. 


A.  D.  ISlt. 


[374 


NcMier  doeB  he  think  ha  would  be  jultified 
by  any  indncemeat  of  noveltyy  in  aban- 
doning those  grounds  on  which  he  long 
ag«>  ibrmed  Ihs  opinion,  that  the  charge 
agmst  the  pand  ought  to  peas  16  as 
assiie;  an  opinion  from  which,  as  yet,  he 
has  seen  no  cause  to  depart.  He  con- 
eeiTCs,  that  he  will  best  discharge  his  duty, 
by  pointing  out  those  leading  views 
of  the  case  on  which  he  expects  the  de- 
cision will  ultimately  rest ;  and  will  not 
Ihtigue  your  lordships  or  himself,  by  en- 
tering upon  the  endless  minutia  of  verbal 
criticism,  or  expatiating  on  the  boundless 
field  of  general  discussion,  which  the  com- 
bined efforts  of  so  many  learned  men  have 
employed  in  prerenUng,  or  at  least  delaying 
for  a  time,  the  trial  of  the  offence  charged 
against  the  panel. 

The  statute  libelled  on  is  of  recent 
origin,  and  was  intended  to  check  a  great 
and  alanning  evil,  which,  of  late  Tears,  has 
led  to  many  crimes  and  disoroersi  and 
even  to  insurrection    and  rebellion,  in 
different  parts  of  Che  united'  kingdom. 
Conspiracies  against  the  lives  and  pro- 
perty of  others,   and  against  the  whole 
Existing  order  of  society,  were  continually 
bredking  out,  which  had  all  of  them  cer- 
tain marked  features  of  resemblance^  and 
tdl  ultimately  tended  to  the  same  end. 
Those  conspiracies  were  dangerous,   in 
proportion    as    they    were    systematic; 
and  it  was  naturally  thought  that  the 
foundation   of  the  evil   would   be  re- 
moved, if  the  bond  of  union  could  be 
destroyed  by  which  they  were  formed  and 
hM  together.     Accordingly,  the  legis- 
lature declared  it  a  capittd  criihe  to  ad- 
minister oaths  of  a  particular  description, 
this  being  invarfilbly  the  Engine  of  mischief 
by  which  tiie  vicious  and  ignorant  were 
united  in  the  prosecution  of  their  own 
ol^ecfs,  or  in  the  blind  advancement  of 
Ihe  more  dangerous  schemes  of  olhers. 
Tor  many  years,  the  country  has  not  been 
altogettier  free  ftom  such  combinations ; 
and,  although  dormant  for  a  time^  they 
have  always  been  revived  on  the  lecur- 
tence  of  any  general  discontent  or  dis- 
tress.   In  the  circumstances  of  the  present 
time,  they  have  found  uifusUal  encoutage- 
ment ;  and  even  the  sober  and  <calculating 
spirit  of  the  people  of  this  part  of  the 
kmgdom  has  not  saved  them  fW)m  the 
general  delusion.    An  association  of  des- 
perate men  whs  formed ;  who  entertained 
sanguine  expectations  that  Ihe  timd  was 
come  for  a  new  order  of  things,  when  tliey 
mi^t    participate   in   the    power    and 
pfifrileges  erf*  the  higher  order  of  the  State, 
and  share  tiie  possMions  of  their  wealthy 
and  more  industrious  neighbours.     The 
jiarticulars  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  this 
coiispiraey,  it  would  not  only  be  foreign 
fioMi  the  pi^eseut  purpose,  but  impfoper 
4nd  ineKpedieiit  to  detail ;  and^  ta  truth, 


the  description  would  have  little  to  re- 
cemnend  it  for  interest  or  novelty.  Con- 
spirators of  all  ages  and  countries  have  a 
striking  resemblance  to  each  other: 
^  Bonis  iovident,  males  extoUunt ;  vetera 
odere,  nova  exoptant ;  odio  suaram  renim 
matari  omnia  student;  turlA  atquie  se* 
ditionibus  sine  curft  aluntur." 

The  proceedings  of  those  persons  were 
perfectly  well  known  to  his  majesty's  go- 
vernment ;  and,  in  order  to  preserve  the 
tranquillity  of  die  country,  it  at  length 
became  necessary  to  interrupt  their 
labours,  before  their  schemes  burst  fordi 
into  mature  and  active  operations.  The 
contamination,  however,  had  spread  to  a 
considerable  extent,  and  had  struck  deep 
root  in  the  hearts  and  affections  of  the 
diseased  part  of  the  community;  and 
though  checked  for  a  time,  by  the  disclo- 
sure and'thefear  of  its  consequences,  there 
was  no  doubt  that,  upon  the  first  oppor- 
tunity, the  same,  or  a  similar  plan  c' 
operations  would  be  resun^,  with  in- 
creased viffour  and  activity. 

Under  these  circumstances,  it  appeared 
to  his  majesty's  advocate,  that  the  pro- 
per course  of  his  public  duty  was,  td  en- 
force the  provisions  of  the  statute,  which 
was  passed  for  the  express  purpose  of 
repressing  such  disorders.  The  panel 
and  another  individual  were  accordingly 
rndicted  to  stand  trial  for  the  statutory 
offence  of  **  administering  an  oath,  pur- 
porting or  intending  to  bind  the  persons 
taking  the  same  to  commit  treason.'^ 

[Comtruction  of  the  oo/A.]— The  first 
question  that  naturally  arises  upon  this 
charge  is,  whether  the  oath  alleged  to 
have  been  administered  by  the  panel  did 
purport  or  intend  to  bind  the  persons  to 
whom  he  administered  the  same  to  com- 
mit treason.  The  prosecutor  is  not  bound 
by  the  statute  to  set  forth  the  terms  of 
the  oath,  but  only  the  purport  of  it.  And 
it  is  not  necessary  that  the  oath  should 
bear,  in  express  terms,  the  guilty  purpose, 
or  should  have  any  meaning  at  all,  pro- 
vided only  it  be  intended  and  understood 
by  the  persons  administering  and  taking 
ft  to  have  that  end  in  view.  It  is  plain, 
that  a  few  letters  of  the  alphabet,  or  any 
words  of  an  innocent  or  opposite  meaning, 
the  oath  of  allegiance  itself,  might  have 
been  so  administered  and  taken,  a3  to 
constitute  the  statutory  crime.  The  pro- 
secutor is  not,  however,  reduced  to  such 
a  narrow  case  as  this,  for  he  produces 
the  words  of  the  oath  itself;  and  under- 
takes to  satisfy  your  lordships,  and  every 
reasonable  person  who  reads  it,  that  the 
oath  does  expressly  mean  to  bind  tlae 
persons  taking  the  same  to  commit  irea- 
son.  It  therefore  seems  unnecessary  to 
say  any  ^ng  on  the  construction  put  by 
the  panel  on  the  phrase  ^  intending  to 
%ind^'  ky  which  he  ascribed  inte^Own  to 


875] 


57  GEORGB.III. 


IVial  tfAadrM  M'KinUy 


[376 


the  oath,. and  not  to  the  penon;  as  if 
there  were  any  sense  in  personifyiQg  an 
oath,  and  giving  it  the  powers  of  the  un- 
standing  and  the  will. 

Much  .  eloquence  and  ingenuity 'have 
been  displayed  in  perverting  the  plain 
sense  and  meaning  of  the  words  oi  the 
oathy  and  endeavouring  to  construe  out 
of  them  a  sense  and  meaning  which  they 
are  not  calculated  to  convey,  and  which 
never  entered  into  the  imaginations  of 
those  who  used  them.  The  literal 
construction  of  the  oath  vras  not  for  a 
moment  insisted  on,  but  a  general  decla- 
mation was  delivered  upon  the  indulgence 
that  ought  to  be  shown  to  persons  accused 
of  crimes,  in  a  favourable  intetpretation 
of  every  question  of  law,  and  of  every 
matter  of  ract,  which  is  brought  into  dis- 
cussion in  a  criminal  trial.  The  prose- 
cutor did  not  object  to  any  rule  of  inter- 
pretation, within  the  utmost  bounds  of 
reason,  that  might  be  followed  in  the 
construction  of  this  oath ;  but  he  thought 
it  his  duty  to  protest  against  tlie  whole 
doctrine,  as  applicable  to  a  question  of 
relevancy,  when  the  very  first  act  of  the 
mind  of  the  judge,  and  of  every  person 
engaged  in  the-  discussion,  is  to  assume 
the  truth  of  the  whole  facts  as  charged. 
In  this  stage  of  the  process,  every  thing 
is  presumed  to  be  done  vnckedly  and 
maliciously,  as  libelled.  And  the  ques- 
tion isy  if  all  these  things  <are  as  stated  by 
the  prosecutor,  ought  they  to  be  followed 
by  punishment?  So  clear  is  this  rule, 
that  things  in  themselves  of  the  most 
innocent  description,  if  libelled  to  be 
«done  wickedly  and  maliciously,  or  for 
the  accomplisiiment  of  some  illegal  pur- 
pose, ate  daily  found  relevant  to  infer 
the  pains  of  law.  It  was  therefore  main- 
tained, that,  in  construing  this  oath,  the 
purpose,  for  whicli  it  •  was  intended,  and 
the  whole  circumstances  under  which  it 
was  administered,  were  to  be  taken  into 
view ;  not  that  the  prosecutor  conceived 
it  necessary  for  the  case,  to  search  for 
matter  of  relevancy  beyond  the  words  of 
the  oath  itself,  but  because  he  thought 
himself  entitled  and  called  upon  to  main- 
tain the  plain  rule  of  law,  as  applicable 
to  every  question  of  the  kind. 

Tlie  words  of  the  oath  are  already  too 
familiar  to  the  Court,  and  are  in  your 
lordships*  hands  in  the  indictment;  so 
that  it  IS  unnecessary  to  quote  them  in  this 
place.  Independent  altogether  of  the 
considerations  above  mentioned,  it  is 
submitted,  that  it  is  impossible  to  construe 
■out  of  the  oath,  standing  by  itself,  the 
reservation  of  illegality  contended  for  by 
the  panel.  It  is  an  unambiguous  obliga- 
tion to  use  all  moral  and  physical  strength, 
or  force,  that  may;  be  neoessaxy  for  the 
end  in  view ;  and  all  r  attempts  to  prove 
Xbe  contrary  must    appear    hopeless  to 


L 


every  unbiassed  mind.  Forced  oomtnic- 
tions,  fiinciful  illustrations,  and  vague 
analogies,  will  not  avail  against  the -plain 
meaning  of  the  words,  as  they  would  be 
understood  in  the  ordinary  afiairs  of  life. 
It  was  justly  observed,  that  grammatical 
niceties  were  not  to  be  employed  in  in- 
terpreting the  meaning  of  persons  in 
the  lower  orders  of  society;  but  it  was 
afterwards  said,  that  "  to  sttpport  endear 
vourt**  to  obtain  any  thing  is  a  solecism ; 
because,  to  support  endeavours  is  nothing 
else  than  to  endeavour.  Now,  this  is  to 
apply  one  of  the  strictest  rules  of  gram- 
matical construction  to  the  words  of  '^  these 
ignoraill»  people,"  as  in  the  very  next 
sentence  they  were  called ;  and  to  apply 
it  to  the  effect  of  drawing  the  conclusion, 
that,  because  they  did  not  express  them- 
selves according  to  the  correct  rules  of 
chaste  composition,  their  words  cannot 
bear  the  meaniug  which  they  are  ex- 
pressly intended  to  convey,  ft  was  ar- 
gued, that  the  words  ^  tke  tmmP  may  be 
die  relative  to  several  antecedents;  and 
that  the  panel  is  entitled  to  have  his 
choice,  ana  to  select  that  antecedent  whidi 
is  best  calculated  to  convert  the  whole 
oath  into  nonsense.  The  prosecutor  would 
feel  ashamed,  in  any  case,  to  enter  into  a 
serious  discussion  of  such  *'  unseemly 
niceties,^  so  little  congenial  to  the  Itberd 
spirit  of  our  criminal  law.  In  the  pre- 
sent, nothing  can  be  more  trifling  or  more 
useless,  where  it  is  so  plain  that  there  is  but 
one  antecedent,  viz.  the  ^  endeavours 
'^  to  obtain,"  to  which,  by  every  rule  of 
common  sense  and  sound  construction, 
this  relative  can  apply. 

The  next  piece  of  violence  that  vras 
done  to  the  plain  meaning  of  the  oath, 
was  the  attempt  to  make  out  that  the 
words  *'  physical  strength*'  are  to  be  un- 
derstood individually, ,  and  not  collec- 
tively; an  I  a  distinctioii  was  attempted  to 
be  made  between  '*  force*'  and  '*  strength." 
This  argument  is  now  iu  a  great  measure 
abolished  by  the  introduction  of  both  the 
words  into  the  new  indictment:  as,  ac* 
cording  to  the  best  information  that  has 
been  obtained,  they  were  not  only .  used 
synonymously,  but  promiscuously. .  But 
the  truth  is,  that  the  observation  never 
had  in  itself  either  force  or  strength ;  for 
*'  physical  strength"  is  unhappily  one  of 
the  most  £auniliar  ideas  and  most  common 
expressions  among  the  lower  orders  of 
politicians,  in  speaking  of  the  force  and 
power  of  numbers,  when  brought .  into 
open  resistance  to  the  ralii^  powers ;  and 
such  common  use  of  the  expression  is  the 
fairest  rule  by  which  it  can  ne  interpreted 
in  the  place  where  it  stands.  This  ^  phy- 
sical force''  is  nothing  else  than  the  power 
to  be  employed  in  subduing  the  oMtade 
or  contrary  force  by  which  universal 
suffrage  is'  to  be  prevented ;  that  is  to 


3771 


far  ^dmmtUHiigiinUn^lXiatht. 


A.  sr.  nvr. 


m$ 


say,  the  open  yiolence  hf  ^vluch  this  pub- 
lic parpoa«  is  to  be  acoomplisbedy  aod 
the  govenunent  overtmned.  It  if  tud 
to  say  that  physical  strength  may  be  ex- 
erted lawfully,  and  to  giye  strange  ex- 
unples  of  its  legal  exercise.  The  ques- 
tion is  not  what  imry  be  the  meaning  of 
any  insulated  words  in  the  oath,  but  what 
tf  their  meaning  where  they  stand.  Now, 
it  is  plain,  upon  the  face  of  the  oath,  that 
the  whole  powers  of  body  and  mind  of 
the  conspirators  were  intended  to  be 
called  forth,  not  only  without  limitation, 
but  with  a  distinctly  announced  gene- 
rality, duLt  was  to  admit  of  no  exceptions 
whatever.  It  was  indeed  attempted,  on 
the  part  of  the  panel,  to  construe  out  of 
die  oath  a  reservation  of  illegality,  thau 
which  nothing  could  be  more  contrary  to 
the  plain  sense  and  meaning  of  the  words. 

The  prosecutor  apprehends  that  the 
whole  of  this  argument  upon  the  mean- 
ing of  the  oath  received  a  aecisiTe  answer 
in  the  proposal  to  insert  into  it  such  un« 
ambiguous  words  as  would  expressly  con- 
vey the  meaning  which  it  is  attempted  to 
draw  from  the  words  as  they  stand.  The 
result  of  this,  experiment  plainly  is,  to 
make  the  oath  contradict  itself,  ^nd  ap- 
pear palpably  absurd;  whereas,  if  the 
argument  on  the  other  side  of  the  bar  had 
been  well  fi>onded,  it  should  have  recon- 
ciled any  apparent  contradiction,  and 
made  the  whole  consistent,  distinct^  and 
iaielligible. 

It  would  be  an  easy  matter  to  illustrate 
the  fair  meaning  of  the  oath  at  length, 
and  to  expose  the  gross  fallacy  and  Uti- 
lity of  every  attempt  to  put  any  other 
construction  upon  it  than  what  it  ex- 
pressly bears;  but  the  prosecutor  cannot 
doubt  but  such  a  task  would  appear  as 
useless  to  your  lordships  as  it  does  to 
himself.  His  wish  is  to  have  that  mean- 
ing put  upon  the  words  which  every  man 
of  common  sense  would  put  upon  them  in 
the  daily  intercourse  of  tile ;  and  he  has 
no  doubt  that  it  is  by  this  test  alone  that 
your  lordships  will  try  them.  Indeed,  he 
has  been  clearly  of  opinion  from  the  be- 
ginning, that  all  argument  upon  the  mean- 
ing of  the  oath,  upon  either  side  of  the 
bar,  is  totally  useless,  and  will  produce 
no  effect  upon  the  mind  of  any  impre* 
ju^iced  roan  of  common  sense,  who  can 
read  the  words  before  him. 

If  Uiis  be  the  sound  view  of  the  case  as 
to  the  construction  of  the  oath,  standing 
by  itself,  what  must  your  lordships  thinx 
of  it,  when  considered  with  reference  to 
all  the  circumstances  of  guilt  under  which 
it  is  charged  to  have  been  administered 
in  this  indictment  ?  It  seems  unnecessary 
to  do  more,  than  shortly  to  adyert  tathese 
circumstances.  They  were  all  mentioned 
in  the  debate ;  and  no  answer  was  at- 
tempted to  be  jnade  to  their  relevancy  in 


the  interpretation  of  the  oath.  The  most 
remarkable,  perhaps ,  of  the  whole  is  the 
administration  of  the  oath  at  MCrei  meeU 
mgty  which  is  no  more  consistent  with 
innocent  intention,  than  the  clause  of  se- 
crecy at  the  conclusion  of  the  oath,  whidi 
was  expressly  admitted  to  be  of  itself  a 
punishable  offence.  Secrecy  is  thus  ad- 
mitted to  be  an  index  of  a  guilty  purpose; 
and  it  is  of  little  moment  whether'  it  is 
admitted  or  not,  as  its  existence  imder 
such  circumstance  is  irreconcileable  wiUi 
innocence.  It  will  always  be  remembered 
also,  that  the  secrecy  in  this  case  was  of 
no  ordinary  description,  as  it  was  a  stand- 
ing rule  of  the  society  to  inflict  the  pu- 
nishment of  death  upon  those  who  re- 
vealed their  secrets ;— an  amiable  feature 
of  the  whole  transaction,  and  whidi 
affords  a  pleasant  commentary  on  the 
panegyric  that  was  pronounced,  at  the 
first  debate,  on  the  **  brotherhood  of 
**  affection,"  in  which  it  was  said  to  be 
so  becoming  that  all  the  subjects  of  this 
country  should  dwell  together  in  unity  !** 
Indeed,  it  may  be  observed,  by  the  way, 
that  it  is  impossible  to  find  a  better  com- 
mentary upon  the  whole  oath  than  this 
conclusion  afibrds,  or  a  better  answer  to 
the  pure  motives  that  were  attempted^ 
vrith  so  much  ingenuity,  to  be  extracted 
from  the  beginning  of  it : — 


>Ut  turpiter  atrum 


Desinat  in  piscem  mulier  formosa 
supeme. 

The  extensive  nature  of  this  ''  brother- 
hood "  was  totally  forgotten  in  the  argu- 
ment as  to  the  individual  application  of 
the  term  **  physical  strength ;"  or  rather, 
this  argument,  like  all  the  rest  upon  the 
meaning  of  the  oath,  was  founded  on  a 
separate  consideration  of  each  member 
and  clause,  indenendent  of  all  the  others. 
Still  less  was  it  tnought  necessary  to  take 
the  slightest  notice  of  the  important  fact 
stated  in  the  libel,  that  the  oath  was 
actually  administered  to  several  hundred 
persons,  whose  point  endeavours  were  of 
course  to  be  used  for  the  promotion  of  the 
common  end.  It  will  also  be  remembo^ 
ed,  in  the  construction  of  the  oath,  that 
it  is  libelled  to  have  been  administered 
to  several  persons,  who,  conscious  of  their 

Suilt  in  the  premises,  have  absconded  and 
ed  from  justice. 

The  truth  of  all  these  facts  must  be 
taken  for  granted  in  the  question  of  rele- 
vancy; and  must,  therefore,  be  taken  into 
view  in  this  stage  of  the  process  in  judg- 
ing of  the  meaning  of  the  oath.  It  will 
also  be  kept  in  view,  that  the  oath  is 
alleged  to  have  been  **  vrickedly  and  mali- 
ciously administered,'*  and  did  **  purport 
or  intend  to  bind  the  persons  takm(|^  Uie 
same  ^  to.  commit  treason,  by  obtaining 
atmual  paiMamentf  and  univenat  suffrage 


4^ 


0799 


57  «BOBGB  III. 


IBM 


MwudUedf  that  if  the  words  of  the  oath 
ar»  at  all  •usoe|>tible  of  the  meaniag  pat 
upon  them  by  the  pfosecator,  and  mt^ 
bear  that  meuang,  ytmr  lordshipe  are 
bound  to  gire  him  ciedit  for  tiie  tnth  of 
that  conatfuetion  which  he  pats  upon 
them.  It  is  ^te  a  nastake  to  sajv  that 
he  must  show,  in  this  question  oc'  rele- 
▼ancy^  that  the  wotds  mmi  of  mcettiiy 
bear  the  eriminal  meaning.  If,  indeed, 
the  criminal  meaning  be  plainly  a  forced 
censtractionf  and  one  which  they  cannot 
feasonably  bear,  yoar  lordships  might  he- 
sitate at  to  sending  them  to  a  juiy,  vnless 
it  were  alleged  tlmt  they  hsre  a  hidden 
€ft  different  meaning  from  what  they  ex- 
pntfi.  Bat  if  the  meaning  be  neither 
forced  nor  tmnatwal,  or  if  it  be  at  all  a 
leasenablet  ^  o^^n  possible  constrnction, 
the  prosecutor  is  enftitled  to  the  Tcrdict  of 
a  juiy  on  the  charge,  and  to  demand  the 
assumption  of  the  tmth  of  ereiy  allega- 
tion he  makes  in  the  preliminary  stages 
of  the  process. 

[ThaiiheoMhmdtUr€ammittnaa$n.]--- 
But  it  is  said,  admitting  the  aiguoieat  to 
have  ftdUdy  that  the  oath  is  entirely  inno- 
cent^  it  by  no  means  follows^  hioweyer 
dnagerous  or  mischierous  it  may  be  sup- 
posed to  be^  that  it  binds  the  persons 
taldng  the  same  to  commit  treason.  It  is 
said,  that  it  does  not  necessarily  purport 
any  such  engagement ;  and  the  same  line 
of  argument  is  had  recourse  td  here,  that 
was  prerionsly  adopted,  in  order  to  per- 
•oade  your  lordslups  that  the  oath  is 
totrily  innocent.  It  is  unneoJBSssly  to 
recur  to  what  has  been  said  above.  If 
the  panel  has  failed,  as  the  prosecutor 
cannot  doubt  he  has,  to  persuade  your 
lordships  to  construe  out  of .  this  oath  a 
resertation  of  illegality ;  and  if  the  prose- 
oulot  be  right  in  believing,  that  eveiy 
man  of  oomtton  sense,  who  has  these 
words  placed  before  him  on  any  ordinaiy 
occasion,  will  at  once  say  that  they  are 
nothing  else  than  an  obligation  to  accom- 
plish the  eods  in  view  by  every  means  in 
the  power  of  the  parties  without  reserva^ 
tion  or  qualification  whatsoever,  and  es- 
pecially by  the  whole  moral  or  physical 
h>ree  in  their  power,  or  at  least  a»  much 
of  it  as  might  be  necessary^— then  the 
Bimpleqaestion  remains,-*-  Sappodngthese 
means  to  have  been  brought  into  action, 
and  pardcalarly  sapposing  their  physical 
force  to  have  been  brought  into  action  for 
acGomplishiikg  the  particular  purposes  in 
view,  would  this  nave  amounted  to  the 
erime  of  treason  ?  Now,  upon  this  point, 
it  is  submitted  to  be  dear,  that  the  ac- 
complishing, or  attempting  to  accomplish, 
any^poby  c  poipose  by  foroe^  especially  by 
the  ioroe  of  numbers,  sueh  as  the  aitera- 
tioa*  of  any  law»  or  ai^.  branch  of  the  con- 
■titilioo,  men  partttularlj  wfaev  the 


-  altisratimi  is  efsoch  a  nature  as  infers  the 
destruction  of  the  whole  frame  and  tez« 
turd  of  the  government,  is,  by  all  the  au- 
thorities, high  treason.  Bat  upon  tfiis  it 
seems-  unnecessaiy  to  enter ;  and,  indeed, 
the  prosecutor  is  onwilting,  and  feels  it 
aitogether  nnneoessvy,  to  detain  your 
loidshipo  with  an^  remaiks  of  his  upon  a 
subject  upon  which  there  are  so  many 
great  andiorities,  all  agreeing  with  ea^ 
other. 

In  quoting  these  authorities  at  length, 
be  is  only  following  the  example  set  be- 
fore him  by  the  English  Judges  on  simi- 
lar oecasions.  ^  I  am  pecoKaily  huppy," 
says  lord  Loughboteugb,  in  this  aaoress 
to  the  grand  jury  in  the  case  of  lord 
Oeoige  Gordon,  ^  that  I  am  enabled  to 
state  the  law  on  the  sid>jeet,  not  from  any 
seasonings  or  deductions  of  my  own, 
which  are  liable  to  error,  and  in  which  a 
change  or  inaecumcy  of  expresrion  might 
be  productive  of  much  mischief;  but 
from  the  6TSt  authority,  from  which  my 
month  only  will  be  employed  in  pro- 
nouncing the  lew.  I  shall  state  it  to  you 
in  the  words  of  that  great,  able,  and 
lemed  judge,  Mr.  Justice  Foster,  that  true 
friend  to  the  liberties  of  his  countiy.*^ 

The  follovring  are  the  passages,  at 
length,  and  in  die  order  in  which  they 
stand  in  the  original,  which  lord  Lough- 
borough quotes ;  and,  it  will  be  observed, 
timt  Mr.  Justice  Foster  begins  the  chap- 
ter with  a  dissent  from  some  of  the  ex- 
pressions of  lord  Hale,  which  were  so 
much  dwelt  upon  at  one  period  of  the  de- 
bate, and  l^e  present  application  of  which 
has  called  forth  so  many  panegyrics  upon 
this  author  in  the  course  of  these  dis- 
cussions. Your  lordships  were  even  told, 
that»  except  Coke,  lord  Hale  is  the  only 
author  allowed  to  be  dted  as  an  authority 
in  an  English  Court/' — a  position  too 
extravagant  to  reqnire  a  commentary. 
But  it  is  a  singular  drcumstaace,  that  the 
English  judges,  on  such  occasionsi  do  not 
appear  to  rafer  at  all  to  this  *'  great  fether 
of  the  law  of  treasons,*'  as  he  was  termed 
in  the  debate;  and  that  the  authority  to 
which  they  do  refer  commences  with  a  dis- 
sent from  his  opinions.  Not  that  the  pro- 
secutor is  ignorant  of  the  great  name  and 
venerable  authority  of  that  excellent  per- 
ion,  bathe  wishes  to  point  out  to  your 
lordships,  that  his  opponents  have  been 
somewtiat  too  extmvagant  in  their  admira- 
tion of  his  authority,  as  applicable  Cb  the 
present  case ;  and  that  it  is  usual  to  look  to 
more  recent  expositions  of  the  law,  im- 
posed in  better  times. 

^^Lord  Chief-Justice  Hale,t  speaking 
of  such  onlawfol  assemblies  as  may 
amount  to  a  levying  of  war  within  the  25 


•W<M. 


*  at  How.  St.  Tr.  490. 

t  Fostec^s  Crown  Law,  p.  20Q. 


9813 


JbrdimmsUmig  fmUaijfid  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1M7. 


£liKiMk,  €•  df  taluBlh  0  difomon  be- 
tween tbose  uuetrecUops  mM^  hare 
canied  tlie  apjpeannee  of  jui  enajy  fonn- 
ed  Wider  leeden^  wad  piwrided  xrikh  mi- 
litvy  weapens,  and  witji  dminay  eoioim, 
&e,  loid  tboee  other  disovderiy  tnauiltaous 
aaaemblies^  which  have  been  diaani  to- 
sethery  and  conducted  to  pwpoies  mani- 
festly imlawftd^  but  vpitbont  may  «if  the 
«idiiiaiy  ahew  and  appvaliis  «f  trar  be- 
ftme  mentSoned. 

"  I  do  net  thiak  apy  greal  almi  can 
be  teid  ob  that  diatiaetioii.  It  m-  tme 
that,  in  case  of  levying  of  war,  tiie  indict- 
menu  geaeiaUy  chaige,  that  the  defend- 
ents  were  anned  and  Mnml  an  a^war- 
like  manner;  and,  wfaene  the  oise  wonld 
adaut  of  it  the  «ther  idrcumaianees  of 
asrordsy  gunfl,  dmmt,  odonra,  Soc.  hare 
been  adiUd.  Bat»  I  tbink,  the  meiits  of 
the  case  have  never  turned  ainf^y  on  any 
of  thtfe  cireumstancei. 

''In  the  cases  of  Damaree  and  Pur- 
chase which  ase  the  last  ftftnted  cases 
that  have  come  in  judgment  x>n.  1he  •point 
of  oonstracttve  l^ing  wax;  there  was 
nothing  given  in  eiidenee  of  the  usual 
pageantiy  of  ww;-^ne  military  W!ea|)ons 
—no  banners  t>r  dmms — nor  amy  regular 
consultation  previous  to  the  rising.  {And 
jet  the  want  of  iboee  ciroumatances 
weighed  nothing  with  the  Gourty  though 
the  prisoner's  coitnset  insisted  much  on 
that  matter.  The  number  jof  the  inawgents 
supplied  the  want  -of  military  weapons; 
and  they  were  fnofided  m^  aseiv-eK>ws, 
and  other  tpola  of.  the  like  nature,  psoper 
Un  the  mischief  they  intended  to  eftct: 

**  Furor  artna  mkuitrat,^ 

^  Sect.  1. — ^Tbe  true  criterion,  therefore, 
in  all  these  cases,  is  qm  ammo  did  the 
parties  assemble?  For,  if  the  assembly 
be  upon  aocount  of  some  j^vate  quarrel, 
or  10  take  revenge  of  pafticnlar  pSneons, 
the  statute  of  treasons  hal^  already  de- 
termined that  point  in  favour  of  the  sub- 
let/' 

*  "  Sect,  3<<— But  in  every  insurrec- 
tion which,  in  judgment  of  law,  is  in- 
tended Against  the  person  of  .the  king, 
be  it  to  dethrone  or  imprison  -  hinh-or 
to  oblige  him  to  alter  his  measures  of 
•govenaient — or  to  remove  evil  counsellors 
nom  about  him^-^these  risings  ail  amount 
to  levying  war  within  .the  statute ;  whether 

,  attended  witti^e  pomp  and  oinmmsHDoes 
of  .open  war  or  no.  And  every  eonsinracv 
to  levy  war  for  these  purposes,  ttkough 
not  treason  wUhin  the  clause  of  levying 
wai^is  yet  an  overt  act  ^wilbiu  the  "ether 
ebuue  of  compassing  the  king's  «death. 
for  these  purpeees  cannot  beteSeeted  by 
ttomben  andopen  lorce.wsthout  mmifest 
danger  jto  bis  peison. 

•  Foster's  CrotmLaw,  p.:  210. 


'<  Sect.  4.— •Insurmctienff  iu  epder  to 
throw  <i^n  all  endesures,  to  aUer  the 
established  law,  isr  chanf^  religiep,  to 
enhance  the  price  of  all  labour,  uir  loiopen 
aU  prisons;  aU  risings  inosder  teened 
theie  jmovatiens,  of  a  public  and  f^ttieral 
concern,  by  an^trmed  foroe,  are,  mcoD- 
eMetion  of  law,  high  treason,  withhi  the 
elanse  of  levying  war.  For,  Ihougbthey 
are  not  Jieeelled  «t  4he  person  of  the  king, 
tbey  are  ngninst  his  r^ynl  mi^iesty  ;•  and^ 
tMsUes  Ihey  hnve  a  &mci  tendeMy  to 
diasolve  ell  the  bonds  of  society,;  and 
to  destn^  all  nsoperty,  and  all^govesoment 
ipQ,  by  MimoeK,  and  an  aaned  lorce. 
Insunedions  likevrise  fgor  lednssing 
national  grieranees,  oir  for  the  eximlsion 
of  foreignets  in  general,  or  indeed  any 
siuf^  nation  living  bene  under  ^  pro- 
taction  of  the  king,  air  tat  the  leforumtion 
lof  realorknaginaiyevibfftffntfie  lutfurs^ 
md  in  nohick  the  inam^ga^  Jme  ne  meckl 
pUerut;  risings  to  efieet  theas  ends  by 
foeoB  •and  numbers,  aici  ^by  eonstrafetion 
of  law^  svithin  the  clanee  of  levying  iwar  ; 
for  they  are  levelled  at  Ihe  king'e  erown 
and  ,f 0^  dignity.^  » 

*  «UponthetrialofDamaree,thecasee 
referred  to-hefoie,:in>eeotioQS  4th  and  6tb 
were  cited  lat  the  bar;  and  ell  the  jndges 
present  were  of  opinion,  that  the  prifoner 
WHS  guilty  of  the  hi^h  ^treason  charged 
upein  him  in  the  indictaicnt  Eor-here 
was  a  rising  with  an  avowed  ineentien  to 
demoliahaii  meeting-houses  in  general; 
and  this  intent  they earried  intoeutfutioa 
es  far  as  they  wereable.  If  the  AMCting- 
bouses  of  the  Protestant  dissentemr  had 
been  erected  and  supported  in  deianoe  of 
all  law,  a  rising  to  destiey  auch  henees  in 
general,  would  have  fallen  under  the  rules 
laid  down  in  ReiHng,  with  regard  to  the 
demolLsbingallbawfJhr-hoiises.  But,  since 
the  meeting<*houses  of Protastaot  dilsentere 
ane,  by  the  Toleration  not,  taken  nnder  the 
protection  of  the  law,  the  inaurvectieo,  in 
the  present  cese,  was  to  be  ceurideied  as 
41  public  declaration  bylhe^rabble  against 
that  act,  and  .an  attempt  to  sender  it  in- 
efiectual  by  manbm*  -md  offmfini»*^    - 

<*AooogdinglyI>emarsewasfound  guilty, 
and  had  judi^ent^deeUv  as  in  cases  of 
high  treason/'. 

In  the  same  esse  of  lord  Oeoige 
Gordon,  lord  Mansfield  ezpiesaes  himself 
thus,  in  addressing  the  jwry.  "^  These  are 
t«so  kinds  of  lervying  <war,  ^ne.agaiest  the 
penon  of  the  king,  to  imprison,  fee*  de- 
throne, or  to  kin  him,  ot  ie  :tneke>him 
change  mesaures,  orrremoue  rcooneeftlors ; 
the  ethes,  which  it  said  to>beJe!nM.again8t 
the  mioesty  of  Ihe  king,  or,. iaiother  wirds, 
agsiqst  him  in  hie  soysl  capnaty^  jm  erhen 
a  mnltitude  riseiaiidnssenble  to  4illaSn  by 
feree  end  violence  any  object  of  a  general 


».      ».•*         «!.  I  <^^— 1^11^ 


A-MI 


"*  jFoaler's  Crown  JLs3es,  p.  Slft^ 


SgS]         57  GEORGE  ifL 

piaKllc  nalnrey  tlmt  is,  levying  wti"  against 
the  majesty  of  the  king;  and  mosl 
leasonaMy  so  held,  because  it  tends  to 
dissolve  all  the  bonds  of  society  to  destroy 
pioperty,  and  to  orertnni  gdyernment,  and 
Ifif  force  of  anus,  to  restrain  the  king  from 
reigning  according  to  law. 

**  Insurrections,  by  force  and  violence,  to 
ndse  the  price  of  wages;  to  open  aU 
prisons;  to  destroy  meeting-houses ;  nay, 
to  destroy  all  brothels;  to  resist  the 
eKecution  of  militia  laws ;  to  throw  down 
all  enclosures;  to  aker  the  established 
law;  I  to  change  religion;  to  redress 
grievances  real  or  pretended;  have  all 
been  held  levying  war.  Many  other  in- 
stances might  be  put.  Lord  Chief  Justice 
Holt,  in  Sir  John  Friend's  case,  says, — 
'  If  pereons  do  assemble  themselves,  and 
act  with  force,  in  opposition  to  some  law 
whidi  they  think  inconvenient,  and  hope 
thereby  to  get  it  repealed,  this  is  levying 
-  war  and  treason.'  In  the  present  case, 
it  don't  rest  upon-  an  implication,  that  the^ 
hoped  by  opposition  to  a  law  Id  get  it 
repealed;  but  the  prosecution  proceeds 
upon  the  direct  ground,  that  the  object 
vras  by  force  and  violence  to  compel  the 
legislature  to  repeal  a  law;  and,  therefore, 
without  any  doubt,  I  tell  you  the  joint 
opinion  of  «6  all,  that  if  this  multitude 
assembled  with  intent,  by  acts  of  force 
•and- violence,  ^o  compel  the  legislature  to 
'tepOKl  a  law,  it  is  high  treason. 
;  Though  the  form  of  an  indictment  for 

this  species  of  treason  mentions  drums, 
tranpets,  arms,  swords,  fifes,  and  guns, 
yet  none  of  tiiese  circumstances  are 
essential.  The  question  always  is,  whether 
the  intent  is,  l^  force  and  violence,  to 
attain  an  object  of  a  general  and  public 
nature  by  any  instruments,  -or  by  aint  of 
their  numbers."  * 

In  like  manner,  Serjeant  Hawkins  f  thus 
expresses  himself:  '< Those  also  'Vfhb 
make  an  insurrection.  In  order  to  redress^ 
a  public  grievance,  whether  it  be  a  real 
-or  pretended  one,  and  of  their  own 
•anthoriw  attempt  with  force  to  redress  it, 
are  said  to  levy  war  against  the  king, 
although  they  have  no  directdesi^n  against 
his  person,  inasmuch  as  they  insoitatly 
invade  his  prerogative,  by  attempting  to 
do'that  by  private  authority,  which  he  bv 

Cbtic  justice  ought  to  do,  which  mam- 
itly  tends  to  a  downright  rebellion ;  as 
vriiers  great  numbers  by  force  attempt  to 
remove  certain  persons  (tcm  the  Ung; 
or  to  lay  violent  hands  on  a  privy  coun- 
cillor ;  or  to  revenge  themselves  against  a 
magiMrate  for  executing  his -office ;  or  to 
bring  down  the  price  of  victuals ;  or  to 
reform  the  law  or  religion ;  or  to  pull 
down  all  bawdy-houses,  or  to  remove  all 

•  21  How.  St.  Tr.  644. 

t  fiaiduiufs  Pieas4>f  the  Cioim,  p.  37. 


Triat  qfj4ndrm  M^Kinhy 


r3S4 


indosures  in  geneial,  &c.  But  where  a 
number  of  men  rise  to  remove  a  grievance 
to  their  private  interest,  as  to  pull  down  a 
particular  enclosure,  intrenching  upon  their 
common,  fcc.  they  are  only  rioters," 

Mr.  Hume  *  most  ably  and  accurately 
sums  up  the  doctrine  ~of  all  the  great 
authorities  in  tha  following  terms : — **  In 
the  construction  of  law,  the  levying  of 
war  against  the  king  is  not  understood  in 
those  insurrections  only  which  have  im- 
mediate relation  to  the  person '  of  his 
i^^ty,  as  if  the  object  be  to  dethrone  or 
imprison  him,  or  to  drive  him  out  of  the 
'  realm,  or  to  cause  him  alter  his  measures 
or  to  remove  evil  counsellors  fiom  his 
presence.  It  equally  embraces  all  those 
risings,  which,  though  not  aimed  direody 
.  at  the  person  of  the  king,  are  however 
against  nis  royal  majesty,  Uiat  is,  against 
his  crown  or  royal  dignity,  s^inst  his 
preroffative,  authority,  or  office.  Under 
this  description,  according  to  all  autho- 
rities, foils  an  insurrection  for  any  of  these 
objects— to  reform  the  estal>lished  law, 
relittion,  or  political  constitution  of  the 
land;  or  to  obtain  redress  for  national 

frievances,  whether  real  or  imaginary, 
or  though  they  be  real,  the  law  and 
government  of  the  realm,  as  long  as  they 
subsist,  cannot  know  any  thing  of  this 
course  of  correcting  them,  nor  make 
account  of  it  as  any  other  than  rebellion 
against  the  king,  who,  as  the  head  of  the 
state,  is  bound  to  prevent  all  such  forcible 
interference  of  private  persons  vrith  his 
own  fonctions,  or  those  of  the  legblative 
-  power." 

It  is  impossible  to  add  any  thing  to 
these  authorities,  which  combine  the 
names  of  some  of  the  greatest  men  that 
ever  adorned  the  English  bench,  speaking 
on  cases  actually  before  them,  with  those 
of  the  best  commentators  on  the  law, 
who  were  more  deliberately  composing 
for  posterity.  The  application  or  these 
authorities  to  the  present  case  is  obvious; 
and  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  if  the 
public  purpose  in  view  had  been  carried 
into  effect,  or  attempted  to  be  carried  into 
efiect,  by  force,  it  would  have  been  high 
treason. 

[Objettion  to  want  of  dncripHoH  of  ire^ 
$em.\ — ^The  next  objection  that  was  stated 
was,  that  the  prosecutor  h^  not  specified 
the  max^ier  in  which  «the  treason  was  to 
have  been  committed,  which  ^t  is  libelled 
that  the  panel  administered  an  oath,  por*- 
porting  or  intending  to  bind  the  potions 
taking  the  same  to  comn^H*  Upon  this, 
and  indeed  other  parts  of  the  case,  wher- 
ever it  suited  the  argument,  it  was  broadly 
assumed,  on  the  other  side  of  the  bar, 
that  this  is  a  charge  of  treason.  Now^ 
the  exposure  of  this  obvious  fallacy  is  the' 

*  Hume,  vol.  ii»  p.  437. 


385) 


far  Administering  unlamfiil  Oath*. 


A.  t,  1817. 


Id8<» 


plain  answer  to  this  objection.  It  is  a 
known  rule  of  law,  <*  that  such  an  account 
of  a  criminal  deed  must  be  given^  as  may 
distinguish  the  particular  charge  from  all 
other  instances  of  the  same  sort  of 
crime  ;***  and  if  this  had  been  a  charge 
of  treason,  unquestionably  the  prosecutor 
would  have  been  bound  to  give  the  speci- 
fication called  for  by  the  panel.  But  the 
hd  is,  that  there  is  no  treason  charged, 
nor  any  other  crime  libelled,  in  the  major 
pro|>o8]tion,  except  that  whereof  the 
whole  facts  are  detailed  in  the  subsump- 
tion.  The  crime  is,  the  administering  an 
oath,  purporting  to  bind  the  person  taking 
the  same  in  a  particular  manner;  and  il 
is  believed  the  administering  of  this  oath 
is  sufficiently  distinguished  from  the  ad- 
ministering of  every  other  oath,  and  from 
every  other  act  of  administering  the  same 
oath.  The  object  which  that  oath  con- 
tained, or  was  intended  to  contain,  an 
obligation  to  accomplish,  was  never  car- 
ried into  effect ;  and  if  it  had,  it  would 
haye  been  a  crime  of  a  different  descrip- 
tion. Kow,  what  can  the  prosecutor  set 
forth  of  the  purport  or  the  intendment, 
which  is  the  essence  of  the  crime,  except 
the  terms  of  the  oath  itself,  and  'such  other 
drcamstances  as  accompanied  the  admi- 
nistration of  it,  as  may  throw  light  upon 
the  meaning  of  the  administrators  and 
takers  ?  All  this  he  ha*  done,  and  more 
he  cannot  do.  He  cannot  state  more  of 
the  facts  than  he  knows ;  nor  can  he  state 
more  than  was  actually  perpetrated;  and 
the  oath  is  the  whole  fact,  and  only  source 
of  information.  Still  less  can  he  be  called 
n|>on  to  draw  an  inference  in  law  from 
fiicts  that  have  never  existed.  The  minor 
proposition  is  a  detail  of  facts,  and  has 
nottiing  to'  do  with  law;  and  if  he  had 
drawn  the  inference  required  by  the  panel, 
he  would  not  have  added  one  iota  to  the 
relevancy.  He  has  told  your  lordships 
aH  that  vras  done ;  the  whole  facts  of  the 
case;  and  it  is  the  principal  part  of  those 
^Mts,  that  there  was  an  obligation  to  commit 
a  crime.  Tliat  this  crime,  if  committed, 
woidd  have  been  of  a  particular  descrip- 
tioo,  and  effected  in  a  particular  way,  is 
nothing  to  the  purpose,  as  it  is  not  the 
hUended  cnme^  but  the  obhgation  to  com- 
mit it,  that  is  the  point  of  dittay. 

The  prosecutor  has  in  fact  aone  touch 
more  than  he  is  bound  to  do  in  this  re- 
spect; for  he  has  specified  the  precise 
objects  and  acts  intended  to  be  done, 
which  in  many  cases  may  not  be  within 
his  power.  Suppose  the  parties  adminis- 
ter and  tak^  an  obligation,  binding  tocom- 
JBit  treason  generally,  or,  in  the  words  of 
the  act  jtself,  ^any  treason,'^  or  all  thie 
ten  treasons  enumerated  at  the  debate,  or 
such  treason  as  may  be  necessary  for  the 


■  .-4.. 


*  Hume,  toI.  d|  p.  310. 

VOL.  xxmiL 


accomplishment  of  a  particular  end,  or 
which  they  may  be  called  upon  \p  commit, 
by  any  individual  or  number  of  indivi- 
duals, whose  authority  they  bind  them- 
selves to  obey ;  b  it  to  be  said  that  tliere 
is  no  relevancy,  because  the  prosecutor 
cannot  specify  the  particular  description 
of  the  treason  which  it  is  intended  to 
commit?  Or,  suppose  an  obligation  to 
murder  all  those  who  stand  in  the  way  of 
some  particular  end :  the  indrvidnals  who 
may  stand  in  the  way,  and  the  manner  of 
their  death,  may  be  unknown  both  to  the 
prosecutor  and  the  conspirators ;  is  it  to 
oe  said  that  the  statute  libeUed  no  opera* 
lion  in  such  a  case  ? 

Thtf  prosecutor  points  out  what  was 
actually  done,  and  founds  upon  the  law 
by  which  it  is  punishable;  and  here  he  * 
apprehends  his  duty  is  djscl^arged.  He 
has  nothing  to  do  with  the  manner  of  an 
intended  act,  and  fiir  less  with  an  infer- 
ence in  law  from  a  fiict  that  never  had 
existence.  He  is  bound  to  tell  the  panel 
the  facts  he  intends  to  prove  against  him, 
and  the  law  by  which  they  are  punishable, 
in  order  that  he  may  be  prepared  for  his 
defence ;  but  he  does  not  know  how  it 
can  help  the  panel  to  shape  his  defence, 
to  tell  nim  what  would  have  been  tlie 
legal  consequence  of  an  act  of  which  he 
is  nat  accused,  and  which  he  only  intended 
to  commit.  He  might  as  well  be  required, 
in  a  case  of  an  indictment  for  an  attempt 
to  poison,  to  specify  the  mode  of  death, 
and  the  legal  consequences  of  murder. 
It  is  maintained,  th^t  this  indictment 
would  have  been  perfectly  relevant,  if  it 
had  merely  libellea  the  wicked  and  mali- 
cious administration  of  the  oath  charged, 
without  a  syllable  as  to  what  its  purport 
or  intendment  is ;  for,  if  the  oath  means 
what  the  prosecutor  alleges,  the  prose- 
cutor's gloss  upon  it  is  mere  surplusage. 
If  it  did  not  mean  any  thing  that  comes 
under  the  act,  then  to  be  sure  it  would  be 
necessaiy  to  hbel  the  hidden  meaning  and 
purpose  with  which  it  is  administered  and 
taken,  otherwise  there  would  be  no  rele- 
yancy  in  the  charge.  But,  if  it  openly 
express  the  unlawful  meaning,  as  in  the 
present  case,  it  is  itseff  the  minor  pro- 
position, the  connectine  link  between  the 
major  proposition  and  the  conclusion ; 
and  the  prosecutor  *knows  no  addition 
that  can  make  the  syllogism  more  perfect.  . 
Jftt^'.  The  administering  an  oatn  of  a 
particular  description^  is  a. crime.  JIfia. 
Yon  did  administer  the  following  oath : 
iErgo,    You  ought  to  be  punished. 

It'  the  libel  rests  upon  the  meaning  of 
the  oath  itself,  it  is  plain  that  the  only 
question  here  is,  whether  the  oath  libelled 

'  falls  underthe  particular  description  men^ 
tioned  in  the  major  proposition ;  and,  so 
far  as  the  case  turns  upon. the  meaning  of 
the  words  of  tiie  oath,  the  Court  will  cer« 

2  G 


9S7] 


57  GEORGE  UI. 


Trial /^  Andrtu  M'KSnk^ 


C99» 


uioly  judge  for  thfiaueWes,  without  the 
least  regard  to  any  argument  or  infecenee 
of  th^  prosecutor.  In  so  far  as  the  case 
turns  upon  a  meaning  not  expressly  con- 
veyed by  the  words,  the  allegations  of  the 
prosecutor,  as  to  the  intendment,  must 
enter  into  the  relevancy.  But  here  he 
maintains  his  charge  upon  the  meaning 
of  the  ^ords  themselves;  and,  setting 
aside  all  the  rest  of  the  qualities  afiSrmed 
of  the  oath  as  superfluous,  he  calls  upon 
your  lordships  to  say  whether  it  falls 
under  the  statute  or  not ;  and  denies  that 
he  is  bound  to  set  forth  in  the  minor  pro- 
position any  thing  but  what  was  actually 
done,  and  the  time,  place,  and  manner 
of  the  deed.  He  has  accordingly  de-^ 
scribed  the  time,  and  place,  and  a  number 
of  thei  circumstances  under  which  the  oath 
was  administered ;  and,  above  all,  he  has 
stated  the  names  of  the  individuals  to 
whom  it  was  administered,  perhaps  the 
most  useful  circumstance  of  the  whole,  in 
order  to  prepare  tbe.panel  for  his  defence. 
,But,  as  to  detailing  tlie  time,  place,  and 
circumstances,  of  what  existed  in  inten- 
tion, it  is  obvious  that  such  a  specification 
is  beyond  his  power.  The  oath  may  be 
administered  before  any  part  of  the  detail 
of  the  execution  of  the  treason  is  arranged, 
— before  any  understanding  among  the 
conspirators  as  to  their  particvlar  plan  of 
operations — ^and,  by  its  nature,  the  oath 
is  likely,  in  general,  to  be  the  preliminary' 
to  every  thing  else.  Yet  here  he  is  asked, 
not  only  to  detail  facts  that  have  not  hap- 
pened, but  to  draw  from  them  an  infer- 
ence in  law.  Now,  he  must  say,  that  he 
cannot  coqceive  any  thing  more  foreign 
from  the  nature  of  a  minor  proposition, 
than  the  detail  of  a  deed  in  contemplation, 
unless  perhaps  it  be  an  inference  in  law 
from  a .  crime  which  never  had  an  exist- 
ence. In  short,  he  has  set  forth  the  ad- 
ministering an  oath,  purporting  to  bind, 
as  forbidden  by  the  statute ;  and  he  sub- 
mits, that  it  is  travelling  out  of  tlie  case 
altogether,  to  ask  any  thing  of  him  be- 
yond the  oath  itself,  and  the  time,  place, 
ai)d  circumstances  of  the  administration. 
He  can  knpw  nothing  pf  the  guilty  pur- 
pose more  than  the  parties  told  him  in  the 
oath, 

>  The  prosecutor  has  attentively  recon- 
sidered this  part  of  the  argument  for  the 
]^el;  and,  fronj  the  beginning  to  the 
end  pf  ity  he  has  not  been  able  to  discover 
a  single  piece  of  reasoning  that  directly 
meets  the  point.  '  The  whple  of  it»  with- 
out exception,  proceeds  upon  the  errone- 
ous assuinption,  that  it  is  a  charge  of 
treason  of  which  your  lordshipt  sure 'now 
oalled  upon  to  judge;  and  if  this  plain 
distinction  is  kept  in  view,  he  will  venture 
to  say,  that  the  argument  hft»  not  even  the 
vestige  of  plausibility. 
{Jvhtther  an  offence  against  thit  ad  eon 


he  tried,  being  treoionJ]    Another  objectkm 
to  the  relevancy  of  this  indictment  was 
derived  from  a  principle  of  theJBnglish 
law,  which  it  was  attempted  to  apply  to 
this  case,  that  all  felony  merges  in  tree- 
sou  ;    from  which  ie  was  said  to  follow, 
that  if  the  facts  set  forth  in  the  indictment 
amount  to  treason,  they  cannot  be  tried 
as  an  offence  against  the  act  libelled  on. 
The  learned  gentleman  who  maintained 
that  plea,   was  obliged  to  assume  the 
falUcy  of  all  the  ingenious  arguments  that 
had  gone  before,  to  show  that  there  is  no 
treason  in  the  case,  and  to  ebandoa  the 
whole  of  those  rules  of  construction  of  the 
oath  and  the  indictment,  for  which  so 
great  a  struggle  was  made  by  the  other 
counsel  for  the  panel.    He  assumed,  that 
treason  was  not  only  in  the  view  o^T  the 
parties,  and  intended  to  be  committed, 
but  that,  by  taking  and  administering  the 
oath,  they  were  guilty  of  treason  by  the 
act  m  the  36th  of  the  king.    It  is  neces- 
sary, therefore,  before  you  can  pay  any 
attention  to  this  alternative  plea, ,  tha^ 
your  lordships  should  come  to  be  of  the 
prosecutor's  opinion  as  to  the  relevancy 
of  the  indictment  on  the  meaning  of  the 
oath ;  for  this  part  of  the  argument  for  the 
panel  is  totally  inconsistent  with,  and  de- 
structive of  the  other. 
.   One  or  two  remarks  were  made,  with 
much  diffidence,  at  the  time,  on  the  long 
and  learned  argument  by  which  this  view 
of  the  subject  was  supported;  but  the 
prosecutor  has  since  had  the  saiisfiM^tion 
to  find,  from  a  consideration  of  the  Eng- 
lish writers,  and  from  the  best  authorities 
to  which  it  was  in  his  power  to  apply  for 
information,  that  those  remarks  were  per* 
fectly  well  founded.    Indeed,  he  is  now 
totally  at  a  loss  to  account  for  the  respect 
with  which  he  listened  to  this  argument 
at  the  time  when  it  was  first  delivered,, 
upon  any  other  ground  than  the  impree* 
sion  op  his  mind,  that  what  was  prepared 
with  so  much  labour,  and   ipaintained 
with  so  much  confidenoe  and  paraif  e  of 
learning,  must  have  had  sotnethiiig  \o  re- 
commend it,  which  he  was  not  able  to 
discover.    He  has  now,  however,  eaoer- 
tained,  that  there  was  no  discovery  to 
make ;  and  has  accordingly  again  to  state 
to  ypur  lordships*  that  the  pnnci|de  of 
the  common  law  of  Eiigland  founded  on, 
has  no  application  to  any  trial  ia  this 
Court  according  to  the  law  of  Scotland  ; 
and  that,  even  in  England,  it  has  tx>  a|>- 
plication  to  a  trial  for  an  offence  against 
the  s)(Ct  of  the  52nd  of  dbe  king, 

lit,  It  is  understood  to  be  «  prindi^e 
in  BngUsH  law>  that  if  a  mn  W  vifd  W 
an  oftnce  tt  a  iekmy^  mhk^  m  fi^ 
amounts  to  treasoa,  he  inii^be  acquitted, 
and  he  may  be  tried  over  ^gain  jht  trea- 
son. But  there  is  no  authority  for  sraag 
that  a  man  caiwot  be  tried  for  felony  wneik 


StKfi 


Jbr  Admhifdering  unlaxqful  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[390 


bis  offence  tmounts  to  treason ;  and  it  is 
olmous  that  tKis  could  nerer  be  taw,  be- 
caizse  the  juiy  alone  can.  judge  nvhether 
he  has  committed  treason  or  not;  and 
nnTess  they  are  satisfied,  upon  the  evi. 
dence,  that  he  has  committed  treason,  he 
cannot  be  acquitted,  on  this  ground,  of 
the  felony.  It  is  the  law  of  England,  that 
%  man  acquitted  on  such  grounds  may  be 
tried  again  for  the  same  fact  under  an- 
other denomination  of  crime ;  and  the  le- 
gislature, in  favour  of  offenders,  have 
thought  tit  to  make  a  trial  under  this  act, 
an  exception  from  the  general  rule ;  and 
have  declared,*  **  That  any  person  who 
shall  be  tried,  and  acquitted  or  convicted 
of  any  offence  against  this  act,  shall  not 
be  liable  to  be  indicted,  prosecuted,  or 
tried  again,  fbr  the  same  offence  or  fact, 
as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of- high 
treason."  It  is  therefore  submitted,  that 
this  objection,  derived  from  the  law  of 
England,  is  one  that  Can  only  be  judged 
of  by  the  jury,  as  the  Court  cannot  try  the 
feet,  and  is  an  objection  to  a  conviction, 
and  not  to  a  trial,  as  the  terms  of  the  act 
show'^which  take  for  granted  the  possi- 
bility of  a  trial  for  an  offence  under  the 
act,  which  offence  may  turn  out  to  be 
treason.  If  no  person  can  be  tried  for  an 
offence  against  the  act,  which  offence 
nay  at  the  same  time  be  treason,  this 
clause  implies  an  absurdity. 

^Jidfyf  But  the  meaning  of  the  legis- 
lature does  not  rest  upon  these  words 
alone.     For,  considering  that  the  offences 
against  this  act  might  often  amount  to 
Iteason,  it  occurred  that  it  might  be  argued 
that  this  act,  being  the  last  declaration 
of  the  will  of  the  legislature  as  to  such 
offences,  did,  by  appointing  this  mode  of 
prosecution,    abrofi^ate    all   former    laws 
9gaihstthero ;  and  it  was  further  enacted,t 
"  Tbat  nothing  in  this  act  contained  shall 
be  construed  to  extend  to  prohibit  any 
person  guilty  of  any  offence  against  this 
act,  and  who  shall  not  be  tried  for  tbe 
flame  as  an  offence  against  this  act,  fl'om 
1>eJng  tried  for  the  same  as  high  treason, 
or  misprision  of  high  treason,  in  the  same 
way  as  if  this  act  had  not  been  made.'' 
Uras  plainly  showing  that  it  was  fblly 
under  the  view  of  those  who  passed  this 
lew,  to  mtke  it  occasionally  appficable  to 
case^  of  treason  which  it  should  not  be 
'diottght  expedient  to  punish  as  such. 

dd^.  Hie  act  itself  not  only  makes  ex- 
press provision  for  the  trial  of  *'  any 
offetiee  committed  against  this  act,''  which 
i^  course  indodes  cases  that  may  amount 
to  treason,  before  this  Court,  but  the 
danse  is  expressed  in  such  a  manner,  as 
to  demonstrate  that  the  offences  are  to  be 
tHed  in  the  ordinary  way.  *'  XPtori^ed 
also,  and  be  it-  farther  enacted^  That  any 

'  '  -    •  rm.  "  II 

•^  Seei.  Sb       t  Sect.  8^       t  Sect.  7. 


offence  committed  against  this  act  on  the 
high  seas,  or  out  of  this  realm,  or  within 
that  part  of  Great  Britain  called  Engfond, 
shall  and  may  be  prosecuted,  tried,  and 
determined,  before  any  court  of  Oyer  and 
Terminer,  or  gaol  delivery,  for  any  county 
in  that  part  of  Great  Britain  called  Eng- 
land, in  such  manner  and  form  as  if  such 
offence  had  been  therein  committed ;  and, 
if  committed  in  that  part  of  Great  Britain 
called  Scotland,  shall  and  may  be  prose- 
cuted, tried;  and  determined,  either  be- 
fore the  Justiciary  court  at  Edinburgh,  or 
in  any  of  ibe  circuit  courts  in  that  part  of 
the  united  kingdom/' 

4thfy,  The  whole  enactment  would  be 
nugatory,  as  far  as  the  binding  to  commit 
treason  goes,  if  this  argument  be  well 
founded ;  for  eveiy  oath  binding  to  com- 
mit treason  may  be  maintained  to  be 
treason  as  well  as  the  present.  It  may  be 
said,  that  no  oath  can  be  administered  to 
kill  or  to  depose  the  king,  or  to  overturn 
the  government,  that  would  riot  be  an 
overt  act  of  treason,  in  compassing  or 
imagining  the  king's  death.  The  treason 
would  be  the  imagination^  or  intention, 
and  the  oath  the  overt-act  Vnanifesting  it. 
So,  the  adminbtering  an  oath  to  levy  war 
for  a  public  purpose,  might  be  said' to  be 
a  conspiracy  between  the  persons  admi- 
nistering knd  taking;  the  same  to  levy  war, 
(though  not  treason  as  levying  war);  and 
the  oath  or  conspiracy  might  be  said  to  be 
an  overt  act  of  compassing  the  kitig's 
death,  or  to  be  tredLson  under  \he  S6th 
of  the  king.  In  England,  the  oath  of  one 
witness  is  sufficient  proof  of  the  statutory 
offence,  but  two  witnesses  are  necessary 
for  proof  of  treason;  and  suppose  the 
evidence  of  only  one  witness  to  be  had, 
if  the  offender  could  not  be  convicted  of 
the  statutory  offence,  he  could  not  be 
convicted  at  all.  Upon  the  statute,  there- 
fore, it  is  submitted  to  be  quite  clearly  the 
meaning  of  this  law,  to  make  the  admi- 
nistering or  taking  an  oath,  purporting 
to  bind  (o  commi;  treason,  triable  accord- 
ing to  the  ordinary  course  of  justice, 
whether  it  be  treason  or  not. 

What  has  been  already  said,  is  such  an 
answer  as  might  be  ma'de  in  an  English 
court  to  this  objection;  but  though  the 
preceding  view  of  the  subject  be  of  itself 
quite  conclusive  and  satisfactory,  the  pro- 
secutor can  by  no  means  admit  that  it  is 
necessary  to  have  recourse  to  any  part  of 
it  in  the  present  case.  For  be  niaintains, 
that  the  statement  formerly  made  is  per- 
fectly correct;  that  the  principle  of  the 
law  of  England,  as  to  the  merging  of 
felony  in  treason,  has  no  application  what- 
ever to  trials  befbre  the  criminal  courts  of 
Scotland.  It  will  not  do  to  say  generally, 
that  the  whole  doctrines  of  tne  English 
law,  as  to  tfeasbn,  have  been  introduced 
into  Scotland.    Lei  us  attend  for  a  mo- 


391 J       ^7  GEORGE  til. 


Trial  ofAmbtta  M^Kinky 


rsoa 


nteoi  totbe  expressions  of  tlit  act  of  qiwen 
Anne,  and  we  shall  distinctly  see  what 
the  legislature  did.  In  the  first  place^ 
they  enact,'*  that  all  crimes  and  offences 
which  are  treason  in  England,  shall  be 
treason  in  Scotland ;  and  that  no  other 
crimes  or  ofiences  shall  be  treason  in 
Scotland.  Does  this  compel  the  prose- 
cution of  any  crime  as  treason,  whicn  may 
be  tried  under  another  and  lower  denomi- 
nation? Certainly  not.  It  is  an  esta- 
blished maxim  of  our  criminal  law,  that  a 
man  may  be  tried  for  a  crime  under  any 
•denomination  of  which  it  is  susceptible ; 
and,  particularly,  that  a  prosecutor  pan- 
not  be  compelled  to  charge  it  by  its 
highest  denomination.f     If  an  act  be 

fassed,  declaring  a  particular  offence  to 
e  henceforth  one  of  a  higher  description 
than  it  has  formerly  been,  the  proseoutor 
is  only  empowered,  not  coo^Ued,  to  tTy 
it  under  its  newly  acquired  character. 
Examples  of  this  doctrine  need  not  be 
given ;  they  occur  in  daily  practice.  If^ 
instead  of  declaring  their  meaning  ex- 
pressly, the  legislature  make  reference  to 
any  particular  law  of  England,  or  of  any 
foreign  country,  which  is  quite  the  same 
thing,  and  declare,  that  what  is  a  crime 
1^  ^at  foreign  law,  in  that  foreign 
•couqtry,  shall  thenceforth  be  a  crime  here, 
and  pw^shable  in  the  sfune  ^ray,  this  iiirill 
not  abrogate  the  previously  existing  com- 
mon law  of  the  land,  by  which  the  same 
offence  is  punishable  as  a  Jower'or  dif- 
ferent description  of  crii^e.  The  great 
principles  of  our  common  law,  sanctioned 
Dy  the  experience  of  ages,  and  founded  on 
the  immutable  basis  of  reason  and  tnuh, 
are  not  lo  be  taken  away  by  implication. 
Your  lordships  hare  acknowleaged  this 
doctrine  in  a  hundred  instances,  to  which 
it  is  needless  to  refer;  as,  for  example,  in 
the  remedy  of  suspension,  which  has  been 
most  properly  held  not  to  be  taken  away^ 
€Ten  Dy  a  clause  declaring  the  judgment 
of  an  inferior  court  final  to  all  intents  and 
purposes.  But  here  there  is  no  such  im- 
plication of  any  interference  with  the  rules 
of  our  common  law.  It  is  said,  that  spch 
and  such  offences  shall  be  treason  ;  but  it 
is  neither  said  nor  implied  that  they  shall 
always  be  tried  as  suqh  whenever  they 
occur,  notwithstanding  any  rule  of  law  to 
the  contrary.  The  law  of  treason,  intro- 
duced by  toe  act  of  queen  Anne,  is  en- 
tirely statutory,  and  has  nothing  to  do 
with  the  common  law  of  England,  of 
which  every  subject,  and  every  lawyer, 
in  this  part  of  the  kingdom,  is  presumed 
and  entitled  to  be  in  total  ignoranee. 

In  the  next  place,  the  act  of  queen 
Anne  appoints  %  trials  for  high  treason  in 


tnoe  appoiDis  4.  inais  lor  n; 

*  7  Anne,  c.  21,  sect.  1. 
t  Hume,  vol,  iii.  p.  276. 
^  Sect  3. 


Scotland  to  be  conducted  ^  in  the  same 
manner*'  as  in  England.  And  certainly 
it  can  as  little  be  mldntained  to  be  a  con- 
sequence of  this  part  of  the  statute  as  of 
the  other,  that  the  general  principle  of  the 
common  law  of  Scotland,  shall  be  abolished, 
^y  which  a  man  may  be  competently  tried 
for  an  offence  by  a  lower  than  the  highest 
denomination  of  which  it  is  susceptible 
and  that  a  eeneral  principle  or  the 
common  law  of  England,  not  peculiar  to 
the  law  of  treason,  shall  be  substituted  in  its 
room.  And  who  does  not  see  that  in  thu, 
AS  in  other  insb^ices,  our  practice  is  the 
most  &vourable  to  the  accused,  as  our 
law  fixes  only  a  maaamm  in  the  scale  of 
legal  responsibility,  and  leaves  the  rest  to 
the  prosecutor?  Declaring,  however, 
that  of  whatever  form  of  charge  he  shall 
make  his  choice,  the  offence  or  fact  which 
shall  once  have  been  submitted  to  the  in- 
vestigation of  a  jury,  can  never  again,  in 
any  shape,  or  under  any  description,  be 
made  the  subject  of  trial,  whatever  may  be 
the  result.  Now,  this  circumstance  at 
once  explains  the  origin  of  the  maxim  of 
English  law  above-mentioned,  and  its 
totd  inapplicability  to  our  criminal  code, 
that  whereas,  in  the  English  practice,  a 
xnxa  may  be  tried  over  again  for  the  same 
'fact,  under  a  different  description  of.  the 
^rime,  it  therefore  becomes  essential  to 
the  ends  of  justice  that  he  should  bc^  ac« 
quitted  of  the  first  charge,  that  he  may 
not  be  twice  convicted  and  twice  puniabed 
for  the  same  offence.  In  our  practice,  on 
the  other  hand,  if  the  aocusea  shall  have 
once  tholed  an  assize  for  a  crimimd  deed, 
by  whatever  wmenjurk  it  may  be  defined 
in  his  indictment,  whether  acquitted  or 
convicted,  he  has  made  his  atonement  to 
the  law,  and  is  for  ever  free  firom  all 
criminal  prosecution  on  that  account. 
The  plain  meaning  of  the  act  of  aueen 
Anne  is,  to  make  the  same  criminal  aeede 
treason  in  both  parts  of  the  united  king- 
dom, and  to  have  them  tried  in  the  same 
manner;  and  if  would  have  been  going 
much  further  to  have  altered  the  law  of 
Scotland,  so  as  to  make  it  imperative  to 
try  for  treason,  what,  by  a  general  prin- 
ciple of  that  law,  might  be  less  severely 
punished,  and  to  prevent  the  trial  of  a 
mau  for  a  less  offence,  whose  acts  might 
amount  to  a  greater. 

In  the  present  case,  too,  it  will  always 
be  kept  in  remembrance,  that  the  argu- 
ment IS  not  merely  that  Uie  act  of  queen 
Anne  has  abolished  a  general  principle  of 
our  common  law,  and  introduced  a  general 
principle  of  tlie  Enfflbh  common  law,  but 
that  it  has  such  rorce  and  validity,  as 
to  destroy  the  express  words  of  the  sob* 
sequently  declared  will  of  the  legislatare 
in  the  52nd  of  the  king. 

It  is  impossible  to  dispute  that,  in  th^ . 
legal  defioitioi^  of  the  crime  of 


3fl0l 


Jor-jUmm^trimg  UHtaufitl  Oatkt. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C394 


in  th«  n0d«  and  ftMm^  pnctiBBhy  wliich 
it  is  to  be  tiied — ^in  the  rales  of  evidence 
by  which  it  is  to  be  established — in  the 
laode  and  effect  of  ooDTiction  and  pnnish- 
nent — in  short,  in  the  whole  process, 
from  the  oonuaencement  to  the  tennina- 
tioo,  the  law  of  England  is  transferred  to 
Scotland.  Bat,  at  this  point,  the  trans- 
ference of  the  English  law,  and  the 
innovation  upon  the  Scotch  law,  stopt 
short.     If  this,  therefore^  had  been  a 

1>ro8e0ntion  for  the  crime  of  treasmi,  your 
ordships  most  have  looked  to  the  ndes  of 
the  law  of  England. 

But,  as  has  been  already  observed,  the 
proposition  upon  which  the  counsel  of 
the  panel  rest,  is  of  a  totally  diffsrent  de- 
scription. This  is  the  fint  occasion,  it  is 
believed,  on  which  it  has  ever  been  hinted 
at  or  maintained  by  any  lawyer  in  either 
kingdom;  and  it  is  impossible  to  con* 
template  the  effecU  of  it  without  the 
deepest  alarm.  The  proposition  is,  that, 
by  the  articles  of  Union,  a  general  prin- 
ciple of  the  English  criminal  law  has  been 
introduced  into  Scodand.  It  is  a  quality 
in  the  definition  of  felony — ^It  is  a  defence 
against  a  charj^e  of  felony,  that  the  fects 
from  which  it  is  inferred  ooostitnte  the 
higher  crime  of  treason.  Nay,  more,  it  is 
likewiM  aqnality  in  the'definition  of  every 
inferior  crime,  and  is  not  pretended  to  be 
peculiar  to  felony.  It  must  be  admitted 
•to  be  a  principle  inherent  in,  and  diffused 
over,  the  whole  common  law  of  England 
relating  to  crimes.  If  the  principle 
mauntained  by  die  counsel  for  the  panel 
be  correct,  then  murder,  robbery,  theft, 
assanl^  mobbing,  or  sedition,  cannot  be 
tried,  if  the  &cts  from  which  (liese  crimes 
are  deduced  can,  by  any  construction, 
however  forced,  be  proved  to  infer  the 
crime  of  treason.    The  privilege  of  the 

Snblic  prosecutor  in  Scotland,  by  which 
e  is  entitled  to  prosecute  for  the  lowest 
denomination  of  crime  which  the  criminal 
act  infers,  would  be  destroyed  by  the  in- 
troduction of  this  strange  principle,  and 
without  anv  conceivable  advantsge.  For, 
in  England,  private  individuals  being  the 
prosecutors,  they  might  occasionally  be 
induced  to  favour  the  party,  accused,  by 
trying  them  upon  a  charge  inferring  too 
low  a  punishment ;  but  here  the  invaluable 
institution  of  a  public  prosecutor  prevents 
such  a  risk. 

On  the  whole,  the  answer  to  this  plea 
is  clear  and ,  ^r^tible ;  namely,  that 
although,  th/b  la^  of  treason,  as  that  crime 
IS  prosecuted,  defined,  and  pjoved  in 
England,  was  by  the  articles  of  the  na<* 
tioottl  union,  traiuforred  to  Scotland ;  yet 
every  other  part  of  our  criminal  code  was, 
is  all  the  pnriQr  and  simplicity  of  its 
systenuLtic  principles,  secured  inviolate. 

It  woula  be  an  easy  task  to  point  out 
0ik     oljjections  to  this  part  of  the  argu* 


ment,  and  to  expose  various  errors,  both 
in  the  law  and  general  reasoning  by 
which  it  was  supported ;  but  enough  Iha 
been  said  already  to  satisfy  your  lordships, 
that  of  all  the  reasonings  which  the  con- 
sultations of  the  eigki  learned  gentlemen 
of  Counsel  for  the  panel  have  produced, 
^is  is  that  which  is  least  deserving  of 
your  serious  attention. 

It  shall  only  be  observed  farther,  be- 
fore quitting  this  subject,  thatjin  several 
of  the  cases  of  sedition  which  occurred 
some  years  ago,  it  was  expressly  stated, 
both  at  the  bar  and  on  the  bench,  that 
certain  acts  charged  amounted  to  treason, 
and  might  have  been  so  libelled  ;*  and 
yet  no  objection  occurred  on  that  ground 
to  their  relevancy. 

The  prosecutor  trusts  that  he  has  now 
sufficiently  answered  all  the  objectiops  to 
the  relevancy  of  the  indictment  that  are 
likelv  to  appear  deserving  of  any  attention. 
At  the  same  .time  as  this  indictment  differs 
in  some.verbal  alterations  from  the  last, 
it  is  more  than  probable  that  it  may  sua- 
gest  to  the  ingenuity  of  hh  learned  mends 
some  verbal  criticisms,  of  which  he  is  not 
aware.  Of  such  he  shall  only  say  in  go-* 
neral,  that  it  is  i^ot  for  the  purpose  of 
affording  an  opportunity  of  oiscovering 
objections  of  this  description  that  panels 
are  served  with  copies  of  their  indictments 
fifteen  days  before  their  trial,  but  in  order 
to  make  them  acquainted  with  the  nature 
of  the  facts  to  be  proved  against  them, 
that  thev  may  be  ade<^uatelv  prepared  for 
their  detence.  If  a  ftur  and  canoid,  state- 
ment has  been  given  to  the  panel  of  the 
.crime  with  which  he  is  charged,  so  as  he 
may  know  it  from  al)  other  instances  **  of 
the  same  sort  of  crime,''  this  is  the  essence 
of  the  relevancy;  and  the  humane  indnl* 
gence,  in  the  previous  service  of  the  indict* 
ment,  in  which  our  practice  differs  from  that 
of  England,  renders  that  critical  and  punc- 
tilious accuracy  cjuite  unnecessary-  here, 
which  it  is  the  genius  of  the  English  prao- 
tice  to  observe,  in]  slight  and  immaterial 
modifications  of  names  and  expressions. 
**  I  cannot  find,"  says  Mr.  Hume,  speak- 
ing of  this  peculiarity  of  the  English  prac- 
tice, ^*  that  in  this  respect  we  have  ever 
been  disposed  to  follow  their  example, 
but  rather,  and  I  think  with  as  sound  a 
judgment,  to  disregard  such  criticisms  as 
unseemly  niceties,  which  serve  only  to 
dimpoint  the  courN  of  justice,  and  bring 
the  law  iUelC  into  contempt.''  It  cannot, 
however,  be  denied,  that  attempts  have  of 
late  been  made  to  encroach  upon  the  |;o- 
neral  principles  of  sound  reason,  by  which 
our  criminal  law  in  such  mattery  faAS.been 
in  time  past  admiiustefed,  and  to  substi- 
tute in  their  room  a  minute  criticism,  and 
technical  construction  of  certain  words 

See  the  cas^s  cited jn  the  note>p  942*  tmu. 


i»i\ 


SI  GEOKOE  III. 


Trkt^Andrkf 


tsm 


fbr  nw  TMnteetiiMi  of  iiuio«mic«v  but  cer- 
tmnly  tettdiug  to  facilitate  ft$f  <Moa9iN>Dal 
•scafie  cf  tbe  giv&ity.  Oof  bcfst  and  abltst 
coanntntalor  has  tAuymrt  diaeh  anxiety  to 
fcai^  ag»ut  ttaU  tril  in  wmay  passages 
id  Ms  adoable  worky*  and,  oa^aeslion- 
9Mfr  nniess  ike  law  is  protecied  from  its 
growth  by  the  wisdmn  d-  tbe  Coan^  it 
wittr  tend  lo  degrade  a  liberal  sdence  to  a 
iwecianfeal  art;  snd^  in  tiine,  to  produce 
affwta  upeo  our  erinmial  code,  not  very 
dissimilar  to  what  would  follow  from  such 
a  setasgrade  MMveiiient  in  philosophy,  as 
would  tessare  to  its  empire  the  logic  of 
the  tehoolft, 

ifr.  Hume,  ia  the  passaga  above 
quoted,  probably  had  in  view  the  beauti- 
M  and  iitipresslve  language  of  lord  Hale  f 
on  this  subject ;— <«a  autfaMo-ity  which  can- 
nea  fail  to  meet  with  respecc  on  the  other 
silk  of  the  bar.  **  In  ftrnmr  of  Hie  great 
atiictnaas  has  been,  in  all  times,  required 
iispoiartsofindietmenta;  andthatnitihis, 
tiM  it:  iv  grown  tv  be  a  fatemisli  and  in- 
aottveuienoy  in  the  law  and  the  adminis- 
tmtian  tHerecrf.  Mom  oflbnders  etoape 
hf  ike  over  easy  ear  given  to  eieeptions 
ksioiictnentBy  tkatt  by  tiieiv  own  inno- 
eanea;^  and  manjr  times  gross  murders^ 
lavgiasies^  foU>eriesy  and  other  heinous 
sflsd  evyiiig'  ofVsuees,  escape  by  these  un- 
aaemVf  aioetiesi  to  the  reproach  of  the 
law^tQ  die  shame  of  the  i^venHnenr>  and 
im  4m  enoonragement  sf  villany,  and  to 
the  dtshononr  of  God ;  and  it  weie  very 
flty  that  by  some  law,  this  overgrown 
«iiriioBi^and  nicety  were  mfovmed,  which 
i»  new  beoeme  the  disease  of  the  "biw; 
and  will,  t  fear„  in  time  gtvw  mortal, 
withoof  some-  timely  ramedv."  Tbe  editor 
sridsj  in  a>note  t  "  l^i»  advine  of  our  author 
iiwild,  if  eempiied  with,  be  of  excellent 
nee;:  fbr  ifr  wonUi>  not  emly prevent  the 
gililiyifromeseapiog,  but  woM  likewise  be 
agaavdHiointiocenee;  fbr  thersby  would  be 
lamevad  the  only  pratenoe  upon  which 
«s«asil  i»  denied  theprUKmer  in  cases  of 
ffttoay;^  fcfr  if  n«  exceptiom  wera  Uf  be 
aUawvdfbulwharwent  tk^-tihemerhs^ttiere 
WMki  thMv  be'  m>i  Aasm  to-  deny  that 
assiiaaneei  hi  easts  where  lifeiaKrOncemed, 
wMsh  yei^is  allowed  itf  every  petit  t^s- 
pMtt"  In49(K>tland,  wl»a  ariminali'have, 
iaiever^Fatage-of  the  process,  theaasistance 
fd'  ootnselv  aadf  the  ashamtages  of  being 
mrmi  mHk  eopies  of  timir  indiotments 
Mae»  daye  befbtw  trial,*  and  ef  bsATing 
«May^poi«eef  lawtdisimsBed  before  tliey 
mm^  sena  xm  »  jwy,.  josiki  sequirn  no 
ftroor  sa^olijeetiotts'  that  do^  not  eater  into 
dUrMerlto  of' the  ease. 

Aeaovding  to  thfe  prosecn^t's- notion  of 


■>w^^>*«ti»ii  mm  i»>«tmii  4»  ttwH  "*!■  ■■  <   wi 


^  HauNV  vok  fmreihwikn^  p.  44^  rsX.4,  p. 
^tV;  Sap;  n,  269;  etaHbrpakm: 
^HaWII^R.CrtoL  S^prt9K 


bit  pnbthi  duty,  it  wonld  be  impoifeible 
Imt  him  to  do  any  thing  more  inconsistent 
with  it,  than  to  admit  that,  in  this  or  any 
caher  case,  any  technical  words  or  phrases 
ai^  essential  to  the  relevancy  of  the  minor 
proposition  of  an  indiotment.  It  is  ea* 
tabluhedlarwy  that,  ^although  tbe  sub- 
sumptitfn  must  be  suitable  in  substance  to 
the  outset  of  the  libel,  it  is  not  necessary 
in  <mr  practice,  to  employ  and  repeal  the 
precise  same  technical  terms  in  the  one 
aa  in  the  other  member  of  the  charge.  It 
iasuficient  that  foots  are  relate  in  the 
subsumption,  which  amount  to  the  crime 
whereof,  in  tbe  outset,  the  libel  professes 
to  aecttse.'^*  He  has  no  de»re,  however, 
to  shelter  himself  under  tias  rale  from  any 
but  frivolous  and  captious  objections.  He 
has*  endeavoured  to  express  himself  in  as 
precise  terms  as  possible ;  and  he  is  con* 
ndent  he  has  expressed  himself  widi  more 
pkwdsion  and  accuracy  than  the  received 
praetiee  of  the  law  requires.  He  has  even 
yielded  to  the'  clamour  horn  the  other  side 
ef  the  bar  fbr  the  insertion  of  the  word 
Jti&momh^  because  it  appeared  to  him  at 
least  a  harmless,  and  certainly  not  an 
inappropriate  expression,  in  libelling 
ttpon  a  Briti^  statute,  where  the  offence, 
or  crime  is  designated  by  the  term 
**^  Mony,''  though  felony  has  no  technical 
meaning  iix  the  law  of  Scotland ;  and  it 
has  been  repeatedly  decided,  on  the 
soundest  piinciples,  that  the  want  of  this 
epithet  is  no  <ri)}ection  whatever  to  the 
ndevancy  of  any  ohaige  f* 

At  all  events,  whatever  special  objec- 
tions may  be  taken  to  any  exnressions  in 
the  subsumption,  your  loroships  will 
always  remember,  that  if  the  diarge  of 
art  and  part  be  correctly  stated  in  terms 
of  the  aet  of  parliament,  it  is  impossible 
that  anv  **  exception  or  objection  take 
awaie  t&Ht  part  of  the  libel/'  1593,  cap. 
158. 

On  tliese  grounds,  the  prosecutor  sub- 
aits^  the  indictment  ought  to  be  fieund 
relevant  to  infer  die  pains  of  law. 
Inrapeeiwhert<^Sft% 

H.  Hotf s  D»viiiiOV». 


My  10,  1817. 
rirFORMATION 

FOB 

m  tl^  CtuiU  tf  Edinburgh, 

▲OAIKST 

ALBXAmSEB,  maconochu;  Af.  ^ 

Mitubufbtmkf  hit  Miijiuisf^t  AdwKoU, 
Jot  hU  Maf6$t^$'  itUetut. 

On  the  Sf2hd'  df^:  of  Pebraary  last,  tha 

**  Hiniia^  vi»L  3^  p.  3641 

t  JHhima^ fi^U  3,«p.  4991  and- Sap;  p.  MT. 


1^ 


aoTi 


for  Admitiatrmg  uak^  CMh*. 


A.  a  1S17. 


[ 


MBfontenft,  Andrew  Jilliiilef .  v«f  tp- 
pmhended  on  a  wamat  by  tbe  sheriff  of 
Lanaiicsliire,  on  a  change  of  being  engaged 
in  e.  '*  ireMonable  plot  or  oonepiraey,''  in- 
tended to  ^accomplish  tbe  subversion 
and  overturn  of  the  present  constitution 
and  government  6f  this  kmgdom,"  &c. ; 
aad  also  of  having  taken  and  ndaunistei«d 
oathsy  contrary  to  the  statute  of  the  52nd 
Geo.  3y  c.  104.  Tbe  spplication  also 
stated,  ^That  iretmmable  correspondencey 
by  letter  and  otherwise,-  had  heen  held 
with  other  districts  of  this  ooontry,  and 
of  England ;  and  that  arms,  mmmmitionf 
and  aghunt  veaponif  hope  betn  prepared 
and  coUeeiedf  or  are  oidered,  and  in  process 
cf  being  made,  prepared,  and  eolleeted." 
On  that  wanant  he  was  brought  before 
thesheriff  for  examination;  nnd  thereafter 
be  was  committed  to  the  gaol  of  Olasgow, 
till  liberated  in  due  course  of  law,  by  a 
wlarrant  of  the  sheriff,  on  diarges  of  a 
similar  import 

Of  this  date,*  a  pctitioii  was  presented 
to  yonr  lordships,  in  the  name  of  his  ma- 
jes^s  advocate,  which  set  forth,  **  That 
your  petitioner  dhaiges  Andrew  M'Kinley 
and  Wyiiam  Edgar,  present  prisoners  in 
the  tolboDth  of  Glasgow,  with  high  treamm, 
and  with  m  trtamnmt  cmuifiraqf  to  obtain 
annnalf»arliaBient8,lmd  universal  suffrage, 
by  physical  force,  and  paitiovlarly  with 
takmg^and  odmimttering  oaths,  binding 
themselves,  under  pain  of  death,  lo  the 
aecoirplishnient  of  those  purposes;  the 
ndminalcring  of  which  oaths  is  a  capital 
felony,  by  the  statute  of  the  52nd  or  the 
king,  in  that  case  made  and  provided,  c. 
904.;  which  crimes  the  said  persons  are 
chaqred  with  having  oommitM,"  Ice.  It 
prayed  year  lordships  ^  to  grant  warrant 
to  any  of  the  macers  of  Court  to  transmit 
the  said  Andiww  M'Kinley  and  William 
Edgar,  under  a  sure  guard,  till  they  are 
broBght  to,  and  innatcerate  for  the  said 
nflbmes  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  till 
liberate  therefrom  in  due  course  or  law." 
On  this  application,  your  lordships  granted 
wanant  nocoidingly,t  ^  delivering,  re- 
caving,  and  transmitting  the  informant 
and  WiUiam  Edgar,  **  till  they  are  btnught 
to,  and  in^aroeiate  within,  the  Castle  of 
Edinbnvgh,  therein  to  be  detained,  till 
thenee  liberated  in  dne  course  of  law,'*  he. 

As  te  infomuoit  dms  stood  eommitted  t 
espnssly  for  the  erinm  of  high  tvsason, 
as  well  as  for  another  offenee  of  an  in- 
feriev  denomination,  he  was  advised  that 
it  would  be  in  vain  for  him  to  apply  for 
lattam  of  intiasatton,  nnder  the  statute 
1701,  e.  6,  in  nvder  to  limit  4be  possible 


dnratien  Jif  bk 


because  the 


tianait  af  tiM  ^flh  Aam^  is,  ftl,  having 
IbIMhimsb  fha  wnoM  law  w  IBngtand  in 


^f^f^m 


"f^mm 


^r^m* 


m^ 


*  M aieb  17,  Mt7. 
t  Maich^7>  1817, 


mgnrd  to  tbe  taid  of  thecvma  nf  tnason, 
wm  intimation  la  his  m^ynty's  aduncate 
could  in  that  case  be  compateossoeamnel 
either  the  oommeaoemeai  er  the  cancla* 
iioo  of  the  trial. 

Bat,  aeon  after  the  anforaaant  had  been 
4hus  imprisoned,  ha  was  served  with  an 
indiclsBent,  ohargtag  bias,  not  onith  the 
crime  of  mason,  but  with  Iha  crime  of 
felony,  under  the  statute  «f  the  6%aA  Geo. 
ftffd,  whieh  provides,  that  any  nniaon  who 
shall  '^adnnnister,  or  cause  to  oe  adminis- 
tered, or  he  aiding  or  aariating  at  tbe  ad- 
ministering of  nay  oath  or  engagement, 
purporting,  or  engaging  to  bind  the  per- 
son taking  the  same  to  ooaamit  ear  tvtason 
or  murder,  or  any  felony  pnnishahle  by 
law  with  death,  Aall,  on  conviction  Ihere- 
ai,  be  adindged  gniltjr  of  felony,*'  &o. 
And,  at  the  aaam  tiaw  that  thisindielment 
was  sMvad  on  the  informant,  a  similar 
indictment  wns  esoouled  against  William 
Edgar. 

Tbe  informant  was  advised  by  bis  aonn- 
§tA  that  this  indictment  wua  in  many  re- 
spects irmlevant,  both  in  its  form  «nd  in 
itejubstanoe.  In  the  minor  fMoposition 
it  stated,  That  the  informant  was  guilty 
of  the  said  crimes,  in  so  far  as  he,  having 
*' wickedly,  maUciaosly,  and  traHemoify 
amapkredamdagraed^tBik  other  aaUdiaptaed 
panom^  to  break  and  distuib  the  public 
peece,  to  cAsnge,  snfoeN,  and  ossri/wwe  the 
fovermmetUf  nd  to  ascHe^  mow,  and  retir, 
tufarretlisn  end  refe/ton;  and  especially 
to  hold  and  attend  secrat  meeting^  for 
the  purpoee  of  obtaining  annanl  parlia« 
ments,  and  nnivefsal  saftage,  by  uiuavrfol 
and  violent  means,  did  then  and  diere, 
wickedly,  malicioniriy,  and  tfoSttarentiy  ad* 
ministei',  or  canse  to  be  administered,  or 
did  aid  or  assist  in  the  adnmiisteriag,  to 
a  great  nuad>er  of  penons,  an  oath  or 
engagement,  or  an  obligation  in  the  nature 
of  an  oath,  in  the  following  terais,  or  to 
the  following  purport.**  It  Ihen  est  forth 
an  oath  in  oortain  specified  terms,  beariog 
ia  the  bodjr  of  it  diese  particniar  words, 
^and,thst  I  will  support  the  same  to  the 
utmost  of  my  power,  either  by  moml  or 
p|)ysiealstreagtb,as  the  case  May  require.*^ 
And  it  subsumed,  whieh  oath  or  obKgation 
did  thus  porpoTt,  or  intend,  to  bi^  the 
persons  taking  the  same  to  commit -trea- 

nBTStsn  ^  the  ettMehed  gmtemmani,  Isiof, 
and  eamfi^ation  ef  tide  kingdom, 

William  Sdgar  was  first  brought  mp  for 
nrial  on  tbe  9th  April,  lfil7.  On  that 
ooeasion,  his  eoansel  stated  varSenaob- 
jaotions  tothovelevancy  of  thelndietment. 
1it|  That  the  facto  averred  In  the  minor 
ptopeaition,  Idking  'diem  «s  they  ^•'V 
ilated,  did  net  ^anoant  to  tiM  erimo 
elMwgid  in  the  majors  and  in  parienlar, 
that  the  oath  set  forth  did  not  purport  ot 
intend  to  bind^thaparttetlaking  the  same 


3993       ^  GEORGB  III. 


Trial  ^Andrm  M*Kinley 


[400 


to  Qommit  any  treason:  2ndl]r,  That  the 
chaige  in  the  minor  propodtion  was  not  saf- 
fidently  specific ;  and,  in  particular,  that 
it  did  not  state  the  particnhr  treason^  to 
the  conunission  of  which  the  oath  was 
aUeged  to  purport  or  intend  to  bind  the 
parlies  taking  ibe  same.  Brdly,  That,  in 
so  fax  as  there  was  any  attempt  at  speci- 
fication,  the  libel  was  irreleyant,  in  so  far 
as  it  averred  that  to  be  a  treason,  which 
is  not  a  treason  of  any  known  denomina- 
tion. 4thly,  That  the  statement  in  the 
beginning  of  the  minor  proposition,  which 
diaiged  directly  a  treasonable  conspiracy, 
was  not  competent  or  admssiable,  being 
in  flMt  an  attempt  to  prore  the  crime  of 
treason  against  me  panel,  under  an  indict- 
ment which  did  not  charge  treason  in  the 
major  proposition,  and  in  a  form  of  trial 
not  competent  in  that  case.  Objections, 
having  tnese  general  characters,  were  ar- 
gued at  considerable  lengdi ;  and  it  was 
particularly  observed,  that  the  prosecutor, 
alter  quoting  the  oath,  in  which  the  words, 
^  either  hw  moral  or  physical  itrengtk  ^ 
were  used,  had,  in  his  own  commentaiy, 
fiMud  it  necessary  to  dumgs  ike  term^  and 
to  state  that  the  oath  bcmnd  the  parties 
to  coomiit  '' treason,  by  effecting  by  phy- 
sical/aros  the  subversion,"  &c. 

mien  that  debate  was  concluded,  your 
lordships  ddivered  your  opinions,  and 
veiy  grave  and  serious  douoto  were  ex- 

Eressed  concerning  the  relevancy  of  the 
bel.  Considering  the  case  to  be  of 
great  importance,  your  lordships  ordered 
llie  parties  to  lodge  informations  on  the 
points  which  had  been  argued.  On  the 
same  day,  the  diet  against  the  infiDrmant, 
M'Kinky,  had  been  Ajoumed  to  the  10th 
of  April ;  but  the  diet  against  Edgar  was 
adjourned  till  the  19th  May. 

Soon  after  this  adjournment,  his  ma- 
jesty's advocate,  feeling  undoubtedly  the 
weight  of  the  objections  whidi  had  been 
argCNi  against  the  libel  as  it  stood^  deter- 
mined to  abandon  these  indictments,  both 
against  Edgar,  and  against  the  informant. 
And  accoidingly,  of  this  date,*  new  in- 
dictments were  served. 

On  the  19th  of  May,  Bdgar  was  put  to 
the  bar,  and  was  required  to  plead  to  the 
new  indictment  But  as  the  diet  had  not 
been  deserted  on  the  former  indictment 
bv  BDj  interlocutor  of  vour  lordships,  an 
objecuon  on  this  ground  was  stated ;  and 
yonr  lordships  deeming  it  necessary  to 
appoint  a  search  for  precedents  in  the 
records  of  the  Court,  th^  diet  was  ad- 
journed till  the  26th  May.  On  that  day, 
your  lordships  determined  that  the^new 
indictment  was  well  served,  but  that  the 
panel  was  not  bound  to  plead  to  it,  until 
an  interlocutor  deserting  the  diet  on  the 
Ssimer  indictment  should  be  pronounced  by 


?  April  10, 1817. 


*  your  lordships.  Such  an  interlocutor 
having  been  accordingly  pronounced, 
Edgar  pleaded  not  gudty  to  the  second 
indictment,  and  your  loidshipi  continued 
all  the  dieu  of  Court  tiU  the  Snd  of 
June. 

On  the  3nd  of  June,  the  informant, 
Andrew  M'Kinley,  was  brought  up  for 
trial  on  the  teeand  indictmenL  After  a 
aimihur  inteilocutor  as  in  the  case  of 
Edgar,  deserting  the  diet  on  the  first  in- 
dictment, had  been  pronounced,  the  in- 
formant pleaded  not  fftHty^  and  his  coun- 
sel then  stated  various  objections  to  the  re- 
levancy of  this  second  indictment.  It  was 
stated,  that  it  was  still  liable  substantially 
to  all  the  same  objecdons  which  had  been 
urged  against  the  former  indictment. 
The  prosecutor  had  indeed  thrown  out 
the  direct  allegation  of  a  traitorous  con- 
spiracy; but  he  bad  still  libelled,  thai 
'  the  panel  did  ^  wickedly,  malidously,  and 
frot^oroitf/v  administer,  or  cause  to  be  ad- 
ministered,'' Ice.  whereby  there  was  still 
a  direct  attempt  to  prove  treason  under 
this  indictment  for  a  fdony  only.  The 
oath  was  redted  in  the  precise  same  terms 
as  in  the  former  indictment ;  and  then 
the  libel  proceeded,  ''which  oatb,  or  en- 
gagement, or  obligation,  to  the  fsregoing 
purport,  ^d  bind,  or  did  puiport  or  intend 

•  to  biad,  the  persons  taking  the  same  tocom- 
mit  treason,  by  effecting^  bvpbysical  fbroe» 
the  subversion  of  the  established  govern- 
ment, laws,  and  constitution  of  this  king- 
dom, and  espedaUy  by  obtaining  annual 

Eirlkments  and  universal  sufirage  by  un- 
wfiil  and  violent  means." 

The  argument  on  the  general  relevancy 
was  resumed  at  great  length,  and  new 
eondderations  were  suggested,  shewing 
that  this  indictment  was,  if  possible,  more 
irrelevant  than  the  former.  Your  lord- 
ships at  the  samo  time  called  the  atten- 
tion of  the  counsel  to  a  particular  objection 
to  the  form  of  the  mmor  propodtion,  in 
stating  the  particular  oocadons  on  which 
the  alleged  oath  or  obligation  had  been 
administered,  where  it  was  described  as 
an  oath  not  fntrporiiMg  or  tnlewliw  to 
bind.  Ice.  but  **  hmdmg  the  persons  tuing 
the  same  to  commit  treason,  as  said  is." 
Your  lordships  wished  to  receive  infor- 
mations on  the  whole  general  poihts 
which  had  been  aigued.  But  you  ex- 
pressed dedded  opinions,  that  the  indict- 
ment was  bad  in  the  point  last  mentioned, 
and  also  bad  in  the  use  of  the  word  froi- 
iarcnttkf  instead  of  fehmousfy. 

In  consequence  of  the  opinions  thus 
intimated,  his  majesty's  advocate  moved 
your  lordships  to  desert  the  diet  on  this 
second  indictment  pro  ioco  et  temportf  re-' 
serving  to  him  to  raise  a  new  indictment 
for  the  samft  offence.  Your  lonlahips  ao» 
cordingly  pronounced  such  an  inteilo- 
cutor. 


'4m] 


Jiir  AdmadiUmg  tnkmftd  Oatht. 


A.D.  r8|7» 


r4Q3 


Thereafter,  in  the  same  day,  a  petition 
was    presented    by    the  lonl  advocate, 
which  stated,  ^' That  your  lordships  have 
this  day  been  pleased  to  desert  the  diet 
against  Anebnew  M^KmUy^  present  psson- 
er  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  accused  as 
fn  the  indictment,  the  diet  whereof  has 
this  day  been  deserted,  and  who  stood 
committed  as  fialty  of  the  crimef  ef  high 
tttammj  and  yoUha  tretuonahU  cofupracy  to 
obtain  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
suffrage  bv  physical  force,  and  admkmUr' 
mg  unlawful  6aths,  hmimg  hmuelf,  under 
pain  of  death,  to  the  aocomplishmient  of 
these  purposes,  the  admrnktaruig  of  which 
oaths  IS  a  capital  felony  by  the  statute  of 
the  52nd  of  toe  King,  c.  104.,  which  crime$ 
the  said  person  is  chaurged  iriik  having  com- 
mitted at  Glasgow,  and  in   the  vicinity 
thereof  in  the  months  of  November  and 
December,  181d,  and  January  and  Feb- 
ruary, 1817,  wkkh  tktrefore  makes  this 
apphcation  necessary  for  a  new  warrant,'^ 
Ice.    And  it  prayed  your  lordships  "to 
grant  warrant  to  commit  the  said  Andrew 
M 'Kinley  to  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh  ac- 
cordingly."    Yonr    lordship    did'  then 
grant  warrant  to  apprehend  tae  informant, 
''and  to  commit  him  prisoner   to   the 
Castle  of  Edinburgh,  therein  to  be  detain- 
ed till  thence  liberated  in  due  course  of 
law.**    The  informant  does  not  at  present 
stop  to  take  notice  of  the  extraordinaty 
terms  of  tins  last  application.    It  is  quo- 
ted, only  that  your   lordships    may  be 
aware,  that  the    informant  still   stands 
committed  for  treiason,  and  for  a  treason- 
able conspiracy,  as  well  as  for  the  crime 
of  administering  unlawful  oaths  under  the 
statute. 

Of  this  date*,  a  third  indictment 
was  executed  against  the  informant; 
and,  on  the  23^  of  June,  he  was 
brought  to  the  bar,  and  pleaded  not 
guilty.  His  counsel  were  prepared  to 
axgue  the  same  general  objections  which 
had  been  stated  to  both  the  former  in- 
dictments, and  to  maintain,  that  this  last 
was,  if  possible,  the  worst  of  them  all. 
But  it  being  understood  that  your  lord- 
ships were  to  orfier  informations,  it  was 
thought  unnecessary  to  occupy  Uie  time 
of  the  Court  vrith  any  debate ;  and  your 
lordships  pronounced  the  following  order : 
''Ordain  parties  procurators  to  give  in 
iflffermations  upon  the  relevancy  of  the 
indictment,  to  the  clerk  of  Court,  in 
order  to  be  recorded;  the  prosecutor  to 

Slve  in  his  informations  on  or  oeforeThurs- 
ay  next,  and  Uie  procurators  for  the 
panel  to  give  in  his  information  on  or 
Before  the  9th  day  of  July  next :  Con- 
tinue the  diet  against  the  panel  till  Mon- 
day the  14th  day  of  the  said  month  of 
Jufy,  and  ordain  all  concerned  then  to 

•  Jiine'r,16ir. 

VOL.  xxxm. 


attend,  each  under  tlie  pains  o£  law, 
and  the  panel  in  the  mean  time  to  be 
carried  back  to  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh.'' 
The  prosecutor's  information  was  accord- 
ingly lodged  on  the  26th  June;  and  the 
informant  is'  now  to  enter  into  the  con- 
sideration of  the  relevancy  of  this  third 
indictment.   • 

The  prosecutor  states,  that  he  has  na 
hope  of  suggesting  any  new  views  of  the 
ease,  and  that  he  will  not  think  himself 
justified,  by  the  inducement  of  novelty, 
in  abandoning  those  grounds  on  which  he 
has  always  been  of  opinion  that  the  in- 
dictment ought  to  pass  to  the  knowledge 
of  an  assize.    It  must  be  admitted,  that 
the  learned  prosecutor  has  been  sufficient- 
ly steady    in  adliering    to  rami  of  his 
own  ideas  on  this  matter,  and  that  he  has 
not  furnished  your  lordships  with,  many 
new  lights  on  the  most  important  ques- 
tions which  arise.    Yet  neither  his  in- 
dictment, nor    his  information,  ia.  alto- 
.     gether  destitute  of  novelty.    Tliere  are 
propositions  maintained  sa  very  new  and 
remarkable,  that,  though  they  were  in- 
deed suggested  in  a  viva  txHrr  pleading, 
the  informant  scarcely  expected  that  they 
would  have  been    deliberately    put  on 
the  record  of  the  Court ;  and  after  having 
twice  indicted  the  informant,  founding  on 
an  oath  of  the  terms  or  purport  specially 
set  forth,  he  has  found  out,  that  one  ol>- 
jection  to  the  relevancy  of  those  indict- 
ments is  at  once  removed  by  the  siinple 
expedient  of  chanffng  the  faet,    "The 
argument  is  now    in  a  ^reat    measure 
abolished  by  the  introduHion  (^  both  the 
words  inta  the  new  indictment."    In  the 
middle  of  the  oath  alleged  to  have  been 
administered,  the  woids   are     changed, 
and  instead  of   the  terms,  '^  either  by 
moral  or  physical  strength,''  your  lord- 
ships have  now  these  words,  '^  either  by 
moral  or  physical  strength,  <]or /orce  .'"> 
What  may  be  the  effect  of  this  addition, 
the  informant  may    perhaps    afterwards 
inquire.    But  the  prosecutor  has  at  least 
the  merit  of  some  novelty  in  this  expe- 
dient for  curing  an  objection  of  rele- 
vancy, by  adapting  the  foot  to  his  own 
argument,  though  he  had  not  ventured  so 
to  state  it  in  any  of  the  former  indict 
ments. 

But  the  informant  is  much  more  anxious 
to  satisfy  your  lordships  on  the  veiy  im- 
portant questions  which  occur   in    this 
case,  than  to  analvse  minutely  the  line  of 
aigument  adopted  by  the  prosecutor.    He 
will  have  occasion  to  advert  to  some  of 
the  extraordinary  positions  maintained^ 
and,  with  great  submission,  they  appear  to 
him  in  a  great  measure  to  reduce  the 
plea  which  they  are  found  necessary  to 
support  taan  absurdity  in  law. 
jlo  your  lordships,  who  are  so  well 
.    acquainted  with  the  subject,  it  might 
2  D 


409} 


57  GIOVGE  ni. 


TfidtfAninmM^MUky 


t 


seem  to  be  a^ery  miDecessai^  snlgect  of 
inqairy,  to  consider  what  is  the  real 
meaning  of  a  question  on  the  relevancy 
of  an  indictment.  Bat  the  manner  in 
which  the  case  has  been  treated  by  the 
prosecutor  renders  this  indisptnsablei  as 
the  basis  of  the  whole  discussion;  for 
he  appears  to  have  entirely  lost  sight 
of  the  ftodamental  principles  of  a  Scotch 
indictment,  as  well  as  of  the  powers 
and  duties  of  your  h>idships  in  consider- 
iogit. 

The  indictment  is  in  the  form  of  a 
8ylk>gism.  The  am^ot  proposition  lays 
doifrn  the  general  nature  of  the  crime 
in  the  abstraet,  with  its  qualities  and 
aggriTaiions.  The  wm&t  proposition  de- 
fines the  partiaAa^  apeaa  of  that  crime 
with  which  th^  panel  is  charged^  and 
detaib  the  fach  from  which  his  guilt 
is  to  be  infemd.  The  condmcm  ig^  that^ 
the  charge  being  proved,  the  punish- 
ment fizc^  by  the  law  shall  be  inflicted. 

Every  indictment  most  shew  $n  Ms 
fiee  of  it  z  plain  relevancy,  otherwise  it 
cannot  be  sent  to-  trial  at  all.  Your 
Lordships  must  be  enabled  to  judge, 
whether  the  specific  charge,  meant  to 
be  made  agafnst  the  panel,,  will  amount 
to  the  crime  charged  in  the  major  propo- 
sition; and  you  must  be  enabled  Uy 
judge,  whether  the  particular  facts 
alleged  are  of  such  a  nature  as  to  amount 
to  mat  specific  charge.  The  panel  has 
a  right  to  be  informed,  in  me  minor 
propoeitioii,  of  the  precise  aooosation 
that  is  made  against  him,  and  also  of 
the  leseling  focts  on  which  it  is  founded. 
But  it  is  not  merely  for  the  paneTs  in- 
fonnation  diat  the  specification  in  the 
minor  proposition  is  required.  It  arises 
from  the  verv  principle  of  such  an  in- 
dictment, and  the  rules  which  govern  the 
trial  of  crimes  in  this  Court.  The  re- 
levancy of  the  charge  belongs  to  vour 
lofdships,  and  not  to  the  iury ;  and  the 
prosecutor  has  it  not  in  nis  power  to 
take  the  coffnizafice  of  this  relevancy  out 
of  the  hands  of  the  Court. 

There  is,  in  this  respect,,  a  distinction 
between  the  practice  of  this  Court,^  and 
the  practice  of  the  criminal  courts  in 
England,  which  it  seems  to  be  of  some 
importance  to  remember.  In  England^ 
the  indictment  is  drawn  compamtively  in 
ft  very  general  form ;  and  it  is  com|]teient, 
even  after  the  verdict  of  a  jury  findmg  the 
prisoner  guilty  to  make  a  motion  in  arrest 
of  judgment,  on  the  ground  of  errors,  or 
of  general  irrelevancy,  in  the  indictment 
in  point  of  law.  This  is  the  usual 
form  of  trying  questions  of  relevancy ; 
and,  accordingly,  wUh  few  ezeeptidns,  it 
is  scarcely  ever  the  practice  to  object 
to  the  indictment  tn  Ihnme, 

Your  lordship  know  that  the  practice 
U  esseutiiOly  different  in  this  Court.    The 


interlocutor  of  tricTancy  pvenomced  by 
the  Court  determines  the  general  law 
of  it ;  and  thouj^  the  panel  is  generally 
permitted  to  use  whatever  aiguoMnts  he 
I.  thinks  fit  to  induce  the  jury  to  acquit 
haor  he  can  never  afterwards  plead  to* 
the  Court  any  objcKttons  to  the  iel«Faiiey 
of  the  indictment.    ▲  «eniie«  of  gmliy 

id  if  the 


the  case  for  ever;   and 
panel,  so  cenvieted,  still  thinks 
m  any  way  aggrieved,  kefaas  no  lemedy 
but  in  the  mercy  of  the  sovereign. 

This  being  nndeniafoly  the  rule  of  the 
law  of  Scotland,,  it  must  be  evidenty  that 
it  creates  an.  absolate  necessity,  not  only 
for  the  utmost  precision  and  aocnmey  in- 
the  statement  of  the  chaige  in  the  in- 
dictment, but  for  the  considerable  ounute- 
ness  of  detail  in  setting  forth  die  fittts^ 
en  whick  thedmrge  is  founded*  It  must 
be  so  stated,,  that  not  only  the  panel 
may  be  awsre  of  the  precise  nature  of 
die  charge  against  vniich  he  has  to 
defi^' hinmel^  but  the  Conrt  may  be 
enabled  to  form  a  correct  opinion  on 
the  relevancy  of  the  whole  accusation. 
It  will  not  do  to  wait  for  the  disdo- 
sure  ef  the  case  in  evidence.  The 
Court  must,  in  the   Bret   inatance,   see 

,«  by  ft  mtinct  exposition  of  the 
speofic  nalwe  e^  the  ehaigi^  aa4  ef  the 
fending  fitfts. 

It  is  certainly  of  no  importance^  what 
opinion  dudl  be  fovmed  on  the  respective 
merits  of  these  two  modes  of  pioeeduxe. 
Your  hudships  will  probaby  be  inclined 
to  think  that  the  advantages  of  your 
own  nde  are  sanctioned  by  a  long  oourae 
of  experience,  and  that  the  inhahstants  of 
this  country  have  every  reason;  to  be 
satisfied  with  a  ^stem^  which  se  efiect- 
naUy  secures  them  against  being  put  in 
hazard  bT  irrelevant  aceusatiene,  er  by- 
charges,  me  precise  natme  of  which  they 
do  not  know. 

But  it  is  self-evident,  that  the  whole 
principle  of  this  eoume  of  trial  absolutely 
requires  a  great  degree  of  precision  in 
the  minor  proposition  of  the  iadieement. 
And  aocosdangly,  no  matter  of  law  ever 
was  more  ctoariy  had  down,  or  more 
rigidly  adhered  to,,  than  the  rule  which 
imposes  this  necessity  on  all  prosecutors 
has  been  in  the  laws  of  Scotland.  Trite 
though  the  subfect  may  be,  the  informant 
considers  it  to  be  indiapensahie  to  lay 
before  your  lordships  seme  part  of  Mr. 
Rumens  statement  on  this  matter ^ 

After  explaining  the  introduotion  of 
the  minor  propoeitton^  which  simply  as- 
serts thai  the  panel  kl  ^  guilty  aeter,  or 
art  and  part,  or  the  fonaaaid  crime,''  Mr. 
Hume  goes  on  tt»  observe^*  '*  The  second 
part  of  thecfattige,  or  subsumptiod,  as.it 

*  Harney  rDL3>  p.  301. 


4Ml 


Jbf  Adrnhmlmitg  unlmfid  Oaihs. 


A.  D.  18iY. 


UQB 


w  OHwdf '  is '  tntradsood  wi(h '  llie  words 
'^  la  00  fiM-  u ;'  and  «oasists,  to  describe 
it  fenerally,  ef  a  namdve  of  Ihe  alleged 
crkDiaal  aet,  with  ike  due  specification  of 
tiM  time,'  plaoe^  and  maDiier  of  doing  it, 
so  as  to  jiuify  tke  ptecedmg  MmuHon  of 
ike  pmef$  paH,  ami  4k&gmih  likewite 
tki»  partknUr  tkarge  Jrmn  all  oTHsas  of 
MB  SAKS  sraciBB,  and  bring  the  |Mnel  to 
the  bar,  siHfieieBtly  ioibnned  of  that 
wheveof  he  is  aecosed. 

^  I  say,  in  Ihe  first  plaee,  that  this  part 
ef  die  libel  mast  give  such  a  hittoiy  of 
the  daed  that  hM  been  done,  at  »kali  wot- 
mmC  <#as  pmxdatg  anratahan  ff^ikc  panel  $ 
gitUt  of  tke  crime  wkkk  k  $tated  m  tke 
ftf^OTf  and  is  now  referred  to  ia  the  sub- 
ramptioa  of  the  miDor  proposition.^  The 
aalbor  then  goes  on,  at  oonsiderable 
length,  to  explain  this  point  of  law,  that 
the  fad  tomtit  ametud  4o  tke  crime  ckarged 
m  the  Major  propesiftion ;  and  among 
otfier  examples  of  the  rale,  he  gives  this: 
*^  On  sodh  a  groimd,  among  others,  the 
Lords  tBsmissed  a  libel  for  pemry,  which 
set  forth  Ihe  seversl  articles  of  the  panel's 
deposition,  and  aSraied  that  they  were 
contraiy  to  the  troth,  but  omitted  to  say, 
tfmt  ttie  panel  swore  these  tilings,  *  hum- 
tag  tke  tame  to  he  fabe.'  ^  The  infermaot 
shall  presently  itkt  die  libertv  ef  quoting 
some  other  passages  ia  a  di^rent  part  of 
Mr.  Hume's  woriL,  on  ttiis  Tery  material 
caae  <ff  trial  fotperfwy. 

But  after  eipuamng  this  bmnch  of  the 
rule,  he  goes  on  to  Ae  other :  f*^  I  have 
said  in  the  second  place,  that  a  libel  is  not 
good,  *  ufliess  it  give  tmeh  on  aecotuU  of 
tke  a'kaimil  deed  at  suy  disttwo'uish 

VnS     PABTICtTLAE    CHAEOB     FKOM     ALL 

otiBft  xvstahces  op  tbb  same  soar  of 
euME,  and  dius  bring  die  panel  to  the 
^bar,  sufficiently  infonned  of  that  whereof 
be  is  accused.  Otherwise  the  purpose 
would  not  beMfiRed  which  the  law  en- 
tertains, tn  ordering  the  panel  to  be 
eehred  with  a  copy  of  fris  libel,  and  allow- 
ing him  so  manr  days  to  mi^e  prepara- 
tion for  his  ilefonce."'  Afterwards  he 
says,  *  And  indeai,  so  undeniable  is  the 
equity  of  this  nsaxim,  that  H  seems  to  hare 
been  uniformly  obsenrsd  in  the  trial  even 
of  crimes  against  tiie  state,  and  in  the 
limes  the  least  remaHEaUe  for  mild  or  im- 
partid  decisions  in  ^t  class  of  cases." 
Then  Mfows  a  detsoled  illustration  of  the 
poittt.  The  -infoimant  can  only  select  a 
few  pasnges :{  ^  It  is  matter  of  substan- 
tial justice,  and  has  been  unifoimly  ob- 
served in  the  practice  of  later  times,  that 
the  piosectttoT  shaH  not  be  held  sufficiently 
•o  have  explained  himself  in  diarging  the 

tag  ikat  htf  fAe  paady  did  commtt  or  wot 

*  Hmae,  vol.  3,  p.  802. 

t  IW.  p.  aiO,  811.        i  hid.  p.  816,  317. 


gmUjf  of  tkat  crime  against  'SUch  a  perton, 
at  such  a  time,  and  ptaoe  ;  He  tkall  further 
be  obliged  to  support  aadjuttify  tkit  affirma- 
tioHf  mtk  an  accourd  ef  the  particular  fact ; 
an  account  which  takes  notice  of  those 
leading  and  peculiar  circumstances  of  the 
deed,  tokiek  terve  to  distiaguitk  it  from 
^ather  deedt  cf  the  tame  dattf  and  of  which 
any  spectator  would  natundlv  make  men- 
tion, in  relating  what  he  had  seen.  In  a 
case  of  oMirder,  for  instance,  the  libel 
shall  not  be  good  thus :  *  Yet  true  it  is  and 
of  verity,  that  you,  the  said  A.  B.  panel, 
are  guilty  actor,  or  art  and  part,  of  the 
said  crime  of  sMRrder,  in  so  laf  as,  upon 
Hie  loth  day  of  April,  1797,  yi^did  kiU 
and  murder  C.  D,  merchant  tn  Edinhurghf 
wilhiu  bis  own  dwelling-house,  situated 
in  the  High  Street  of  the  said  citv  of 
Edifibuigh^  and  so  conclude,  wittiout 
coBomuaicstinK  either  to  the  judge  or  the 
panel  any  further  particulars  of  the  stonr. 
The  reason  is  obvious :  A  murder  might 
be  committed  on  the  person  of  C.  D.  at 
tbe  tiflse  and  plaoe  Kbelled,  in  manv  van* 
«us  ways,  as  by  shooting,  stabbing, 
strangling,  poisoniDg,  and  so  forth ;  and, 
according  at  it  ii  intended  to  prove  one  or 
amMer  qfihete  madm  afaUaighter^  tke  pond 
mtuf  have  to  take  a  different  courte  totoardt 
kit  dtfenet  and  exctUpaiion.'* 

Afterwards,  ^  I  may  add,  that  Ihe  pro- 
secutor is  obliged  to  enter  into  such  a  de- 
ttd\y''for  ikitJkrAer  and  equally  tubttantial 

MBOKM,  ikai  *  HB  MUST  OTBEBWISB  BE 
'VBSTBD  IV  BFFCCT  WITB  THE  EKTIBB 
^OGBIZAVCE   Of  THE  BSLEVAVCT   OF  HIS 

own  uscL,  a  matter  wludi  helongetk  not 
to  hiaty  nor  even  to  tke  jary,  but  to  the 
covBT  Atx)iiB:  and  that  be  might  thus 
force  on  tbe  trial  of  such  a  charge,  toAicA, 
to  be  ditmiued  at  inept  or  irrelevantt  needt 
only  to  be  opened  ap  and  eaplained.  For 
under  these  getieraf  terms  ot  murder^  rob^ 
tteal,  and  tke  likcy  the  prosecutor  may  con- 
ceal some  nice  and  disputable,  or  peihaps 
some  laatastical  and  extravagant  notions 
of  his  own,  such  as  are  unknown  to  the 
law  and  practice  of  the  land,  loc.'*  Now, 
if  the  prosecutor  be  allowed  filas  towrtq^ 
up  kit  cote  in  myttery,  and  keep  the  fact 
lo  hisHelf,  which  is  the  foundation  of  his 
charge,  he,  for  certain,  gmns  bis  object  of 
h»riDg  %is  libel  remitted  to  an  assize: 
with  whom,  tf  ke  can  preoaU  to  adopt  kit 
opitaomontheaubfeetfkinofalteanderrone- 
out  toever  tkey  be,  he  may  obtain  a  fiivour- 
■able  venMct,  aiid  tkm  camtrain  the  judge 
to  pau  aetttence  on  the  joritoner^  contrary  to 
tke  Ima  4ndjuttice  of  the  cote. 

**'Aad  if  this  be  true  of  such  crimes  as 
theft  and  nnurdcrr,  much  more  doet  the  tame 
hM  good  of  many  other  crimet,  which  are  of 
a  more  eompUx  or  atore  tubtile  natwCf  and 
wilh  respect  to  which,  unless  elucidated 

*  Hume,  vol.  3,  p.  818. 


4071 


57  G£ORG£  III. 


Trid  %fA»iftm  VhRde^ 


[406 


witk  a  full  detail  of  tbt  circtuniCaiices  of 
ibe  UsXj  no  notioo  can  well  be  formed 
vrhether  tbe  charge  be  pertinent  or  not. 
Take,  for  instancey  the  crime  of  bribery." 
Amongotherexamples  under  this  head,  the 
Autbor  states  the  case  of  jKy^fMyy.  ^  The  like 
dificuasion  took  place  in  the  case  of  Law- 
son  of  Westertown,*  on  that  article  of  his 
i  ndictment  for  the  crime  of  peijury,  wherein 
he  was  charged  with  swearing  falsely,  that 
his  title  as  a  freeholder,  was  not  nomuial 
or  JictUious,  nor  created  for  the  purpose  of 
enabling  him  to  Tote  for  a  member  to 
seiTO  in  parliament  For,  on  this  head, 
folding  it  advisable  to  be  more  reserved  and 
eautiout  than  on  the  other  artieUi  of  the 
charge,  the  prosecutor  had  failed  to  set 
fortli  any  such  detail  of  facts  and  circum- 
stances, from  which  it  could  be  gathered, 
either  what  meaning  he  himself  attached 
to  ibis  mystical  and  litigioits  j^rase  of  a  no- 
minal  and  ficHticm  titJey  or  which  might 
emMe  thejvdge  to  discern^  whether  he  were 
correct  or  not  in  his  notions  on  that  sub- 
ject. In  consequence,  this  part  of  the 
libel,  and  this  alone,  was  found  not  to  be 
*  so  qualified  as  to  import  a  relevant 
/charge  of  peijury,  upon  which  the  panel 
may  or  can  be  remitted  lo  the  knowledge 
of  assize.'^' 

The  author  concludes  the  whole  of  this 
matter  with  obsenrin^,t  **  The  truth  is, 
that  the  best  confirmation  of  the  rule,  next 
to  the  obvious  justice  of  the  thing  itself,  tf 
tJie  wUform.obserwmoe  t^  it  in  the  maice 
of  la^  timesp  which  has  fainderea  many 
controversies  of  this  sort  from  arising  in 
Court,  and  is  itself  a  daily  testimony  to 
the  tenor  of  the  law.''' 

Now^  though  it  is  Uue  that  there  are 
some  exceptions  from  the  strictneis  of  this 
nile,  arising  from  the  necessity  of  the 
case,  and  though  there  are  also  limiu 
to  the  rule,  so  that  an  unreasonable 
degree  of  minuteness  shall  not  be  re- 
quired, the  rule  itself  is  fixed  and  pe- 
remptory, and  the  principles  on  which  it 
depends  are  both  clear  in  themselves,  and 
such  as  demonstrate  the  necessity  of  it 
to  the  substantial  justice  of  every  trial  in 
this  Court.  The  informant  hardly  thinks 
it  necessary  to  make  any  apology  for  the 
fulness  of  his  statement  on  the  subject, 
because  he  apprehends  that  it  is  substan- 
tially denied  ^hough  indeed  admitted  in 
words)  thcoughout  the  information  of  tbe 
prosecutor. 

The  major  proposition  of  this  indictF- 
ment  consists  entirely  in  a  recitation 
of  the  clauses  of  the  statute  of  the 
37tli  of  the  king.  The  material  part 
is  in  these  words,  "  that  every  person 
who  shall,  in  any  manner  or  form  what- 
soever, administer,  or  cause  to  be  ad- 
ministered, or  be  aiding  and   assisting 


Hume,  vol.  3,  p^  319.  f  Ibid,  p.  320. 


ftt  4he  administeriiig  of  any  otih  or  en- 
gagement ;  patpartingf  oi^intendmg  to  bmd 
the  person  taking  the  same  to  conunit  aht 
treason  or  murder^  or  Avrfelat^  punishable 
by  law  with  death,  shad,  on  conviction 
thereof  by  due  course  of  law,  be  adiudged 

Sihy  of  felony,  an<L  suffer  death  as  a 
on,  without  MnefitAf  der^." 

The  general  crime  here  raised  into  the 
rank  of  a  felony,  consists  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  an  oath.  But  the  quality  of  tbe 
oath  in  whidi  the  essence  of  the  crime 
consists,  admits  of  the  great  vaiietieBy  and 
is  described  in  the  statute  by  a  reference 
to  certain  other  general  denominatioos  of 
crimes.  It  must  be  an  oath  pmporting  or 
intending  to  bind  the  party  taking  it  to  cer- 
tain things ;  1st,  Purporting  or  intending 
to  bind  him  to  commit  ai^  treason  ;  2iid, 
Purporting  or  intending  to  bind  him  lo 
commit  murder;  3rd,  Purporting  or  in- 
tendinis  to  bind  him  to  commit  anyfdomf. 
The  crmie  of  the  statute  is  not  demied  to 
any  ooe  of  these  obligations,  nor  does  it 
require  them  all  to  make  up  the  statutoiT 
offence.  Each  is  a  separate  sort  of  o^ 
fonoe  of  its  own  character,  all  under  the 
same  enactment  of  the  statute,  and  sM 
.consisting  in  the  administration  of  tbe 
^oMh. 

But  there  are  many  sorts  of  treason; 
there  are  many  hundreds  of  different  felo- 
nies ;  there  are  murders  which  amount  to 
petty  treason,  and  murders  of  a  different 
tort;  but  though  the  statute  mentions 
murder,  merely  according  to  the  unifonn 
practice  in  all  such  English  statutes,  it 
does  not  speak  of  any  murder  as  in  the 
other  cases.  The  statute  does  not  distin- 
guish the  varieties  of  treasons  and  fdonies. 
It  provides,  that  the  administration  of  an 
oath,  purporting  or  intending  to  bind  to 
coipmit  aity  treason  or  at^  miony,  shall 
be  felony ;  and  it  leaves  the  precise  defi- 
nition of  the  particular  crime  to  be  settled 
according  to  the  fact  in  each  case.  If  tha 
oath  purports  or  intends  to  bind  to  com- 
mit burglary,  that  is  the  crime  in  that  case ; 
or  to  commit  repe  ;  and  so  of  all  the  nu- 
merous y^^oniei  existing  in  the  law.  In 
the  same  manner,  if  it  purports  or  intends 
to  bind  to  conmas  the  kings  death,  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  oath  having  this  pur- 
port or  intendment  is  the  statutory  crime 
in  that  case.  If  it  imports  or  intends  to 
bind  to  levy  war,  that  is  the  essence  of  the 
crime  in  that  case.  If  it  Durports  or  in- 
tends to  bind  to  counterfeit  the  king's 
coin,  that  is  the  treason  in  that  case,  &e 
obligation  to  commit  which  is  the  basis 
of  the  offence.  And  so  of  all  the  other 
eight  treasons  which  exist  in  the  law. 

It  may  be  known  to  your  lordships, 
that  the  three  great  genera  of  crimes  in 
the  law  of  England  are  'Dneason,  Felams, 
and  MisdemMnour.  Every  thing  foils 
undtr,<«e  or  other  of  these  denomiaatiofu. 


400] 


Jbf  MmhtUiHMt  mtkmflit  Oaikt. 


A.  D.  laiT. 


uio 


Tbcit  sn  inferior  claww;  and  MOMtimet 
the  plms  of  the  eiown  are  atatod  lepa^ 
nMjf  as  in  thii  staente  wmtdtt  is  put  as 
dbtingttisbed  fromfekmjy  the  inrarmant 
belieres,  acooidiag  to  tho  constant  prac- 
tice in  sodi  Boglish  acts,  and  periiaps  in 
this  case,  with  some  view  to  the  case  of 
those  mnrdeis  which  are  petty  tnaaon.  Bat, 
in  general,  tr0aioR^^s&my,and  MMdbiiMwwr, 
are  the  geaers,  and  comprehend  CTCiy 
iihing. 

The  same  feet,  whidi  is  properly  a 
-treason,  may  be  sko  a  felonr.  Bat  at  a 
^reasoiiy  it  is  not  comprdienaed  under  the 
•denomination  c^fdimf.  The  same  feet 
may  be  at  the  same  time  treason  and 
felony ;  for  example,  to  murder  the  king 
is  an  overt  act  of  compassing  the  king's 
death,  and  so  trtuon^  and  idso  fdony  in 
the  ewrdfip.  But  the  crime  of  high  trea- 
son is  an  entirely  distinct  dass ;  and  your 
lordsbipe  will  hereafter  hare  to  consider 
whether,  in  the  case  of  the  same  feet  in- 
volving both  crimes,  the  felony  does  not 
necessarily  meige  in  the  treason;  With 
this  point  the  informant  does  not  at  pre- 
sent interfere.  In  the  mean  time,  it  is 
4dear,  that  trtaton  is  used  constantly 
throoii^ut  the  English  books  as  agenenc 
term  just  in  the  same  manner  as  the  term 
yUbny,  and  one  of  the  plainest  illustiations 
is  to  be  found  in  this  statute,  and  in  the 
▼eiy  words  founded  on,  where  it  speaks 
of  amf  treason,  or  amf  felony,  precisely  on 
the  same  principle,  referring  to  any  one 
of  the  numerous  treasons,  or  the  still  more 
namerous  felonies,  which  exist  in  the 
4aw. 

The  informant  shall  venture,  hereafter, 
to  enter  a  little  more  feUyinto  the  sub- 
ject of  the4reason  law.  But  at  present, 
iieiuaybe  allowed  to  observe,  that  the 
separation  ef  the  different  sorts-  of  trea- 
son, or  gather  of  the  MattU  tretnam,  is 
so  clear,  that  the  Taluable  statute  of  king 
William  *  for  regulating  trials  of  trea- 
son, fee.  lays  down  a  rule  now  in  strict 
observance,  that  no  person  shall  be  in- 
dicted, tried,  or  attainted  of  high  treason, 
but  upon  the  oaths  vS  two  lawfel  wit- 
nesses, either  both  to  the  some  avert 
dctf  or  one  of  them  to  one,  and  the  other 
of  them  to  another,  overt  act  of  thb  bams 
iremmu'  And  Sir  Michael  Foster  f  in 
<pioting  the  statute,  prints  the  words  **  tke 
eame  tftatan'*  in  italics,  lo  mark  his  clear 
understanding,  that  it  must  be  two  vrit- 
nesses  to  sepante  overt  acts  of  the  same 
medes  of  treason  as  s  diaimet  erme.  In 
the  same  manner,'  it  is  provided,  hj  the 
fourth  section  of  •>the  same  statute,  that  if 
**  two  or  more  diotmct  iroooeme^  of  dmsrt 
kmde^  be  alleged  in  one  indictment,  one 
wit^Ma.'Iprodaced  to  prove  *^  ome  if  tko 


■W^l»i» 


«  7th  WUliam  3id;  c.  8. 
t  Foster's  Grim*  Law^  893. 


*^  and  another  witness  predooed 
10  prore  another,  shall  not  be  deoned  two 
witnesses  **  to  tbb  same  treammJ* 

The  statute  of  the  Sad  and  3fd  Anne,  c. 
20,  makes  it  high  fnaaioa  for  aay  offioer  or 
soldier  to  hold  correspondence  with  any 
rebel  oi^nemy,  or  to  give  adrice,  fee.  to 
the  king's  enemies ;  and  it  makes  it  Jelm^ 
to  raise  mutiny  or  sedition  in  the  army, 
fee.  fee.  And,  by  the  36th  section  of  that 
act,  it  is  provided,  that  the  Iressont  and 
felomee  beifore  mentioned  may  be  iaauired 
of,  fee.  in  the  manner  there  pointea  out. 
The  treaaons  and  the  felonies  are  con* 
stantljf  spoken  of  in  the  nfens/  number,  as 
genenc  descriptions  jot  two  dsMes  of 
crimes. 

The  statute  of  the  7th  Anne,  c.  Sl,^  $  8, 
the  Tery  act  which  extends  the  treason 
law  of  England  to  Scotland,  speaks 
throughout  of  Iranonf  in  the  plural  num- 
ber; and  it  spedally  provides,  that  Uie 
justice-court  dull  inquire  of  ali  high  truh 
S0Ri,  fee. 

In  general,  therefore,  there  cannot  be 
the- smallest  doubt,  that,  in  the  phrase- 
ology of  the  English  law  and  statutes, 
treimm  is.  a  generic  term,  descriptive  of  a 
dass  of  crimes ;  and  that,  when  the  legis- 
lature speaks  of  a  treason,  or  ony  treason, 
it  means  a  pmHadar  tort  or  deeenptum  of 
treason^  or  miy  om  of  dl  the  particular 
spades  of  the  general  crime. 
.  But  the  plainest  illustration  for  the 
present  question  is  to  be  found  in  the 
other  branch  of  the  si^e  dause  of  this 
statute,  '*  or  any  felony  punishable  by  law 
with  death;''  which,  m  this  statute,  is 
put  ex&ctly  on  a  footing  vrith  **  say  trea- 
son." There  are  some  hundreds  of  felo- 
nies in  the  law  of  England,  and  there  are 
▼eiy  many  fdonies  punishable  with  death 
in  the  law  of  Scouand.  But  it  is  im« 
posnble  for  any  Court  to  imaginsu  that, 
when  this  statute  speaks  of  any jfefeny,  it 
means  any  thing  more  than  to  describe 
generdly  the  nature  of  the  offence,  the 
administration  of, the  oath  bindins  to 
commit  which  shall  be  deemed  fdony, 
assuming  that  the  particular  felony,  or 
particular  spades  of  the  crime  meditated, 
shall  be  defined  in  the  indictment  on  which 
the  diarge  proceeds. 

Thus,  the  major  propodtion  of  this 
indictment  libels  a  crime,  eonsistinfl  in  the 
administration  of  an  oaUi,  binding  the 
party  taking  the  same  to  commit  certdn 
generic  crimes,  of  which  there  are  a  great 
Turietyofspedes.  Theessence  of  the  sta- 
tutory offence  must  always  be  resdved 
into  the  thing,  which  the  eath  adminis- 
tered purports  or  intends,  or  at  least  is 
alleged  formalfy  to  fiarport,  or  infen^  to 
bind  the  party  taking  it  to  do.  It  is  in 
that  only  that  the  criminality  does  or  can 
lie;  and  it  is  quite  apparent,  that  the 
Statute  if  so.veiy.gefeieru  init9  ' 


4111       57GEOmGSni. 


trial  ^Awimm  MUCm% 


M* 


Uoor  of  thaEt  ^mg  or  oIAmi^  maik  wMipre- 
httiids  so  maAjr  pariioiHar  oatcs,  vid  par- 
ticalar  descriptions  of  crimes,  fbat'it  of 
Dooessity  supposes  a  partioulanlj  of  state- 
ment to  be  %v9fHk  in  the  iadMtasent  in 
each  oase. 

The  pioseoator  has  thovgftl  fit  to  pass 
oyer  this  part  of  the  caae  afiogetber  with- 
ool  notice.  Bnt  jrottr  lordsliips,  after 
amending  to  the  tme  nature  ef  the  sta- 
tute, whkk  fonnsthe  whole  uaior  pro- 
posttioD  of  this  indietment,  wiU  have  no 
difficahy  in  pefoeiving  tiie  foil  Ibroe  of  it 
in  relation  to  the  material  questions  which 
remain  on  the  minor  proposition. 

The  informant  is  here  immedialely  led 
into  the  several  important  queftioBS,  on 
irhioh  the  relevancy  of  this  indictment 
depends.    If  the  reasoning  of  the  pro- 
•ecutor  is  well  fiounded,  it  woold  be  very 
unnecessary  to  enter  on  any  such  inquiry. 
For,   as   mr   as  the   informant   under- 
stands the  statement  in  the  tnibMiation, 
it  is,  according  to  him,  quite  imneeessaiy 
to  give  your  lordships  an  cppoftnni^  of 
judging  of  the  relerancy  or  the  indicts 
sent  «t«ll.    He  gives  your  lordships  his 
theory  in  a  short  compam.    ^  The  pro- 
•ecuftor  knows  no  addition  that  emi  make 
the  syllogism  more  perfect.    Mi)f.    The 
administering    an  oath  of  a  particular 
description  is  a  crime.    Iftn.    You  did 
administer  <AeJb0owNWiMieA  ;   £^,  You 
ought  to  be  punirfied^^  And  elsewhere  f 
the  piosecutor  says,  that  ^  in  this  tftage 
of  the  process,  every  thing  is  Meumed 
to  be  ooae  awfeectfy  and  Mottaoarf^,  as 
Kbelied.    And  the  question  is,  i f  all  these 
things  are  as  staled  by  the^  prosecutor, 
ought  they  to  be  followed  by  ponish- 
mentf  So  dear  is  this  rule,  Uiat  lAmgi 
•I  lAonssftMSo^Me  smmI  maocsnldbermfioii, 
iflibelied  to  be  done  mchtdfy,  and  melici- 
oail|f,  or  for  the  accomplishroent  of  some 
illegal  puipose,  are  daily  found  irelevaiit 
to  infer  Hw  paiasof  Umt."    Widi  ift  de- 
ference, the  informaot  must  be  ^Uowed 
lo  say,  that,  in  las  humble  appnhension, 
a  OKRe  complete  coafusioa  or  legal  ideas 
has  been  larelY  eipreseed  in  the  eame 
number  of  words.    Aceevding  to  -^  pro- 
saootor'e  dialecticks,  this  would  be  a  com- 
plete legal  syllogism,  whidh  your  loidahips 
must  ofnecessitjf  remit  to  a  jaiy.    ^  Joo* 
jot^    The  admimsteiiag  of  an  e«ii,  pur- 
foking  or  inteading  to  bind  to  commit 
iaay  treaiOB  or.  Ihlony,  is  Moay.   JMKnor, 
Yondidwfafcsdy  and  wwdfeisMiiy  administer 
mi  oathcf the  fbllowiagpa«port,irilii<li  pur- 
port is,  thsilhe  party  takhsglhe  same  shall 
wsElk  oae  aiile  overv  moraiBg.     £r»9. 
You  fluost  be  mmished  with  deadi.*    The 
oroioctttor  piaialy  aisames,   that  your 
lordships  are  notto  jiid^  of  the  Mtevaocy 
of  the  minor  propeeitioa.    'i(  be  shall 


«  Pwpeeutor't  laf:  p.  3M.      t  Id£  p.  375. 


[«1S 

cnly  be  pieasad  to  slaie,  that  that  which 
iie  asserts  to  have  been  done  was*done 
widfMf  and  sm/isisasjy,  your  kadshipe 
aaust  take  it  for  grimed  that  it  asMMRte  to 
ikt  crwm  tUmHed  in  the  a^ior  jpropooition, 

q^biee^  aim  asBst  leave  it  to  the  jmy  to  de- 
taimine  whether  the  ptosocutor  shsll  prove 
aay  preeioechminalaetornot.  Ifthein* 
Ibnaaat  has  aay  oompreheosion  of  this, 
it  is  precisely  a  plea,  directed  to  the  ob- 

<Mi^  attof  the  ktmdi  ^  &  Ctmi.  It  is 
jast  that  case  atirtad  by  Jir.  Hwae,  where 
the  prosecutor  wraps  his  caae  up  in 
myaleiy,  in  hopes  of  getting  it  passed 
to  an  assiae;  and  thea,  if  ho  can  pre- 
vail on  theai,  nghtly  or  wiiuagly,  to  give 
him  a  verdict,  compels  year  kedshipe 
to  proaoanoe  semteace  against  law  and 


jaatica. 

But  an  indictmaat  under  this  statute 
osBMMt  be  fraamd  on  this  principle.  Your 
losdshipe  mast  have  the  means  of  judging 
of  the  vdevaacyof  the  minor  proposition : 
aad  jon  cannot  eeod  it  to  tiial,  on  any 
sach  raadom  aasumptioa  of  what  wtmj  by 
possibility  turn  oat,  as  the  proseentor  is 
pleased  4opveeeot  to  yoa.  It  is  perfectly 
true,  that,  ia  the  <|ueslioii  of  rdevaiu^, 
the  feots  averred  sn  the  indiotment  ought 
eo  be  tdBoa  as  tsue.  But  4ie  mere  aver- 
meat  of  ajielsaisaf  inCsaliim  will  not  eiake 
cekaanq^,  if  thefeot  stated  is  oither  not 
in  itself  relenwt,  or  nstf  a^fkimUy  mcyk^ 
U  eae6lf  yottt  lordd^  t^jtiige  ^fia  ro- 

In  order  to  sift  more  carefully  the  ques- 
<aoa  codceming  the  laiwaacy  of  the  mi- 
nor proposition  ia  4his  case,  it  is  now 
oeeessary  to  caasider  the  particular  ob- 
jeotioas  which  thewerasal  of  it  ioHnedi- 
otely  presoats.  And  the  iafowsaat  shall 
here  take  the  libeity  of  invevtiagthe  order 
adopted  by  the  pmeeeutor,  ami  of  con- 
sidering, 1,  Whether  the  preeeculor  was 
bound  to  state  Us  aariioahr  Maam, 
whioh  he  means  to  allege  drnt^w  oath 
liheHed  on  fmpmied  or  mlsaMto  bind 
the  parties  taking  it  to  parpetraiOi  3. 
WlMther  then  is  any  avanneat  in  this 
maMr  ptoposition,  tAich  can  inlaw  be 
takaa  as  aa  swetmeatthat  the  panel  did 
admiabter  an  oadi,  purporting  or  intend- 
ing to  biad  the  partim  to  eoamwt  any 
fwationUirtreaioa;  aad,  t,  Whether  ike 
aM  Mkellei  ea,  is  aa  oath  pa^por^ingor  m- 
iradpy  to  bind  the  party  ukmg  it  lo 
ceaHSit  trsasoa*  The  informant  adopts 
Ihisanangament,  for  veastms  which  will 
praseatly  be  ae^  evident  to  your  tord- 
ehips.  Ferhe  appseheods,  ihst  the  ob- 
{eeboa  io  the  rdomttcy  cC  this  iadidment 
maot  totihjectioiiof  merelbrm,  but  an 
objection  which  enters  into  the  substance 
of  the  whole  charge.  The  prosecutor 
himoif  thalhedoie  aetsttita  bis  indict- 


4181 


for  AdmimMerk^  mUnsfid  OtUh* 

It  aeeoidiBf  to  -eoneet  priaciyks  of 
relevancy,  witboat  shewing  at  one*  that, 
m  tke  mbtimce  <f  it,  it  camol  be  main- 
taiaed.  If  he  did  not  know  this,  it  wcmld  be 
the  eacieet  thing  iai^able  lo  frwae  a  re- 
levant indktmenC,  as  the  inlbrmani  will 
presenilj  sbew^  But  the  prosecutor  is 
now  eiriviag  lor  the  vety  objpel  whieh  has 
been  nniferaily  Teprobailcd  in  die  history 
of  the  Gowty  10  take  the  relevancy  out  of 
the  hands  of  yonr  lordships,  and  lo  obtain 
the  dunce  of  a  veidict  firom  a  jniy^  on 
errmmm  naUBmqfthemim'e  eftketHi^ey 
and  fwifpM  infecences  froai  fiscts.  that  are 
totally  inapplicaibie  to  it.  The  qnsstion 
eonoeniing  the  purport  of  the  eiih  is  a 
qoeation  ^  g^reat  imponance;  and  if  the 
infonnant  does  not  mistake,  the  prose- 
cnior  has  ha»rded  propoaitiona  on  the 
snlijeot  of  the  uMist  nntemdde  and  eitravap- 

Snt  nature.  But  it  seems  to  Uaa  to  be 
St  of  all  material,  tosee^  what  it  was  ne- 
cessiiy  for  the  prosecutor  to  stale,  io 
Older  to  ipialifr  wl  define  the  charge  and 
aUegaiioB  of  fact  in  the  minor  proposi- 
tion; and  how  laiv  independenl  or  the 
tetms  irf  the  oatth,  he  has  compliod  with 
the  Riles  of  law  in  that  patticular. 

1.  The  infeimaat  hnmUy  maiatains, 
that  it  waa  incumbent  on  tfif  prDseeutor, 
in  the  minor  nroposition  of  die  indictment 
to  specify  ana  define  Jkepartkwimt  Uemm 
to  which  he  alleges  the  oath  said  to  hare 
been  administered;  purported  or  intended 
to  bind  the  party  taking  it. 

M  the  intormant  oeosiders  this  to  be  a 
flhtid  obfection  to-  the  indictment,  and  an 
objection  which,  though  already  twice 
Mtinct^  esplained,  the  :pvosecQlor  has 
found  himself  nnaUe,  by  any  amendment, 
la  semove  consistently,  it  sMst  her  pre- 
sumed, with  his  knowkdge  of  the  facts  of 
the  case,  the  infonoant  must  beg  th$  in- 
dulgence of  Tonr  loidafaips  is  explailKng  it 
at  considemble  length. 

If  the  foundation  of  this  proseontion 
were  the  administration  of  an  oatb^rileged 
to  purport  or  imended  to  biad  die  party 
taking  it  to  commit  • /«lofiy>  theinfiMmant 
presumes  that  even  the  prosecutor  would 
scarcely  dispute  that  the  partiodar  felony 
must  be  specified  in  the  radictment.'  He 
has  indeea  ventured  to  put  Uie  case  of  an 
oatlv  ^  biiiding  to  commit  Ireaioe  gaie* 
fu%^  or,  hi  the  words  of  the  act  itself, 
^  mny  tnamm  i*  and  has  boldly  maintained 
that  it  wufuld  be  a  snfficieot  libelfing  to 
state  that  fact.  And  he  has  also  said  a 
great  deal  about  the  imposaftility  of 
stming  httt  whidi  were  only  in  tiitention, 
and  never  took  place.  These  doctrines 
the  iofonaant  snaU  presently  oonsider. 
B«l.  ikt  proscontor  has  entiiely  avoided 
the  ease  of  the  oath  allegsd  to  purport  to 
bind  to.  comtut  a  fdom^y  and  hni  not 
attempted  an  aosfpetf  to  die  iirealstible 
lUuelntiMs  snggcsttod  in  Ihe.heariig  on 


A.  D.  \%Vt. 


[414 


this  point  >  and  to  diis,  in  the.fittt  place 
the  informant  requests  Ifae  attention  of 
yonr  lordships* 

Suppoeing,then,  that  an  oalh  had  been 
adminialered,  which  the  proeeeutor  thought 
purported  to  bind  die  party  to  oommit  e 

fikmy :  How  must  he  •  lav  this  in  the 
minor  proposition  of  the  inaictmenir?  1. 
If  he  were  to  lay  it  as  the  proseeutor  sug- 
gests, in  the  words  of  the  statute,  would 
it  not  be  manifosdy  no  eharge  at  all? 
^  In  80  fiur  as  yen  did  on  die  day  of 

te.  ndsainister  an  oath,  pur- 
porting, or  intending  to  bind  the  party 
tiddng  it  to  commit  miyfdamf  punisfaabie 
with  death.''  B^ysucii  a  charge^  the  panel 
would  be  left  to  conjecture,  wAkA  ttffioc 
kminifihlKk^  he  was  accused  of  having 
bound  the  petty  to  commit;  and  it  ia 
quite  nnneeessaxy  to  say,  that  it  would  be 
utterly  irrelevant.  2*.  If  the  prosecutor 
libelled,  that  tim  oath  puq>orted  to  bind 
«to  coBimit ye&ni|r,"  or  *^ 9  fdmtyf*  or 
^  asBis  folony  f  the  indictment  wovAd  in 
aU  these  caaes  he  plaitdy  bad,  as  in  foot 
centaining  no-  allegation  of  the  panel 
having  administered  an  oath,  pniportnig  to* 
bind  to  the  eomnlissien  ef  my  ipegHk  or 
eNoum  emne. 

When  this  '»  stated  in*  m  geneiui  view,, 
ike  truth  of  die  propositioB  cannot  pos- 
sibly be  denied.    No  prosecutor  would 
have  the  face  to  present  such  an  indict* 
meat  to  the  Court..    But  the   sort  of 
reasoning   wfaidi    die    prosecutor    hero 
applies  to  the  case  of  treason,  Ott|fht  Xq 
tJord  him  en  equidly  good  plea,  in  the 
ease  of  e&  oath  alleged  to  bind  to  commit 
folony;  and  the  informant  does  not  know 
that  he  win  not  maintain  it.    Hemaybe 
supposed  to  state,  that,  besides  alleging 
that  die  oath  purported  to  bitid  to  commit 
foloay,  he  had  recited  the  purport  cf  the 
oadi  its^  and  diat  from  that  purport,  or 
the  meditated  ads  implied  in  it,  the  par- 
doular  felony  intended  nicgA^  lypdsalWtffy 
he  eoUeeted;  and  that  it  is  the  province  of 
die  jurjr  to  determine,  whether  it  Is  ait 
oadi.  binding  to  commit  folony  or  not* 
The  informant  firmly  beliefus,  diat  suck 
reasoning,  if  applied  to  the  case  of  felony, 
would  only  require  to  be  stated  to  shew 
dm  impottibility  of  maintaining  it.    But 
the  iflformant  shall  take  the  liber^  of  ob- 
serving, that,  even  if  the  precise/rc^  whicb 
the  osSh  Was  alleged  to  bind  the  party  to 
commit  were  set  fordi,  the  indictment 
would  be  cleMrljrbad,  if  it  did  not  state 
Mrfiefisnr  tf  the  fdmy,  the  obligation  to 
commit  which  waa  to  be  proved  by  the 
ootttemfiBdon  el  the  fiMst,  to  the  per- 
fimnance  of  which  the  oath  purported  to 
hind*    Hie  act  trhidi  consdmtes,   ojr 
aflbtdrthe  evidence  of  a  felony,  irnot  the 
folony   itaelf.      There    may   be    many 
qmdities  in  te  same  act,  which  essentially 

'  vm^  the  maldeveiiioadon  either erime 


41ft]       57GEaRGB  HI. 

arising  out  of  it.  The  wme  act  ittay  be 
evidence  of  many  different  feloniet •  And 
of  this  no  better  illustration  can  be  giren, 
than  that  which  was  suggested  in  the  de- 
bate. Suppose  the  prosecutor  had  libelled 
that  the  panel  had  administered  an  oath, 

gurporting  to  bind  the  partr  to  commit  a 
tlony,  aikl  that  he  had  explained  this,  by 
stating^  that  he  had  administeced  an  oath, 
purporting  to  bind  the  'party  to  carry 
awify  a  certain  quantity  of  com  from  the 
place  where  it  was  deposited,  and  deliver 
It  to  a  certain  shipmaster :  When  the 
panel  objected  to  the  relevancy  of  such  an 
nidietnient,  the  prosecutor  might  answer 
as  he  does  here — ^I  have  libelled  thefiu^t 
which  took  place,  that  the  oath  was  ad- 
ministered, and  I  have  libelled  that  it  was 
done  wickedly  and  feloniously :  Let  me 
go  to  the  jury,  and  I  vrill  satisfy  them 
,tliat  the  ftct  which  the  party  was  bound 

**  to  do  by  the  oath  was  an  act  of  some /e^oiiy 
OP  mother.  If  the  Court  permitted  this, 
the  panel  might  come  into  Court;  be- 
lieving that  the  prosecutor  meant  to  say 
that  tibe  obligation  intended  was  to  steal 
the  com,  and  might  come  prepared  to 
prove  that  it  was  Ms  own  property.  He 
might  then  find,  that  the  prosecutor  did 
not  intend  to  allege  thefts  but  frmiMaU 
htmknfftejf.  Suppose  the  panel  were  even 
preparad  for  this  charge,  and  ready  to 
prove  that  he  was  not  banlurupt ;  he  might 
then  find,  that  the  prosecutor  meant  to 
allege  an  engagement  ibr  abstracting  the 
com  from  a  storehouse,  and  so  to  commit 
felony,*  under  the  statute  of  lltfa  Geo. 
3rd.    He  might  be  prepared  for  this  also, 

-  and  able  to  shew  that  the  case  was  not 
within  the  statute.  But,  though  prepared 
for  all  theee  felonies,  he  might  find  the 
intention  of  the  prosecutor  to  ,be,  to  prove 
that  the  oath  purported  or  intended  to 
bind  the  party  to  deliver  the  grain  to  a 
shipmaster  who  had  been  residing  six 
months  in  France,  and  so  to  commit  felony 
by  holding  intercourse  with  a  person  in 
that  situation,  contrary  to  the  non-inter- 
cottfM  act  of  the  Geo.  3id. 

fiut  this  is  only  an  example  of  what 
runs  through  the  whole  law.  .  The 
statutory  felonies  in  England  amount  to 
many  hundreds,  and  have  been  constantly 
increasing.  Many  of  them  are  distin- 
guished from  one  aaother  by  the  nicest 
shades  of  difference,  though  consisting  in 
the  same  direct  act.  But,  unless  the  pro- 
secntor  were  bound  to  state,  what  de- 
nomination of  crime  he  alleged  the  oath 
to  bind  the  party  taking  it  to  commit,  he 
might  jnst  as  wA  be  permitted*  to  say  in 

Snerali  that  it  bound  tim  to  commit 
jony  in   the  abstract,   or  enjr  fdofn^^ 
'  according  to  the  ingenious  supposition  of 
<  the  prosecutor.    The  prisoner  could  only 
gness  at  die  nature  of  me  Ghargeintended, 
and  could  only  grope  in  the  oarit  for  the 


Tfki  qfAndren  M^KwIetf 


L416 


ciraumstanees  most  material  for  his  de- 
fence. 

The  ease  of  felony  is  indeed  so  veiy 
dear,  that  the  prosecutor  has  not  ventured 
to  touch  it.  An  indictment  never  could 
be  sustained,  which  did  not  specify  the 
particular  species  of  felony  which  the 
prosecutor  alleged  the  oath  to  bind  the 
party  to  commit.  The  informant  readily 
admits,  that  the  prosecutor  is  entitled  to 
assume  the  troth  of  Xhtfaett  especially  set 
forth.  He  only  says,  that  the  indictment 
must  be  sufficient  wfoint  ofaoerment^  and 
that,  first  of  all,  there  must  be  a  distinct 
oBegtOion  that  the  oath  did  purport  or 
intend  to  bind  to  the  commission  of  a 
MptaficfiAmf.  To  say,  that  it  bound  to  the 
commission  of  folony  in  the  abstract^ 
would  be  altogether  nugatory,  and  could 
not  be  sent  to  a  jury  under  ai^  eiicuin- 
stances. 

But  the  prosecutor  directs  himself 
solely  to  the  case  of  treasonr;  and,  because 
it  is  more  a  matter  of  common  language 
to  speak  of  treason  as  a  particular  offence 
than  to  use  the  same  expression  as  to 
felony,  he  presses  ^our  lordships  to  the 
adoption  or  a  ralr  m  the  enforoement  of 
this  statute,  in  tbe  case  of  an  oath  alleged 
to  bind  to  the-  commission  of  a  treason, 
which  would  be  totally  inadmissible  in 
the  case  of  an  oath  alleged  to  bind  to 
the  commission-  of  a  felony.  But  this 
is  a  very  unsatisfactoiy  way  of  resolving 
either  the  legal  principle,  or  the  sub* 
stantial  justice  or  this  question.  The 
statute  here  speaks  of  **  amf  treason,'*  and 
of  **  amf  folony,^  by  phraseology  identically 
tlie  same:  In  both,  it  uses  technical 
legal  terms :  And  the  efiect  of  it  must 
be  resolved,  not  by  any  false -impressions 
arising  ftom  the  practice  of  fimnliar  dis- 
course, but  by  the  true  legal  diaracters  of 
the  denominations  employed.  And  when- 
ever your  lordships  come  to  consider  what 
treason  really  is  in  the  contemplation  of 
law,  mid  what  the  legislature  means,  when 
it  speaks  iir  a  statute  of  an  obygation  U> 
commit  amf  treaean,  the  informant  believes 
it  will  be  found,  tiiat  it  is  by  for  the 
dearest  case  of  the  two ;  and  tlmt,  if  the 
prosecutor  would  be  bound  to  specify  tke 
fdony,  to  the  commission  of  whidi  he 
alleged  an  oath  to  bind,  it  is  still  more 
necessary,  that  he  should  be  required  to 
spedfy  the  particular  treason,  to  which  he 
alleges  the  oalh  in  this  case  purports  to 
bind  those  to  whom  it  is  said  to  have  been 
administered. 

Here  the  informant  finds  himself  in  a 
very  unexpected  difficulty.  The  law  of 
treason  is  matter  of  English  law.  ^  It  de- 

Sends  on  statates,  and  on  the  dfeta  and 
edsions  of  the  judges  and  lawyers  who 
have  written  and  sfmen  on  the  subject. 
And  the  great  body  of  tfiis  law  of  treasoa 
lies  in  the  woik  of  afar  Matthew  Bale, 


my 


for  ^Afbl^Ulorin§f  Uttla}/^  (kdh$. 


A.  D.  1817, 


[4It 


nM^  Itqui  il9  tist  i^ppearao^  to  the 
IMMfBol  nMNM9t»  )iu  be^  looked  VP  to 
tilfcejppidfftioB  jof  creiy  thing  alf^  thftt 
1^  imr  ben  writteo  or  s^d  on  this  most 
JMresliqg  braaeh  of  teir.  Ait,  to  the 
AAffpoiie  of  the  infomiiAt't  oouayel^  and 
Afj  lieUeTe  as  wi^  to  the  surprise  of 
gpour  lordships,  the  authority  of  |)ij|l  great 
j^idge  and  laiwver,  equMljr  preiouad  in 
4ke  ImmiDg  of  his  pvofBMiont  iooornipt 
ip  the  tferoaa  of  his  pnhlic  fiin^ons, 
And  inoat  esedlent  in  evBiy  Diirate  quality 
^Mcb  can  add  dipntyeAdTalae  to  the 
bikhtest  taleatSv  has  be^  at  oncp  cast 
^SMM  bgr  te  leaned  peosecntMr,  as  ^  no 
5V»lght  in  acnestiottof  tiiason;  u  dia- 
mgiiAid  by  the  judges  of  Engiaad,  and 
m  itt  4nee  pnc  dovn  by  the  snnposed 
atenoe  of  lora  Loiighhoiieqtfi»  ana  by  a 
Htffw  passages  selected  from  the  woifcs  of 
sir  Kiiteel  Foster,  serj^ant  Hawkins,  aod 
Mx^  Hnine.  The  infonnant  never  heaid, 
that  the  naaoe  of  lord  Longhboiough  could 
Iw  motioned  in  a  aueaUon  of  law,  in 
oppositioo  to  that  or  lord  Ilale.  The 
treatise  of  sir  Michael  Foster  is  un- 
doubtedly of  the  hi^esi  authority.  But, 
though  on  some  few  particular  points,  that 
giaai  judge  differs  from  the  statemeau  of 
hml  Hale,  the  truth  is,  that  bis  disooorse 
is  nothing  more  than  n  short  commeoury 
on  the  detailed  law  of  treason,  as  laid 
down  by  sir  Matthew  Hale,  which  is 
tbtongfaont  vetoRod  to,  as  the  basis  on 
which  every  snooeeding  writer  must  build 
whatever  additione  or  changes  the  progress 
of  lime  has  suggested. 

Jndge  Foster  was  a  gveat  loyer  of  the 
S«volnti<l»  Mtablishment ;  and  he  has 
told  nsy  in  ^  pfeface  to  his  first  edition, 
that  he  attiibutad  ai^  mbtakes  ifito  which 
teid  Hale  had  fidlen,  chiefly  to  the  oppo- 
site prejudices  which  he  had  early  re* 
miwaw  ow  that  subject.  But  he  never 
aptale  tf  him  but  with  tks  most  profound 
i«^oot  and  veneration.  *^Why,  there- 
fiMS^  mas^  not  a  sood  sulj^ect,  be  it  in 
SWson  or  oat  of  siiasoo,  (eaotioo  the 
younger  port  of  the  professioo  agaiiist  the 
pv^judaces  whioh  tbe  nhme  of  lofd«chief- 
JQstioe  Hale,  •  noais  snsr  himciiiBr$d  and 
ftimmei,  may  otherwise  beget; in  them? 
I>  for  my  ^pait,  make  no  ajmlogy  for  the 
freedom  I  Ittve  taken  with  the  sentiments 
of  an  anther,  wtos  memory  Jcen  love  ami 
Aoooar,  without  adopting  any  of  his  mis- 
takes upon  the  subject  of  gcvenmiaU,  It 
cannet  be  denied,  and  I  see  no  reason  for 
making  a  pecret  of  it,  that  the  learned 
judge  hath,  in  bis  writfag^  paid  no  regard 
to  the  frimMn  199m  vAoh  4he  rmtoluthn 

'  aadprueai  Mpipjy  stfaWi^wtfrf  aHjmnded. 
The  psevailing  opinions  'of  the  tames  in 
which  he  received  his  first^impressions, 

.  might  mislead  him.''— '< lie  was  nndoubi- 
e^  .foeof  grai  tn  hit  pr^/biion;  alid, 
which  raiseth  even  a  great  ehanwter  in- 

VOL.  XXXIU. 


fiai^ely  higher  ip  point  of  real  merit  and 
esteem,  he  was,  ,in  every  relation  of  life, 
^a  good  ^an;  though  the  reotitqde  of  his 
intentions,  ^ile  under  the  strong  bias  of 
early  prqodices,  might  sometimes  betray 
him  into  great  mistakes.'^  In  another 
part  of  his  work,*  he  has  said  expressly, 
in  allusion  to  Hawkinp,  *^  This  has  been 
urged  with  some  advantage  by  a  good 
moderii  writer  on  the  crown  law.  Hie  heet 
we  kam  Bzcsrr  Ha  lb.''  Thus  plainly 
settiig  Hale  at  the  hefid  of  allthewntera 
on  the  crown  law. 

Bnt  the  infonnant  has  said  too  nraeh 
on  this  subject.  The  lepntatioa  o^  sir 
Matthew  Hale  as  a  lawyer,  and  his  aa- 
diority  on  the  law  pf  treason^  will  proba- 
bly survive  the  cases  of  Edgar  and 
M^Kinley.  Bat  it  is  worthy  of  remailc, 
that  the  tendency  of  the  prdndiofs  to 
vrhich  Foster  alludesy  was  a  tendencjjr,  not 
in  favour  of  the  persons  accused  of  trea- 
son, but  against  them,  and  in  support  of 
prerogative ;  and  the  only  passage  whidi 
the  prosecutor  has  condescended  to  quote 
from  Hale,  is  a  passage  which,  whether 
just  or  not,  is  certainly  of  this  tendency. 
The  prosecutor  will  hardly  obtain  inudh 
benept  in  this  view,  by  applying  to  ur 
Michael  Fmter  to  aet  aside  the  authority 
of  Hale. 

It  is,  however,  of  more  importance  to 
tttke  notice,  that  in  truth,  the  most  mate- 
rial point  in  which  Foster's  statement  of 
the  law  of  treason  differs  from  that  of 
Hale,  is  preciselv  that  point  to  which  the 
passages  quoted  from  Foster  by  the  pio- 
eeeutor  relate;  and  it  is  remarkable,  mat, 
in  that  disputed  question.  Hale  and  Foster 
each  took  the  side  which  was  likely  io  ha 
the  result  of  his  own  ruling  opinions. 
The  point  itself,  so  far  as  it  is  here  ma* 
teriaf,  shall  be  presently  attended  to. 

It  is  known  to  your  lordships,  that, 
previous  to  the  statute  of  the  25th  £dw. 
3rd,  the  law  of  treason  was  extremely  un- 
certain, $0  that,  by  means  of  the  con- 
structive treasons  which  were  every  day 
invented,  or  applied  to  particular  ^ases, 
there  was  scarcely  any  breach  of  law  or 
oflfenoe  towards  the  government,  which 
the  spirit  of  party  or  of  tyranny  could 
not  convert  into  a  chaige  of  high  treason. 
Hale,  after  giving  some  examples,  says,"* 
''3v  these,  {Old  the  like  instances  that 
might  bo  given^  it  appearp  how  uncertain 
and  arbitrary  the  enme  of  treason  was 
before  the  statpte  of  2tfth  Edward  3rd, 
wber^by  it  came  to  pass,  that  every  ofence 
tbat  was,  or  seemed  to  b^,  a  breach  of  the 
feith  and  allegianoe  due  to  the  king,  was, 
by  construetioQ,  and  consequence,  and 
interpretation,  raised  into  the  offence  of 
high  treason,    ^od  we  need  no  greater 


2  £ 


♦  Foster,  p.  20r. 

t  Hale»  P.  C.  p.  a2y  83. 


4id] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ^Andrem  M'Kmky 


[430 


instance  of  this  maltiplication  of  con- 
structive treasons,  than  the  troublesome 
reign  of  king  Richard  2ndy  which,  though 
it  were  after  the  limitation  of  treasons  by 
the  statute  of  25th  Edward  3rd,  yet  things 
were  so  carried  by  factions  and  parties  in 
this  king's  reign,  that  this  statute  was 
little  observed,  but  as  this  and  the  other 
party  prevailed,  so  the  crima  of  high 
treason  were  in  a  manner  arbitrarily  im- 
posed, and  adjudged  to  the  4iMdvantage 
of  that  party  which  was  intended  to  be 
suppressed/^  &c. 

Hale  states  a  most  remaikable  example 
of  ^is,  which  he  undeniably  eives  as  an 
instance  of  direct  violation  of  the  statute 
of  Edward  3rd.  In  the  10th  Richard*2nd, 
a  commission  far  the  redress  of  {grievances 
veas  granted  by  the  king,  /)n  the  impor- 
tunitv  of  some  of  the  great  Lords  and  of 
the  Commons,  to  the  archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury and  others,  which  was  thought 
prejud icial  to  the  king's  prerogative.  After 
this,  the  king  call^  together  the  two 
^hief  justices,  Tresilian  and  Thiriinge, 
and  other  judges,  and  put  various  ques- 
tions to  them ;  among  others  this :  ^  Qua- 
lem  pcenam  mereatur,  qui  compulertmf 
five  actanmt  regctn  ad  cotaentkndwn  confeo" 
fiom  dictarum  tUUuti,  ordinationis,  et  com- 
missionis  ?  Ad  quam  questionem,  unani- 
mit^r  responderunt^^uMf  stmt utproditoret 
m&ith  pumendi.*^  lliere  were  eight  odier 
questions  put  to  these  judges,  to  which  it 
is  unnecessary  to  refer.  It  will  be  ob- 
served, that  the  crime  attributed  in  the 
above  question  to  the  persons  alluded  to, 
was  that  of  compelling  or  forcing  the 
king  to  consent  \o  a  certain  statute;  and 
there  could  be  no  doubt,  that  that  act  was 
an  overt  Mt  of  high  treason.  But  these 
judges  took  it  upon  them  to  say,  Azi  it 
was  in  iiielf^  a  ireaton.  And  your  lord- 
ships will  now  see,  what  Hale  states  oon- 
ceming  the  result  of  these  opinioiit. 
^  This  extravagant,  as  well  as  extrajudi- 
cial declaration  of  treason  by  these  judges, 
gave  presently  an  universal  offence  to  the 
kingdom ;  for  presently  it  brought  a  great 
insecurity  to  all  persons,  and  the  next 
parliament  cnutino  purifkatUmis  '11th 
Richard  2nd,  there  were  divers  appeals  of 
treasons  by  certain  lords  appellors,  where- 
in many  were  convict  of  high  treason 
under  general  toordi  of  accroicJdng'rfnfal 
power,  SUBVERTI190  THE  REALM,  &c.  and 
imong  the  rest,  thoie  very  judges,  that  had 
thus  liberally  and  arhUrarily  expounded 
treason  in  answer  to  the  kinf^s  qvestions, 
vere  ^or  that  very  cause  ai^ged  guilty  of 
treaiony  and  had  judgment  to  be  nanged, 
dra^wn,  and  quartered,  though  the  exe- 
cution was  spared  ;  and  they  having  led 
the  way  by  an  arbitrary  construction  of 
treason  not  within  the  statute,  they  fell 


*  Hale,  P.  C.  84. 


under  the  same  hie  by  the  like  aiMtrary 
construction  of  the  crime  of  treason.^ 
Accordingly,  all  these  judges  were  ba- 
nished to  Ireland,  except  Tresilian,*  who 
ufos  eseaiUd  acoorHmg  to  the  jud^gment. 
Hale  states,  that  the  tide  again  turned, 
and  by  the  21st  Richard  2nd,  the  stat^  of 
the  matter  was  reversed  ;  yet  that  act  was 
afterwards  repealed  bj  the  Ist.Heniy  4th; 
and  Hale  adds,  f'*  Though  the  statutes 
of  Ist,  Edward  6th,  and  1st  Mary,  have 
taken  away  those  treasons,  which  either 
the  statute  of  11th  Richard  2nd,  or  1st 
Henry  4tb,  had  introduced,  more  than 
were  in  the  statute  of  25th  Edward  3rd, 
yet  it  hath  not  taken  away  the  efficafcy  of 

'the  parliaments  of  11th  Richard  2ndi  and 
3rd  )ienry  4th,  as  to  their  delarations^  that 
the  extrqfLdicial  opimons  of  those  judges  tocre 

filse  and  erroneous;  but  m  that  respedt  the 
parliaments  of  1st  Henry  4th,  and  11th 
Richard  2nd,  are  offoroe^  as  to  the  damv- 

IMO    OP    THOSE    EXTRAVAGANT    AND    UN- 

WARRAMTABLE  opsnums  and  dedarationsJ*^ 
In  concluding  the  chapter  on  ^  Treasons 
at  the  common  law,  and  their  uncertainty,'' 
Hale,  referring  to  those  examples  in  the 
reign  of  Richard  2nd,  says;  X  that,  from 
such  instances  it  appears,  *  **  How  danger- 
ous it  is  to  depart  from  the  letter  of  thai 
statute,  and  to  multiply  and  enhance 
crimes  into  treason  by  amhiguous  andgene^ 
ral  words f  as  accroaching  rf  royal  power, 

SUBVBRTTIIG  of  FUKDAlf EVTAL  LAWS,  WSd 

the  like;  and  how  dangerous  it  is  to 
depart  from  the  letter  of  Uiat  statute,  and 
by  construction  and  analogy  to  make  trea- 
sons, where  the  letter  of  the  law  has  not 
done  it :  for  such  a  method  admits  of  no 
limits  or  bounds,  but  runs  as  far  as  the 
wit  and  inyention  of  accusers,  and  the 
odiottsness  and  detestation  of .  persons 
aocnsed,  will  cany  men." 

The  statute  of  Bdward  3rd,  settled  the 
law  on  this  sabject,  by  dedaring  all  the 
treasons  ander  defined  and  tedmical  de- 
nominations; and  lord  Hale  aanounces 
them  in  the  following  tertts :  ||  **  The  se- 
▼eral  high  treasons  hereby  declared  are 
these:  1st,  The  compassing  of  the  death 
of  the  king,  queen,  or  prince,  and  declar- 
ing the  same  by  an  overt  act ;  2od,  The 
violation  or  carnal  knowledge  of  the 
king's  cpnsort,  the  king's  eldest  daughter 
unmarried,  or  the  prince's  wife ;  Srd,  The 
levying  of  war  against  the  king ;  4th,  The 
adhering  to  the  king's  enemies,  withia 
the  land  or  vrithbut,  and  declaring  the 
same  by  some  overt  act ;  5th,  The  coan- 
terfeiting  of  the  great  seal  or  privv  seal ; 
6th,  The  counterfeiting  of  the  kings  coin, 
or  bringing  counterfeit  coin  into  this 
realm ;  7th,  The  killing  of  the  chancellor, 

•l  St.  Tr.  13,14;  1  How.  St.Tr.  117. 
+  Hale,  P.  C.  266.  t  Ibid.  86. 

II  Ibid.  91. 


431] 


for  Administering  unlamjfitl  Oaths, 


A.  D.  1817. 


L4d2 


tretswer,  justices  of  the  one  bench  or  the 
•Iher,  justices  ia  eyre,  justices  of  assize, 

.  justices  of  oyer  and  ternuoer,  in  their 
places,  doing  their  ofltos." 

Four  other  treasons  have  been  intro- 
t  doced,  1st,  With  regard  to  papists ;  2nd, 
In  relation  to  impairing'  the  coin ;  3rd , 
Any  attempt  to  'Obstruct  the  protestant 
soceession,  &c.;  and  4lb,  By  the  36th 
Geoige  3rd,  c.  37,  it  is  made  treason  to 
amiptast  WMigflw,  Mwen/,  ^c.  to  levy  war,  in 

'  order  to  compel  the  king  to  clmnge  his 
measnres  or  counsels,  or  to  put  him  under 
constraint,  &c.  Bat  your  lordships  will 
observe,  thai  this  last  treason  does  not 
consist  in  any  conspiracy  jfor  obtmmnf  an 
akenOtm  ef  tke  tisa,  bat  expressly  in  a 
c<mamw^  to  Itwf  war  tor  that  puipoee. 
fiat  the  importaot  peiDt  is,  that  by  the 

.«  U^,  as  established  by  ^  act  of  Edward 
3rd,  and  acknowledged  ever  since,  what- 
ever additional  treasons  may  be  intro- 
duced, tWe  is  a  complete  separation  of 
the  differeiit  existing  (fvosims,  or  speckt 
of  the  generic  crime.  There  is  a  defined 
certainty  in  the  denomination  which 
belongs  to  each ;  and  nothing  whatever 
can  be  described  as  a  treason,  which  is 
not  one  or  other  of  the  treasons  thus 
established  in  the  law.  In  short,  the 
separation  of  all  dte  treasons  from  one 
another  is  as  complete  by  the  statute, 
and  has  been  as  anxiously  insisted  on 
by  every  writer,  and  by  every  judge,  who 
deserves  to  be  quoted  on  the  subject,  as 
the  sepaiation  of  the  different  species  of 
felony. 

Now,,  one  of  the  most  important  con- 
sequences of  tins  accurate  definition  of 
the  various  treasons  existing  in  the  law, 
.  i8>  that  there  is  an  essential  distinction 
between  tvery  treason  iMfy  and  the  overt 
act  J  or  actSy  which  will  be  sufficient  to 
support  or  to  prooc  the  charge  of  it.  Lord 
Hide  goes  ^M^gh  all  the  treasons  which 
had  been  declared  in  his  time,  and  ex- 
plains separately,  what  that  particular 
treason  consists  in,  and  what  overt  acts 
shall  be  sufficient  to  sustain  the  charge. 
Por  example,  treating  of  treason  in  com- 
passing the  death  of  the  king,  oueen.  Ice. 
M  considers  separately*,  ''3,  whaitthaU 
he  said  a  compassing  or  imamuing  if  eny  of 
tkeir  dentksr  and,  <'4,  What  sh^l  be 
evidence^  or  an  overt  act,  to  prove  such 
imasijuiig."  Under  the  first  of  these 
heads,  he  saysf-,  that  the  words  compMs 
orjnw^tne  ''remr  to  the  purpose  or  design 
of  the  mind  or  will,  thougn  the  purpose 
Or  design  take  not  effect.*'  Ahtr  explain- 
ing this,  he  adds,  I ''  Compasnng  the  death 
ef  the  king,  is  hi|^  treason,  though  it  he 
not  effected;  but  because  the  compassing 
is'only  an  act  of  the  mind,  and  cannot  of 

*Bal^P.C.9l,93.  imA.lW.  t  Ibid.  108. 


I 


itself  be  tried  without  some  ooeri  act  to 
evidence  it,  such  an  overt  act  is  requisite 
to  make  such  compassing  or  imagination 
high  treason.  De  quo  ia/raJ'*  And  in  a 
note  it  is  said,  *'  In  so  much  that  where 
the  Jcing  is  aatualfy  murdered,,  it  is  the 
coomassing  Ids  death  .tsMch  is  the  treason, 
SM  not  the  kilting,  which  is  onfy  an  overt 
act.— -Keling,  8."  This  was  in  the  case 
of  the  regicides;  and  no  more  plain  il- 
lustration can  be  found  of  the  distinction 
between  that  which  is  treason  in  law,  and 
that  which  is  an  overt  act  to  prove  it. 

The  treason  by  levying  war,  establish- 
ed .by  the  2/»th.  Bdward  drd,  is  also  ex- 
plained at  great  length ;  and  lord  Hale*, 
alluding  to  the  clause  of  the.  statute, 
speaks  of  it  as  "this  obscwe  clause  of 
levying  wfer  against  the  king."  Accord- 
iogly^  this  obscurity  produced  a  contro- 
versy, which  is  the  subject  of  the  passa- 

.  ges  so  anxiously  quoted  by  the  prosecutor 
from  sir  Michael  Foster.  The  difference 
was  just  this.  Lord  Hale  saysf,  tliat 
<<  to  make  a  treason  within  the  clause  of 
this  statute,  there  must  be  three  things 
concurring;  1,  It  must  be  a  levying  of 
war;  2,  It  must  be  a  levying  of  war 
smiinst  tke  king;.  3,  It  must  be  a  levying 

.  of  war  against  the  king  in  Alt  reo^.''  On 
the  first  of  these  points,  he  sayst»  that 
it  is  a  question  of  fact  requiring  many 
circumstances  which  it  is  difficult  to 
enumerate  or  define,  '*  and  commonly  is 
expressed  by  the  words,  more  guerrino 
arraiati.  As,  where  people  are  assem- 
bled in  great  numbers,  armed  with 
weapons  offensive,  or  weapons  of  war, 
if  they  march  thus  armed  in  a  body ;  if 
they  have  chosen  commanders  or  officers; 
if  they  march  cum  vextillit  espUcatis,  o| 
with  drums  or  trumpets,  and  the  like; 
whether  the  greatness  of  their  numbers, 
and  their  continuance  together  doing 
these  acts,  may  not  amount  to  more 
guerrino  arraiati,  may  be  considerable.'' 
After  stating  that  a  hare  conspiracy  to 
levy    war   and    provide    weapons,   &c. 

.  though  it  may  in  some  cases  be  an  overt 
act  ^  composting  the  king*i  death,  .is  not 
treason  under  the  head  of  the  statute  of 
Ism^warva  a  substantive  tr^«^on ;  he 
adds,  ''  Again,  the  actual  assembling  of 
many  rioters  in  great  numbers,  to  do 
unlawful  acts,  if  it  be  not  mode  guerrino, 
or  tfi  tpecie  belli,  as  if  they  have  no  military 
arms,  nor  march  or  contipue  together 
in  the  posture  of  war,  may  make  a 
great  riot,  yet  doth  not  aUoayt  amount  to 
SiUmpng  of  war, — Vide  Statute  3rd  and 
4th  Kdward  6th,  cap.  5 ;  1  Mar.  c.  83." 

.  This  last  is  the  point  on  which  Foster 
differs.  He  says,  that  the  true  criterion 
is,  quo  ammo  did  the  parties  assemble  ?" 
That  is,    whether  for  a  purpose,  of  a 

.♦  Hale,  148.    t  Ibid.  130.    J  Ibid.  131. 


M»] 


57  GfiOROE  IIL 


Trka  ifAnJr^  M*Kh^ 


pritrale  or  particolar  Batumi  ^  for  a 
porpose  of  genenl  concem?  and  he 
says,  ^  **  But  every  imunrdum  whichy 
in  judgaent  of  law,  is  intended  against 
Ibtf  person  of  tiie  king,  be  it  to 
defhrome  or  imprison  him,  or  to 
oblige  him  to  alter  his  measores  of 
government,  or  to  remove  evil  counsel- 
lor! from  about  him— these  ritjpift  all 
amo«M  to  levyinff  vrar  within  the  srtatute, 
whether  attended  with  te  P<Mttp  vad 
circumstances  of  open  war  or  not.  And 
every  eompiraa^  to  levy  war  for  these 
purposes,  thn^  not  treason  within  the 
clause  of  levying,  wtfi  is  yet  an  overt  ■ 
met  within  the  ether  danse^  of  eompattmg 
the  hMi  death.'*  And  then  he  explains, 
what  shall  be  deemed  a  Ivryvig  m  war 
in  this  sense,  "  m  coiutructian  of  law^ 
ae  distinguished  from  the  direct  levving 
^  war  against  the  king  himself;  and  to 
maik  the  distinction  between  these,  he 
adds,  t^hat  is  also  a  dear  matter  of  law 
(independent  nt  least  of  the  aet  of  the 
80th  Geo.  3rd,);  **  But  a  bare oatigpirat^ 
for  eifecting  a  rising  for  Ms  putpotee 
menthmd  in  the  iioo  preceSng  tectums 
md  «i  the  next^  is  not  an  overt  act  of 
compassing  the  king's  dewA.  Nos  vrill 
it  eome  under  otap  species  of  treason 
vnthin  the.  35th  Bdward  8id,  fmAst  the 
rising  he  efeeted.  And  in  that  case,  the 
conspirators,  as  vrell  as  the  actonr^  will 
all  b*  equslff  guilty ;  for  in  high  treason 
of  an  kinds,  all  the  fartkipes  erimmU  are 

frindpaAs.''  And,  mr  all  tlAi  doetrine, 
oster  refers  particularly  to  the  cases  of 
Oamaree  and  Purchase  in  the  i^n  of 
qaeen  Anne. 

Now,  there  is  perhaps  so  very  great 
diifereuce,  after  alt,  between  the  doctrine 
of  Hale  and  that  of  Foster.  For,  in  the 
passage  above  quoted  hath  Hate,  he  only 
says,  that  the  assembling  of  rioters  for 
muawfol  acts,  without  thd  apparatus  of 
war>  *'doth  npt srfioeys  amomt  toa  levy- 
Im  of  war;''  and  though  he  does  geneN 
9XL9  reqttire  tiie  assembling  mon  SelU  as 
a  distinetive  qnality  of  the  levying  war. 
it  k  verY  dottbcftil,  whether  he  vroold 
Ikaye  dHKred  at  all  fnm  the  Mg meat 
in  the  case  of  DaomiM  and  nithase. 
Hie  obfeet  in  that  ceie  was,  the  de- 
Mruetion  of  e0  meetiug-honset  of  the 
dlBseoten;  and  though  the  peieotts  aa- 
iembled  had  not  the  regular  accoutre- 
ments of  an  army,  they  were  provided 
with  implemer^ts  proper  for  the  purpose 
intended,  such  as  **ac#,  crows,  and  other 
foob,  of  the  like  natuire  f  end  Purchase 
vrtis  taken  when  aetuAlly  assaulting  the 
military  vrith  A  dntuji^  swo^ 

But  it  IS  uhnecessaty  to  puriu^  this 
inquiry.  The  informimt  cehn()t  tee,  in 
Whkt  Way  it  aids  the  pleik  df  the  prosecutor, 

*  l^ost^,  pi  210>  3tl.        t  ttid.  p.  213. 


C4M 

to  fchew  tkk  difletepBe  beilraea  Hsleand 
FoMer,  unless^  indeed,  his  meawMg  be, 
to  throw  aside  the  anttiority  of  Hide  alto- 
gether, on  odMT  points^  in-  which  he  is  not 
eontradieled,  but  eoafirasiad,  by  Foster. 

If  the  proseenlotf  cMild  have  shewn, 
that,  in  the  eases  of  Damaree  and  Pur- 
chase, it  had  been  held  not  to  he  ms^usmj^ 
to  mt  forth  that  was  wAs  iMVta»mmntt 
thekM,  but  only  tcr  state  tbs  mn^Sct  of 
assembling  to  putt  down  all  meuing- 
houses,  the  infonaant  conld  uadentand 
the  obiect  of  these  quotatioaa  fiwm  Fos- 
ter. But  Foeter  himself*  sIMii  timt  in 
those  eves,  '<The  iAdiotmei^  ehimd, 
that  the  prisonem,  witideawiiif  udr 
allegiaaDe,  foe.  and  coiOBpiiing  te^  hMend- 
iag  to  distort)  tie  pnUio  pease  and  tnn- 
quilli^  of  &•  kingdom^  dsd  taitorously 
compass,  imagine,  and  intend,  to  leey 
end  rake  war,  rebellion,  and*  insoitMBtion, 
against  the  queen,  withirt  iMue  kingdom  ; 
and  that,  in  order  to  eomplfete  and  effect 
these  their  traiteioQS  intentiona  and  im- 
aginations, they,  on  the  ^y  of 
at  with  a  makltude  of 
people,  to  the  nnmbev  of  90^^  mined  and 
arreted  in  m  warlike  iadnii»,  &c.  then  and 
thete  traitorously  assembled,  dU  iraitot' 
oni^  ordain^  prepere,  AKn  exyt  wae 
a^emst  the  qmen,  against  tile  d«ty  of 
their  allegiance,"  foc«  The  diflbrence 
of  o|Hnion,  therefore,  such  ae  it  is, 
does  not  at  all  alfoct  the  dhtiaut 
eeparation  of  alithe  treaaom,  aslafd  down 
by  the  statute,  and  by  lord  Hale.  Foster 
does  not  make  any  thing  to  be  tt^asoa 
in  law,  which  Hale  did  not  hoM  to  be 
so;  and  the  tndictmeou  in  the  ipwes  of 
Damaree  and  Purchase  were  laid  on  the 
express  allegation  that  todr  had  been 
aelsttdfy  MaL  The  whole  dtfibrtnee  is, 
on  the  nature  of  ^e  avcftaet  whidi  shall 
be  sufficient  to  prove  a  levying  of  vrar : 
But,  unless  it  be  avened  that  Witf  vr«s 
levied,  by  whntnver  acts  it  it  to  be  pitwed, 
it  is  dear,  oh  «very  anthoiHy,  that  there 
ii  no  allegation  of  a  Ihmisii  rnamitted. 

Another  iltaaMtfon  of  the  diflbreiion 
between  a  treawm  Ittalf,  and  tfeg  overt 
act  by  whidt  it  Is  piwted)  oMMil  in  a 
pdttt  inddentally  sttfeed  in  HM  ^oot»» 
fiOQs  above  gt?ren.  Bufoee  th4i  act  of 
the  36fo  of  tb«  king,  a  wm^  aWHfiiimt.j 
to  levy  wnr  was  m  no  oae$  t^ommL  Tins 
is  stattod  expresdy  both  by  fial«  neid  hf 
Poster.  Yei  i,  <A>nMyiltgr  to  Hf9f  wnr 
itM«f%  qgtffoir  the  mg,  U  Md  h¥  them 
both  to  be  $n&oertact  of  oempoisnifc  the 
kiog^s  deatli ;  whii*  both  «liO  dgM^  thnt, 
in  the cMie  of  M  coitmmtto$  ot  ^muptm 
taaoB  levytag  «f  wek*,  wMsh  tiki  Mbt  aa 
miidi  against  tlw  ktdff A  pMtafti  fts  Ifaiiiat 
fait  gov«ftiift4Rit)  a  bfldtl  rtHfi-^jF  W  levy 
war  of  thai  kind  ia  as^ 


•  FOIMr,pi 


m§i 


Jcr  ^HmlM0i»iwt  mla^tfil|^  Oaihs. 


•f  tanftwiag  tbe  kui|^9  ^IwHi.  Your 
lordildps.Mdy  thaiefof^  thai  ia  Uia  one 
case,  a  oonspiracy  to  do  tktit  nAiekf  if 
damtf  wmM MmUm^  iretaom^  is  declared 
mi  to  h^  tieafoa^  and  yet  to  be  an 
cwert  mt  4d  eonprtf^ag  the  king's  death, 
^hkhtrlreBaon;  and  in  the  other  case, 
the  mete  euwydruty  to  do  that  which 
ipoidd  bt  ti^enony  m  levying  war  against 
the  govenmeAt^  and  so  caiuirueiiveh 
ngMaei  tbe  fclnf^  ia  neither  tnaeon  itself, 
not  efveh  an  overt  9i<Hk  of  eoapawing  the 
hing^e  deafhi 

Keeping  theae  poinia  in  view,  the  in- 
formant most  now  come  a  little  closer  to 
tbn  pneise  poin*  of  difference  between 
Inm  mA  the  pfodncolor  in  this  casf  •  The 
pTQMonlor  nmintaios,  that  he  is  not 
&onnd  to  set  fenb  in  the  indictaMnt  the 

ri6t  treason,  which  be  means  to  allege 
oMh  adniinislered  bound  the  party 
to  0OBMut«  For  if  he  ia  bound  to  set 
Ibrth  thii  epecific  treason,  it  wiil  be  an 
oa^  matter  to  shew^  that  he  has  not 
dene  aob  lie  is  oUiged  to  admiti  that  if 
this  wnre  .in  inditlment  for  treason, 
it  wonld  be  bni,  if  it  did  not  expressly 
ati^n  what  paErticdnr  treason,  under 
the  slilntesf  the  pnsener  Waa  charged 
At  least,  the  informant  pre- 
that  diis  mnai  bo  admitted; 
hecanna,  if  it  is  nol^  the  contrary  position 
wMd  jiasft  bo  a  remal  of  all  the  con- 
flhKwtivo  tffcaapna#  and  all  the  uncertain^ 
existed  befotn  the  stainte  of  Ed- 
9id.  It  most  be  admltted>  that 
the  oaem  statemtet  of  an  net^  which 
Inight  bo  an  owert  mU  of  iome  known 
♦r<aaan»  wonld  *oi  be  snffieieiK  tUlegntion 
of  tto.  orioM  of  treason,  nnAess  the 
spclsftu  tfftaaon  woee  in  the  fint  place 
Bta%pd|  tel  is^  mt^  eompasdmg  the 
king's  daatby  §r  kvying  War,  or  ad- 
bonby  to  the  king's  etaeminy  filo*  But 
the  pweocBitor  sajSy  tfiat  this  is  not  an 
for  tioaaon^  but  an  indiettnent 
a  certain  onthi  and 
that  hois  not  bdnod  to  slale  any  thing 
nMO  llian  Iho  nrtimi  pnrpoK  of  tbat  oath, 
nnd  is  entilisd  to  infer  thoeeitpon^  that 
it  is  Ctt  omh  binding  4he  party  to  4mmmi 


This  plea  soams  tn  bo  answavad,  the 
iMemont  it  is  sadnoedto  the  flOBMnon  sense 
of  Ihn  tinng.  Tho  pioeoontir  eonid  not 
WiOt  a  man  for  019  «reaosii»  without 
ipouifjing  lis  iKOsen*  Ho  QoaU  not 
indial  a  man  for  nay  fofon3%  without 
spocifoiuglifcefotoiqp.  Hie  letfiatatwm  has 
paotide^-  tbna  foe  foot  of  ninwiiscering 
i,  fnH^tiig  to  bind  tho  pafty  to 
o^  Uinasy»  or  on^  fotey,  shall 
folony.  Now,  what  is  it  -tiiat  tiM 
oft  this  ataaatory  oflinee  oonsists 
in  !  Xt  is  nsf  in  the  mere  ndministnition 
of  an  onth,  nor  inoemi^t  meetings,  wUr  in 
an  obligation  ^  socrotfy,  foe.    It  coniists 


.  fo.  jy.  k»n.  [4«« 

ssfojp  n  tho  engagememt  undertaken  by  the 
ontb^  to  commit  a  tntmn  or  o  fdom^.  ■ 
And  vbaC,  then,  is  «  treason  or  a  felony 
in  lav?  The  general  terms  trtoum  and 
fihw  indicate  no  legal  idea,  except  by 
refennce  to  the  numerous  specific  treasons 
and  'eloaies  which  are  established  in  the 
law,  The  crime  here  charged,  therefore, 
Ues  n  the  engagement  to  commit  ont  or 
alAe'  of  those  fpeet/!c  and  known  felonies 
or  feisons.  to  say,  that  it  was  an  en- 
gagtment  to  commit  treason  or  felony, 
witicut  specification,  is  to  make  an  affirm- 
atioo  which  has  no  meaning  in  law.  If 
the  prosecutor  could  not  have  chaiged  the 
tnU  u  the  same  manner,  if  it  had  been 
eoimiUedf  it  is,  with  submission,  impossi- 
ble 10  make  sense  of  the  plea,  that  he  is 
enttled  here  to  charge  the  imposition  of 
the  mgogemeiU  to  do  it  as  the  crime  of 
thii  statute.  Tho  crime  is  in  the  imposi- 
tioi  of  .an  engagement  to  commit  a  trea- 
soi.  But  the  prosecutor  could  not  havo 
chirged  a  treason  as  actually  committed, 
by  stating  the  veiy  same  things  as  ctone, 
whch  he  here  says  the  party  was  hoimd  to 
4»  Andp  therefore,  it  follows,  with  sub- 
mssioB,  as  clearly  as  any  conclusion  in 
fiidid,  that  this  is  not  a  legal  charge, 
tbit  an  oath  was  administered,  binding 
thijarijf  to  eommU  a  truuon, 

Aie  prosecutor  says  more  than  once, 
thit  he  cannot  state  or  prove  the  manner 
aid  circumstances  of  an  act  which  never 
WIS  committed.  But  this  is  an  entire  mis* 
a^diansion  of  the  pointy  tho  informant 
is  not  requiring  him  to  state  the  manner 
aol  circumstances  of  any  act.    What  he 

auires  is  this:  The  prosecutor  avers, 
I  must  avor,  that  the  informant  admi- 
natered  an  oath,  pur|K>rting  or  intending 
t^bind  the  party  takii^  it  to  commit  a 
tnaton.  The  informant  requires  him  to 
stne^  wM  tfecjfic  treason  the  oath  did 
pnnpprt  to  bind  the  party  to  commit  ?  If 
neinas  a  oase  at  all,  he  innt^  know  what 
tietton  he  means  to  say  to  ike  jmy  tho 
oati  bonad  the  party  to  eommiL  If  ho 
oantot  state  that  it  bound  to  the  cooh 
misdoa  of  o  tp4eifie  treason^  he  has  no 
rightio  try  the  informant  upon  this  Ij^tute  ; 
and  ir  be  does  know  his  own  meaning,  ho 
.is  boiiid  to  state  it  for  0ie  information  of 
the  paael»  and  of  the  Court;  and  at  any 
rate,  without  it  then  is  no  alleigation  of 
an  oath  to  commit  treason  at  all. 

Bo^  in  truth,  the  prosecutor  is  ready 
enoo^  to  state  what  he  nails  tiie  ocf^ 
thau^  only  in  contemplation.  He  baa 
in  aU  his  indictments  atated  it  nearly  in 
the  same  way ;  and  here  be  states  it,  by 
describing  the  oath  to  be  an  nath'^pur- 
portiog,  or  intending  to  bind  the  persona 
taking  the  same  to  commit  treason,  by 
obtaiimg  mrnual  parUaments  tmd  u^ioenal 
SH^wi^  *y  phynpal  Mrengtk  or  >ra,  and 
thirtky  ^fiuimg  Tua  H^nvBASflOQi  «M^  ths 


437]        ffl  GEORGE  IIL 


TVmTa 


M*tBiJig 


tis» 


ESTABLISHCD  OOVBENMENT,  Um^  mid  COn" 

itittUion  of  this  kingdom,  Iw  miaurfki  and 
violent  means,"  lliis  is  indeed  an  aver- 
ment of  an  act  said  to  have  bet)  in  con- 
templation in  the  administratftn  of  the 
oath.  It  is  an  averment  of  an  ac  intended, 
which,  if  done,  might  have  been  an  overt 
act  of  some  treason.  Bnt  it  U  not  an 
Hverment  of  that  as  intended,  y/hih  if  dene, 
would  have  been  itsdf  a  treason.  On  the 
contrary,  it  is  precisely  sach  aa  iverment 
as  all  the  authorities  hat  e  repnbated  as 
a  charge  of  treason,  and  for  the  tatemant 
of  wUch,  as  treason,  the  jcdges  of 
B^cbard  the  second  suffered  so  sfvereW. 

It  has  been  shown,  th«i  the  mm%  ncl 
may  be  an  overt  act  of  manj  different 
felonies.  But  the  same  is  true  '<»f  treason. 
The  same  act  may  be  an  act  of  compass- 
ing the  king's  death,  of  conspiriQ(  to  levy 
war,  of  adhering  to  the  king's  inemies, 
or  an  act  of  treason  under  the  no^inter- 
course  acts  during  the  late  war;  and  an 
oath  blinding  to  commit  such  an  set  must 
be  precisely  in  the  same  prediMmaent, 
and  must  be  characterised  in  tie  very 
same  manner  that  is  necessary  ii  regard 
to  the  act  itself.  Suppose  a  penon  ad- 
ministers an  oath  to  another,  bmdng  him 
to  deliver  certain  goods  or  momy  to  a 
person  in  France.  Allowio^  the  prose- 
cutor for  the  present  to  take  his  ovn  views 
as  to  the  meaning  of  the  statute,  ifhen  it 
speaks  of  the  purport  or  intendmefik  of  the 
oath,  it  is  obvious,  that,  supposing  a  trear 
sonable  intention,  the  act  may  be  m  overt 
act  of  many  treasons.  1,  The  objict  may 
be,  to  bribe  a  person  to  come  to  Bigland 
to  murder  the  king.  2,  It  may  be  to 
raise  troops,  or  purchase  arms,  in  lirther- 
ance  of  a  cofnspiracy  to  levy  war,  3,  It 
may  be  to  give  md  to  the  kuufs  memies  ; 
or,  4,  It  may  be  treasoniinaer  ^e  non- 
intercourse  acts,  by  binding  to  the  ex- 
^  portation  of  goods  not  japanned. 

fiut  can  it  possibly  be  maintamed,  that, 
the  prosecutor,  in  soch  a  case,  would  be 
entitled  to  lay  simply  fAe/acr,  thtt  an  oath 
was  administered,  binding  the*  party  to 
commit  treason,  by  delivering;tbe  goods 
in  the  manner  engaged  for,  wiftout  aped- 
iying  the  particular  treason/ whiA  he 
alleged  to  be  thereby  engaged  for  f  >  Un- 
doubtedly the  prosecutor  here  maintains 
that  he  would.  The  panel  so  accused 
might  come  prepared  to  shew,  that  there 
was  no  compassing  the  hinges  death;  that 
there  was  no  conqriracy  to  leey  war;  and 
that  there  was  no  oikarence  to  the  kmg*s 
enemies;  and  he  might  be  catched  in  a 
capital  felony,  because  the  prosecutor 
proved  the  goods  not  to  be  japmrned,  and 
adduced  circumstances  to  infer  that  the 
exportation  of  such  roods  was  the  object 
of  the  oath ;  although,  if  ihe  prisoner  had 
known  what  the  treason  inuSnded  woe,  he 
could  perhaps  have  proved,,  either  that 


the  goods  were  japanned,  orthathehad 
reasonable  ground  to  heUece  them  to  be- 
japanned.  .  ' 

If  it  is  clear,  therefore,  that,  in  aUeging- 
treason  directly,  it  is-  quite  inssfficient  to- 
allege  an  act  which  may  be  an  oveft  act 
to  prove  a  treason  r  it  seems  to  be  at- 
least  equally  clear,  tiiat,  in  an  indictment 
for  administering  an  oath  alleged  to  bind  < 
to  the  commission  of  a  treason,  it  cannot 
be  enough  to  state  the  engagement  to  d»< 
an  act,,  which,  if  done^  woald  be  an  overt 
act  of  some  treasom  In  <  both  caaes^  the 
speoimt  tMison  intanded  must  be  set 
forth. 

The  prosecutor  seems  to-svppoaa*  that 
the  circumstance  of  the  present  qoeatioD- 
relating  to  an  engagement,  or  an  intent 
tioB^  one  step  removed  tom  the  actoai 
ease  of  treason,  is  to  have  the  efiect  of 
doing  away  all  the  rules  of  the  law  of 
treason,  and '  admitting  all  the  loosenesa- 
of  construction  which  has  been  so  often,, 
and  so  much  condemned.  But  the  infor- 
mant shall  put  a  case,  where  the  very  same- 
thing  must  have  existed,  and  yet  where 
the  attempt  to  stale  <the  overt  act  in  place 
of  the  specific  treaaon,  could  not  be 
maintain^  for  a  moment.  Supoose  that 
before  the  act  of  the  36tli  of  the  king,, 
tlwre  had  been  an  indietment  groandra 
on  the  fact  of  coMpMky  to  levy  war  to 
depose  the  king.  As  already  explmned,. 
evidence  of  snd^  a  conspiracy  would  have 
been  evidence  of  an  overt  act  ofcomp&smng 
the  king's  death,  although  the  bare  con- 
spiracy, not  carried  into  actual  effect,, 
would  not  have  been  treason  itself.  Now, 
if  the  mdKctment  had  laid  merely  theyoc^, 
would  it  have  been  ^  any  answer  to  the 
objection  of  irrelevan(^  founded  on  the 
omission  to  lay  compasssng  theTcin^s  death, 
to  say,  that  the  overt  act  had  bean  laid, 
and  that  it  belonged  to  the  jury  to  infer 
the  specific  treason  1  The  answer  would 
have  been,  that  it  was  not  an  allegation  of 
i0iy  treason.  Certainly,  it  could  not  have 
been  listened  to  for  a  moment. 

But  there  is  another  case,  actmUy  de- 
cided, and  of  a  far  stronger  import  than 
the  pteseiit  argument  requires,,  which 
seems  to  the  informant  to  be  quite  deci- 
sive 6f  this  whole  matter.  He  refers  to 
the  ease  of  Rex  varmf  Kendal  and  Roe,, 
decided  by  lord-chief-justice  Holt  in  the 
reign  of  kiiHs  William.*  Kendal  and  Boe 
Were  committed  prisonen  to  Newgate,  bv 
a  warrant  of  the  secretary  of  stale,  which 
authorised  the  keoper  to  reoove  them,. 
<' they  being  ehargea  tsM  high  treamm,  in 
being  prnw  to  and  amsiing  ihe  escape  of 
sir  James  Montgomery,  out  of  the  custody 

«  Rex  V.  Kendal  and  Roe ;  7  William  3rd.; 
Raymond's  Reports,  vol.  1,  p.  65,  66,  67; 
Salkeld,  vol.  1,  p.  346 ;  State  Trials^  ft^  554 
to  562;  12  How.  St.  Tr.  1299. 


48»t 


Jot  AdmnidmHg  wdm^l  Oatkt. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[430 


of  W&lliam  Svtioo,  one  of  has  malest^r's 
messengen  in  oidiiuffj,  and  ekatgfd  unih 
ki^  treaum.  You  are  to  keep  them  in 
safe  and  doie  custody,  until  thiy  ahall  be 
debreied  bjr  due  eoune  of  law/'  A  writ 
of  BabMe.Corpus  having  bean  obtained, 
by  which  the  prisonen  demanded  to  be 
admitlad  to  bail,  a  question  aioae,  whe- 
ther this  was  a  good  commilinent  for 
treason;  and  difeent  exceptions  were 
taken  to  the  warrant.  !  The  only  one  that 
is  material  is  thus. stated  by  lord  Ray- 
mood:  << LoiCZjr,  Th« di6fendant*s counsel 
took  exception  to  the  retom,  diat  the 
imaumfor  wlmkurJamei  MimigBmiry  toot 
tommUted^  wot  not  tptofisd  m  ikt  wmrmU 

2'  tommUmeut.  For  perhaps  sir  James 
ontgomeiy's  treason  might  be  sneh  as 
that  &e  accessory  to  it  should  not  be 
guilty  of  high  tieasoa.  And  if  a  man 
teceiTe  a  counterfeiter  of  the  great  seal, 
knowing  that  he  is  a  countemiter,  &c. 
it  u  not  treason^  12.  Co.  81.  ReceiTing 
of  a  coiner,  knowing  th$it  he  is  such,  is 
but  misprision  of  treason.  But  Holt, 
chief-justice,  said,  that  there  was  no  au- 
thority, ^at  a  man  who  breaks  prison,  and 
lets  out  a  coiner,  is  not  a  traitor.  Bid  he 
mid  all  the  Court  loere  of  cpmum,  thtd  wp' 
jmmg  the  crime  to  be  high  treaaon^  two 
tkingi  should  kdne  hun  tpeafied  in thevntr- 
rmd  of  oomoatmenir  1,  For -what  treason 
nr  James  Montgomery  vm  committed;  for 
he  who  breaks  the  prison  is  guilty  4»^  the 
ePBOiFic  treason,  2,  It  o^t  to  have 
been  srerred,  that  sir  James  MDntgomery 
committed  the  fact ;  because  the  breaking 
of  the  prison  is  affected  with  the  same 
offence.  And  therefoie,  for  this  defect, 
the  prisoners  were  bailed."  SalkeldsUtes 
the jfointshortly  thus-:  Holt,  chie^justice, 
held,  ^  3rdlv,  That  sir  James  Montgoifiery's 
treason  oa^  to  hane  been  inserted  in  the 
warmUy  with  an  allegation  that  sir  James 
did  thelact;  because  the  defendants,  by 
breaking  the  prison,  are  gtiil^  of-iht  bams 
SPMCiFic  Ireesofiand  oifenee;  and  for  thk 
cmne  tk^  were  iaUed:'  In  the  State 
Trials,  the  case  is  reported  at  length;  and 
lord-chicf-justiee  Holt  states  this  point  in 
the  fdlowittg  manner:  <'But  Mr.  At* 
toroey,  the  question  is,  whether  yon  ought 
not  to  have  specked  these  two  thina  inyour 
wammtSf'Jor  what  treason  sir  James  was 
committed?  And  my  reason  is,  because 
the  escape  wouldhe  the  tame  spbgies  of 
treason  toith  thai  for  which  the  party  rescued 
was  committed;  and  ^ndly,  That  he  had 
done  a  treason,  that  sir  James  was  guilty. 
But  Mr.  Attorney,  will  you  further  con- 
sider of  it,  though  I  think  we  must  bail 
them  in  the  mean  time,  an  Bdbeas  Corpus 
being  a  feslinum  remedium;  but  I  would 
hear  my  brothers*  opinions."  "The  .other 
judges,  Rokeby  and  Byre,  concurred  in 
this  point,  and  the  parties  were  bailed. 
The  informant  cannot  help  adt^rting 


to  one  of  tlearguments  of  the  Attorn^ 
and  SolicftohGeneral  of  that  day,  whidi 
his  msyes^  Advocate  seems  to  have 
borrowed  ic  the  present  case.  ^'Then 
Mr.  Attomo^eneral  and  Mr.  Solicitor 
insisted,  thathe  rescue  of  one  in  custody 
on  smpMaoBOf  treason  was  treason,  that 
the  seUingfmh  the  ooert  act  urns  more  for 
the  adoantagkof  thenrisoner  than  Uardv 
aBepng  tke  pedes  of  treason,"*  Le.  Hu 
m^ty's  ad%;ate  seems  to  have  adopted 
the  same  opion  against  all  the  law  of 
treason.  B^  Lord  Chief  Justice  Holt 
held  a  very  dferent  doctrine  %iid  decided 
accordingly. 

It  is  eyidei,  that  the  case  of  a  warrant 
of  oommitmet  is  a  for  stronger  case  than 
that^ofan  inietment.  Even  if  it  could 
have  been  hcl|  that  the  warrant  of  com- 
mitment for  iding  the  escape  would  be 
good,  withoi^  specifying  tne  particular 
treason ;  it  yvald  be  qnite  impossible  to 
state,  that  sjkvlietment  for  that  as  treason 
woidd  be  gid  without  specifying  the 
treason  for  inch  the  party,  who  escaped 
had  stood  conitted.  But  that  is  jtst  a 
case  of  the  sae  nature  with  the  present. 
The  treason  here  lay  MMtedia^  in  the 
act  of  aiding  le  escape,  just  as  the  felony 
lies  here  inmiiiately  in  the  act  of  admin« 
isteringthe  (th.  But  in  the  one  case, 
the  essence  dhe  crime  lay  in  the  treason 
committed  Y  sir  James  Montgomery, 
and  in  the  her,  it  lies  in  the  treason 
which  the  ot  bound  the  party  to  com- 
mit. In  neitkr  is  it  possible  to  state  et^ 
crime  as  eomltted,  without  alleging  the 
tpecyie  treasodsns  in  the  one  case,  and 
tmdert4dcen  tod  done  in  the  other. 

If  your  lor^nps  will  now  look  back  to 
the  statementof  Mr.  Hume  in  the  pas- 
sage '  formerl'  quoted,  concerning  the 
necessiw  of  recision,  accuracy,  and  a 
reasonable  d^ee  of  mintitenesi^  in  the 
statement  of  e-iiatttre  of  the  cham,  and 
of  the  thingoaeant  to  be  esublished 
against  the  p4oner,  the  informant  pre- 
sumes you  wisee  the  application  which 
he  intends  to  lAe  of  all  the  detail  with 
which  he  hhs  Ire  trooMed  you,  In  some 
matters  of  me  technical  expression,  the 
rules  of  the  la^of  England  may  be  more 
strict  even  in  lictments,  than  the  rules 
of  the  .law  oScotland.  But  in  every 
consideration  laterial  in  the  present 
question,  notl)^  can  be  more  certain 
than  that  the  ity  principle  of  a  Scotch 
indictment  neosanly  requires  more  pre- 
cision, more  acnacy,  and  more- minute- 
ness, than  everrfts  required  ,in  any  Eng- 
lish indictment'  And  yet  the  learned 
prosecutor  willperbaps  tell  uS  in  this 
case,  that  it -i one  of  tlie  '^unseemly 
niceties"  to  whit  he  is  so  fond  of  alluding, 
that^a  man  shad '  desire  to  ktiow  what 
the  crime  is  olvrhich  he  is  accuseid,  or 
that  your  Ibrdsfais  should  desire  to  see, 


4gt2         57  GBORGB  ill. 


Trial  ^jitidum  M'Kui^ 


<tet  Umk  Is  a  cwae  tit  mmmui  wmtUf^ 
befom  yM  «Jtow  an  UiiolaMBt  to  put 
to  die  knowMgeof  waMnt.  TW  i»- 
Ibmaai  takes  the  Vtmty  of  ai^iog, 
^thoat  the  fear  e€  fesoaafale  oontta- 
aiotiooy  that,  without  «a  amaiein^  a 
spaoiitt  tiaauPy  as  adaitakMi  \ff  the 
ywywt  wd  intandsBPt  of  the  oath, 
tjheia  if  no  stateoMt  of  any  orima 
whrnever.  Hieia  ianaitBlwnat  of  ^  the 
criminal  daed,''  aoah  %** mt^ 4i$tit^mA 
m»fmiMm'9kmwtfimdlttkm'm0mwu 
AfAtmrnwH^crm}'  This  is  giving 
Aa  prsBSsator  ^gMijht  leaNj  intand- 
ittg  to  state  a  treason  i  sama  soit.  Bat 
tinly  ttKM  is  no  awaiient  of  «  orine  at 
ail;  the  stalanMnt  bev  mnij't  that  a 
man  administered  anmh,  porpaitibgto 
bind  to  oertain  aoiSy  iMi  aia  lotaftv  a»* 
Jhiinsi  mtkelmtf  Imam'  as  dasofiptira 
of  «i|^  iwiiipw  ;  and,  t  the  eontrnvfi  ab- 
oafolely  deoidad  by  ^paalad  Judginents, 
both  of  the  CooHs  od  of  pariianent, 
not  fo  be  any  known  laeies  of  tvoMDn. 

UnteeSy  then,  yoo  leidshina  are  to 
■eject  the  pvkiciple  ofie  law  of  Seodand, 
-diat  the  praseontor  «at  put  it  in  the 
power  of  yonr  loids^  to  see  whether 
he  has  a  talonnt  as  bofsie  yon  will 
asquire  the  panel  to<o  npon  his  trial ; 
jand  aidess  it  ean  Soield  thgt  the  pro- 
■ecntor  is  entitled  ionithhold  from  the 
panel  a  knowledge  «n  of  the  criaae — 
the  particular  feionjor  the  particular 
tseasoiip*fin  whieh  thwhole  nerita  of  the 
ohargo  against  him  oonsls;  itseematobe 
^my  dear,  that,  wiihct  going  any  farther, 
t^ofo  is«ot  oran  thoopeafanoe  of  rele- 
▼ancjr  io  Iha  preseBl  motaiant. 

II.  Tfaa  seooi^fiai  whiah  the  infbr- 
nsnt  fiivposes  to  coniar  iwHl  not  saquire 
along  dioeussioo.  is,  that  thia  indict- 
anentdoea  not  10*  it  contain  nay  state- 
ment .of  the  paitidd  areason,  sphuh  the 
nmafeutar  aHe^mthsnthto  pnrpaitorin- 
haid  -to  Innd  the  paitaking  it  io  cammit. 
'  And  yet  the  infonnt  most  be  aUowed 
ao  obsorva,  that  en  heva,  tbongh  the 
pamacutor  does  notretend  to  naikitain 
ihatthaindietment  d»  stpttethe  particu- 
lar tmaaoD,  be  stiUabouTB  under  a  Tery 
important  mistake  ao  the  real  stale  of  the 
qoastion.  He  says,  wt  he  is  not  bound 
iomake  anystatennft  whatever,  eacept 
M  mere  recital  of  a  faot,  or  a  simple 
allegatioD  of  the  pport,  of  the  oath. — 
dLn^jrpotiiasis  mDrmconsistant  witii  the 
pmotieal  rales  of  la  Taw  of  Scotland 
onanot  be  canpdri.  But  supposing  it 
waia  so,  yonr  lordsps  will  ba  pleased  to 
ebsetae,  that  the  ."aseoailor  has  wot  in 
tins  instance  ftAteod  that  aonna.  He 
im  mado  his  mven^t  quite  distinally,  of 
tUht  whiah  he  is  laasad  to  stats  to  be 
<Ae  trvosim,  whichba  oath  administered 
bound  the  party  toammit  And,  with 
mboiisnohi  Mtfaif.cui  be  dearer  in  the 


C4M 

oriauflal  law,  than  thafty^evHi  whan  a  party 
is  it^  taaitf  to  make  an  aaamMat  on  a 
partianlar  point,  if  he  dait  amke  il  in  a 
nwnnar  that  19  ifsalaraat,  the  whal»  in- 
dictment ftUs  to  piaoBSy  on  BfifnHm<f  thia 
iirtlavaney.  in  the  premnt  ease,  tha 
whole  ralaaaMy  on  t|ie  anbalaamaif  tha 
•oath  dapands  on  tl^  qnettion,  wihaiher  it 
did  pmpoK  to  bi«d  the  party  to  aammit 
traaaan  f  Tha  psomculor  aaya^  hn  was 
Mftbpnnd  to  nudw  miynvamiant  «rhat- 
efm  on  lUs  anhfaot,  and  might  ham 
aimply  atatad,  that  siMh  an  oath  mm  ad- 
aahiisiaiad,  namating  tha  pvpoM.  Hie 
infaiapmit  simtt  cansMar  &is.  Bat,  in 
tha  ftfst  flam,  thp  paaaaentor  has,  an  tha 
indJetnsanr,  atpitad  what  he  bald  to  Ibe  the 
pm  poi  t  api  iinandww!  iit  of  tha  aatfi.  And 
«ml;r,  if  your  loidships  were  rid  of  OTory 
oiiar  qnastion,  ^  wo^dd  ha  voder  the 
nampity  of  daafing,  whether  that  state- 
is  a  raiarant  attaMtagn  of 


Mow,whntiBtiwallagMionJ  It  ta^  that 
thaaath  banarf  to  coaMnit  treases^'*<  by 
obtHHia^  annual  pmKamonts,  and  nni- 
wnaal  saflkaga,  by  pineal  atmngth  or 
dbrce,  md  rtenriy  ^jMmg  ike  sPBvtmsion 
•V  TacaanLBf.isnai>oovi&iiicBaT,  i^aws, 
0Hi  mmtik^H  qftki$  kingdom^  by  o^aw. 
IhtaKim^ln^nNans.^  Thane  is  a^danying 
that  ikm  is  m^ant  laba  a  statement  of  an 
^oaA  Uadinf  Ibe  fortr  to  connmi  tsaason. 
Bjit  onlam  uie  law  of  treason,  in^taid  of 
biang  the  most  oertain  of  all  laws,  is  re-^ 
d^iied  again  into  the  unoeitatDtrof  the 
twrnam  of  fiidhaid  the  aaoond^s  time, 
it  is  impossible  to  maintain,  that  this  ia 
an  allegation  in  noiat  of  Jaw  af  any 
•obiigntion  to  esmarnt  a  treason. 

llainformaut  shall  not  heretapeai  what 
he  has  alvaadyiidly  detaoSad,  cpna*ning 
the  raank  af  4he  attempt,  in  tha  thne  <m 
&hjhaad  tbeaaaond,  to  dafeskt  the  net  of 
Mwwd  die  thiid.  But  the  words  of  lord 
IMe  oira  certainly  va ly  striking,  and 
appaaantly  prophetic,  wheae  he  aaya^  that 
these  proceedings  shew  ^  how  danacrona 
it  is  to  deiNHt  from  die  letter  or  that 
statute,  and  to  multiply  and  enhance 
crimes  into  :traeson,  by  omU^uom  and 
gmmi  wnids,  as  aeeromkmg  cf  royal 
jwmr,  BUBVBwrivo  or  vuvDAiniNTAip 
LAWS,  and  Ms  jifte/'  Thecamof  safaer^ 
mg  fimdamenial  iaws,  reprasentad  as  n 
treason  by  Richard's  judges,  is  the  toit 
ease  which  the  proseoulor  has  here  adopted, 
and  obstinately  permrerad  in  maiataining, 
in  three  indictments.  But  if  this  was  not 
an  aUegatron  of  txeason  in  lord  Hale*a 
tiaM,  and  was  still  iess  admitted  by  Foo- 
ter, the  praaeeutor  will  find  itdiAcuIt  to 
J  produce  even  the  Teadge  of  an  anthority 
br  so  violent  a  revulsion  to  tiie  teneta 
of  one  of  the  most  arbitrary  leigns  that 
ean  be  aaleotad  jn  the  eattierhiatoiy  of 
Bagiafid. 


43d] 


far  Admnisltiring  uhla^ofid  Oatht. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[434 


; 


It  it  remaikabley  however^  that  even 
th«  discussions  and  the  statutes  produced 
by  these  attempts  in  the  time  of  Richard, 
the  second^  to  disturb  the  statute  of 
Edward,  are  not  without,  the  support  of 
express  authority  in  a  taier  period.  The 
act  of  rcTetsion  of  the  attainder  of  the 
earlof  Staraflbrd,  is  a  decisive  ooofinaation 
of  it.  In  those  violent  times,  the  veiV 
same  thing  was  sucoessfnUy  practised^ 
The  biU  of  attainder  *  bears,  that  the 
commons  of  England  "  impeached  Iho^ 
mas  earl  of  Strafford^  of  high  treason,^ 
tMdtaooming  to  subvert  tbb  AVcrBHt 
AKD  vrKDAMBXTAL  LAWS  ttw/  govemmoU 
cfkuM^ffeti^i  reabnt  ofEtiglami  tuid  Ire^ 
fmd,  and  to  introduce  an  arbitrary  and 
tyrannical  government,  against  law^  in  the 
said  kingdoms ;  tmdfar  exereiting  a  tyrw^ 
flottf  imd  txmhUant  fofuaer  over  and  cganui 
th€  lam  of  the  soitf  AaL^donrf,  and  tk6  iatSrIlef , 
citotec,  andhvet  of  ms  M<^CMty*i  irifects.*' 
There  were  other  charges ;  but  this  was 
the  leading  one;  and  on  that  bill,  lord 
Strafford  was  attainted  and  executed,  as . 
all  the  world  knows.  Now  the  act  f  re^ 
venhtg  this  attainder  begins  in  the  follow- 
ing terms :  ^  Whereas  'Diomas  late  earl  of 
Strafford^  was  impeached  of  high  treason^ 
f^pOB  prHenet  o^xhdeavoubing  to  sub- 
vert   THE     rUVDAMEKTAL     LAWS^      and 

called  to  a  public  and  solemn  arraignment 
and  trial  before  the  peers  in  parhamenti 
whei^  he  made  a  particular  defence  to 
eveiv  article  oljected  against  him;  insos- 
rouch  that  the  turbulent  party,  then  seeing 
no  hopes  to  effect  their  unjust  designs  by 
any  orainaiy  way  and  method  of  proceed- 
ings, did  at  last  resolve  to  effect  the  de- 
struction and  attainder  of  the  said  eairl^ 
by  an  act  of  parliament  to  be  therefore 
fnrpottbf  madef  to  condemn  Mm  ufon  ac-^ 

CUMULATrVB   TBEASOIT,  VOHB  of  the  pn^ 

teadedcrimei  (eiitf  tbbasoit  apart,  «fitf  td 
tpM  not  be  in  Se  vjhok^  tf  th^  had  been 
provedy  as  they  were  not;  ana  also  ad* 
fidged  him  guiHy  rf  constructive  treason 
(that  is,  of  levying  war  against  the  king)," 
kc.  On  these  and  other  reasons^  the  sta- 
tute bears,  **  for  all  which  causes,  be  it 
declared  aiid  enacted,  fisc.  that  the  said 
act  of  attainder  is  now  hereby  repealed^ 
revoked,  and  reversed.'' 

Nothing  can  be  more  precisely  descrip* 
live  of  the  prosecutor's  notidn  of  a  treasoni 
than  the  veijr  words,  both  of  the  bill  of 
attainder^  and  of  the  act  of  reversal,  in 
that  veiy  celebrated  case*  And  whatevef 
other  merits  mig^t  be  invobred  in  lord 
Strafford's  conduct,the  informant  helievesi 
that  no  lawyer  in  better  times  ever  doubts 
ed  that  in  this  poini  the  reversal  declared 
'  the  law  eorrectfy.    It  is  in  precise  con- 

*  trial  of  earl  Strafford,  p.  756.  See  also 
State  Trials,  1641  [3  Ubw.  St.  tr.  1518.] 

t 1770. 

VOL.  XXXIIl 


formitv  to  the  very  words  afterwards  em- 
ployed by  lord  Hale,  as  well  as  to  those 
of  the  statutes  which  condemned  the 
judgment  of  Tresilian  and  the  other  un^ 
fortunate  judges,  who  were  weak  enough 
to  surrender  Uie  liberties  of  their  country 
'  to  the  influence  of  the  prejudices,  or  of 
the  interests  of  the  moment.  . 

His  majesty's  advocate  has  had  the 
merit  of  asserting  in  the  present  day,  that 
«  man  had  engaged  to  commit  treatdny  who 
according  to  his  lordship's  own  averment, 
was  under  an  engagement  simply  to  do 
the  very  things  expressed  by  the  tame  toordi, 
which  Tresilian  and  the  other  judges  lost 
their  lives  or  liberties  by  declaring  to  be 
treason^  and  which  the  paHiament  ot 
England  long  after  declared  not  to  he 
treason^  by  reversing  the  attainder  of  the 
eari  of  Strafford.  And,  with  the  full 
leave  of  the  informant,  he  may  take  the 
ftirther  merit  of  maintaining  that  to  be  an 
averment  of  treason,  which  lord  Hale  has 
bestowed  many  anxious  pages  to  prove 
to  be  merely  one  of  those  pretences  ot 
treason,  by  which,  in  bad  times,  the  best 
principles  of  the  constitution  had  been 
endangered,  and  the  real  interests  of  th^ 
country  betrayed. 

It  seems)  then^  to  be  past  all  possibi-* 
iity  of  dispute^  1*  That  the  ptofeecutor 
has  not  stated  what  the  treason  i%  which 
the  oath  libelled  on  purported  to  bind  the 
pirty  taking  it  to  commit;  3.  That  he 
nas  in  fact  stated  that  to  be  treason  which 
is  not  treason;  and  the  allegation  of 
which,  as  treason,  lutt  been  invttriably 
condemned  in  all  fha  best  tiiAto  of  the 
law.  And  the  informant  believes  that  h^ 
has  proved,  3.  That  en  indictment  imM 
this  statute^  which  dees  not  state  the  spe- 
cific treason  referred  to,  cannot  be  re' 
levant  or  competent  to  be  sent  to  *  jury» 

Illk  The  third  part  ohhis  cause  remains* 
Your  lordships  have  to  consider,  whether 
the  oatli,  the  pur^rt,  if  not  the  terms,  o^ 
which,  is  set  forth  in  the  indictments  is 
an  oath  purporting  or  intending  to  bind 
the  party  taking  it  to  commit  any  treason 
in  terms  of  the  statute. 

But,  before  entering  on  the  considera- 
-  tion  of  the  words  set  forth  in  this  libel,  it 
is  impossible  not  to  take  notice  of  the  ir- 
tesistible  inference  concerning  the  prose- 
ciitor's  own  knowledge  of  the  fact,  arising 
from  the  whole  circumstances  already  de- 
tailed. It  is  here  maintained,  that  the 
prosecutor  is  not  bound  to  set  forth  the 
words  of  the  oath  at  all,  but  only  the  pur- 
port which  be  ascribes  to  it.— ^f  this'  pre<> 
sently.  But  the  prosecutor  has  set  forth, 
in  all  the  indictments,  specific  words, 
which  he  states  as  th^  purport  of  the  oath 
said  to  have  been  adraiaistered ;  -and 
which  words,  of  course,  he  is  bound  to 
knew  to  b^  as  nearly  its  possible  the  words 


435J 


57  OBOBGB  HI. 


TVa/  afAndreti  M'Kbdiey 


C4a6 


of  which  fun  means  to  sMeinpt  a  proof. 
But,  before  looking  into  the  nature  of  the 
oath  so  expressly  libelled  on,  it  is  quite 
impossible  to  ^  overlook  the  circnmstances 
ander  whieh  your  lordships  are  desired  to 
consider  the  eflfeet  of  it. 

In  the  information  of  his  majesty's  ad- 
▼ocate,  there  is  an  appearance  of  taking 
tiiis  case  to  be  attends  with  no  difficulty. 
BnC,  considering  that  this  is  the  third  jn- 
dietment  which  nas  been  raised,  and  that 
on  it  yoor  lordships  have  reqmred  infor* 
mations,  te  informant  is  at  least  entitled 
to  say,  that,  in  the  way  the  indictments 
of  the  prosecutOT  have  bean  managed,  they 
are 'involved  in  the  most  serious  difficulties 
ift  point  of  relevancy.  In  saying  this,  the 
informant  imputes  no  blame  to  the  pro- 
secutor, except  that  of  an  insufficient  con- 
sideration of  the^ease,  before  raising  the 
ihrst  indictment,  and  too  mnch  perse- 
verance in  an  untenable  ease;  for  he  can 
draw  no  other  inference  fnmr  the  whole 
course  of  these  proceedings,  but  that 
really  the  prosecutlir  is  not  <Me  t6  state, 
til  foixt  ojfacty  a  case  that  would  be  re&- 
vtoit  under  this  statute.  If  he  could  have 
done  so,  it  is,  with  submission,  quite  in- 
conceivable that,  after  all  the  discussion 
that  hstf  ^en  place^  he  should  have  ex- 
hibited this  last  indictment,  exposed  to 
every  one  of  the  objections,  in  point  of 
subitknce)  which  lay  against  the  two  for- 
itier  libels.  It  is  impossible  to  infer  any 
thing  f^om  this  perseverance  in  a  wrong 
l!onree,  exOept  this,  that  tiie  prosecutor 
knows,  that  if  he  were  oftoe  to  lay  the 
indictment  as  it  ought  to  lie,  it  would 
either  be  iiypareut  that  it  was  irrelevant, 
en  accownt  of  a  plain  fbcongmity  between 
Ae  averment  and  the  purport  of  the  oath 
set  forth ;  or,  if  the  relevancy  of  it  should 
be  made  out  by  strfrng  averment,  it  would 
totally  fail  upon  the  evidence.  Notwith- 
standing the  very  extraoitlinary  charge  on 
the  words  of  the  oath  ih  this  indictment, 
Hie  informant  vives  the  prosecutor  credit 
fbt  rejecting  «bis  last  course.  He  does 
^ot  believe,  that  the  prosecutor  would 
attempt  to  obtain  an  interlocutor  of  rele- 
vancy, by  framing  his  indictment  in  a 
manner  which  he  knew  to  be  exposed  to 
k  necessary  failure  upon  the  evidence. 
And  he  must  colifess,  that  he  attributes 
the  whole  fulure  in  these  indictments  to 
this  cause.  The  reality  is,  that  the  at- 
tempt to  try  Uie  prisoners  upon  this 
statute  has  been  begun  without  a  die  con- 
sideration of  the  nature  of  the  case,  and 
of  the  crime  which  the  statute  has  created ; 
and  the  prosecutor  now  finds,  that  he 
cannot,  consistently  with  the  fsttts  of  the 
tase,  libel  the  indictment  in  tht  only  tvay 
in  which  a  relevant  indictment  can  be  laid 
under  this  act  of  parliament. 

The  informant  cannot  otherwi^,  after 
ail  the.disewSleB  which  hat  takett  place, 


account  for  ibe'  fbnft  of  the  pitesent  in- 
dictnent.  In  fhe  discussion  on  the  second 
Indictment,  it  was  very  distinctly  stated, 
by  the  coudsel  fbr  the  crown,  tluit  the 
treason  which  he  meant  so  allege,  as  in- 
volved in  the  oath,  was  that  of  hnjimgwar. 
Now,  wkat  dMcukyetMtimre  be  mttatmg 
iM$intkemSktmeuthtpl&ikto9riU^  Hie 
minor  vropCBition  would  just  ht9e  run 
thtn :  **  In  so  fisr  as  yen  did  wickedly  and 
feloniomly  administer,  or  Cadse  to  be  ad- 
ministered, Hn  oatb>  purporting  or  intend- 
ing to  bind  the  patty  taking  the  sane,  u> 
commit  a  treason  fylevyii^wti^4maiHtttk^ 
king;  whieh  oath  waa  in  the  ttdlowing 
terms,  or  of  the  fbHowing  purport."  Sup- 
posing the  purport  of  the  oath  siC  forth 
to  mtj^ort  <!Ait  itaiemeni^  the  informant  sees 
at  present  no  oljection  to  the  relevancy 
of  it»  as  an  averment  to  satisfy  the  terms 
of  the  statute;  except)  indeed,  the  ob- 
jection of  the  felony  m^fging  in  the  trea- 
son. And  why  is  it  that  the  prosecutor 
will  not  make  that  avvrmcnt  ?  OoAsider- 
ing  the  difficulties  which  your  lDfdship» 
have  fielt  on  this  evliject^  it  is  quite  im- 
possible to  imagitie,  that  the  prasecutor 
would  avoid  so  very  obvious  a  method  of 
removing  the  first  difficulty,  afler  ithad 
been  twice  deafly  pointed  out,  if  be  had 
not  solid  reasons,  in  the  substatme  t>f  the 
casC)  for  refusing  to  make  the  averment. 
Hie  informant  confesses  he  cannot  account 
fot-  t!he  proceeding  on  any  other  hypothesis. 

But  if  the  panmer  cannot  make  the 
aveftnent  in  tdtmbik  in  the  indictment, 
which  he  has  already  topitessed  in  debate,, 
can  any  otheb  ih^tenee  be  drawn,  but 
that  (he  indiclment  amiM  be  irrelevant  f 
Be  says,  he  weanft  to  phjm  i»  Ate  jmy^ 
that  the  ^th  Mrporttd  to  bind  the  party 
m  iMf  iMr.«^  THen>  why  aot  ae  in  the  in- 
dictment? No  i«aion  en  earth  ean  be 
given,  butonetff  threfe  t  eiHier,  M,  The 
p^osetuter  ha^  tsien  up  a  boImm  of  his 
own  about  this  indictmdbt^  againtt  all  law 
and  aiMhbtfty,  «nd  !^  wiH  not  depMt  from 
It;  Of)  adfy,  he  knows  that  if  he  made 
ttie  averment  of  levying  war^  the  puport 
of  the  oath^  which  h6  must  set  forth, 
would  Show  a  plain  itvelevancy  t  ov,  3dly» 
If  he  got  the  indietilient  passed  to  aa 
assize,  the  fact  would  not  aappert  the 
averteent,  and  "die  juvy  could  net  fail  to 
see  U  with  perfbet  elearneSs.  l%e  in- 
ftHWiatit  e^tM^dete  lh«  fiiat  su^MSifiott  to 
be  out  of  Hie  '<{u«stibl^  and  m  by  no 
meahs  imagines  \L  Bet  the  tw«  other 
explanatieas  of  the  pA>aeediag,  he  eannot 
but  think  to  be  the  real  truth  it  the  case  ^ 
beeaese^  b^i)sidel4if  die  dear  lorthority 
that  is  ageftntt  dh^  prosecutor  in  his  pre- 
sent firm  of4ibelling,  it  is  imeenceiyable, 
why  he  should  not  have  removed  the  ob- 
jection by  so  very  simpU  a  course  of  pro- 
ceeding. 

If  the  prosecutor  diovgh^  thkl  by  ^os* 


'4fff\ 


JifrJtMltHttriig  utia^lOaOtt. 


A.©,  18lt. 


[496 


flibilily  tiM  f»ctt  #f  ttie  caift  atighi  r,esolve 
into  lotne  otfusr  t^eaion  thim  that  of  ao 
eofl^eoMtit  io  ^e«y  wary  ^e  in6>rj»ant  is 
w>t  umqe  Aat  !>«  voiiU  b«  tied  down  to 
this.  If -the  indictBMiit  wtce  in  England, 
be  loiglilJay  it  under  upanste  cmmUi  as 
mn  enga^emeeit  to  /ay  tcwr  ;  an  esgage- 
ment  to  cvwqwif /J^  Iw^s  dco^A  ;  or  an  en- 
gaganwat  to  eowpire  ^  isiy  hiop,  &e« ;  and 
I)M  tfifoanaAt  is  npt  at  present  advised  of 
ajDjY  oljiieotion  that  could  be  made  to  an 
inaictmentin  this  «oiiit,  which  laid  the 
case  aUurmttivel^  as  an  oath  binding  to 
«oinfkass  the  hinges  death ;  sr  otherwise  an 
4)ath  binding  to  levy  war;  or  etkerwise  an 
oath  binding  to  conspire  to  levy  war,  &c. 
In  other  cases,  as  many  alternatives  may 
he  taken.  In  a  case  of  rgfe^  k  way  be 
laid  altenatively,  rap$;  or  a»$aiidi  with 
itUaU  to  eontmU  rope  ;  oisinifle  otsauU;  or 
nooimdifig  under  loid  EUenborough's  act. 
And  other  iUnstrationa  might  be  given. 

Why  the  pjcoeecutor  has  not  adopted 
-nome  siich.oonifeas  this*  is  quite  incon- 
ceivable pn  any  other  supposition  than 
-that  he  kaoiivs  the  case  coqM  npt  be  sus- 
tained ii  he  were  eo  to  atate  it.  And  thus 
your  locdflhipe  enter  on  the  consideration 
of  the  pQi]KM3t  And  inVendment  of  the  oath, 
with  real  evidence  beloie  you,  Abi^t  the 
rpsosecotor  dare  not  atate,  that  the  oath 
4oes  purport  or  intend  to  bind  to  the 
eommisiion  of  any  specific  treaaon.  When 
your  loidahips  look  unto  the  oath  set  forth, 
and  weigh  the  terms  of  it,  you  cannot  be 
much  sorpnsed  at  the  existence  of  this 
imnramioB. 

lit  iM  impeeeibie  to  aux  a  wcrd  concern- 
ang  the  cooatructiop  to  ne  put  on  the  oath, 
aa^tate^  in  the  indiotqient,  without  first 
talong  aome  notice  of  the  Tery.eiajBavagant 
4ootno^  »bi«h  ate  maintained  in  ttie  in- 
ibimation  forihis  majest/s  advocate 

It  in  totmaimtnined,  that  the  prosecutor 
is  not  bonnd'to  int  forth  the  srord9.of  the  , 
nath  at  aU,  but  only  the  purport;  and 
-that  any  natfa,  kame^Hr  tanocna/,  if  it  were 
ffoted  to  be  intended  to  signify  an  en-  . 
gagement  to  commit  treasoi^  might  be 
a  televant^raond.of charge.   The  mfonn- 
ant  humbW  denies  this  to  be  at  all  the 
meaaing^i  thisatatttte.    He  apprehends  , 
that  the  aiQida  -^'purporting  or  intend-  • 
ing,''  wace  purposely  employed ,  instead  ' 
of  thoaa  of  the  ibcmer  statute,  '*  purport- 
iag  or  intend^''  in  order  to  exclude  this  ^ 
oonatmctian.     But,  supposing   it  were 
^thannae,    it    would    not    avail     the 
paeaecttlor.    For  even  if  it  were  admis- 
attda  to  4Nt  ioith  the  oath  of  allegiance, 
or  any  other  oath,  however  innocent  in 
ate  pumact  or  :inlwdmant>  and  then  to 
pi)ova4Batihe  actaal  intention  wasdifferent 
from  vlipit  appeased  on  the  face  of  the 
oalh,  it«  appiahanded  that  nothing  in 
the  votld  o<Mild  be  clearer,  than  that, 
•fiQai4iDf.iOLj^lha  pnc|ieo  of  yourtloid- 


ship,  4ha  pro^ecotor  must  set  forth  spe- 
4uficaUy  the  facts,  frqm  which  he^eant 
•  to  draiw  t|ie  inference  pf  an  int^ention 
diferent  from,  or  stronger  than,  the  pur- 
port an4  inta«4meat  of  the  oatli  libelled. 
M  4ha^  case*  the  indictment  would  be 
had  £»r  want  of  specifijcation- 

But,  ^nore  generally,  the  informant 
mnet  obiierve,  that  1^  knows  pf  no.  prin- 
ciple, on  which  the  prosecutor  can  be 
ffxfti^pted  kfm  setting  forth  tlte  oath 
alleged  to  haye  been  administered. .  It  is 
true,  that,  by  the  fourth  section  of  the 
statute,  ix  is  provided,  ihat  he  shall  not 
be  hound  to  state  the  very  wqrds  pf  the 
o^,  hut  only  the  piirport  oi  it.  But  he 
is  stiU  ifot/nd  fo  Ubel  the  furpoft;  and  if 
the  purport  io  libelled  does  not  support 
the  allegation  of  an  oath,  purporting  or 
mtendisiig  to  bind  the  eonuoiffion^' a  treaton, 
the  iofi>rmant  can  discover  no  auM^ority 
on  this  atatute,  fojr  alleging,  on  any  other 
ground^  that  alelony  has  been  committed. 

Tbe^e  are  swny  analogous  cases  iwhich 
Ui9y  be  suggested.  The  informant  un- 
deia4^ds,  that,  in  the  law  of  England, 
it  is  ^uile  settled,  A&t  in  an  indictment 
for  ^ndiifg  a  threatenu^  letter^  the  terms 
of  the  lettar  must  h^  set  forth ;  and  that, 
in  like  manner,  in  an  indictment  for  ob- 
tfuning  money  on  false  pretences,  the 
false  pretence  wust  be  stated.  So  also, 
in  an  indictment  on  the  statute  d9th  Geo. 
ard.  c.  U)6^  against  agreements  among 
workmen  Jcr  co^Uroulag  their  masters, 
the  words  of  the  agreement  alleged  must 
.be  libell^  <^n.  But  the  infonnant  cannot 
4eaira  i^iy  cm  more  analogous  thau  one 
4vbich  is  distinctly  laid  down  in  our  own 
law,  that  of  au  indictment  for  p/ffj^ry^ 
where,  aa  the  question  jturns  precisely  on 
itbe  terms  of  an  oath,  ^  rule  has  a  direct 
applicatioa  to  the  present  case.  And 
the  ini^mant  shall  return  to  that  ciipe,  as 
soon  as  he  has  adverted  to  another  very 
ex^raoirdiniuy  doctrine  of  the  prosecutor. 
It  if  maintained  in  this  .ca^e»  it  is 
believed  for  the  very  first  time  in  a  crim- 
inal Gourty  that  there  is  no  presumption 
in  fiivour  pf  innocence,  or  at  least  none 
which  can  w^igh  with  your  lordships  in 
4his  question  of  relevancy.  When  thjc 
|)rosecutor  says  merely,  that,  in  a  question 
of  relevancy,  the  first  act  of  the  mind  of 
a  judge  is  ^o  assume  the  trqtb  of  all 
the  jfacts  chai]gcd,  the  informant  un- 
derstands what  he  mnans;  and  though 
the  statement  h^s  no  tendency  to  prove 
:the  relevancy  of  an  indictment,  in  vrhich 
there  is  no  cdlegation  even  that  fmy  spe- 
cific came  wa^  committed,  and  far  less 
any  specification  of  jbfiiA  to  suppprt  it, 
4be  itwormaut  has  no  occasion  to. dispute 
thej^eneral  proposition.  But  the  prose- 
cutor has  gone  a  ^reat  deal  further.  The 
^question  ^joncermng  the  purport  or  ini- 
tendment  of  .ihia  oath>  is  a  question  of 


4391 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ofAmdrem  M*kMiif 


copstiiiotion  and  relevancy  by  itself; 
and  whether  it  belong!  to  the  judge  or  to 
the  jury  to  consider  it,  there  must  be 
some  rule  of  judgment  to  turn  the  scale, 
on  the  supposition  tfkat  any  doubt  hangs 
over  it.  The  informant's  counsel  took 
the  liberty  of  suggesting  the  very  obvious 
and  common-place  rule  of  law,  that  in  all 
trials  for  crimes,  there  is  a  presumption 
in  favour  of  innocence,  whtcfa  runs 
tfirough  the  whole  proceedings,  and  is 
applied  to  Uie  indictment-*to  the  proof— 
to  the  verdict;  and  he  remaiked  the 
peculiar  importanoe^f  giving  full  effect 
|o  it,  in  acase  where  the  whole  charge  turns 
on  the  import  of  words  which  may  admit 
of  various  meanings,  and  may  be  under>t 
stood  by  different  personsin  very  different 
senses.  It  seemea  to  him,  that  the  prin- 
eipie  of  judgment  in  sudi  a  case  must 
necessarily  be,  that,  if  the  words  alleged 
are  at  aU  nacqMk  cf  a  metmmg  comuicni 
with  mnoeenee,  the  accusedt  vrho  stands 
on  the  peril  of  life  and  death,  roust  have 
^  the  benefit  of  that  constmction;  and 
"  tiiat  it  could  net  be  %  oood  allegation  of 
administer^ttg  an  oaia,  purporting  to 
fiinid  to  commit  a  treason,  where  the  oath 
averred  is  of  a  purport  which  ma^  eitker 
be  reconciled  With  the  supposition   of 

Krfect  innocence,  or  at  least  with  some 
d  or  even  criminal  purpose  of  a  much 
lower  denomination.  He  did  not  mean 
that,  by  far-fetched  and  extravagant  con- 
ceptions, some  colour  of  possibility 
could  be  raised.  He  only  maintained, 
that  if,  upon  fidr  and  just  construction, 
the  oath  set  forth  did  not  neoe$mrify  pur- 
port an  obligation  to  commit  a  treason, 
he  was  entitled,  by  the  established  pre- 
sumption of  law,  to  take  the  more  fiavour- 
able  or  less  criminal  construction,  and  to 
object  to  the  allegation,  as  not  a  relevant 
statement  of  an  oath  purporting  to  bind 
to  the  commission  of  any  treasota.   '^ 

All  this  appeared  to  be  so  very  trite 
and  clear,  that  an  apology  vras  even 
thought  necessary  for  insisting  on  it.  But 
the  prosecutor  has  here  a  case  of  that 
unmanageable  nature,  that  he  is  obliged 
to  reject  even  the  most  established  max- 
ims of  law,  and  to  invert  the  plainest 
rules  of  justice.  In  his  information,*  he 
has  told  your  lordships  explicitly,  that 
^*  it  is  submitted,  that  if  the  woMs  of  the 
oath  Bxe  at  aU  tiuc^tibk  of  the  meaning 
nut  tqxm  them  by  the  pnneaUor^  and  nu^ 
near  that  meaning,  your  lordships  are 
bound  to  give  him  oiiditfor  the  truth  of 
that  cowstRitCTioif  tMch  he  putg  toon 
them.  It  is  quite  a  mistake  to  say,  tnat 
he  must  shew,  in  this  question  6i  rele- 
vancy, that .  the  words  mugt  mT  necestity 
bear  the  criminal  meaning.  If,  indeed, 
the  criminal  meaning  be  j^amfy  a  forced 

•  Inf.  p.  379. 


t440 

tonOfwitMm^  and  one  which  they  cannot 
reasonably  bear,  your  lordships  might 
hesitate  as  to  sending  them  to  a  jury, 
unless  it  were  alleged  that  they  have  a 
hidden  or  different  meaning  fimn  what 
they  express.  But  if  the  meaning  be 
neither  forced  nor  unnatural,  or  t^  t^  6c 
at  oil  a  reammMe^  oa  etbn  ▲  PoasiBLc 
oonifmctiofi,  the  pnmeader  i»  enOtied  ta 
the  verdict  of  a  jmy  on  tike  charge,  and 
10  demand  the  assumption  of  the  truth 
of  every  aUegaiion  he  makes  in  the  pre- 
liminary stage  of  the  process."  If  your 
lordships  are  prepared  to  admit  this 
statement  of  law,  it  will  be  in  vain  to 
object  to  the  relevancy  of  any  indictment. 
But  the  informant  must  remind  the 
prosecutor,  that  the  allegation  of  a  co»- 
etruction  is  not  the  allegation  of  a  fact ; 
and,  what  is  still  more  remarkable,  that 
the  prosecutor  has  not,  in  factj  made  any 
proper  allegation  in  this  indictment,  of 
the  construction  which  be  puts  on  the 
oadi ;  and  is  actually  maintaininff,  that  he 
is  not  bound  to  do  so.  But  ia  it  really 
true,  that,  if  the  words  set  forth  by  a 
prosecutor,  os  his  averment  of  facts,, 
which  is  the  same  thing,  are  at  alltmc^- 
ihle  of  a  criminal  meaningi  or  can,  by  anyt 
jMSttUs  eomtrvctionf  be  nude  to  bear  it,^ 
the  indictment  must  be  held  relevant? 
This  is  an  inversion  of  all  the  rules  of 
criminal  law.  What  ie  a  question  of  re-, 
levancy  ?  It  is,  whether  the  facts  averred,^ 
if  proved  as  stated,  amount  to,  or  legtdly^ 
prove  the  crime  4Jiarged.  But  do  they 
prove  it,  if  it  is  merely  that,  by  any  votn- 
Ue  construction,  they  nuy  admit  ot  the 
criminal  meaning  ?  Is  not  the  rule  just 
the  contrary,  that,  supposing  all  the  nets 
proved,  if  thev  do  not  neceisgrily,  or 
according  to  ndr  neeeaary  c<mclnsion, 
prove  or  amount  to  the  crime  charged, 
there  is  no  case  made  out,  and  the  pre- 
sumption of  innocence  prevails?  The 
question  of  relevancy,  before  proof,  is 
just  the  same  to  the  court,  on  the  as- 
sumption of  the  foots  averred,  as  the 
question  of  euiUy  or  not  ia  to  the  jury, 
on  the  actual  state  of  the  prorf.  If  a  jucy 
could  not  legally  convict  on  an  adnumon 
of  all  the  yac/s*  averred,  but  not  of  the 
prosecutor's  comtructiom,  the  court  cannot 
ind  the  libel  relevant.  The  question  is 
just  the  same  in  both  cases,  and  the  pre* 
sumptions  in  favour  of  innocence  must 
have  at  least  the  same  weight,  in  con- 
sidering the  prosecutor^s  averments  before 
proof,  which  they  confessedly  have  in 
the  construction  of  his  proof  after  it  ia 
led. 

When  the  proiecutor  was  pn»onnding 
this  new  prmet|^  of  crimmal  justice, 
the  case  of  a  trial  for  perfmy  might  have 
occurred  to  him ;  and  he  might  have  asked 
himself  this  question—* Is  an  indictment 
for  perjury  good,  though  the  thing  alleged 


4411 


• 

Jilt  Admiiulerii^  laUamfiit  Oatkt. 


A.  D.  t817. 


t44ft 


to  have  been  sworn,  is  verftOhf  rtamdk' 
akie  with  innoeeneey  ir,  by  amf  pombU 
amttrmOiony  it  mt^  bear  tbe  supposition 
•of  wilful  ftdsehood?  The  informant  shall 
answer  the  question  in  the  words  of 
Mr.  Hume*  ''Tlie  substance  of  the 
crime,  and  that  which  all  the  other  par- 
ticulars in  the  description  of  it  only 
modify  and  limit  is,  that  a  plain  fiilsehood 
be  explicitly  and  wiUuUy  affirmed.  For, 
if  eiMer  thert  u  avt  ooubt  a6oiir  the 
true  ttaie  of  ike  factf  or  about  thb  seuse 

in  WHICH  THE  PAXIL'S  WORDS  AEB  TO 
BZ  UBDBB8TOOO;  OB  IF  THBT  CAB  IB 
ABY  BEA80BABLE  WAY  BE  BECOBCILBD 
WITH  THE  TB17TH,  OB  WITH  AK  IHBOCEBT 

ufTBBTiOB,  or,  m  general,  if  ii  i$  not 
mamfeit  and  obwWj  but  matter  of  tikeU* 
boodonfyy  and  of  mferenee  and  eompariton 
of  many  partiailarty  tbai  he  had  a  faUe 
and  eom^  meanings  thu  MU  moe  him 
Jrmn  the  aeauation  of  perfwy.  Indeed  it 
wcmld  be  very  dangerom  to  commit  any 
me  ypon  tueh  comtntctioe  mundt;  con' 
mdering  the  imferfcetion  of  tanguagey  and 
the  iMl  more  imperjeet  uie  whach  m  many 
pemm  hone  of  t/,  and  how  uneoud  thenr 
degreee  of  inteliigenee  in  the  effwrt  of  Itfe, 
end  even  their degree$  ^capacity  for  the 
akervation  of  facte,**  The  learned  author 
<|votes  cases  in  support  of  this  statement, 
in  which  libels  for  perjury  were  found 
irrdevanty  precisely  De»use  the  oaths 
as  averred  did  not  **  absolutely  eidude" 
the  supposition  of  innocence.  And  he 
thus  proceeds  :t  '^For  the  same  reasons 
which  suggested  these  decisions,-  it  is 
more  emeaalfy  rtqmutey  that  in  all  pro^ 
cesses  for  peijurv,  the  prosecutor  he  not 
aikmed  to  lay  Mb  Ubef  genemUy,  or  in 
ambigaous  terms ;  pnee  otherunaehe  woidd 
take  the  eognKumee  of  the  relevant  of  the 
charge  to  Mmidfy  oat  of  the  handi  of  the 
Courty  to  vAom  of  r^M  t^  belongt.  He 
has  to  eiplain,  therefore,  wherein  it  is, 
that  the  nlsehood  lies,  and  must  support 
(or  as  we  say,  qnal^)  his  charge  with 
such  a  statement  of  the  circumstances  of 
the  hcty  as  justifies  his  aYerment  of  a 
ialse  oadi  haYing  been  taken,  and  shall 
ground  a  clear  inierence  (if  they  be 
proYCd)  concerning  the  situation  of  the 
panel's  conscience  on  the  occasion.  It 
was,  aoeordingly,  for  want  t>f  such  a 
detail  and  explanation,  that  one  part  of 
Che  libel  was  found  irrelerant  in  the 
noted  ease  of  Lawson  of  Westertown.'' 

The  informant  presumes  he  has  said 
enough  on  this  singular  doctrine  of  the 
pfoseculor,  and  thiu,  whateYOr  opinion 
your  lordships  may  form  on  the  purport 
of  this  oath,  m  point  of  relerancy,  ne  may 
at  least  rely  on  your  lordships  giving  to 
him,  in  this  case  of  capital  arraignment 

founded  6tt  worda  alone,  all  the  benefit  of 

I       >  I       I.I 

Hnne^YoL  L  p.  127.  f  ibid.  129. 


those  presumi^ons  of  law  and  reason^ 
which  protect  innocence  even  against  trial 
on  loose  and  doubtful  allegations. 

In  taking  notice  of  the  remarks  made 
by  the  informant's  counsel,  on  the  terms 
of  the  oath,  the  prosecutor  has  been 
pleased  to  allude  to  the  obligation  of 
secrecy,  and  in  connexion  with  it  to  add,^ 
^An  amiable  feature  of  the  whole  trana- 
action,  and  which  affords  a  pleasant  com* 
mentaiy  on  the  panegyric  that  wot  prom 
-nomued  at  the  first  deoate,  on  the  'bro- 
therhood of  affection,'  in  which  it  was 
said  to  be  so '  becoming  that  all  the  sub- 
jects of  this  country  shcMrid  dwell  togeUier 
in  unity.' "  It  is  impossible  not  to  feel 
s6me  surprise  at  this  passage;  for,  un- 
doubtedly, no  each  sentiment  vnu  expreteed 
iy  either  of  the  v^bmamfM  cemnm.  An 
argument  was  indeed  maintained  to  show, 
that  the  proposal  of  establishing  a  brother- . 
hood  of  affection,  <iirf  not  ofnecemty  mv^f 
mty  crimnaUtyy  or  that  crhninality  whidh 
is  meant  to  be  chained  in  the  indictment. 
But  no  panegyrie  wa$  prommneed;  and  in 
general,  it  was  admitted,  that  the  oath 
might  be  improper  and  dangerousy  and 
might  raise  uupiiont  of  criminal  designs. 
It  would,  therefore,  have  been  more  cor* 
rect,  if  the  prosecutor  had  withheld  an  in^ 
sinuation  so  perfoctly  groundless. 

The  prosecutor  has  libelled  the  purport 
of  the  oath,  which  he  savs  was  adminis- 
tered; and  it  is  somewhat  remarkable* 
that  he  should  come  to  a  trial  of  so  serious 
a  nature  as  this,  in  such  uncertainty  as  to 
'  the  words  which  were  really  used,  Uiat  he 
can  at  pleasure  substitute  one  word  for 
another,  as  it  suits  his  argument  on  the 
question  of  rdevancy.  But  as  he  waa 
bound  to  aver  the  purport  and  intendment 
of  the  oath,  and  has  accordingly  set  forth 
the  words  which  he  says  contain  the  pur- 
port of  it,  it  is  for  your  lordships  to  jndge, 
whether,  if  an  oath  in  such  terms  was 
administered,  it  is  an  oath  purporting  or 
intending  to  bind  the  pat^  taking  it  to 
commit  a  treason.  This  is  a  question 
quite  distittot  from  the  question  already 
considered,  as  to  the  necessity  of  setting 
forth  the  specific  treason.  Supposing  that 
the  prosecutor  had  libelled  an  engage- 
ment to  commit  treason  by  lenyintt  wary  or 
jmy  other  fptcific  treason,  and  had  then 
set  forth  this  oath,  the  qnesdon  is,  whe- 
ther it  comes  up  to  tbe  averment,  that  it 
was  an  oath  purporting  or  intending  to 
bind  to  the  commission  of  a  treason  ? 

But,  in  this  part  of  the  question,  the 
proeeontor  is  under  another  mistake.  As- 
suming that  he  is  not  obliged  to  state  the 
specific  treason,  he  further  takes  it  for 
granted,  that  your  lordships  are  not  to  be 
satisfied  that  the  oath  does  purport  or 
intend  to  bind  to  the  eommission.  of  a  . 

*  Inf.  p.  37Q. 


4ii3       SYOBOROfiUI. 


IritdffAMirm  U*Ki94^ 


[444 


whniftypiaion  my  be  ettortamcd  on 

th<i  «tlMr  point^  it  ii  qail«  Uip«nible 

tbatyo«f  lordalup0  cm  bold  thai  Uiis  in- 

diilmBt  is  wlcTAsty  valest  you  ace  Batis- 

fied^  tet  tbe  p«rp«t  of  tb«  oMb  set  fortb 

U  tocbt  tbftt  ytou,  V9  now  pMOMed  to 

affirm  that  ii4iei  jNvpaK«riaioM  to  bind 

to  tba  aommiauonof  to«M  ^pecj^  treason. 

UnlMi  yonr  kwdsbipa  can  x^^joot  all  the 

aaoamiiMtod  auAbari^  on  ^e  Um  oi  ti»a^ 

so«^  and  pnoeeed   oai   tha  eid  aulgar 

aotioiui  of  titaaoA  in  the  abttnct,.  con- 

•iitiag  lA  aaj  thing  inaginaMe  diat  is 

^MagfMahlato  tbamiatiBg  goireEomentt 

it  u  inpoeiible  that  yon  oan  bold  the 

Ipnrpofft  «f  the  oath  liballad  to  be  an 

oMigadiop  to  connait  tieasoo,  iMntll  yon 

aia  lativftod  wkat  traaion  it  doci  parport 

•ritttead  4o  bind  tiie  party  to  oonamit. 

IQbeinlbfanNit  sayti  that  4faa  proaacutor  is 

tasid  As  stele  what  iba  tieason  ts.    But 

aUoviBf  biv  to  gat  dd  of  this  difficnlty, 

at  is  at  aU  evavia  naoasaafy^  that  your 

kvdsbipasboaldaaelbaitfAs  4Mth  mferred 

does  parpait  to  bind  to  sonie  s^Mecific 

twaaon*    Wtibont  ibis,  then  is  no  and  to 

fthalaasentasiafaiicbaniadietiaeaC  For, 

iC  9(o«r  toidaUps  cannot  tell  wbiA  the 

tfaaiiin  is,  jhow  is  the  panel  lo  dascorer 

it?    Hew  aaairaiir  ioidsbips  to  jodge  of 

ebi  sAiiianayf  How  are  the  jury  to  judge 

al  tbeaiiplioation  of  the  evidence  f  .  The 

JMiyaniat  gi»»«  veidiflt  indeed;  bnt  the 

wuf  thing  which  the  kw  ioSends  to  pre- 

^fcnt,  by  rsqvittBg  an  iotadaontor  of  re- 

More  ailowing  the  case  to  go 

Tf  m  Iba  risk  mi  ermnaaw  in- 

«c  iawofwat  views  nf  the.  law, 

^idkls  of  nsMctton  which  aaa  not 

itodifayanyeoaMid  or  lagiosAcfaurge. 

Yottff  loidahipa  will  l(«iu  then,  into 

,  this  <aalb,  l^aspng  it  m  afaid  <hse  yon 

flsiatsMhenpfOttrapiaieoi^  tbatitfdoes 

pnsport  «r  sntand  to  bind  to  the  aenmis- 

aian  lef  peneafcoifio  treaaan.    The  pro- 

centoor  bto  said,  iai  the  traason  is  that 

0f  leiFying  war;  and  fat  it  is  vary  faanark- 

afale»  4hat  be  has  fset  new  Tentnfed  to 

toato  Ibis  in  hia  intfaraaatM.    Tbairuth 

aaaasB  to  be,  that  the  moa^ent  the  case  is. 

laduead  to  Ae  taatof  a  daAnad  tseason, 

it  is  oaihr  by  amest  Tiolant  atretcfa  of  the 

fteram  of  the  oaih,  and  ihf  the  aid  of  pre- 

ouasptians  and  aappasitions  not  supported 

by  nay  ^aels  iibellad,  thai  it  can  be  main- 

tofaud  to  ttt  an  oath  pnrnasting  to  bind  to 

Ue  i^Baaecotor  fiyideayogrs  to  distin- 
ff«iah  ti»  tiadpiafWitfly  diam  tbeiword 
—    '^  '  eepeeaania  iba  ilatter  as 

:e  io  dn  wtensiona  of  the 
nay  fca  the  tanoas  or 
apfiaarnt  *pnrpoft  of  the  oalb.  31m  in- 
^onaasiiflabanitai,  tfaattbis  eonstsootion  is 
ahogetfaer  inadmissible;  and  be  nnder- 
stood  your  loidtfnpf  to^iate  long  ago  in- 


lusnag  refi 


tiewted  a  dear  gpinien,  that  these  words, 
^  (]iiiporting  or  tntaodtngy"  do  not  refer 
to  the  intentions  of  the  parties,  bnt  to  the 
pmput  and  mUndmmt  of  the  oath  itself. 
Iba  infonnant  does  not  mean  by  this,  that 
the  pnMWQtor  in  tied  down  in  bis  proof 
to  Abe  vary  words  which  be  sets  forth  in 
the  indictment,  so  that  if  be  should  prove 
wotds  aligbtly  diisring  irom  tbemt  be 
would  not  be  entitled  to  a  veidict.  Both 
these  words  ooair  peiba^  seem  to  eaclude 
this  supposition.  The  tnigrmant  might 
admit,  that  oeitbar  the  pwvart  uer  the 
•ntoi^aan^  means  the  same  thing  wiih  the 
toior  of  an  oalb.  But  wben  this  is  ad- 
mitted»  which  ad  eoee  answem  m  great 
pan  of  the  paaseentor's  feaecntng»  it  is 
stiU  usie,  that  the  pnrppii  and  intendment 
being  elated  must  show  e^  ftck  a  rele- 
vnncy.  The  oajb,  nsetoled  in  point  of 
fMHport  and  tatendeaent,  «u»st  be  an  oaib 
«Mch,  in  Ibe  judgoenl  cif  yonr  lecdshipa, 
detaaiMiipoet  and  inlend  to  bind  the  party 
idling  it  to  oeisimit  «  specific  tosason. 
Ml  i|4loee  net  defiend  9»  ai^  iatoPt  in- 
tentians  of  the  parties.  U  is  the  purport 
aad  ii^endment  of  tkfi  eel^  that  must 
detnaraainn  the  relevancy  of  the  iadM^toient ; 
mid  the  opinion  «f  «our  lordibipf  on  that 
fMiat  is  not  to  be  astered  by  eny  eeppost- 
4ion  fof  oonoe^a^  views  in  the  parties. 

Tkm  mmaiiwble  change  of  terms,  be- 
iwoan  Ibis  atatuto  and  tbe  Ibrwer  act 
n^iinsl  tMlaa^fid  oelbs*  veiy  etrengljr  con- 
fiims  this  view«ns  being  tbe  ivial  meaning 
of  the  kgiehiture.  In  that  foneernet,  tbo 
wjnls  were,  **  pnrpoptiw  or  intended  to 
Umd/'lto.  Tbe  wwd  <*UmdBd;'  es  op- 
poeod  to  ^'pnrpoitingt''  might  be  snpposed 
to  «afer  4ireotly  to  tbe  intoeilin»  ef  the 
paitiea,  andaoto  :meM»  Ibet  4boiiih  the 
oath  migbt  net  eKaeAlrfNiipPii^i^>t<tog(«o- 
meae  to  anamil. «  Ueeeen,  jfHH  evs  eo 
undemtoed  and  mkmM  by  tk^  ^artiea. 
The  statote  now  before  ye«r  b>aMi»p(i  is  a 
imcb  neoie  soveae  jtotnie»  eimag  that 
into  the  auk  of  aoapHel  feieny^  which,  if 
toe  anteningvere  evectly  the  e«toe»  was 
before  onfy  a  feloi9t«  with  bei»ete  of  ^rgy. 
Hnsa,  it  aoMMt  be  enppoaedi  ihe  legislature 
locked  witbgveMer  «nre  to  Ibe  form  of 
espsessien;  and  tboogb  ih»y  aae4e  it 
eipttel  to  administer  en  oeth,  #ieper<n^ 
to  bind  to  the  eomcHeaien  of  a  tseaeon  or 
felony,  or  an  oathtii(cn«Ng  to  bind  to  the 
oommisaion  of  .a  tceaaon  or  Moey;  they 
did  not  think  et  enpedieo^  to  evtoad  the 
nanishment  of  deetbto  an  nctiof  so  very 
looaa  aiibaricto^.as  that  of  iubewiietering 
an  oailb»  which  tiaeugbsiQjt  htaaing,  even 
SB  pnrpoit  or  tntendoieiiti  eegr  oUigation 
to  pnmaDii  n  laenaan  or  ji.^t6mff  mght, 
by  ^nrnfierii'im,  w^^hfww,  m  imfmuim^  be 
ttfntmUi  as  so  mumt  or  mkm^/d.  The 
.dflfarense  between  these  4Wo  thim  is 
mamiest ;  >  ana  yet  tne  prooecnvor  nas  occn 
ptoaeed,  irithouttoidng  any  n<?lieex€  the 


4451 


JiiiT  AilmiMeriitg'mUgufiU  Oaiht. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C44d 


«rg«Hi«iit|  and  In  1^  itee  ftf  iNbtt  was 
«riid«ftWod  to  bti  eipreiMd  mtb%  opinion 
tffyoitvk>Fdgliip0|toaitiiiii»fltoiio#9  that 
If  tli0ie  it  iiH  itS^hMIt  yiiUwm  Ibr  n»- 
jMtolfN^  an  tMMtfwn  m  Hie  pa*ti«  tv  admi- 
iriit«r  or  tak«  an  otttk  to  oontttit  Ueason 
or  Mimff  tho  txiiM  of  tlM  afat«t»ii  com- 
Ailt^d. 

There  ie  an  knporant  di^tittctlott  which 
the  proeeeotoF  entitely  o<rertook«i  To 
adinlniBter  an  Oiiflk  whieh  it  intakfed  to 
^ind  the  fartiee  to  oomnit  treeeetii  is  un- 
doubtedly a  great  erinie;  it  is  perhaps 
olearly  within  the  farmer  statate^  but,  at 
idl  evenie^  it  is  pnrishable  on  other 
gmnnda.  But,  though  a  great  crime,  it 
may  not  be  Ife  crime  of  fMv  statute.  The 
informant  has  no  donbt,  that  the  prosecu- 
tor cooid  hate  libelled  the  case  which  he 
alleces  in  his  informatieii,  though  not  in 
the  tndlctnient)  as  a  crime  sererely  punish- 
able in  the  law  of  Sce^Sand.  Bnt  the 
question  on  this  Indictnient  ie,  whether 
ihe  dath  as  libelled  is  withib  the  particular 
statute ;  and  there  the  question  is^  whether 
itpafyurlf  or  iniemk  to  bind  the  party  to 
eouMaittfi^  irmMU  And  tiiis  is  numbly 
apprehend  to  be  an  entirely  different 
tf ing  frum  any  supposed  intention  in  the 
patties  to  an  oath  which  has  no  such  pur- 
pott  or  intendment. 

One  eonrideration  may  senv  to  show 
the  ^rety  gresEt  difihrence  between  the 
terms  or  the  BtaftutCi  ttid  the  prosecutor's 
nenstfnotion  of  them.  When  your  lord- 
Mps  eve  ennslieriing  the  putport  or  in- 
tfcudin^ttt  of  an  nath,  writings  or  speech^ 
you  afU  entitled  lo  infer  from  the  words, 
thai  h^h  tile  parties  understood  and  in- 
Uended  Hiai  wnit^  was  expressed*  But  if 
yow  hMdMHps  Biife  required  to  lock  into 
the  Moussus  of  patties  in  the  use  of  words 
wMch  de  ne^  pnr^peK  the  intentton  assumed, 
it  Is  etideut^  that  Ae  One  party  might  in- 
tend a  meetdng,  of  whteh  the  other  never 
ihoeghft  Ibr  a  memcfnt.  zhe  administrator 
of  thn  Mrth  might  have  meant  to  impose 
an  nbllgutiott  to  tommit  a  treason,  while 
the  tflfeer  teeeilred  it  in  its  plainest  mean- 
ing and  purport,  and  nerer  0iou|^  of  the 
faiddett  design.  In  such  a  case,  it  could 
nefer  be  said,  that  Ifae  oalh  was  an  obli- 
gation purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the 
pally  th  commit  treason,  when  the  party 
taking  H  was  altogether  msenslbie  or  any 
sneh  meaning.  In  the  same  manner,  the 
patty  taking  it  mi^  understand,  an  obli- 
gation to  oottMil  a  treaanni  and  jNst  this 
may  be  totally  unknown  to  dm  laMmtira- 
Uftf  from'  whom  the  "secrel  hileution  may 
ot  entnuiy  ^oMcealed,  and  who  may,  in 
plain  good  ihith,  administer  a  perfectly 
innocent  oath,  hhring  no  eudi  purport, 
and  no  sudi  intendment.  ITiis  just  shows 
^  great  and  essential  difference  between 
the  two  things ;  and  the  informant  humbly 

uppiufamNe^  omt^  ^tMifiCeiing  the  tnms  of 


Uris  statute,  he  is  entkMm  the  strlet  and 
true  meaniMt  of  those  t«nus,  asflting  a 
iwle  madly  difbiuttt  from  that  of  the  ex- 
traneotis  inlentions  of  me  pavties. 

But  your  loidihips  WW  ohserfU,  Ihat  in 
rtn^ty  the  proeeeuter  in  this  case  has  not 
put  mmseu  in  u  sHuatlun  to  plead  the 
point  in  the  way  he  sitempts  to  plead  it. 

He  has  not  smied  in  the  indictment. 
Htm  the  oath  was^McndM  or  nuribisfoorf  to 
bind  the  parties  in  oMy  odicr  tsn^  than 
aooording  to  its  e:iptm  pirpefrt  or  mtentU 
MSM*  Tiitre  la  no  mgation  of  a  con* 
eealed  or  di Areift  meenlng,  Ihr  lesi  any 
Bpeciilcation  e^  facta  to  support  such  an 
allegetion.  In  trati)«  (hei^mre,  Am%  is 
here  no  it>om  for  this  discussion.  For 
whatever  it  might  he  competent  to  a  pro- 
secutor to  Vbel  under  this  statute,  surely 
there  can  he  no  doubt,  that  If  be  libels  the 
purport  of  an  oath,  and  males  no  special 
averment  of  u  diffe^rent  meaning,  and  no 
specification  of  fects  to  infer  such  k  sup- 
po^itiott,  be '  must  be  held  to  cott4n^  him- 
self to  the  purport  set  fbrfh,  as  indicating 
the  Inientidn  both  of  the  Udmioiitrator 
end  the  receiver  of  the  oath.  Herii',  ac- 
eordfa|ly,  the  pr&secutor  dees  eonfine 
himself  to  the  purport  stated.  For  as  to 
his  stetement  of  secret  meetings,  and  the 
numbers  to  whom  the  oath  is  md  to  have 
been  administered,  it  iA  quite  absurd  to 
allege,  that  such  ciieumsianees  are  of 
the  lightest  Televaney,  to  give  any  effect 
to  the  oafh  whldilts  purport  and  intend- 
ment do  nM  wMWht. 

The  question  then  is,  ^slmt  thii  oath 
purports  and  intend^  by  its  terms  m  bind 
theparty  tsiting  It  to  perrormf  In  con- 
sideling  this,  the  jAosecutor  always  as- 
sumes, that  there  is  no  other  e^mative 
but  to  suppose,  that  the  oath  eidmr^und 
due  patty  to  commit  treiEison,  tft  wns  per* 
fhctiy  innoceirt.  Bitt  thii  is  a  supposition 
altogether  etfloheous.  fttnay  be  admitted, 
that,  without  reference  to  some  -odier 
ohjeets,  dris  6adi  wes  in  a  Mgh  degree 
improper;  thi^  it  was  highly  dtihinal; 
that  it  was  of  an  evtremely  dangerous 
tendency  \  thtft  tt  vras  the  duty  of  the 
pift)Kc  prosecutor  to  take  notice  of  it,  if 
^e  fhets  were  due  %  end  that  it  might, 
with  the  utmost  propriety,  hhvu  l^en 
made  "nie  subject  of  an  indictment*  Sup* 
posing  all  this,  the  question  remains, 
whether  it  is  an  oath  binding  the  party  to 
tMMittt  -a  -fteassftf  nothing,  therefore,  can 
be  mtMU  irrdei^nt  or  inconclusive,  than 
to  stMe  trtcumstance^  in  the  oafh  which 
indiesAe  improper  or  mimival  views* 
They  nwy  be  toy  Migrant  to  show  mcA 
tntuMtions:  but  what  youz  lordships  are 
%0Uttd  %o  Aeteimine  is,  whether  the  oath 
purpovth  to  Mnd  Ae  party  to  commit 
ti^eason*  Supposing  that  tn^  prosecutor 
liheUed,  as  he  does,  dmt  thn  inmnl^  ad- 
mnuimmn  mi  umn  purpeiwng  ^ 


4471       VI  GEORGE  UI. 


Trud  oJAnitifm  M'KMey 


r446 


la  the  oohlmiasioii  of.  a  >  iteatmi,  and 
that  yoor  lordships  were  satisfied  that  it 
purported  to  bind  to  .oonnnission  of  a 
particular /e^of^fy  the  criminal  intention 
ijrould  be  clear  enough,  but  the  iirelevattcy 
of  the  indictment  would  be  equally  clear.  - 
Or,  supposing  that  it  were  libelled  in  the 
same  way,  and  your  lordships  were  satis- 
fied that  ^e  administiaiion  of  the  oath 
amounted  to  utedUum^  or  was  meant  to 
excite  a  riaif  the  criminality  would  be 
plain  enough  f  but  it  would  make  nothing 
towards  showing  that  the  indictment  might 
be  sent  to  an  assize.  It  is  most  important 
to  remember,  that  the  law  of  treason  is 
the  most  sacred  and  delicate  of  all  subjects 
in  the  law^  and  that  this  is  an  indictment 
which  eitiar  inTolves  an  engagement  to 
commit  o  ireaum,  akid  nothing  elsOf  or  is 
totally  wrekvtmt.  The  blame  or  crimi- 
i^ality  imputable  to  the  parties  in. other 
rpspects  is  totally  immaterial  to  the  ques- 
tion. 

Look,  then,  into  the  terms  of  this  oath. 
The  informant  does  not  intond  to  detain 
your  lordships  with  any  long  or  minute 
cri|icism.  He  does  not  agree  with  the 
prosecutor,  that  your  lordslups  can  desire 
no  assistance  from  anjf  lemaiks  on  the 
oadi ;  and  he  so  far  diflwrs  from  him  as  to 
the  obTious  purport  of  it,  that  he  thinks 
no  person  can  read  it,  and  say  that  its 
purport  is  to  commit  treason  of  any,  kind, 
lie  may  suspect  bad  intentions ;  he  may 
eren  suspect  treasonable  intentions.  But 
this  is  not  the  point.  It  has  been  the 
prosecutor's  object  throughout  to  escape 
mm  all  Iqpd  precision,  and  to  take  away 
the  life  of  the  informant  on  some  rough 
and  unmeaning  conclusions  of  a  crimi- 
nality which  he  cannot  define*  Butdsie 
question  is,  whether  the  oath  porpoits  tfie 
commission  of  a  treason,  and,  according 
to  the  veibal  statemient  of  the  prosecutor, 
it  truly  is,  whether  it  purporte  an  obiig^ 
turn  to  Itnjf  HMT* 

The  purty  swears^  **  that  he  will  peise* 
▼ere  in  his  endeaTOurs  to  form  a  brother- 
hood of  affection  among  ^tons  of  cTeiy 
description  who  are  considered  worthy  of 
confidence.''  It  was  said,  that  this  im- 
plied an  association  of  prodigious  extent. 
Peihaps  not;  for  it  is  limited  by  the  ideas 
of  confidence  which  the  parties  enter- 
tained. But  though  it  were  ever  so  wide, 
that  would  not  make  the  obligation  to 
form  it  an  obligation  to  commit  treason* 
It  does  not  even  imply  crimindity  by 
itself,  though  it  may  be  rendered  criminal 
by  the  objects  in  view.  He  next  swears 
to  "peisevere  in  his  endeavonrs  to  obtain 
the  electiye  tenchise  for  all  persons  of 
the  age  of  twenty-one,  not  disqualified  by 
crimfu,  '&c.  and  annual  parliaments.'' 
The  prosecutor  may  state,  and  those  who 
aigue  the  case  of  the  informant  will, agree 
With  him|  that^  nothing  more  unoonsti* 


tutional,- nothing  more  absurd,  nothing 
more  mischievous,  nothing  more  ncjcessa- 
rily  leading  to  denrntism,  and  to  the  d^ 
stmction  of  the  liberties  of  the  countrfy 
could  be  suggested,  than  this  proposal  of 
universal  aufficage  and  annual  parliamente. 
But  if  there  is  any  liberty  in  this  oonntty^ 
it  permits  the  subject  to  entertain,  and ' 
ereli  publish,  speculative  opinions,  which 
are  unconstitutional,  absurd,  and  even 
mischievous,  if  they  do  not  tend  to  any 
direct  breach  of  law.  If  there  is  any 
thing  certain  in  the  law  of  treason  (and 
it  is  the  most  certain  of  all  lawsX  the 
pursuit  of  such  oljeots  has  not  tfie  least 
relation  to  any  treason,  and  does  not 
even  infer  the  slightest  saspides  of  an 
intention  to  commit  it. 

But  the  sting  of  this  oath  is  supposed 
to  lie  in  the  words  which  follow,  ''and 
that  I  will  support  the  same  to  the  utmost 
of  my  power,  either  \rf  moral  or  physical 
strength  (or  force),  as  the  case  may  re-^ 
quire."  It  is  not  clear  to  what  the  words^ 
''support  the  same"  refer.  Ihey  may 
refer  to  the  hrothirhood  of  t^fktkmi  or  to 
the  fncfeonwrt  for  obtaining  annual  par- 
liamente and  universal  suffrage  themseivea 
whei^  obtained.  If  there  is  any  doubt, 
your  lordships  will  interpret  fovourably.. 
And  this  is  tne  more  neoeiMaiy,  when  you 
eonsider  thenatore  of  this  offence.  There 
might  be  very  mischievous  designs  in  the 
person  or  persons  who  originaUy  framed 
this  oath ;  and  yet,  if  it  was  adnunistered 
to  hundreds,  as  die  prosecutor  says^  pro- 
bably nine -tenths  of  them  did  not  underw 
stand  it.  At  all  events,  they  mig^  put 
different  constructions ;  and  if  the  PUUd 
grammar  of  the  •  sentence  admite  ef  w^ 
pljTing  the  words  "  to  support  the  same,*^ 
to  the  objectewhen  attainea,  the  informant 
is  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  that  constmc^ 
tion ;  and  in  demanding  it,  he  is  not  ask-> 
ing  any  force  upon  the  words  which  they 
do  not  fairly  bean  but  only  that  masons 
able  allowance  for  the  imperfisc^ion  of 
language,  and  the  various  understandings 
of  It,  which  all  vmters  agree  must  ba 
given  in  such  a  case* 

But,  allowing  the  prosecutor  to  apply 
these  words  to  toe  ondeaiwmn  for  obtaining 
universal  suffrage  and  annual  pariiaments, 
can  any  man  say,  that  they  purport  an 
engagement  to  levy  war  i^goms^  tke  kng^ 
Ihe  party  is  to  support  his  endeavours  ia 
the  utmott  of  hii  power,  either  by  his  moral 
or  his  fijftkal  itrengthf  as  the  case  may 
require. 

If  it  had  been  that .  he  was  to  support 
them  to  the.  uimoet  of  kie  pcwMr,  wiibont 
any  addition,  would  it  have,  been  an  en- 
gagement .  to  commit  treason  ?  Those 
Kords  would  have  comprehended  all  that 
it  ejprested  by  the  words  as  they  stand  s 
Xhey. would  have  comprehended  both 
moral  and  physical  tir^th,  both  mor»l 


^4i»J 


Jbhjidminisienng  uniavoful  Oaths, 


A.  D.  1817. 


L450 


ixkd,  physical  force.  The  informaot  sup- 
'po9es,  that  the  prosecutor  would  not  have 
said  in  that  case^  that  tliis  was  ah  engage- 
ment to  commit  treason.  And  why  would 
Ke  not  have  said  it  f  For  no  reason  that 
the  informant  knows,  but  that,  though  a 
man  tnoy  intend  to  lery  war,  in  order  to 
obtain  annual  parliaments  and  nniyersal 
soilrage,  this  is  not  to  be  inferred,  merely 
because  he  engages  to  support  his  endea- 
▼onis  for  obtainitig  them  to  the  utmost  of 
bis  power.  All  his  powers^  moral  and 
physical,  ixe  includda  in  the  terms ;  and 
yet  the  t>urport  6f  an  In^agemeut  to 
commit  trekson  cduld  never  oe  stated. 
The  informant  codfesses,  he  can  see  no 
solution  of  this,  extept  by  what  the  pro- 
secutor is  pleased  to  caU  a  **  reservation 
bf  illegali^:''  Ih  plainer  terms>  that 
presumption  of  irinoceiice,  by  which 
words,  which  admit  of  an  inilbceiit  con- 
struction, or  of  a  construction  which  is 
not  treasonable,  are  not  to  be  extended  or 
twisted,  so  as  td  make  out  a  guilty  or 
traitorous  desini. 

If  the  words  had  been,  ^That  I  will 
support  the  same  to  the  utmost  of  my 
power,  with  ffiy  whole. moral  strength,^*  the 
design  might  equally  hare  tfeeto  to  commit 
a  treason:  For  undoubtedly,  a  tteason 
toay  be  committed  b^  moral  strength 
alone — ^by  writing  letters, — furnishing  mo- 
iiey, — giving  advice, — giving  information, 
— encouragiifg,  .comforting,  persiiadinff 
others.  But  yet  the  prosecutor  would 
scarcely  have  inferred  an  obligation  to 
.^commit  treason,  if  the  oath  had  b^en  so 
^pressed..  And  why  notf  For.no  r^asoo^ 
but  that,  though  treason  might  be  so  com- 
hnitted,  the  presumption  of  innoicence 
would  not  dipw  the  engageihent  to  be  so 
construed,  when  so  many  other  supposi- 
tions, consistent  With  innocence,  could  be 
made. 

The  prosecutor's  caJe>  then,  lies  entirely 
in  the  supposed  effect  of  the  words,  «  or 
physical  strength;'*  or,  as  he  has  now 
oeen  pleased  to  express  it,  *'  or  physidil 
streng&i  (or  force)."  Now,  it  ii  true,  that 
a  nan  H^ho  Undertakes  tolevywai-  map,  and 
most  prbbably  will,  exert  both  moral  and 
physical  strehgfli ;  but  it  does  not  follow, 
mat  every  man,  Whb  engages  to  support 
certain  end^ivours  for  obtaining  a  public 
object,  either  by  his  moi^  or  physical 
stren^,  as  the  case  may  require  necessa- 
rily hmdt  himself  to  levy  ioar,  or  to  do  any 
act  of  treason,  t.  It  is  rfbt  ab  engagement 
to  Ifvy.war,  because  the  occasion  may- 
never  arise.  Hie '  parties  may  be  Con- 
sented with  the  exertion  of  their  moral 
strength,  and  may  even  accoojplish  the 
object  by  these  means.  But  2,  There  are 
JDSt  as  many  ways  in  which  phydcal 
streng[th  may  be  lawfulfy  eierted  for  at^ 
tiinin^  such  an  ohject,  as  there  are  ways 
in  which  moral  strength  may  be  lawfully 

VOL.  xxxin. 


exerted.  A  man  may  make  joufnies— he 
may  print  books — ^he  may  make  speech^ 
—he  may  work  to  procure  money  to  pay 
the  expense— he  may  erect  hustings-— he 
ihay  use  his  physical  strength  in  keeping 
off  the  crowd  at  a  meeting — ^he  may  de- 
fend the  meeting  against  an  illegal  attack. 
Itinumerable  other  suppositions  may  be 
ma^e,  demonstrating,  tliat  the  exertion  of 
physical  strength  no  more  necessarily  im- 
plies levying  War;  or  any  treason,  than  the 
Exertion  of  moral  strength  does.  But,  3, 
Either  moral  or  bhysicail  stieifgth  may  be 
employed  unlawpiUVf  lind  yet  n6t  have  the 
least  tendency  to  become  an  overt  act, 
either  of  kvymg  War;  or  of  any  other  trea» 
son,  A  man  may  resist  a  magistrate,  who 
requited  th^  dissolution  of  an  assembly, 
under  th^  late  st^nte ;  he  may  arrest  a 
member  of  parliament  illegallY ;  he  may 
murder  a  prime  minister ;  and  he  may  do 
innumerable  other  minor  acts,  contrary  to 
^law,  all  for  the  purpose  of  accomplishing 
'the  object  of  annual  parliaments,  and  uni- 
versal suffrage ;  and  yet  it  would  be  im"* 
possible  to  state  that  he  had  levied  war,  or 
was  guUty  <f  trjMson.  There  is  no  denying 
these  thingS4  and  the  prosecutor  has  not 
attembt^  to  deny  thehi. 

But  what  is  the  consequence?  It  is^ 
With  ^tibmission,  quite  inevitable,  that  the 
engagemeifl  to  support  his  endeavours  by^ 
his  physical  strength,  if  the  case  may  re^ 
quire  it,  is  no  more  an  engagement  to  levpr 
war,  or  to  commit  treason,  than  th6  obli*" 
gation  to  support  those  endeavomv  to  the 
utmost  of  his  power  generally,  or  to  sup- 
port them  by  his  moral  sttetigth>  would  be. 
For  the  fei^  same  principle  of  judgment 
applies.  The  thing  engaged  to  be  done 
m<inf  hwhide  tlie  case'  of  criminalJtT,  but  it 
also  may  be  reconciled  either  with  a  law** 
ful  intention,  or  with  the  contemplation 
5f  acts, 'which,  though  not  lawful,  have  no 
relation  to  treason.  The  presumption  in 
favour  of  innocence  comes  in,  and  the 
^  reservation  of  illegality*'  is  just  as  ad-^ 
missible,  and  as  necessarily  implied  in 
this  case  ai  in  the  olbent. 

Mdke  (he  supposition  for  a  moment^ 
that  this  oath  were  legid  tiUid  binding,  ac- 
cording to  its  terms:  Tlie  party  lK>und 
might  be  obliged  to  make  great  exertions 

'  in  order  to  obt^n  the  object  of  annual 
parliaments,  &C.  But  if  he  were  required 
to  murder  the  king,  ^ould  it  be  stated 
'that  that  was  part  of  bis  engagement  T 
Or  suppose  that  he  Were  required  to  inur- 
der  hit  own  faihet,  or  Ids  own  u»/e,  or  his 
owAchUd;  could  it  be  said,  that,  because 
he  had  engaged  to  support  his^en'deivours 

•  for  a  particular  object  with  his  m6ral  or 
physical  strength,  as  the. case  might  re- 
quire, he  bad  therefore  engaged  to  commit 
all  manner  of  atrocities  wiitiout  distinc- 
tion ?  It  is  plain  thai  the  engagement 
never  could  admit  of  such  a  construction* 

a  G 


4511 


57  GEORGE  IH. 


Trud  ^Andrem  M^Kmleg 


Tb«  proiecutor'f  nuUke  UoeailjUie 
tamey  wl)icii  lie  b9>  aniouno^  in  bis 
general  pIfA  t^  i^a  nUtr^^icy,  when  be 
•eypj  fh|tt  i(  by  anyfmi^  cofnAmcfwiiy 
tbe  Qtlh  OMiry  bev  the  soppoiidon  of  a 
toeaeoDabie^eeigPx  that  i$  eiioiigh  to  make 
it  peievaat.  Ue  Mmines,  that  every  im- 
agioable  case  pf  the  £iertioo  of  physieal 
Btrengtb  ia  undeitahen»  ^thovgh  he  will 
not  make  the  #ame  auppoeition  in  the  case 
ef  MorW  strepgth  or  power  in  general. 
Bnt  the  informant  faambly  mfdnUins,  that, 
ta  be  eenld  exert  his  power,  «nd  exert 
his  moffl  strength^  and  exier^  lu9  physical 
itrength,  aU  alit^  either  Imi^fUfy  or  unkw-' 
fidl^i  either  UrmoiM^  or  not  trfotonahfy, 
be  is  entitled  in  the  last  ease,  just  as 
^  amch  as  in  the  othen,  to  the  aiost  ^vour- 
able  oonstructioDy  and  to  boM»  that  the 
engagement  was  merely  to  use  his  strength 
in  a  lawiul  manner;  hut  tha^,  at  all 
e^ontSy  it  did  not  puiport  an  engegement 
to  levy  war,  or  commit  iFeasoB. 

The  additional  term  *(or  fonoeV  which 
the  prosecnter  has  imfi>dnced  into  this 
indictment^  snrely  cannot  alter  the  state 
of  the  question  against  the  informant. 
It  .is  stsied  as  an  alternative  <»  synony- 
mous term,  though  plainly  not  ^ynony* 
mousy  and  introduced  for  tliat  vm  reason ; 
and  the  introdiietipn  of  it  only  shews  the 
very  uncertain  date  on  whioh  this  prose- 
tntion  has  been  mwid,  But  it  may  be 
observed^  that  the  pseeecito?  has  not  told 
your  lordshipif  wAwA  9f  Ibepe  ^o  words 
was  employed,  in  any  ef  the  fmiiaikr 
eases  in  whi<A  he  eharges  4^  m^  to  have 
been  administeied  h^  the  iaibrmant;  and 
he  is  here  endeevouiing  tp  make  e  rele- 
vancy by  mere  guess,  without  affirming 
that  the  word  new  introdnoed  w<»  aetuaihf 
used  in  m^  one  of  the  eAAW  Ubelled  in 
this  indictment. 

If  the  pre-secutor  means  lo  say,  that 
this  was  an  engagement  <o  8l^)port  the 
endeavonra  by  a  eombined  physical  force, 
it  is  an  idea  completely  ineonsistent  with 
the  words  of  the  oath,  for  yeur  lordships 
will  remembei',  that  it  is  '*  in|f  eodeavours*' 
that  are  to  be  supported,  and  #e  engage- 
ment is,  *  dtat  I  will  support  ^e  same  to 
the  utmost  of  m^  power  ;*'  the  reference 
being  coustantly  to  individual  exertions 
alone.  It  is  only  by  construction,  and  the 
most  violent  implication,  thai  this  idea  of 
a  combined  force  can  be  at  all  maintained 
as  involved  in  this  oath.  And,  in  short, 
it  is  impossible  to  call  thif  anenmiement 
to  levy  wv,  withoiit  enticely  departing 
bo^hftom  the  lolfi;  ^f  l%w  on  that  sub- 
ject, and  frpm  ev«Or  w^ect  idea  of  the 
qualities  whidt  ase  n^eemry  %»  anch  an 
•ogagatoeat* 


i4S^ 

The  remainder  of  this  oath  contains  an 
engagemisnt  to  |iecrepy»  to  which  the  pro- 
secutor fineqoently  reCery.  But  an  engage- 
ment of  secrecy,  however  improper  it  maj 
be  in  itself,  and  however  it  maj^  raise 
suspicions,  and  even  belief,  of  criminal 
4iesigns,  wiU  n^t  make  thi9  oath  to  be  an 
oath  purpprting  tp  bind  to  levy  war,  or 
commit  any  treason,  if  there  it  np  engnge- 
mfioAitfthU  purport  in  the  vest  of  the  oiSh. 
Such  oaths  of  secrecy  are  known  to  exist, 
and  that  with  peculiar  sanctions^  in  so- 
cieties which  'aie  net  deemed  to  be  con- 
trary to  any  law.  But  even  spuposing 
the  socieUr  to  have  had  bad  d^gns,  it 
does  not  follow  thei  there  was  ap  engage- 
ment to  commit  treason ;  and  youf  lord- 
ships will  not  viplate  the  law,  and  proceed 
on  principle^  pf  constructive  treason, 
merely  because  the  prpsecutor  hes  not 
taken  the  right  way  cf  putting  p,  $top  to 
proceedings  which  might  be  dangerous  or 
illegal. 

It  is' time  to  conclude  this  discqssioo. 
Your  lordships  are  here  called  on^  for  tfie 
first  tvme,  to  decide  pn  the  relevancy  of  an 
indictment  laid  pn  a  ptatwte  in  th«  highest 
deipree  penal.  The  act  was  pasted  with 
a  view  tp  particular  cironmstancei^  which 
do  pot,  and  never  did  exist  in  this  ooun* 
try;  and  the  truth  is,  that  those  who  made 
it  had  more  in  their  view  the  case  of  oathfr« 
binding  to  comniU  murder  and  other  felo- 
nies, than  the  ca^e  of  an  oath  binding  to 
commit  treason.  Perhaps  the  omo  of 
treason  was  not  well  considered*  $nt  be ' 
this  as  it  may,  it  is  humbly  subniitted, 
that,  exclusive  of  thp  separate  point, 
which  is  tp  be  argued,  if  there  was  here 
an  path  administered^  purporting  pr  in- 
tending  to  bind  the  pttrty  taking.  H  to 
commit  any  known  tre^son^  there  wna  ao 
difficult  whenever  in  laying  a  reteiant 
indictment  for  that  offence.  Bnt,  it  ift 
now  ppparani,  that  the  prosecntor^s  diff- 
culties  origias^te  in  the  substanpe  ef  the 
case.  He  raip?o<  a?e^  thiLt  the  oath  pur- 
ported or  intended  tp  bind  the  pnTty, 
eiiker  to  levy  wot,  or  to  oav^^eis  the,  Ick^m 
death,  or  to  cfinmre  to  (ngr  vxr,  or  to  mU 
here  to  the  kin^B  enemie$f  kc  He  setn 
forth  an  oath,  which  purports  to  bind  t» 
none  of  these  treasons ;  and  he  retees  to 
make  the  averment,  in  direct  violatipn  of 
all  the  rules  of  cnmtnal  indictmeats^ 
plainly  meanine,  and  almost  wrpwiqg  hts 
intention,  to  take  the  fel^vanq/  efthe  cfceyc 
entirely  out  of  the  htmdt  iff  the  Coml. 

J4NX9  hfogoi^iiirf • 


459] 


Jbr  AimiiHslerhtg  uniMofid  Oaths* 


A.  D.  1817. 


r4st 


M^  t%  1817. 
SOFPLKMENtARY  INFOAMAtlON 


AKOB£W  M^KINLBY,  prtient  Frwmet  in 
tk€  Cottle^ 


ALBXANDEB  MACONOCHIE,  1^..^ 

fat  Ait  Mo/es^f  iii«dfiB«f . 

•The  prisoner  hM  next  to  Miblnit  to  the 
Court  a  Tiew  of  the  4]i]6ttM  totally  dif« 
toent  ffom  tho«e  he  has  dready  offieted^ 
and  in  trgiiiag  which  he  is  to  proeeedi  on 
Che  assumption,  that  those  fiews  which  he 
iuis  already  stated  are  erroneous.  For  the 
puipose  of  this  arguttent  he  is  to  assume, 
that  the  oath  does,  in  its  terms  necessarily, 
and  by  due  constructioni  purport  and  in- 
tend to  bind  the  peraoM  taking  the  iame 
to  commit  treason ;  and  that  the  specific 
treason,  to  the  comnkission  of  which  \\  did 
purport  And  Intend  to  bind,  is  sufixdently 
aet  forth  in  this  indictment. 

Then  the  prisoner  says,  that  the  treason 
there  set  forth  is,  and  can  be,  no  other 
thatt  the  *  levying  war  against  the  king, 
ia  order,  by  fof6e  or  constraint,  to  com- 
pel him^  to  change  his  measures  or  eeun- 
aels,  or  m  order  to  put  force  or  constraint 
iipe#  both  Houses,  or  either  Houte  of 
nrfiament.'' 

The  aeeusMfofl  is,  that  the  prisoner 
**  did,  at  secret  iheetings,  and  other  occa- 
aions,  at  Oiasgow,  or  in  t^  immediate 
vienity  thereof,  iwfckedlry,  maliciously, 
and  MmioiMly  administei*,  or  cause  to 
be  fldmhrist^Md^  or  did  aid  or  aasiat  at 
ahe  administ^ilg,^  to  a  great  duflSber  of 
persons,  to  fho  amount  of  seYcral-  hun- 
dveds,  an  oath,  or  engagement,  or  ad  en- 
gagement, or  obligation  id  tfie  nature  of 
an  oath,  pdrportidg  or  intending  to  bind 
Ihe  persons  taking  thef  same  td  codimit 
treason,  by  Obtaining  annual  parliaments 
and  uniTenal  sdifrage  by  physical  stretigth 
4>r  force,  and  tiiereby  emcting  the  sub- 
▼ersf<$n  of  the  establiaAied  government, 
laws,  and  const^tntioti  of  this  kingdom, 
by  milawfiil  and  violent  means/' 

The  prisoner  hae  eudedivoured  to  satisfy 
your  lordships,  that  -tfiis  is  liot  such  an 
aiecusation  ts  is  snfliciently  precise  to 
put  a  person  upon  his  trial  either  for 
folony,  m  for  high  treason,  or  for  any 
•ther  crime.  The  eiime  provided  against 
b^tbe  statute,  is  the  administering  an 
oath,  purporting  or  idteudiag  to  bind  to 
the  commission  of  any  treason.  Whether 
the  oafli  does  puiport  or  inteud  so  to  bind, 
it  a  qaestion  of  legal  constraction,  and  it 
depends  on  two  propositions,  Fir^,  What 
act  it  is  which  to  d»|  the  oath  purports  or 


intends  to  bitid ;  Secandfy,  Whether  that 
act  be  a  treason.  This  latter  <|uestion  de- 
pedds  on  the  words  of  certain  statutes, 
add  your  lordships,  in  determining  whe- 
ther any  act  dobe,  or  propo!jed  to  be  done, 
is,  or  would  be,  an  act  of  treason,  must 
look  to  the  Mrords  of  those  statutes/  as 
.they  ar4  expounded  bv  the  decrsions  of 
the  Courts,  and  must  be  satisfied  that 
such  act  comes,  or  would  com^,  within 
euch  words  so  expottaded.  This  it  is 
which,  byyottr  interloeulor  of  relevancy, 
you  must  necessarily  declare,  and  this  you 
cannot  do,  unless  the  words  of  the  indict- 
ment are  so  fram^  that  your  simple  af- 
Hrroance  of  fhe  proposition  there  set 
forth  may  amount  to  a  distinct  and  suffi- 
cient judgment  in  law,  that  the  foct  al- 
leged to  be  projected  would,  if  carried 
info  execution,  amouht  to  one  or  othet*  of 
ihe  treasons  declared  by  statute.  Your 
lordships,  in  your  interlocutor  of  rele- 
vancy, cannot  vary  from  the  terms  of  the 
indictment.  By  finding  this  indictment 
relevant,  you  do  judicially  declare,  that 
^  to  obtain  anuau  parliaments  add  ani- 
vereal  suffrage  by  physical  strength  or 
force,  and  thereby  to  effect  the  sdbversion 
of  the  established  government,  laws,  and 
constitutiott  of  this  kingdom,  by  unlawful 
and  violeni  means,''  M  treason  legally  and 
sufficiently  describe. 

The  prosecutor  afilrmsy  that  the  oath 
purported  to  bind ,  persons  (o  comrmit 
treason,  and  that  It  bound  them  to  do  so 
by  doing  that  Which  is  here  set  forth, 
like  doing  that,  therefore,  he  affirms  us  be 
the  committing  of  treason,  and  he  desires 
of  your  lordships  to  pronounce  a  solemn 
judgment  of  this  Court,  declaring  that  it 
IS  so,  in  the  terms  with  which  he  has  sup- 
plied you.  An  indtctmedt,  therefore, 
against  any  person  for  coidfditting  trea- 
son, alleging  that  he  has  done  what  it  is 
herein  set  forth  that  the  oath  in  question 
purported  to  bind  the  persons  taking  it 
to  do,  and  stating  that  allegation  in  the 
terras  here  employed,,  most  l)ereafter, 
under  this  judgment  of  your  lordships,  be 
a  good  and  valid  indictment  of  treason, 
since  it  would  be  conceived  in  terms 
which  your  lordships  have  decided  t^l>e, 
in  an  indictment,  a  sufficient  description 
of  treason. 

But  there  ane  no  treasons  in  the  law, 
unless  by  the  ilSfh  Edward  3rd,  or  some 
subsequent  statute,  and  your  lordships 
cannot  declare  this  to  be  a  legal  and  sofTi- 
cient  description  of  treason,  without  de? 
daring  it  to  be  a  legal  and  sufficient  de- 
scription of  some  treason  declared  in  that 
or  some  subsequent  statute.         ' 

The  declamtiod  demanded  of  you  by  his 
majesty's  advocate  is  not*  that  the  com- 
mitting a  particular  act  wiuld  amount  to  an 
avert  act  of$ome  gpec^c  treaton  decfarcd  htf 
ikUnte;  mM  he  desires  that  you  shoufd 


t 


4Jf$}  ^       ^7  GEORGE  IIL 


Triat  of  Andrew  M*Kinkjf 


[45^ 


ftud  that  this  is  a  uffidtnt  de$crifltiim  cf  a^ 
freatot^  declared  hy  your  lordth^. 

In  Done  of  the  statutes  does  thiy  ftppetr 
as  the  description  of  any  sort  of  treason;' 
^nd  the  demand  of  the  prosecutor  is  diis. 
that  your  lordships,  of  ypur  authority,  s^all 
declare  a  new  treofoUf  Which  is  contrary  to 
law,  and  wqpld  be  matter  of  impeachment. 
^  For  it  is  a  contradiction  in  terms  to  say^ 
that  your  lordships  can  declare  that  an 
oath  pqrport9  fo  bind  to  the  commission 
of  high  'treason,  beo^use  it  purports  to 
bind  to  do  acts  fi^llipg  within  a  certain 
description,  without  declaring  that  that 
description  is  (s  docr^ioii  oftreaum;  and 
it  is  a  contradiction  in  terms  to  say,  that 
\i  is  Ugalfy  and  nMdetUUf  alleged  that  an 
oath  purports  to  bind  to  the  commission 
of  treason,  by  binding  to  do  acts  which 
would  come  within  a  certain  description, 
without  declaring  that  such  descriptiop  is 
^  le^al  and  sMcient  description  of  treason. 

lITow,  high  trea^n  is  of  two  general 
descriptiqns.  Ther^  is  qne  which  consists 
in  the  oompassings  and  imaginations  or 
)he  mind ;  and  another,  ^orhich  consists  in 
the  doing  some  act,  Treason^  of  the 
jformer  description  must  be  ms^nifested  by 
something  actually  done  and  'perfonqed, 
by  which  the  treasonable  compassing  may 
)>e  known ;  and  to  }]ie  due  allegation  of  such 
treasons  two  things  are  necessary :  Fvst, 
To  set  forth,  and  legally  to  describe,  the 
pompassing  and  imagination  constituting 
^e  treason ;  and,  SMmdlif,  To  set  forth, 
with  sufficient  accuracy,  the  act  done, 
Irom  which  such  compassing  and  imagina-  ^ 
tion  is  inferred.  And  the  setting  f9rth 
the  act  only,  is  not  setting  forth  the 
treason,  but  what  is  meant  to  be  giyeo  in 
evidence  of  the  treason, 'and  which  can 
peyer  constitute  treoMon^  till  that  from  which 
4in  inference  is  drawn  be  confounfl^  if  ith 
ihat  which  is  inferred ;  or  qntil  the 
f  yidence  adduced  shall  be  deemed  the  same 
thing  with  tlie  ayerment  which  it  is  in- 
tended to  prpyQ. 

In.  the  second  description  of  treasons 
*- those  which  do  qot  reside  in  the  mjnd, 
but  which  consist  in  some  act  performed 
— the  daar^ftion  ^ftke  act  n  the  ducripltUM 

qf  the  TREASOV, 

In  describing  the  treasons  which  reside 
in  the  mind,  the  compastings  andwuigmatiam 
^ust  be  described  m  the  terms  of  the  statutes 
which  declare  them  to  be  treason^  and  the 
overt  act  must  be  so  stated,  that,  if  proyed 
to  follow  from  such  compassings  and 
imaginations,  it  will  amount  to  a  manifes- 
tation thereof.  In  treasons  which  consist 
not  in  the  intentions  or  wishes  of  the  heart, 
the  fact  commuted  must  be  set  forth  ti)  the 
words  of  the  statutes  declaring  it  a  treason. 
Nor  can,  in  either  case,  the  statutory  )an- 
gu^ge  be  departed  from,  without  holding 
out  a  netQ  definition  of  treason,  or  deman4ing 
th^t  tht  treason  which  \s  described  \n^  the 


statutes  may  be  Uderred  by  cpniiitnatUon ; 
both  of  which  are  direetly  contrary  to  law. 
If  it  be  said,  the  description  giyen  is  a 
description  of  what  would  constitute  aii 
overt  act  of  some  treason,  then  the  prisoner 
replies,  A  description  of  the  overt  act  U 
not  a  description  of  the  treason,  but  of^ 
the  evidence  of  the  treason  merely.  The^ 
Court  and  the  prisoner  are  entitled  to  have 
the  treason  alle^,  of  which  the  overt  act 
'  it  is  said  would  be  evidence, '  tiiatl4bt 
former  m^y  judge  whether  it  would  be  so, 
and  the  latter  may  prepare  to  deTend 
himself,  by  shewing  that  it  would  not. 
It  is  to  no  purpose  to  say,  that  the  sort 
of  treason  is  apparent,  and  the  infer- 
ence from  the  overt  act  quite  plain. 
The  rule  must  general.  Either  the 
treason  must  be  set  forth  in  all  cases,  or 
it  is  nedbsary  in  none.  Th^  legal  form 
of  indictpiepts  cannot  v^ry,  by  the  ca- 
pricious estiQiat^  that  v^%Y  be  made  of 
the  convenience  or  iQcpnvenience  of  dis^ 
pepsing  with  them  in  particular  cases.  If, 
m  diis  case*  it  be  unnecessary  to  set  forth 
the  treason,  then  this  must  be  held  for  the 
general  rule  in  indictments  on  this  statute 
and  eoually  the  rule  as  to  oaths  purporting 
to  bind  to  commit /efonia,  notwithstanding 
their  indescribable  nuipber  and  varietur ; 
Uiough  it  is  pbyiqui  that  in  qiany,  or  in 
most  cases,  this  nile  vvould '  be  wholly  in** 
4:pnsistent  ivith  ju9tip^- 

If  it  be  said;  the  thing  alleged  to  be 
projected  is  itself  the  treason,  then  the 
prboner  replies,  It  is  not  a  treason  de* 
scribed  in  any  of  the  statutes. 

But  in  what  be  is  now  to  offer,*  the 
-prisoner,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  admits 
that  this  position  is  a  mistake— that  the 
description  here  given  is  a  sufficient  de^ 
scription  of  high  treason — that  it  is  not 
necessaij  to  follow,  in  this  instance,  the 
words  of  the  statutes  by  which  the  various 
treasons  are  created  or  defined — ^but  thai 
it  is  enough  if  the  description  be  such  as 
to  ponvey  to  ordinary  apprehensions,  that 
the  fact,  if  oommitted,  would  iall,  or 
might  fall,  under  some  of  the  known  legal 
descriptions  of  treason.  The  prisoner,^ 
th^refore,  must  set  himself  to  consider  of 
what  species  of  treason  a  person  ought  to 
be  indicted,  who  hath  done  that  which,  in 
common  language,  and  to  a  oommop  in- 
tent, the  allegation  in  the  indictment  would 
or  might  convey. 

It  is  obvious,  that  no  other  treason  cai^ 
be  meant  than  that  of  levying  war  against 
the  king.  It  may  involve  the  compassing 
and  imagining  tlie  deatii  of  the  king,  be- 
cause the  levying  of  war  against  the  kiDg 
may  well  be  an  overt  act  of  such  cons, 
passing  and  imagining.  For  your  lord- 
ships know  that  it  is  laid  down  by  lon| 
Hale,  *  that  "  any  assembly  to  levy  war 

*  1  Hale  las.  ^       ^ 


far  Admmulfri»guiAmfid4)tiAt. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C44& 


jigjginst  the  king,  eidier  to  depose,  or 
restraioy  or  enforce  him  to  any  act^  or  to 
come  to  his  presence  to  remove  his  Goan- 
sellors,  or  ministers,  or  to  fight  against  the 
king's  lieutenant,  or  military  commissiopate 
officers,  is  an  overt  act,  proting  the  coin- 
passing  the  death  of  (he  king,  for  sufh  a 
war  is  directed  against 'the  very  person  of 
the  king,  and  he  that  designs  to  fight 
against  the  king,  cannot  but  know  at  least 
it  must  hazard  his  life."  And  in  sir  John 
Friend's  case,  *  who  was  indicted  of  high 
treason,  in  compassing  and  conspiring  the 
death  of  the  king,  lord  chief  justice  fiolt 
^ys  down  the  law,  that  ^  If  there  be  only 
a  conspiracy  to  levy  war,  it  is  not  treason; 
but  if  the  design  and  conspiracy  be  either 
to  kill  the  king  or  depose  him,  or  imprison 
bin^  gr  put  any  force  or  restraint  upon 
him',  aqd  the  way  and  method  of  effecting 
pf  these  18  by  levying  a  war,  then  the  con- 
sultation and  conspiracy  to  levy  a  war 
for  that  purpose,  ishigb  treason,  though 
no  war  be  levied;  for  such  consultation 
and  conspiracy  is  an  overt  apt  proving  the 
compassing  the  death  of  tjie  king.*' 

Kow  if  the  )oose  ^rords  of  jthjs  indict* 
ment  are  to  be  construed  as  describing 
any  sort  of  ^npwn  treason,  the  obtaining 
by  physical  strength  that  whid^  effects  the 
^iibTersion  pf  the  established  goyemment, 
laws,  and  constitution,  may  be  an  assem- 
bly to  levy  war  against  the  king,  to  depose 
him,  and  can  hardly  by  construction,  if 
treason  may  be  made  matter  of  construe* 
tion,  be  less  than  the  levying  war  to  en- 
force the  kin^  to  some  act,  or  to  put  a 
force  or  restraint  upon  him,  since  it  ciinnot 
be  supposed  thsit.the  king  will  consent 
to  suclt  subversion,  and  since  he  cannot 
consistently  with  his  diity  ^d  his  oath, 
but  oppose  it  at  all  hazards*  fiut  to  effect 
^is  subversion  by  unlawful  and  violent 
meens,  through  the  obtaining  annual  par* 
fiaments  and  universal  suffrage  by  physical 
force  or  strength,  if  they  are  words  snf- 
^ciently  certain  and  precise  to  amount  to 
a  legal  allegation  of  any  sort  of  treason, 
^pan  mean  nothing  else  than  a  levying  of 
war,  in  order,  by  force  and  constraint,  to 
compel  the  king  to  change  his  measure^ 
or  coon3e]s,  or  t^t  vqy  rate  in  order  to  put 
,fgrce  or  cohstr^t  upon  both  Houses,  or 
either  House  pf  parliament,  since  annual 
parliaments,  and  universal  suffrage  cannot 
be  obtained  but  by  an  act  passed  by  the 
two  Houses,  and  by  the  king,  and  it  this 
passing  be  obtained  by  violent  means, 
which  violence  amounts  to  treasonable 
violence,  it  can.  be  no  other  than  the 
putting  such,  force  or  constraint  either 
upon  ms  ms^esty,  or  upon  one  or  other 
House  of  Parliament,  as  is  above  men* 
tioned. 

Furtbe^  if  the  levying  of  war,  mea^t 

^  4  St.  Tr.  625,  6^6.    [13  How.  St.  Tr.  61.] 


here  to  be  imputed,  be;,  as  has  been  said 
against  the  king's  person,  the  oompas^ng 
the  kin|^s  death  is  the  treason,  and  the 
conspinng  to  levy  sudi  war  is  an  overt 
{^ct  therepf,  pnder  the  statute  of  25t|i 
^ward  3rd-  If  the  war  to  be  levied 
irerp  for  the  purpose,  by  force  or  f;on« 
straint,  to  compel  the  king  to  change  his 
measures,  in  order  to  put  force  on  both 
Houses,  or  either  House  of  Par)iaii|ent, 
the  compassing  or  imagining  to  levy  ^udi 
war  is  oeclared  to  be  high  treason,  during 
his  mmesty's  life,  by  36&  Geo.  Jrd,  c*  7; 
and  of  necessary  consequence,  tbe  con- 
spiring to  levy  such  war  is  an  overt  apt  of 
such  compassing  and  imagining. 

It  cannot  be  doubled  mt  the  adminis* 
tering,  at  secret  meetinss,  and  on  pther 
occasions,  to  a  great  number  of  persops  to 
the  amount  of  several  hundreds,  an  oath, 
purporting  or  intending  to  bind  Oiese 
nundreds  of  persons  to  levr  such  war,^ 
amounts  to  a  conspiring,  and  to  an  overt 
act  of  ccnnpassing  such  levying  of  war. 

The  prosecutor,  therefore,  is  in  this  di- 
lemma firom  which  it  is  impossible  ha 
should  escape.  Either  he  has  not  suf** 
/iciently  charged  the  felony  under  th^  act 
preating  it,  because  he  has  not  sufficiently 
alleged  that  the  oath  purported  to  bind  to 
pommit  any  treason  ;--whidi  the  prisoner 
says  he  has  not :  Or  if  he  have  sufficiently 
phased  it,  which  the  prosecutor  says  he 
has,  then  what  he  has  cnarged  amounts  to 
4n  overt  act  of  high  treason ;  and  this  the 
prisoner  undertakes  to  satisfy  your  loid« 
ships  cannot  be  tried  on  the  indictment 
of  the  lord  advocate,  or  according  to  the 
mode  of  trial  which  in  this  case  has  been 
adopted.  The  prisoner  is  aware^  that 
mere  words,  unaccompanied  by  any  acting 
pr  any  njeasure  taken,  do  not  constitute 
an  overt  act  of  any  sort  of  ^reason,  thongh^ 
in  particular  cases,  where  the  security  of 
the  subject  appears  to  have  been  less  re- 
garded than  tne  jealousy  felt  by  die  Crown, 
it  has  been  otherwise  held ;  but  it  never 
Ifvas  doubted,  that  the  assembling  of  per- 
sons, together  to  conspire,  or  to  confider 
of,  or  to  bind  themselves  to  commit,  an 
overt  act  of  any  treason  which  consists  in 
compassing  and  imagining,  is  in  itself, 
without  more,  an  overt  act  of  such 
compassing  and  imagining.  Thus,  **  if 
there  be  an  assembling  together  to  con- 
sider how  they  may  kill  the  king,  this 
assembling  is  an  overt  act  to  make  good 
an  indictment  of  compassing  the  king's 
death."  ^  And  in  the  case  of  SomerviU^ 
Arden,  and  others,  f  it  was  resolved  bv 
all  the  jndges  of  Endand  assembled, 
**  that  at  to  Arden  and  ue  rest,  that  they 
conspired  with  the  said  Somervill,^  and 
procured  him  to  undertake  to  commit  the 

•^  1  Hale,  P.  C.  119. 

t  1  Anderson's  Rep.  106< 


49Sf]       57GBOROB  III. 


7Mx/  ofAndrm  »Kndey 


treason  which  m^  to  destroy  the  qaeeo^ 
was  sufficient  overt  act,  since  they  were 
assembled  to  this  purpose,  and  procured  or 
engaged  him ;  for  otherwise  the  procurers 
of  treason  might  always  escape  punish- 
ment, if,  after  their  procurement,  they  did 
not  proceed  fu/ther.^  And  to  the  same 
purpose^sergeant  Hawkins  says,  '*  It  hath 
been  resoWed  that  conspiring  to  levv  war 
against  the  king's  person  may  be  alleged 
ai»  overt  act  of  compassing  his  death;*'* 

The  accusation  in  this  indictment 
amounting  In  substance  to  a  charge  of 
high  treason,  manifested  by  an  overt  act, 
the  prisoner  humbly  maintains,  as  conse- 
quent on  this,  three  propositions : 

1st,  That  this  accusation,  amounting 
to  an  accusation  of  having  committed  an 
overt  act  of  treason,  cannot,  bv  the  ge- 
neral and  established  rules  of  law,  be 
tried  as  a  felony  under  this  or  any  other 
statute. 

2ndly,  That  by  positive  statute,  7th 
iU^ne,  c.  SI.  it  cannot  be  tried  in  Scot- 
land, by  the  ordinary  forms  of  the  Court 
of  Justiciary,  or  on  an  indictment  by  the 
lord  advocate. 

3rdly,  That  there  is  nothing  in  the  act 
52nd  Geo.  III.  c.  104.  on  which  this  in- 
dictment is  laid,  which  abrogates  the  rule 
of  law  above  mentioned,  or  repeals  the 
said  statute  of  queen  Anne.  Neither  is 
any  such  alteration  of  the  law  to  be  in- 
ferred ftom  any  legal  construction  of  the 
words  of  this  statute  of  the  king ;  nor  is 
there  any  reason  to  believe  that  the  legis* 
lature  entertained  any  such  intention. 

1st.  The  prisoner  humbly  maintains, 
that  the  accusation  against  him,  resolving 
in  substance  into  a  charge  of  high  treason, 
cannot  be  tried  as  a  felony. 

The  prisoner  need  hardly  state,  that  the 
law  of  Scotland  was,  by  the  said  act  of 
queen  Anne,  rendered  the  same  in  matters 
of  high  treason  with  that  of  England. 
The  act  declares,  that  what  is  treason 
within  England,  snail  be  adjudged  treasnn 
within  Scotland;  that  nothing  shall  be 
treason  in  Scotland  which  is  not  treasan 
in  England ;  and  that  the  trial  of  treason 
in  Scotland  shall  be  the  same  as  is  used 
in  England.  Therefore  the  two  questions, 
1st,  what  is  treason  in  Scotland?  and, 
2ndly,  How  that  wliich  is  treason  shall 
be  tried  in  Scotland  ?  must  be  determined 
by  the  English  law.  In  these  respects, 
the  law  of  England  is  a  part  of  the  law  of 
Scotland ;  and  if  it  be  tnu^  generally  in- 
troduced into  this  Country,  and  ingrafted 
upon  our  national  law.  it  cannot  be 
doubted  Iha^  it  was  introauoed  wholly  and 
entire,  that  all  its  principles  and  rules  are 
our  principles  and  rules  in  these  matters, 
and  that  your  lordships,  wherever  a  ques- 
tion of  high  treason  arises^  are  as  much 

T ~  I  —      — — — — — -  -  ■ 

*  Hawkins,  P.  C.  B.  1,  c.  17,  §  27. 


\AS6 

bound  to  jndge  according  to  the  pnnciplea 
which  govern  the  courts  of  la  win  England 
in  such  cases,  both  of  what  oonstitntes 
the  offence,  of  the  mode  in  which  it  mutt 
be  set  forth  and  alleged,  and  of  how  it 
may  be  tried  and  mvestigtted,  as,  in  a 
charge  oif  theft^  yon  are  bcwaid  to  adheie  i 
to  the  common  and  statute  law  of  Scot-  ' 
land,  to  the  principles  of  our  own  muni- 
cipal institutions,  and  to  tlie  eonne  of 
procedure  established  by  fhe  praetiee  of 
your  predeoessan  in  the  Coorc  Of  Jnsti- 
ciary.  To  talk  of  introdndng  a  system 
of  law  ftom  a  foreign  country,  in  an  ex- 
tensive and  important  branch  of  the  law, 
rejecting  at  the  same  time  any  of  those 
rules  and  maxims  which  in  its  own  coontiy 
attend  that  part  of  its  institutionB,  and  re- 
guhite,  extend^  restrain,  or  modmr  timir 
application,  is  in  terms  a  oontradletion, 
and  would  be  in  practice  worse  than  an 
absurdity. 

If,  therefore,  the  facts  charged  In  the 
present  indictment  would  amount,  ao- 
eording  to  the  English'  authorities,  to  hi^ 
treason,  and  if  such  &cts  committed  la 
England  could  not  be  tried  there  as  a 
felony, — ^if  it  be  true  that,  in  case  of  a 
trial  in  England  for  a  folony,  the  trial 
must,  bv  the  law  of  England,  m  slopped, 
if  the  nets  came  out  in  evidence  so<m  as 
they  are  h^re  alleged,  and  no  verdiet  or 
judgment  of  the  folony  oonld  be  pro- 
nounced on  such  evidence^ — ^then  the  pri- 
soner maintains,  that  by  the  law  of  Scot- 
land, this  being  the  same  in  this  matter 
as  the  law  of  island,  no  triad  for  folony 
can  proceed  in  Scotland  on  this  charse. 
If  it  could,  then  it  is  obvious,  that  Sie 
law  of  treason  in  England  would  be  no 
longer  the  law  of  treason  in  Scotland,  and 
the  mode  of  trial  fin  England  would  be  no 
longer  the  mode  of  trial  in  Scotland ;  for 
offences  amounting  by  the  law  of  Eng^nd 
to  high  treason,  might  neverdieless  be 
tried  in  Scodand  by  a  fonn  of  trial,  by 
which  the  same  offences  coaM  0ot  be 
tried  in  England. 

On  this  part  of  the  subject  the  prose- 
cutor has  oividedhis  axgument  into  two 
averments.*  1st,  That  the  principle  of 
the  common  law  of  England  founded  on, 
has  no  application  to  any  trial  in  this 
Court,  according  to  the  law  of  Scotland. 
And,  2ndly^  That  even  in  England  it  has 
no  application  to  a  trial  for  an  ofl^nce 
against  the  act  of  the  52nd  of  the  king. 

To  the  second  Question  the  nrisoner 
will  have  to  address  nimself  hereafter*  In 
the  meanwhile,  he  ia  anxiotv  to  c<m&ne 
your  lordship's  attention  to  the  first,  be- 
cadse  if  it  be  true  that  die  prindple  of 
,  the  law  of  England  has  iKT  appHcation  to 
this  trial,  it  were  vain  to  inquire  footber 
what  that  principle  is. 

*  Information  for  his  mii||esty's  advocate,  p.  9^. 


MU 


for  4iminuimng  unlmfiU  Oaths* 


A.  D.  I»i7« 


Uea 


To  Hm  mtHBer  %u  irludi  the  prosecutor 
liM  met  tliif  ebfectioD*  the  prisoner's 
Qomieel  ee^bftfdlj  widerlske  te  ao  justice, 
eioee  tliej  eve  oospelled  to  confess,  that 
theie  is  much  of  his  reesoBsng  which  they 
4ere  not  pretea^  to  undeistand.  For  the 
seeeaing  respect  niA  which  he  conde- 
soendea  to  honoui  that  stated  at  the  bar 
for  the  prisoaer,  the  pmecotor  has  thought 
it  necessary  to  apolo|[iie,  by  accounting 
for  it  from  the  impression  on  his  mind  at 
the  timci  tha|L  the  aigoment  must  have 
something  in  it  he  was  unable  to  diseorer ; 
and  to  atone  for  it  by  deolaring^  that  be 
has  now  ascertained  that  there  was  no 
discovery  to  make.  The  prisoner's  counsel 
are  by  no  pieans  in  this  situation.  On 
the  contraiy,  from  the  beaten  track  of  an 
jaquiiy  into  the  application  of  some  simple 
and  welMLuown  principles  of  law^  they 
have  found  themselTes  suddenly  trans- 
ported into  unexplored  regions^,  where 
discoferies  are  made  at  every  step,  and 
psopofitions  equaUy  new  anq  surprising 
start  up  at  every  tuning. 

In  one  sentence  the  prisoner  finds, 
let*  JhM  **  though  it  is  understood  to  be 
a  principle  in  Ewilish  law,  that  if  e  nun 

fia  imumi%  Is  titnonf  le  mn9i  be  ac- 
^vvn^Df  yet  **  iker§  mnoauthoriiyfor 
m/mg^  J%at  •  «vBi  cmmpi  be  triid  for 

And,  2ndly,  '^  iM  ike  >ry  akme  am 
jedgt^  wnzTxnn  bx  has  coyvirrBD 
TmnAson  on  nor.''  Tbe  9rst  of  these 
pn^ositiqas  aponnte  to  thii^  that  where 
n  man  cannpt  be  UwfiiULy  couTicted,  he 
may  yet  be  lawfbUy  tned;  sud  is  so 
stated,  lefiffenieerMf^  in  tfie  next  sentence 
but  ene,  for  it  is  laftdp  that  '^  this  objee- 
figm  derived  froas  thakw  of  £og;|and  is 
AV  QiMlct^qir  XQ  A  eovTiCTion,  avd 
HOT  TO  A  TnzAi^''  So  thet  it  is  no  ob- 
jection to  the  poking  a  men  on  biatrial, 
thai  no  conviction  cen  ibllow*  nor  any 
vassnn  w)iy  yonr  loidshios  should  not  send 
en  indictment  to  the  Knowledge  of  an 
eesise*  tbetf.  if  eU  the  bcu  are  proved  as 
laidy  th^  assise  cennnt  lawfriUy  convict. 
That  is»  the  Cowt  and  jury  a^  te  sit  and 

ar  eeuses  fi>i  the  amusement  of  my  lord- 
voeate^  or  tho  ettom^-general,  where 
no  result  ean  tiJte  piece;  imd  prisoners 
erem  he  e^rpesed  to  torturvvul  to  danger, 
ftr  Af  eo^e  pwp^iee  of  tins  inhmnsn  di- 

Of  th^e«t(il9|ld  of  tb«  WnB^dMMT.  ^ch 

lekt  Ipf  0wi^>  the  possu^t^  of  e  trial 
hfi  mfmm^  wifr  th%  ^  vdiiql^otence 
mytHm«|tt9H«ifpNm^  l!fe(?^fierson 
«w  }m  <fl4  m  «n  wnicp  egmst  the 
9^  mjliieh  irftaMtmit  elitWiemf  time 
te  tsyng>  tine  denes  imnKe«  imfbsur- 
mf[r   YtJiet  thif  dense  does  imply^  will 


•  laf,  Pi  |M. 


iVM 


be  afterwards  shown.  But  assuredly  it 
impUes  no  such  absurdly  as  this,  that  it 
meant  to  authorise  the  triel  of  persons 
under  drcomstances  in  which  they  cannot 
be  lawfully  convicted. 

But  if  this  proposition  he  astonishing^ 
the  second,  by  which  it  ^  meant  to  be 
supported,  is  not  less  so.  Ihe  counsel 
for  the  prisoner  had  elways  be|ieved,  that 
whether  certain  friels  amounted  to  a  cer« 
tain  crime,  waa^a  gtirtHon  ^iiour— of  which, 
in  Scotland,  the  Cdurl  disposed  on  the 
showing  of  uie  indictment,  by  thdv  inter* 
locntor  of  relevancy — ana  on  which,  in 
England,  as  the  facts  came  out  in^evidence, 
the  Court  may  stop  the  trial,  or  direct  en 
accfuittal,  or  direct  a  special  verdict.;  and 
which,  after  trial,  may  be  jud|^  of  there 
by  the  Court,  dther  on  a  special  vevdkt, 
or  on  a  motion  in  arrest  of  ^ud^ent  on 
the  evidence.  They  have  now  learaed, 
that  they  have  all  along  been  miserably 
deceived,  for  thev  have  it  on  grave  antho- 
rity,  that  ^  whether  what  a  man  haa  oom- 
mitted  be  treason  or  not.  Me  /ury  elpnc 
ten  judge  ;^  and  **  OaH  one  accused  of 
felony  cannot  he  acquitted  on  the  around 
that  he  has  committed  treason,  umcsi  ike 
j»yiire9ati^fiedqftkii.  tfim  the  emdtmce^ 


lese,  and  some  otner  wuw»**hvi.«, 
are  staled  to  be  smA  en  oofioer  et  mey  be 
nmde  in  on  £ri^^  eauri  to  tkk  o^jectiem. 
This  the  prisoner  must  be  perinitted  to 
deubt;  although  it  appears  to  the  pioee* 
outor  ^wte  concbmoe  md  aati^adory* 

But  the  argument*  by  which  the  proee* 
eutor  wQuldprovi^  that  ^'  the  principle  of 
the  law  9f  ^ngland^  as  to  the  merging  of 
fdony  in  treason,  has  no  application 
whatever  to  trials  before  the  criminal 
courts  of  Sootland,"  is  too-  curiomi  to  be 
passed  over.  ^ 

h  is  said,  the!  **  it  will  not  do  to  say 
generaUj^  ml  Uui  whole  docUines  ^  the 
English  law,  a«  to  treason^  have  been 
introduced  into  Seotlandi"  though  it  is 
a4mitled  to  be  enacted  by  the  stalnle  of' 
queen  Anne^that  **  dl  crimes  and  offeneee 
which  are  treason  in  En|^d  shall  be 
treason  in  Scotland."  And  it  ia  asked, 
^  whether  this  compds  the  prosecution 
of  any  crime  as  treason,  whkkwft^;  be  tried 
under  onather  and  lower  rff noumMiififlu  T** 
With  great  deference  the  questiqn  is, 
leb^tker  or  not  U  ma^  be  iq  trkdl  It  is 
quite  true,  thet  the  tendering  of  thoee 
offences  treason  in  Scotland  whidi  are 
tieason  in  England,  would  of  itsdi^  make 
no  abersdon  in  the  mode  dther  otprose- 
eution  or  of  punishment,     But  t£e  act 

rm  e  great  ded  further*  E<^b|.i|fction 
it  is  ejected,  thail  ^  the  jpstica  court, 
eniothCY  oenrts*.  having  pp^  to  jndge 
tn.eeses-nf  hidi  ti^sen-epi  mif^rismn  of 
high  tieesoisSi  Seotleml,  ees  mgiiissd  is 

^  (pif.p«99<h 


463]        ^7  GEORGE  til. 

en^n  hy  the  oaihi  of  twelve  ikeH  in  th« 
khire  or  stewartry  where  the  courts  shall 
^if&faU  high  treasottt  and  mispriaSoD  of 
high  treason  committed  within  tne  shires 

.  or  stewartries,  and  theirtapon  to  ptoceed^ 
hear,  mnd  deUrtmne  offences,  whereof  any 

'  person  shall  be  indicted  before  them,  in 
9uch  mmmar  a$  £le  cburt  afQueerCi  beiichf  or 
jmtices  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  in  En^hmd 
mau  do.  And  if  any  person  be  indicted, 
of  nigh  treason,  fcc.  oefore  any  justices  of 
Oyer  and  Terminer,  or  of  the  Circuit 
Courts,  &c.  upon  the  request  of  the 
queen^s  advocate  ffeneral,  the  lord  chan-. 
celtor  shall  award  her  majesty's  writ  of 
teriiinFari  directed  to  the  justices  of  Oyef 
and  Terminer,  &c.  commanding  tiiem  to 
tertify  such  indictment  into  (he  justice 
court,  which  court  it  required  to  proceed 
•poll,  Aeor,  and  determine  the  same  at  the 
court  ^  Queen* t  bench  in  England  mty  do  ; 
and  ail  persons  convicted  or  attaititetf  of 
nigh  treason  or  misprision  of  high  t/eason 
in  Scotland,  shall  be  subject  to  the  same 
'  corruption  X)f  blood,  pains,  and  forfeitures, 
m  persons  convicted  or  attainted  of  high 

'  treason  or  misprision  of  high  treason  in 
Enkland.'' 

What  is  there  wanting  in  this  act  tc^ 
make  up  the  Proposition,  that  **  the  vihole 

'   doctrines  of  the  SngUsh  law  at  to  treason 

have  heen  introduced  into  ScttlandT  There 

'       is  here  a  declaration  that  the  same  thing 

'shall   constitute    the   offence;   that  tl^e 

mode  of  inquiry,  indictment,  and  trial, 

-  shall  be  the  same,  and  that  the  same  pains 
and  forfeitures  shall  follow  on  conviction. 
How  can  it  be  said,  that*  the  previously 

'  existing^  common  law  of  Scotland  has  not, 
in  relation  to  offences  which  amount  to 
treason,  been,  by  this  declaration  of  the 
le^pslature  abrogated?''  or  that  to  a^rt 
itus,  is  ^to  take  away  the  prinisiples  of 
our  common  law  by  implication  P"  How 
can  it  be  said,  ''thttt  it  is  neither  said 
fior  iihplied,  that  such  offences  shdll  al*' 
^ys  be  tried  as  treason  V^  Whether  an 
offence  amount  to  treason  or  not,  .does 
not  depend  oil  the  denomination  which 
the  lora  advocate  may  think  fit  to  bestow 
upon  it.  It  is  not  the  doctrite  of  the 
law  of  Scotland,  that  the  lord  adtocate 
may  prosecute  one  crime,  under  the 
denomination  appropriated  to  another — 
murder  under  the  denomination  of  theft 
— 6r  treason  under  tfiat  of  mm^er.  But 
that,  where  a[  crime  consists  of  v^oos 
species,  or  de^es  of  guilt  and  aggrava- 
tion., he  may  indict  for  the  lower  species, 
or  for  circtunstatrces  of  infe^ibr  affgrava* 
lion,  in  order  to  restrict  the  punishment ; 

'  Mj  having  indicled  for' an  offence  capitally, 
to  which  a  capital  pnnishbient  is  affixM, 

'  be  may,  if  he  thinks  proper,  on  the  same 

^  "Mictnteitt,  restrict  his  charge  to  the  infer- 


Tritd  of  Andrew  M^Kinley 


Ud4 


rr  •-  * 


•  Inf.  p.  391. 


ring[  an  inferior  punishment.  He  tnay  also, 
Where  two  crimes  have  been  comridtted, 
indict  for  the  one  and  not  for  the  otiier,  if 
he  thinks  fit,  as  he  may  in  his  discretion 
Abstain  from  indictifag  altogether.  But 
he  cannot  alter  the  nature  of  the 
offence  committed,  or  declare  that,  that 
which  constitutes  one  sort  of  crime  vhall 
be  held  to  constitute  another,  ot  .that, 
that  which  constitutes  a  cenain  crime  shall 
be  held  nbt  so  to  do. 

The  prosecutor's  argument  is  this,  That 
by  denominating  certaihi  abts  folony,  he 
may  tiy  theili  ks  felony  j  that  by  refusing 
to  call  them  treason,  he  inay  ^Iter  their 
nature,  and  dispense  with  the  statute 
regarding  them.  Whereas  the  previous 
question  is.  To  what  offence  ao  these 
facts  amount?  Do  they  constitute  any 
high  treason }  If  they  do,  it  is  clear  they 
are  within  the  statute  of  queien  Anne, 
&nd  there  is  no  loneer  any  room  for 
talking  of  the  powers  of  the  lord  advbcate, 
or  of  the  rul^  of  the  common  law  of 
Scotland,  which,  in  this  case,  have  no 
more  application  than  they  would  have 
in  a  country  removed  beyond  the'  juris- 
diction of  your  lordships. 

It  is  really  to  no  puipose  for.  the  prose- 
cutor to  ifay,  that  thetaw-of  treason  intro- 
duced by  the  act  of  queen  AiAft;  B'eo^ly 
Statutory,  andlias  noihing  to  db  with  the 
common  law  of  England,*  or  to  con- 
gratulate himself  on  the  total  ignorance 
in  which  he  is  presumed  and  entitled  to' 
remain  on  this  subjects  What  is  intro- 
duced by  the  act  of  queen  Anne,  b  the 
whole  laiw  of  Etigland,  whether  by  statute 
or  by  common  law,  regarding  higfaf 
treason^  its  trial,  and  its  punishment. 
Whether '(he  rule'  contended  for  arises 
from  *^  ft  general  principle  of  the  com- 

'  mbn  law  of  Enjgl^d,  not  peouSar  to  the 
law  of  treason,  is  not  the  quesGofi.  Is* 
it  a  principle  of  the  law  of  Engtattd  t^ 
piitable  to  cases  of  treason  ?  -  If  it  be^ 
then  it  is  a  principle  introduced  into' 
Scotland,  in  cases  of  treason  by.  the  act 
of  oueen  Anne.  Btit  (haft  the  whole  law 
of  England  as  to  treason  is  transferred* 
to  Scotland,  is  aidmitted'by  the  pt^^utor. 
For  he  states  that  "iC  is  impossible  to 
dispute,  that  in  the  I'e^  definition  6i  the 
crime  of  treitson ;  in  th4  mod6  and  fonn 
of  process  bv  which  it  is  to  be  tried  ; 
in  tne  hdei'of  evidence  by  whidi  it  is 
t<ybe  established;  in,  the' mode  and  effect 
of  conviction'  andpuni^aient;  in  shorty 
in  (he  whole  process  from  the  commence-' 
Iheht  to'the  terminati6n,  the  law  of  Eog^. 
land  is  transferired  to^Sootlaad*  Bu^^ 
he  adds,  f'  at  this  '  poivt*  the  tratislittw 

'  6rice  of  tlie  English  law,  end  'the  inm>^ 
vation  upon '  the .  Scotch  loiw,  •  m^  tkori/* 

'  that    is,   at  the  termination'  of  Mr^wMr 

•  Inf.  p.  391,. 


40ft] 


^fiir  Mmnitleting  knte^/tc/  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C46(h 


ffoeem.  The  prisoner  is  pracUely  of  this 
opinion,  that  after  having  determined 
the  definition  of  the  ciimey  the  whole 
oouiae  of  proced<kre>  and  the  punishment, 
the  in^iwsce  of  the  En^ish  law  stops, 
and  lea?es  yotir  loidships  to  define, 
iovestigats,  and  punish  other  crimes 
aocofdmg  to  (he  rules  of  our  ancient 
municipS  law.  Whether  this  can  he 
called  ''stopping  short/'  he  does  not 
presome  to  detennine. 

The  prisoner, theTefoTe,trHl i^ply him' 
self  first  of  all  to  prove,  that  an  offence 
amounting  on  thtf  endence  to  what  b 
here  attempted  to  he  charged,  and 
insisted  to  he  sufficfently  charged,  could 
Hot  io  England  be  tried  as  a  felony,  under 
HoM  or  any  other  act  of  Pariiament. 

The  rule  of  the  common  hew  of  Eng- 
land is  this^  ^'Treason  drowns  felony^'' 
or,  as  it  is  otherwise  expressed,  ''  Felony 
merges  in  treason.''  And  in  general,  by 
the  rule  of  the  common  law  of  England, 
the  greater  offence  drowns  the  less. 

Thus,  in  the  year-book,  31A  Hen«  Gth^ 
15,  it  was  agreed,  that  if  a  man  be 
indicted,  arraif^ied,  and  acquitted  of  the 
robbery  of  J.  S.  he  (meaning  J.  S.)  shall 
not  have  trespass,  for  the  trespass  is 
extinct  in  the  f^ony,  e$  onme  mt^  trahit 
mdmnwnm,^ 

And  no  trespass  lies  for  what  appears 
to  the  Court  to  be  felony*  So  no  actioir 
of  ttespass  lies  bv  the  husband  for  a  bat- 
lefy  of  the  wife,  by  which  die  languished 
for  six  weeks,  and  then  died  of  the  same 
blow,  for  this  is  felony.  Iliongfa  for  the 
batteiy  of  the  wiihi  by  which  he  lost  her 
society  for  a  certain  time,  an  action  of 
trespass  does  lie  by  the  husband*  alone,t 
And  in  Dawkes  v.  Coreneighf  Mr.  Jus- 
liee  Jones,  citing  the  above  case  of  Hug- 
gins,  says,  *'If  the  ptrty  robbed  may 
have  his  election,  either  to  indict  the 
felon,  or  to  have  his  action  of  trespass^ 
this  would  prove  very  dangerous.'^  And 
lord  chief-justice  Roll§  gives  the  same 
reason  for  an  action  of  trespass  lying 
when  the  fects  amount  to  a  felony,  namely, 
the  danger  the  felon  mij^t  not  be  tried. 

In  like  manner^  it  b  laid  down,  8rd 
Hen.  rth,  10,  by  Hussey  C.  J.  <' There 
can  be  no  accessary  in  treason.  Tkt  re- 
cMmg^  a  traiior  emmoi  be  onfy  Jelamfy  (le 
veaetment  de  traitor  ne  poet  esse  tantwn 
fidony),  but  b  treason,  et  m  tarn  %bidemJ^\ 

Saceombe's  case,  33rd  Hen.  8th,  is 
thus  reported  by  lofd 'chief-justice  Dyers 
**  A  woman  had  poison'd  her  husband, 
which  offence  is  made  treason  about  the 
aist  Hen.  8th,  (32nd  Hen.  8ih^;  and  by 
Ibe  gjBnetal  paraon  granted  by  PaHiament 


jtr^ 


^  31.  Hen.  6th,  15,  Brokers  Ah.  Trespass,  145. 
t  Hwgins^  Case,  4  Jsc  1 ;  2  Roll's  Ah.  557. 
1  Ibid.  556.  Pl.  16.  $  Stile's  Rep.  347-8. 

H  Year-Bookf  3,.Heii.  7fb,  10 ;  Broke's  Ab.  19. 
VOL.  XXXIII.  ' 


in  32nd  Hen.  8th,  thb  offence  was 
pardoned.  Now  the  son  had  brought 
appeal  of  murder  against  the  wife.  "Die 
question  was.  Whether  this  appeal  lies  ? 
And  some  thought,  that  because  the 
,  offence  b  made  treason,  it  meigeth  each 
lesser  crime,  as  the  crime  of  murder, 
which  was  before  at  common  law;  and 
so  the  offence  is  not  punishable  aS 
murder,  but  as  treason,  and  so  no  appeal 
lies.  .  But  some  were  of  a  contrary 
opinion,  &c.  But  the  opinion  of  the 
judges  was,  that  the  appeal  was  not 
maintainable.''*  And  the  reporter  refers 
to  the  case  3rd  Hen.  7th,  above  stated. 

And  in  Coke's  Eep.  in  ''the  cases  olP 
|mrd(ms,"  29th  Sllz.  it  is  laid  down :  <<  If 
murder  cr  petit  treason  be  made  high 
ireason,  thereby  the  murder  or  petit 
treason  b  extinct,^)r  lugh  ireaaon  doth 
droum  every  lea  qffoteeJ^f 

And  it  hath  been  held,  that  petit 
treason,  which  b  lit  fact  an  aggravated 
species  of  murder,  being  the  murder  of 
a  husband  by  hb  wife,  or  of  the  master 
or  mistress  by  a  servant,  which  are  de- 
clared to  be  treasons  by  25th  £dw.  3rd, 
in  like  manner  drowns  and  extinguishes 
the  felony  of  murder. 

It  is  very  true,  that  it  is  questioned 
whether  petit  treason  be  in  truth  an 
offence  of  a  distinct  sort  from  murder. 
Lord  Hale  thinks  not ;  for  he  says,  that  all 
petit  treason  comes-  under  the  name  of 
fetony.  But  so,  of  old,  did  high  treason 
idso. 

Judge  Foster.also  b  at  much  pains  to 
'  flbow^  that  petit  treason  is  an  oneace  of 
the  same  nature  with  murder. 

Be  this,  however,  as  it  may,  Judcre 
Foster's  opinion  b  conclusive,  that  by  the 
tommen  law  of  En^landy  all  ftlaniet  merge 
in  the  ofienee  of  high  treason';  and  an  act 
imouniing  in  its  dreumstanees^  toon  act 
of  MtA  treakon,  camutt  by  the  law  of  Eng^ 
land  be  tried  ae  a  feUmy, 

**  There  is  a  case  in  "Dyer^X  says  the 
learned  Judge  (the  case  cited  above), 
^'  which  hath  been  thought  to  favour  tlie 
opinion,  that  the  crime  of  musder  b 
merged  in  petit  treaaon^  and  that  a  pardon 
of  treason  dbofaarged  it,  notwithstanding 
the  exception  of  murder;  but  that  case 
proveth  nothing  like  it.  A  irife,' about 
the  31st  Hen.  8th,  poboned  her  husband  <^ 
Then  came  a  general  pardon  by  whjch 
treasou  was  pardoned,  but  with  au  ex- 
ception, of  wilful  murder.  The  heir 
brought  an  appeal  of  murder,  kgatnst  the 
wife,  and  it  was  a4judged  that  the  appeal 
did  not  lie^  Thb  case  doth  not  prove 
that  murder  is  merged  in  petit  treason, 
but  thsitboth  murder  and  peta  treaaon  were 

*  Dyer's  Rep.  50.  a. 

t  6.  Coke's  kep.  13.  6. 

t  Dyer^s  Bep.  50,  25tli  Hen.  8th.  supra. 

2  H 


467] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  of  Andrea  M*Ki»Uy 


[468 


'  merged  and  exlinguuhed  m  the  effmu  of 
Mgh  treatum;  for  at  that  time,-  by  virtue 
of  the  22iul  Hen;  8thy  all  wilful  poison- 
ing was  high  treason,  end-  being  to,  the 
i|jpeai^  not  being  saved  by  the  act,  wa$ 
htarredf  whether    the    te£ason     had 

BEEK  PABDOKED  OB  NOT/'* 

Deeming  that  manslaughter^  murder, 
and  petit  treason,  are  various  species  of 
crimmal  homicide,  Judge  Foster  con- 
cludes, that  if,  upon  aninmctment  for  mur- 
der, the  facts  should  turn  out  to  be  petit 
inaton,  he  does  not  think  it  advisable  to 
dirett  a  verdict  of  acquittal,  for  fear  it 
should  avail  the  prisoner  on  a  subsequent 
indictmeut  for  murder*    But  he  by  no 

•  means  thinks  that  in  suqh  a  case  he  ought 
to  be  convicted,  for  he  8ays,t  "  Though 
I  am  satisfied  that  the  law  considers  petit 
treason  and  murder  as  one  offence,  differ- 
ing only  in  circumstance  and  degree,  yet, 
wbether  it  may  be  advisable  to  proceed 
upon  an  indictment  for  murder  against  a 
perK>n  plainly  appearing  to  be  guilty  of 
petit  treason,  is  a  matter  that  deserveth 
gieat  consideration,  and  probably  deter- 
mined the  attorney-general  to  prefer  a 
fresh  bill  for  petit  treason  in  Swanks  case," 
(who  had  been  first  indicted  of  murder, 
and  the  attorney-general  discovered  before 
the  trial  that  the  deceased  was  his 
master).  '*For  though-  the  otfences  are 
to  most  purposes  considered  as  substanti- 
ally the  same,  yet  as  there  is  some  differ- 
ence between  them  with  regftrd  to  Uie 
judgment  that  is  to  be  pronounced  upon 
a  conviction,  and  a  very  material  one  with 

.  w^ard  to  the  trial,  a  person  indicted  for 
pmt  treoMon  being  entitled  to  a  peremptory 
challenge  of  a^y  I  thiidc,  if  the  prosecutor 
be  apprised  of  the  true  state  ot  the  case, 
ashemaj^beif  he  useth  due  diligence, 
he  ought  td  adapt  the  indictment  to  the 
tiutk  of  the  fact.  But  if,  through  mis- 
take on  the  part  of  the  prosecutor,  or 
through  the  i^^orance  or  inattention  of 
the  officer,  a  bill  be  preferred  at  for  murder,, 
and  it  thall  come  out  m  evidence  that  the 
friumer  ttood  tn  that  tort  of  relation  to 
the  deceated  which  rendered  the  offence 
fetit  treaton,  1  do  not  think  it  by  any 
means  advisid)le  to  direct  the  jury  to 

•  give  a  Terdiot  of  acquittal,  for  a  person 
charged  with  a  crime  of  so  heinous  a 
nature  ougjit  not  to  hsve  the  chance 
given  him  by  the  court  of  avaiUog  himself 
of  a  plea  of.  auterfoitM  acquit.  In  such  a 
4iase  I  should  make  no  sort'  of  difficulty 
^  ditcharging  the  Jury  of  that  indietmentf 
and  ordering  a  fresh  indictment  for  petit 
treason.  In  this  method  the  prisoner  will 
have  the  advantage  of  his  peren^Oory  chaUen- 

•^^and  the  public  justice  will  not  suffer. 
Upon  this  two  observations  arise.  Fin/, 
That  though  the  offences  are  substantially 

■^         *  Foster^  Crown  Law,  325.   f  »bid.  82T. 


the  same,  the  greater  advantages  afi^rded 
by  the  law  to  the  prisoner  on  the  trial, 
in  the  peremptory  challenge  of  35  of  the 
jury — ^in  the  requiring  two  vntntesies-^-and 
otber  circumstances  beyond  what  .are 
allowed  in  trials  of  murder,  entitle  the 
prisoner,  in  Judge  Foster's  opinion,  lo 
be  indicted  for  petit  treason,  if  bis  ofience 
amount  to  that  description,  and  to  have 
the  indictment  dismissed,  if  through 
mistake,  or  ignorance,  or  inattention  in 
the  prosecutor,  it  be  preferred  as  for 
murder,  and  it  comes  out  in  evidence  that 
his  relation  to-  the  deceased  renders  the 
poffence  peti  t  treason.  Secondly,  That  if  petit 
treason  were  to  be  considered  as  a  distinct 
species  of  offence,  of  another  and  higher 
description  (as  high  treason  compared  with 
felony),  an  acciuittal  must  follow,  if  the 
facts  on  the  evidence  should  amoont  to 
the  higher  crime.  * 

The  prisoner  thinks  therefore,  that  your 
lordships  will  be  satisfied  from  what  is 
above  stated,  that  there  is  no  doubt  what- 
ever, but  by  the  common  law  of  England 
all  inferior  offences  are  merged  and  ex- 
tinguished in  the  offence  of  high  treason. 
The  case  in  the  33rd  Hen.  8th,  in  Dyer's 
Reports  as    explained    by  Mr.    Justice 
Foster,  is  by  him  declared  to  be  law; 
and  he  states  expressly,  that  in  thai  case, 
though  the  crime  committed  was  murder, 
yet  it  being  also  treason,  the  murder  mer- 
ged in  the  treason,  and  the  trial,  a{^>eal, 
or  indictment  for  murder,  was  therefore 
barred  by  the  rule  of  law,  independent 
of  the  question  arising  out  of  the  subse- 
quent pardon.  Indeed,  when  that  learned 
judge  declares,  that  where,  no/tuMstanding 
there  be  adifference  m  thepunishment,  yet  there 
being  also  a  dMrence  in  the  mods  of  ^  trials 
one  indicted  tor  murder  cannot  properly 
be  convicted,  if  on    the  evidence    the 
offence  turn  out  to  be  petit  treason:  al- 
though that  learned  judge  is  so  clearly 
of  opinion,    the    two  offences  are    but 
shades  of  the  *same  generic  crimes  that  be 
thinks  It  doubtful  whether  the  'prisoner 
may  not  plead  an- acquittal  of  the  murder, 
in  bar  or  the  second  indictment;   when 
he  declares,  that  in  such  a  case  the  judge 
should  rather   take  the  strong    snep   of 
'  discharging  the  juiy  without  their*  find- 
ing a  verdict,  tn  order  that  the  prisoner  nu^ 
be  tried  with  those  advantages  to  uMdk  the 
law  has  entitled  him  ;  he  could  not  but  be  of 
opinion,  that  where  the  crimes  are  essen- 
tially different  in  their  nature,  it  Is  im- 
possible to  deprive  a  prisoner  of  the  ben^fite 
of  the  mode  of  trial  appointed  for  the  crime 
he  is  truly  accused   of,  under  pretext  of 
assigning  to  it  an  inferior  denominaiiain, 

II.  But,  in  the  second  plaee,  if  this  be 
true  generally  by  the  princi^es  of  the 
common  law  of  England,  which  in  thcs 
matter  is  the  law  of  Scotland  also,  in  the 
latter  country,  the  necessity  of  adherinf  ^ 


4d9] 


Jbr  AdmimsteriHg  vn/awfid  Oaths. 


A.  O.  1817. 


C47« 


in  all  cases  of  treason,  to  the  form  of  pro- 
ceeding which  the  la^r  ha^  prescribed  for 
the  trial  of  such  cases,  is  yet  more  impe- 
rative. In  this  country,  the  duty  of* pro- 
ceeding aoeording  to  a  particular  form 

,  and  mode  of  trial,  is  imposed  on  your 
lordships  by  positive  statute. 

The  act  7th  queen  Anne«  c.  21,  has 
not  only  declared,  that  *'  such  crimes  and 
oflfences  which  are  high  treason  witliin 
England,  shall  be  construed,  adjudged, 

,  and  taken  to  be  high  treason  within  Scot- 
land ;  but  it  positively  commands  that  all 
acts  of  treason  shall  be  inquired  into,  and 
tried  in  Scptland  in  the  same  manner  as 
is  used  in  the  court  of  King's  bench,  or 
by  the  justices  of  Oyer  and  Terminer  in 
England. 

Your  lordships  know,  that  in  that  act'there 
is  not  only  a  permissive  clause,  enabling 
tb^  queen  and  her  su^essors  to  issue  out 
commiiisions  of  Oyef  and  Terminer  in 
Scotland  under  the  great  seal,  to  hear  and 
determine  cases  of  high  treason  ;  but  by 
4  3,  it  is  enacted,  *'  That  the  justice  couc,t 
of  Scotland  shall  have  full  power  and  au- 
thority, end  they  are  heremf  required  to 
inqukt  hjf  the  oaihi  of  twelve  good  and 
Imofid  men,  of  the  county,  shiie,  or  stew- 
znrj  where  the  respective  Courts  shall 
•it,  of  all  high  treason  and  misprision  of 

^gh  treason  committed  within  the  said 
county,  &c.  and  thereupon  to  proceed^ 
kear^  and  determine**  (tha^  is,  they  are  re- 
quired,  to  proceed,  hear,  and  deteimine), 
**  Me  ioid  offenees  of  any  persons  who  are 
indicted  to  stand  before  them,  m  $uch 
mannei  m  the  amrt  ofKin^i  ftencA,  or  the 
justieee  of  Oyer  and  Temnner  tn  England^ 
may  do  (y  the  lawt  of  England, 

Here,  then,  is  a  positive  enactment 
re^iiring  and  commanding  your  lordships 
to  inquire  into,  Aeor,  end  determine  ell  quet- 
tkm$  of  high  treaion,  in  the  tame  manner  e$ 
the  Coart  of  King* t  bench  does  in  England, 
mndin  no  other.  If  your  lordships  were 
to  hear  and  determine  any  question  of 
ihis  sort,  by  any  other  manner  of  proceed- 
ing, there  cannot  be  a  doubt  that  it  would 
be  a  direct  breach  of  this  act  of  parlia- 
ment ;  and  it  will  hardly  be  contended 
that  the  question.  Whether  ,a  fact  iom- 
mitted  be  an  act  of  high  treason,  or  an 
inferior  offence?  depends  on  the  words 
in  which  the  public  prosecutor  may  choose 
to  charge  it.  This  were  an  evident  ab- 
sardity ;  for  thus  it  would  be  in  the  power 
of  the  public  prosecutor,  at  his  pleasure^ 
to  dispense  with  the  law.  It  is  not  here 
the  question.  Whether  the  })ublic  prose- 
cutor shall  restrict  his  charge,  or  dispense 
widi  part  of  the  punishment?  but. 
Whether  he  Mi  diaente  wOh  the  mode  or 
TRJAi*  which  your  tordth^  are  commanded 

,  hf  statute  to  obterve  7  It  is  to  no  purpose 
to  say,  that  if  he  takef^from  the  prisoner  the 
;»dvantage  conferred  on  him  by  law  in  the  1 


mode  of  trial,  he  compensates  this  by  so 
framing,  his  accusation  as  to  infer  a  more 
limited  punishment.  It  were  a  sufficient 
answer  to  say,  that  this  is  contrary  to  law. 
But  it  can  hardly  be  gravely  asserted, 
that,  in  the  present  instance,  any  such 
compensation  is  offered,  since  'What  the 
prosecutor  demands  is  nothing  iess  than 
the  life  of  the  unfortunate  man  ^ho  now 
addresses  yqu;  and  with  what  further 
consequences  his  conviction  is  to  be  at- 
tended, is  equally  unimportant  to  himself, 
to  those  in  whom  he  is  interested,  and 
to  the  public.  That  because  he  waves 
certain  consequences  following  conviction 
on  an  indictment  of  hi^h  treason,  in  the 
corruption  of  the  blood,  and  the  infliction 
of  some  senseless  indignities  on  the  life- , 
less  body  of  the  criminal,  the  public 
prosecutor  shall  be  permitted  to  prosecute 
him  to  a  conviction  of  deatli,  from  which 
he  is  entitled  to  believe  he  might  escape, 
if  not  deprived  of  the  mode  of  trial  ap- 
pointed by  laWf  under  4he  xsircnmstances 
in  which  he  stands,  is  a  proposition  so 
monstrous — so  inconsistent  with  substan- 
tial justice — so  opposite  to  every  doctrine 
of  any  law — and  so  totally  irreconcileable 
to  the  humane  principle  of  British  law, 
that  the  prisoner  is  incapable  of  reasoning 
upon  it.  He  cannot  adequately  express 
his  surprise,  that  it  should  -  ever  have 
occurred  to  any  person,  as  one  on  which 
it  was  possible  for  a  court  of  justice  to 
consent  to  proceed. 

And  that  the  legislature,  in  passing  the 
said  act  of  queen  Anne,  was  aware,  .that 
from  that  time  no  act  which  amounted  to 
high  treason  could  be  tried  in  Scotland 
by  the  usual  forms  of  the  criininal  courts, 
appears  from  this,  that,  lest  there  should 
be  any  doubt  respecting  those  crimes 
which  had  been  treason  before  by  the  law 
of  Scotland,  but  which  by  this  act  were 
declared  to  be  so  no  longer,  it  was  thought 
proper,  by  the  7th  section,  to  enact, 
**  lliat  theft  in  landed  men,  murder  under 
trust,  wilful  fire-raising,  firing  coal-heoshs, 
and  assassination,  which  were  declared  to 
be  treason  by  particular  statutes  in  Scot- 
land, should  tnereafter  only  be  judged 
and  deemed  to  be  capital  offences,"  &c. 
'*  And  the  persons  committers  thereof,  are 
10  be  punished  and  fried  in  the  same 
manner  as  by  the  laws  of  Scotland  is  pro- 
vided in  the  cases  of  other  capital  crimes, 
any  thing  in  this  act  to  the  contrary  not- 
withstanding." 

III.  In  the  third  place,  the  prisoner  has 
to  st)ibmit,  that  there  is  nothing  contained  * 
in  the  act  52nd  Geo.  3rd,  c.  104  on  which 
this  indictment  is  laid,  which  abrogates 
the  general  rule  of  law,  that  an  act  of 
treason  cannot  be  tried  as  a  felony,  or  re» 
peals  the  said  statute  of  queen  Anne,  by 
which  your  lordships  are  bound  to  inquire 
of,^  hear^  an^,  determine  all  acts  of  treason. 


4711       57  GEORGE  III. 


Triai  i^Andrein  M*Kiiikg 


[472* 


in  such  manner  as  the  Court  of  King's- 
bench,  or  the  justices  of  Oyer  and  Ter- 
miner may  do. 

The  prisoner  undertakes  entirely  to 
satisfy  your  lordships,  that  by  no  just 
rule  of  construction  can  this  act  52nd  of  the 
King  be  held  so  to  do— that  it  contains 
no  words  sufficient  for  this  purpose-^that 
it  is  not  to  be  inferred,  either  from  its 
general  scope,  or  any  of  its  enactments 
— that  sudi  a  construction  was  not  in  the 
Tiew  of  the  legblature  when  it  was  pass- 
ed— and  that  it  would  invoWe  the  most 
manifest  absurdities. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  statutes 
1st  Edw.  6th^  c.  12,  requiring  two  wit- 
nesses in  cases  of  treason,  and  5th  and' 
6th  Edw.  6th,  f.  11,  confirming  this  pro* 
vision,  and  requiring  that  the  witnesses^ 
if  living;  shall  be  examined  in  person  in 
the  bpen  coart ;  the  1st  &  2na  Phil.  9t 
Mar.  restoring  in  all  cases  of  treason  to 
the  prisoner,  the  peremptory  chadlenge  of 
35  jurymen ;  (he  statute  7th  Will .  3rd,  c.  3, 
confirming  these  privileges,  and  adding 
Other  valuable  ones,  such  as  the  allowing 
the  prisoner  a  copy  of  his  indictment,  the 
assigning  him  counsel,  limiting  the  time 
of  prosecution,  and  so  on,  are  statutes 
for  the  benefit  of  tbe  subject,  and  in 
favour  of  life.  As  little  can  it  be  doubted 
that  tlie  act  f  th  of  queen  Anne,  limiting 
and  defining  cases  of  treason,  introducing 
into  Scotland  the  same  mode  of  trial  as 
in  England,  and  allowing  the  prisoner  a 
list  of  tbe  witnesses  against  him,  is  of 
the  same  nature.  Many  valuable  pri- 
vileges belone  to  the  subject  in  Scotland 
when  accused  o^  ordinary  crimes  which 
are  not  conferred  by  the  law  and  practice 
of  England ;  but  in  the  case  of  high  trear- 
fion,  he  has,  by  the  law  of  England,  all 
the  same  privileges,  as  by  the  law  of 
Scotland  in  ordinary  crimes;  a  copy  al- 
lowed him  of  his  indictment,  counsel  to 
conduct  his  defence,  and  two  witnesses 
necessary  to  be  produced  against  him. 
And  to  these  other  valuable  privileges  are 
superadded,  his  indictment  is  not  the 
discretion  of  a  law-officer  of  the  Crown, 
but  must  be  found  by  a  grand  jury  on 
their  oaths;  he  has  a  peremptory  chal- 
lenge, without  cause  shewn,  of  35  of  his 
jury ;  and  the  jury  to  convict  him  must 
be  unanimous. 

Of  th^se  acts,  therefore,  this  prisoner 
thinks  himself  entitled  to  say,  tnatlthey 
are  to  be  interpreted  favourably  for  the 
subject,  and' strictly  against  him ;  and  that 
it  would  be  contrary  to  all  the  rUle*s  of 
law  to  hold,  that  they  may  be  repealed  by 
implication.-  Nothing  less  than  the  ex- 
press will  of  the  legislature  can  be  suffi- 
cient for  this  purpose,  and  this  will  con- 
veyed in  distinct  words  of  repeal.  It 
mi^ht  be  a  question,  whether,  if  a  stibse* 
quent  act  were  passed;  whkh  could  receive 


no  t^tct  con^stenily  with  mch  acts  con" 
tinumg  in  foroe^  tbit  would  of  necessity 
repeal  them  in  the  same  manner  as  posi- 
tive and  direct  words  to  that  effect.  But 
the  prisoner  submits,  that  there  can  be  no 
doubt,  where  a  ndmquent  tiaiute  may  re- 
cewe  effect  to  mamf  e$9enikd  mrpota^ 
al&ou^  there  be  some  to  which  it  will 
not  apply,  unless  by  operating  the  repeal 
of  former  laws  of  the  nature  which  has 
been  described.  In  this  case,  ecooiding 
to  no  recdved  rule  of  construction,  can 
the  subsequent  statute  be  held  to  operate 
such  repeal  without  express  words. 

The  clauses  of  the  act  5t^nd  Geo.  3rd, 
c.  104,  which  affect  the  present  question, 
are,  the  first,  the  seventh,  and  the  last. 
The  first  clause  is  in  these  words :  *'  That 
every  person  who  shall,  in  any  manner  or 
form  whatsoever,  administer  or  canse  to 
be  administered,  fiui.  any  oath  or  engage- 
ment, purporting  or  intending  to  bind  Sie 
person  taking  the  same,  to  commit  any 
treason  or  murder,  or  any  f^ony  pnnish- 
able  by  law  with  death,  shall,  on  convic- 
tion thereof  by  due  course  of  law,  be  ad** 
judged  guilty  of  felony,  and  suffer  death 
as  a  felon,  without  benefit  of  clergy.'* 
The  seventh  clause  enacts,  '^lliat  any 
offence  committed  against  this  act,  if 
committed  in  that  part  of  Great  Britain 
called  Scotland,  shall  and  may  be  prose- 
cuted, tried  and  determined,  either  before 
the  Justiciary  Court  at  Edinbuigh,  or  in 
any  of  the  Circuit  Courts  in  thu  part  of 
the  United  Kingdom."  The  daiise  pro- 
vides and  declares,  **  That  any  person 
who  shall  be  tried,  and  acquitted  or  con- 
victed of  any  ofi^nce  against  this  act, 
shall  not  be  liable  to  be  indicted,  prose* 
cuted,  or  tried  again  for  the  same  offence 
or  hx^.  as  high  treason ;  and  that  Aothing 
in  this. act  contained  shall  be  construed 
to  extend  to  prohibit  any  person  guilty  of 
any  offence  against  this  act,  and  who  shall 
not  be  tried  for  the  same  as  an  offifence 
against  this  act,  from  being  tried  for  the 
same  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of 
high  treason,  in  such  a  manner  as  if  this 
act  had  not  been  made." 

There  are  here  no  express  vrords  re- 
pealing any  of  the  acts  above  mentioned* 
which  confer  on  the  subject  the  privileges 
he  is  entitled  to  when  accused  of  an  of- 
fence amounting  to  the  crime  of  high 
treason.  There  is  not  even  an  allusion 
to  any  of  these  statutes,  or  the  insertion  of 
the  usual  general  words  where  it  is  io* 
tended  to  introduce  any  alteration  in  the 
law ;  ^  %ny  law  or  practice  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding.*^  If,  therefbre»  these 
beneficial  statutes  of  Edw.  6th,  mi.  It 
Mary,  William  3rd,  and  Anne,  are  lo  be 
held  repealed,  it  is  evident  that  they  can 
only  be  so  by  inference  and  impHcatioo. 

It  were  a  waste  of  your  lordsaips'  tlnfte, 
to  argue  at  length,^  that  the  gtnerd  lUles 


47a3 


Jor  4^immdeiiKg  « 


OtOu, 


A.  D.  ^817. 


Ut* 


of  the  common  law  are  not  to  be  lidd*  ab« 
Togated  1>y  implication^  much  less  are  po- 
skire  statutes  enacted  for  the  -benefit  of 
the  SQbject  in  favour  of  life  and  liberty. 
To  take  an  instance  that  happens  at  the 
moment  to  occur,  the  act  19tb  Geo.  3rdy 
commonly  caHed  the  comprehending  act, 
empowered  the  commissionerB  Of  supply 
in  Scothmdy  to  examine  such  peisons  as 
were  brought  before  them,  and  if  fbrund 
withili  the  description  of  the  act,  as  able- 
bodied,  idle,  and  disorderly  persons,  &c. 
to  deUver  them  over  to  the  military  offi- 
cers of  the  king  for  recruiting  the  forces ; 
and  it  was  dec&red,  **  that  from  and  after 
such  delivery,  fcc.  every  person  so  raised, 
shall  be  deemed  a  listed  soldier  to  all  in- 
tents, &c.  and  shall  not  be  liable  tbbe 
taken  out  of  his  majesty^s  service  by  any 
process  other  than  ibr  some  criminal 
matter ;"  and  it  was  contended,  that  no 
civil  -cottit,  therefore,  could  give  any  relief 
irom  the  a4iudipation  of  the  commis- 
sioners. Bat  in  the  case  of  Pattillo  v. 
Sir  William  Maxwell,*  and  in  Cooper  v. 
Sir  John  Ogilvie,t  the  Court  of  Session 
were  of  opinion,  that  ^  their  powers  of 
reviewing  the  sentences  of  the  commis- 
sioners, aturngfrcm,  their  inherent  and  con- 
itUtttkm$l  juradkHon^  were  not  excluded 
by  this  statute/'  And,  in  like  manner,  in 
the  case  of  Guthrie  v.  Cowan,^  which 
was  a  conviction  by  the  Justices  of  the 
Peace,  under  3dth  Geo,  3rd,  c.  06,  to 
prevent  the  damaging  of  raw  hides  and 
•ekiiis,  by  which  act  the  Justices  at  quarter 
sessions,  on  appeal,  **  aire  empaioered  fir- 
wdfy  to  hear  and  determine  the  tamef^  and 
still  more  to  mark  the  intention  of  the  le- 
gislature, it  \&  enacted,  that  **  no  Such 
Judgment  or  conviction  shall  be  Remove- 
able  by  '^  certiorari  into  any  Court  what- 
soever .'*  Yet  the  Court  of  Session  Were 
of  opinioui  that  tohere  the  privilege  of  op- 
peai  to  the  Soprtime  Court  vna  not  ejipudtfy 
prokSfitedj  an,  exeltmon  of  its  jvritdktien 
um  not  to  he  presumed. 

But  the  prisoner  must  revert  once  more 
to  what  -he  has  already  endeavoured  to 
urge  on  your  lordships'  particular  atten- 
jtion,  that  this  question,  How  this  offbnce 
is  to  be  tried  ?  most  be  decided  by  your 
lordships  by  the  principles  of  the  English 
law ;  for  it  is  no  other  than  a  question, 
jof  how  a  matter  constituting  the  crime  of 
high  treason  is  to  be  tried  r  as  to  which. 
both  according  to  the  general  purport  and 
effect,  and  by  the  particular  words  of  the 
statute  of  Anne,  your  lordships  are  to 
proceed  in  the  same  manner  that  the 
Court  of  King's^bench  in  England  wduld 
proceed* 

If  therefore  the  pti«oner  ean  saHsfy 

•  June  25, 177^. 

t  Aug.  10,  1780.    June  22,  1781,    Dec. 
1788.  •    t  I>ec.  10, 1807. 


your  lerdships,  lh£l  this  act  of  the  52nd 
of  the  king  cantot  "be  held,  according  to 
the  law  of  England,  to  authorise  the  trial 
of  this  bffence  otherwise  than  as  high 
treason;  he  thinks  your  lordships  will 
have  no  difficulty  In  deciding,  that  the 
same  rule  of  construction  must  be  adopt- 
ed in  this  Court.  It  would  be  sufficient 
for  this  purpose  to  remark  on  the  strange 
and  anomalous  situation  in  which  the 
subjects  of  the  opposite  ends  of  the  island 
would  be  placea,  if  your  lordships  were 
to  hold  this  act  a  virtual  repeal  of  the 
treason  laws,  nro  ^cm^o,  while  no  such  con- 
struction could  take  place  in  Englsmd ; 
thus,  supposing '  that  the  legislature  in- 
tended to  deprive  the  inhabitants  of  Scot- 
land of  benefits  carefully  conferred  on 
them  at  the  Union,  while  ^et  it  left  tliese 
benefits  entire  for  the  enjoyment  of'  our 
more  fortunate  neighbours. 

That  it  is  a  rule  of  the  common  law  of 
England,  that  an  act  amounting  io  high 
^treason,  cannot  be  tried  as  an  inferior 
spedes  of  ofience,  has  bfcen  made  ap- 
parent. 

In  the  construction  of  statutes,  it  is  a 
general  rule  in  the  law  of  England,  that  a 
statute  ought  to  be  ^  construed  atcafding. 
to  the  reason  and  rule  of  the  common  law. 
this  is  BO  laid  down  by  Lotd  Chief  Btiron 
Comyns,*  quoting  Plowden*^  Comm^tap 
ries,  an  ancient  book  of  great  authority. 

And  in  the  modern  case  of  Eton  Col- 
lege V.  the  bishop  of  Winchester,f  it  is 
laid  down  by  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas, 
that  even  private  acts  are  subject  to  this 
rule.  *'  Private- acts  of  parliament.'*  it  is 
said,  ^  must  be  construed  according  to 
the  principle  of  the  common  law."^  A 
general  custoiti  as  is  well  known,  is  no- 
Siing  else  than  part  of  the  common  law. 
And  it  is  said  by  lord  Coke,|  *'  there  is  a 
diversity  between  an  act  of  parliament  in 
the  negative  and  in  the  affirmative ;  for 
an  affirmative  act  does  not  take  away  a 
custom."  And  the  learned  editor,  Mr. 
Hargrave,  has  the  following  note  oh  this 
passage  §  "  Hiis  rule,  about  affirmative 
statutes,  is  very  common  in  the  hooks," 
and  he  refers  to  Flowden's  Commentaries. 
**  In  another  place,"  he  adds,  **  Loid 
Coke  lays  down  a  like  rule,  as  to  these 
not  taking  away  the  common  law,  but 
with  more  particularity;  for  his  words 
are,  that  a  iatute  made  in  the  qffirmdtioe^ 
toithfmt  anv  negative  expressed  or  implied^ 
doth  not  take  away  the  common  Icxo.^ 

And  lord.^Coke  says,  ^  It  appears  in 
our  books,  that  in  many  cases  tne  com* 
mon  law  will  control  acts  of  parliairient, 
and  sometimes  adjudge  them  to  be'  ut- 


.  ■«■■■»>■ 


%  w 


♦  Comyna*  Dig.  o. 
t  3  Wilson's  Rep,  496. 
}  Cbke,  Linleton,  115,  &. 
§  Coke's  2nd  Inst.  200. 


Farliaaent,  R.  12. 


475] 


57  GEORGE  III. 


TrUd  ^Atidrea  M^KtHk}/ 


U76 


terly  void ;  for  when  an  act  of  iMurliament 
18  against  common  rig^t  and  reason,  or 
repugnant,  or  impossible  to  be  performed, 
the  common  law  will  control  it^  and  ad« 
judge  such  act  to  be  void."* 

As  in  a  grant  to  the  king,  a  reeenration 
by  act  of  parliament  to  the  donor  of  Ser- 
vices, ^'/^the  common  law  controls  it,  and 
adjudees  it  void  as  to  the  services,  for  it 
is  against  reason  diat  the  king  should  do 
services.*' — **  So,  if  an  act  of  parliament 
gives  to  any  to  bold  all  manner  of  pleas 
within  his  manor  of  D.  yet  he  shall  bold 
no  Plea  to  whidi  be  himself  is  party,  for 
tiMMpn  at^  kc.  And  elsewhere  he  says, 
**  This  case  is  of  necessity  .by  construction 
excepted  out  of  the  statute/'t 

And  in  like  manner,  speaking  of  a  cer- 
tain action,  an  action  oi  waste,  whether, 
under  the  statute  of  Glocester,  it  may  be 
brought  against  the  assignee  of  one 
having  alife  estate  as  tenant l^  thecourtesy, 
the  wcffds  of  the  statute  being  general, 
that  it  may  be  brought  against  him  that 
boldedi  by  law  of  England,  or  othenom 
fffr  term  cf  l^,  lord  Coke  says,  **  Albeit 
the  assignee  of  the  tenant  by  the  courtesy 
is  wUkin  the  letter  of  thit  lam^  yet  no  ac- 
tion of  waste  shall  be  brought  against  the 
assignee ;  for  m  conairtietkm  of  Uaiutes^ 
the  reaun  of  ike  common  law  poeth  great 

Ugkt^  AKD  THE  JUDGES,  AB  MUCH  AS  MAY 
BE  FOLLOW  THE  RULE  THEREOF ."^ 

The  prisoner,  therefore,  assuming  it  to 
be  sufficiently  proved,  that  the  rule  of  the 
common  law  in  his  case  is  as  he  has  stated 
it,  humbly  contends,  that  the  statute  on 
whidi  this  indictment  is  laid,  must  be  in- 
terpreted agreeably  to  that  rule  of  the 
common  law  if  possible.  That  an  officer 
of  the  crown  should  at  his  pleasure,  by 
calling  an  offence  by  one  name  insteaui  of 
by  another,  deprive  the  subject  of  that 
mode  of  trial,  to  which,  under  such  cir- 
cumstances, the  law  has  entitled  him  for 
bis  benefit,  ie  against  common  right  and 
reatonf  and  therefore  nothing  less  than 
express  words  can  induce  your  lordships 
so  to  interpret  an  act  of  parliament.  Nor 
is  it  possible  that  the  Court  shall  shew 
less  anxiety  to  protect  the  rules  of  the 
common  law,  in  cases  of  such  inferior 
interest  as  are  above  stated,  than  in 
a  case  of  life  and  death,  where  the  sub- 
ject is  under  an  accusation  which  the  law 
considers  ss  calling  on  it  to  watch  over  his 
safety  with  peculiar  jealousy. 

In  like  manner,  it  is  the  general  rule  in 
interpreting  subsequent  acts  of  parliament. 
BO  to  expound  them  as  that  they  mt^  not 
contradict  former  etatutee^  which  they  do 
not  exprndjr  contain  words  to  repeal. 
Thus,  it  is  laid  down  in  Roll's  Reports  as 
a  general  rule,  legafoeteriereeprioree  con* 


•  8  Coke's  Rep.  118. 
I  Coke,  2  Inst  301. 


t  2  Inst.  25. 


trariae  abrogant.  But  it  is  said,  ^This 
cannot  be  by  ambiguous  .  and  general 
words."  And  it  is  stated  as  a  rule,  that 
**  when  two  general  statutes  are  made,  and 
one  contradicts  (apparently)  the  other, 
both  if  they  can  be,  snail  be  so  expoanded 
that  the  one  may  not  contradict  the  other. 
And  a  txdnequent  act,  which  cah  he  re- 
consiled  with  theformery  shall  not  be  a  repeal 
qfit,^*   . 

In  like  manner,  lord  Coke  lays  down 
the  rules  for  interpreting  subsequent 
statutes,  with  reference  to  former  ones,  as 
follows.  Having  agreed  to  the  general 
rule  above  mentioned,  leges  posteriores 
priores  conlrarias  abrogantf  be  observes  that 
*<as  to  this  purpose  contrarium  est  nod- 
tiplex.f 

**  Iff,  If  one  is  an  express  and  material 
negative,  and  the  last  is  an  express  and 
material  affirmative;  or  if  the  first  is 
affirmative,  and  the  latter  negative. 

**2dfy.  Although  both  are  affirmative; 
as  by  the  statute  33Td  Henry  8th,  c  23» 
it  is  enacted.  That  if  any  person  being 
examined  before  the  king's  counsel,  or 
three  of  them,  shall  confess  any  treajon, 
misprision,  or  murder,  or  be  by  them  ve- 
hemently suspected,  he  shall  be  tried  in 
any  county  where  the  king  pleases,  by  his 
commission, 'kc.  And  afterwards  another 
law  was  made,  lst&  2nd  P.&M.  10,  in  these 
words,  that  all  trials  hereafter  to  be  had  far 
ang  treason  shall  be  had  according  to  the 
course  of  the  common  law,  and  not  otherwise. 
This  latter  act,  although  the  latter  words 
had  not  been,  had  abrogated  the  former, 
because  Uiey  were  contrary  in  matter. 
But  it  doth  not  abrogate  the  statute  35th 
Henry  8th,  c;  2,  of  trial  of  treasons  beyond 
the  seas,  notvnthstanding  the  negative  words, 
because  it  was  not  contrary  in  matter,ybr 
that  was  not  triable  by  the  common  Imo, 

**  3dfy,  Contrariety  in  respect  of  the  form 
prescribed,  &c.  Only  it  must  be  known,  thai 
for  as  much  as  acts  of  Parliament  are  et- 
taldish^  with  such  gravityy  uMomy  and 
wmertal  consent  of  the  whole  realm,  for  the 
adcaneement  of  the  commonwealth,  they  ought 
not,  by  any  constrained  construction,  out  of 

THE    GEM  ERA  L     AND    AMBIGUOUS  WORDS 

OF  A  SUBSEQUEST  ACT,  to  bs  abrogated,  but 
ought  to  be  numUained  and  supported  with  a 
benign  and  favourable  construction"  And 
he  illustrates  this  hj  a  case  in  the  21st  of 
Elizabeth  in  which  it  was  found,  that  the 
act  16th  Richard  2nd,  c.  5,  which  enacts, 
that  all  the  lands  and  tenements  of  one 
attainted  in  a  premunire  shall  be  forfeited 
to  the  king,  had  not  repealed  the  statnle*  , 
de  Donis,  authorising  the  creation  of 
estates-tail,  and  that  the  tenant  m  tal  should 
notwithstandmg  forfeit  only  for  his  it^ 

Thus,  lord  Kenyon  says,  '*  There  axe 

*  •  I       I  ■  1    ■ 

*  2nd  Roll's  Rep.  410. 
t  11  Coke's  Rep.  63.*  a,** 


471] 


jor  Admintstering  unknot  Otini. 


A'.  D.  UlT. 


C478 


te? end  cases  in  the  books  to  shew,  tdat 
vrfaere  the  intention  of  the  legislalnre  was 
ftpparenty  that  the  subsequent  act  should 
not  hafe  sach  an  operation,  there,  eren 
though  the  words  of  such  statute,  taken 
stricUyand  grammaticallj,  would  repeal 
a  former  act,  the  courts  of  law,  jidjni^ /or 
ike  hmtpt  of  the  tukjeet^  haye  hdd  that 
they  ought  not  to  receive  such  a  construc- 
tion.''• 

And  in  the  interpretation  of  statutes 
more  nearly  connected  with  the  sutject  in 
hand,  there  is  an  instance  directly  in  point, 
to  shew  that  it  is  not  sufficient  that  the 
words  of  a  subsequent  statute  mt^  amoumi 
to  a  repeal  of  a  former  law,  to  induce  the 
courts  to  hold  a  prior  statute,  enaeted  for 
the^benefit  of  the  subject,  repealed.  It 
seems  to  be  agreed  at  present,  that,  by  the 
common  law,  as  it  stood  before  the  1st  of 
Edward  6th,  one  witness  was  sufficient  in 
the  case  of  treason,  as  well  as  in  other 
oapttal  cases.  This  is  the  opinion  of 
sergeant  Hawkins,  t  and  more  clearly  that 
of  Mr.  J.  Foster.} 

By  Ist  Edward  6th,  c  It,  and  5th  & 
6th  Edward  6th,  c.  11,  two  witn^ses  are 
rendered  necessary  in  all  indictments  or 
convictions  for  treason,  petit  treason,  or 
misprision  of  treason ;  and  by  Ist  U  2nd 
Philip  fc  Mary  c.  10,  **  it  is  enacted,  that 
all  trials  after  that  statute  to  be  had, 
awazded,  or  made  for  any  treason,  shall 
be  bad  and  used  cnfy  aaurding  id  the  Ate 
enkr  and  come  of  the  common  imoy  By 
like  general  terms  of  this  act,  strictly  taken, 
it  would  appear  as  if  the  acts  of  £dward 
6th,  introducing  two  witnesses  in  trials 
for  treason,  were  repealed,  as  well  as  those 
statutes  of  Henry  8th,  to  some  of  which 
fusion  has  been  made  above,  which 
trenched  upon  the  rules  established  for 
the  safety  of  the  subject.  Bat  it  is  clearly 
shewn  by  Mr.  Justice  Foster,  that,  not- 
withstanding the  generality  of  the  words, 
the  act  of  railip  and  Mary  was  never  so 
interpreted.  Lord  Coke§  is  of  this 
opinion.  Lord  Hale,  though  he  appears 
sometimes  to  have  doubted  it,  yet  seems 
finally  to  have  been  of  this  opinion  also.  || 
The  judges,  in  the  case  of  the  re^cides, 
agreed  that  the  law  requires  two  witnesses 
in  the  case  of  treason;  and  in  lord 
Slaflbrd's  trial  the  same  thingwas  agreed.f 
From  that  time  to  the  Revolution,  this  has 
been  regarded  as  settted  law,  which,  till 
'  die  passing  of  7th  William  8rd,  could  only  ; 
Ims  so  under  thie  said  statutes  of  Edward 
6th.  The  ground  on  which  the  statute  of 
Philip  and  Maiy  received  this  interpre- 

^  4  Term  Bos,  2. 
t  Hawk.  P.  C.  B.  2,  c.25,  §  129. 
t  Foster  233.  §  Coke,  3rdlnst.  26,  27. 

A  1  Hale,  906., 

f  Kelyng's  Rep.  9 ;  3  St.  Tr.  204.    (7  How. 
St.  Tr.  1293.J 


tation  conld  be  only  this,  that  the  rule  inm 
troAteed  by  Me  Mte  ^  Etkoatd  Zrd^  were  m 
faoour  of  the  ndjtet^  and  eould  therefore  mi 
he  held  to  be  repeokdbiU  by  eeprem  w^rde. 
Without  doubt,  tiie  words  of  the  statote 
of  Philip  and  Mary  were  sufficient,  if 
taken  in  their  extent,  to  repeal  Uie  tw« 
statutes  of  Ed^raud  6th.  In  that  inslanoe 
the  advantages  conferred  on  thesabjeci 
in  the  mode  of  trial  for  the  ofienoe^  were 
held  not  to  be  abrogated  by  general  words, 
though  in  strictness  liable  to  this  inter- 
pretation. So,  in  the  i»esent  instance,  the 
prisoner  hmnbly  contends,  that  the  benefits 
eonferred  in  the  mode  of  trial  by  so  many 
statutes,  cannot  be  hdd  to  be  abrogated 
by  the  general  worfs  of  the  act  on  whidi 
this  indictment  is  ftamed;  words  lese 
subject  to  sndi  an  interpretation  than  those 
of  die  act  of  Philip  and  Mary. 

But  further,  the  prisoner  humbly  sab-* 
mits  it  as  quite  dear,  that  without  the 
most  express  words,  it  can  never  he  ander-  ^ 
stood  that  the  Ugidatme  intended  to  render 
ancffisnoea^eio^fViUchbylawiemtroaeani 
Lideed,  this  mn^t  appear  to  evei^  laiiiyer 
nothing  short  of  a  oontiadictioii  in  terms* 
And  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  it  is  not 
here  the  question,  whether  the  legislature 
intended  merely  that  the  partiealar  sort  of 
treason,  which  might  be  committed  by 
administerinff .  some  sorts  of  treasonable 
oaths, thoMoe teibd  m  the  mam manaar 
as  felomes  are  triedf  and  that  the  subjeet, 
in  this  ease,  should  be  deprived  of  the 
benefits  of  a  trial  as  for  treason.  That 
this  is  not  lightly  to  be  inferred,  the 
prisoner  has  already  endeavoured  fo  show* 
But  the  demiand  made  by  the  prosecutor 
is  of  a  yet  more  extraordinaiy  nature.- 
He  desires  that  your  lovdsbips  shouldliold, 
that  by  this  act  the  legblotare  have  de- 
dared  a  treason  to  be  ajmmy.  The  words 
of  the  statute  are,  that  the  person  ad- 
ministering a  obtain  oath,  shall  be  ad- 
judged ffuilty  of  felony ;  and  the  propo- 
"sition  of  the  prosecutor  is,  that  he  shall 
be  so  ad^ged,  although,  by  the  act  of 
which  he  is  accused,  he  is  guilty  of  treason. 
The  prisoner  affirms,  without  fear  of  con- 
tradiction, that  if  that  be  the  meaning  of 
the  act,  it  stands  single  in  the  statute-book. 
He  ventures  to  affirm,  without  fear  of 
contradiction,  that  there  is  not  a  passage 
in  any  writer  on  the  kw  of  England,  m 
the  doctrine  of  any  judge,  or  the  argument 
of  any  Englidi  lawyer,  of  which  a  record 
has  been  preserved,  from  wbich  it  may 
be  inferred,  that  the  possibility  of  any 
such  enactment  was  ever  contemplated. 
bf  the  coune  the  legislature  adopts,  when 
it  proposes  to  dispense  with  the  mode  of 
trial  m  treason,  there  are  modem  in- 
stances ;  but  that  this  is  not  tiie  course 
for  that  purpose^  there  is  abundant 
authority  to  shew. 

By  the  3rd  Henry  7th,  c«  14>  it  is 


47»1         57€U|OtQt  Uh 

to  he  tkarkingV  saswA  9tnm9.mA  hb 

■MP»ppiil.to*ihB  ohjMiBarHMlhof  bi>k)tt8e* 

'  hob^  Ik*  mite'.  any^o»iiM«Mmks«i  com- 

]MMag%  qpMpiwiwetyi  oa:  inagiiMlionSy 


muniir. 


the 
tbft 


bjpi  Ae 


MMOiv«Brp«Mn%.tO'destioy  or 

we  kingi.  w  99^  iMd^  o&^  other 

m  to  thmMka^oamamAf  &c. 

he  jjHd9B4.Mo»ji^  and 

toj  have    judgmbnt.  and 

iHMMllMiAed  flughtto  have 

laaiJ'     CfeiiypMini  and 

Oe 


oMMairaui  to  Arfxt'iiA  nwdew 
ia^  wiUntill  amr  <Mbl|  ligh  Iraaanm  .under 
thft  statato  df  Bdwadli  aadfi;.  Mid  2^  ^Ae 
9f^Mti$tofHmryJtk  it)  would 

»iiUi  ha  tkie.naafceBDtnioiatnaiyy 
aaitie  ana  eatv^defiriirai  o£  the  faenefit 
of  dergf..  BM:ta  ltodlOobB^.wha  has  an 
enpffaaii  da^itag  upee  thisittiutul%it  never 
Qa0nncd.diet .  thia  inteanretotien  jooald  be 
fHiatapes.  itk  Hft  rafaraa?  it  aa  only  ap- 
plaaaUai  tai  nah.aaat  off  oonfadaraagr^  ^om- 
ptowag^.ftg.  aa^  Aaag  ■aaiiwpwef  \i  iy  the 
adeutt  a§t^  refmni,  laaetf  eo^  tmmimt  to 
toeofoeu.  Bot^heL^aa^^  ^To.  daataay  or 
miaiiaaithain^i  Bj,ihM  aet<t^  egpreufy 
lypm-i^  tf^dimjfmigmmi'^  rte:ia6<w  jmt* 
faiMial^  tfae^  basuicB  ttaafloefhdeaetf  9  con- 
aptegy,  or  uaagiaeilwn^  tfaaae  nuatbaBome 
ffliheiovtiit  aaiy  i)r  daedy  I  wwl  i  n§  <ha  lai  1  nto, 
to  make  it  tieaaoawilh&euthe  aiatote  of 
Wih  MwmdAd.  Jmd^ikmfitn^  Urn  bare 
nf^tdtn^^  €OMf&ttnif^j,  oontfnai^  or 
•winy'miitwi,*  1^  «Maim^/  ti  ^amdr^/^s/br^ 
iy  iAia.adb/  fiat«i£-the  oonspiratois  do 
paonrida.  any  maeoai^.or'Olbar  tfaingy  to 
aeoompUiihdiefardevilialriinteiM,  tkk,and 
the  fi«v  ia  oe^owr^  otf.  to  makeiittaeaKm.*** 
efafafaoaaconaei  II  iiag  jhaiia  1 1  aMwaftnld  be 
a— ctedinto  e  felehy/heholda.theanlicting 
en  oflenoft^be.  a  m>afv  4o:be  .ajuS^gmen$ 
of  tikcwkile  'patfiammtf  thet  thait  ase  eir- 
onmatancaatnedar.iahich  it  aii|^.be.com« 
niitlifl  withoea  being  gnihy  of  tieasoo, 
akhough  the  woada joe  ecpreasLyaiich  as 
ere  theveiy  deflnitioDof  thehigheat  sort 
of  treason. 

In  like  manner,  thepiiaoner  would  say, 
tiMt  the  act  53nd  of  the  king,  declaring 
thet  the  adaainiateang  of  an  oath^  pur- 

Crttoff  to  bind  to  oommit  tfeaaoBy  shall  i 
a  feloiiy,  ia  a  judgment  of  paiiiament 
that  it  may  be  oommittad  without  being 
guiky  of  tveaaoa.  But  aa  lord  Gokii  goes 
on.  to  aay,  if  certaiacixcumatancaa  aecom- 
pany>  the  ceelhdeieciea  mentioned  in  the 
M  of  Heniy  7tfa»  these  are  overt  aeta  to 
toake  ittreaaon,  intimating  that  it  can  no 
longer  be  triad, as  a.fiakniy  undet  that 
ataluto;  ao,  the.jpaiaaoer  would  say^  that, 
if  the.oalh.ba  edininiatared  undte  certain 
oiceomalanees,  thfen^aach  adminiatering  is 
trnhMntiaadihe  ofiSmneT  cannot  be  tried 
under  the  53nd  of  theektog% 


To  the  same  purpose  lol^  Hi^  ob- 
serving on  this  statute  of  Henry  7th>  re- 
marks, **  that  it  makes  conspiring  the 
king's  death  to  be  felony,  which  k  wndd 
wot  kaoedom^  ^  0e  hare  wumras^withoitt 
anoaert^KthadbotHUreaumr*  The  same 
author  remarks,  that,  ^  the  statutes  1st 
and  2nd  Phil,  and  Mar.  c.  3.,  1st  ^w. 
M»  0. 19.>  23rd  £Us.  Cri  3.,  making  several 
offences  felony,  kaoe  this  wary  claSm^  the 

mMn  MOT'  BBIIto    TnBASON     BY   STATUTE 

23th  Edward  3rd  f  and  he  aays,  **  enaO- 
mg  a»  qffmce  to  hea  /eiony  as  a  gnat  em- 
dSwethatU  wa$not  treaton brfarB,  avd  A' 

iVDGMBIlT  OF  PABLXAMEIIT  tV  POINT, 
FOR  IT  OAVNOT  BB  THOVORT  THAT  IT 
WOULD  MAKB  THAT  LESS  THAR  TABASON- 
WaiOH  WAS  tRBASOU   BY  %&TU   KdwaBD' 

And  Mr.  J.  Foster^  in  terms  more  ez- 
plidty  says^  ^  Lord  ohief-jttstioe  Hale  vras 
of  opinion,  that  bare  words  are  not  an 
overt,  act  of  treaaon.  Coke  waa  of  the 
siaae  opUiioiL  I{ale.has  treated  the  sub- 
ject pretty  much  at*  large,  and  I^ha)l  not 
repeat  hm  argument,,  but  I  muflt  say,  J 
MmA  hi$  reaeom  founded  OH'  temporal^  actSy 
or  act€.mce  repeaUdy. which  maktefeaking 
thewordttheremeetjorthfelo'iyycr  aiaefe- 
meonoTf  ABE  ukanbwbbablr;*  For,  }f 
theee  word9,<  seditious  to  the  last  degree, 
had  been  demed  overt  act^wiUmthc  etattdep 
qfireaeentf  the.  leo^slaturb  couia  not, 

WIf«  Aaiir«90BT  OJ  CONSXSTEIiCr,  HAVE 
TliB^TEn.    TREie  A6    B&LONT    Oft   lUSDE- 

iceeiien."  And  he  adds  in  a^  note,  the 
like' use  hath  been  made  oi  temporary 
slaltutasy  which  make  words  in  certain 
cesae  treason.  But  I  do  not  buUd  upon 
thaatw    I  BELT  OR-  those  which* make 

WORDS  felony  OSU  MISDfiM BAROBt^'t 

The  prisoner,  therefore,  takes  it  for 
gBranted>oii  all  theauthoiitiesyithatso  &r 
is  the  en^Btii^.  ask  oflGemce  to  be  felony 
whieh  was  ^understood  to  be  treason^  from 
being,  a  declaration  of  thhr  legislature,  that 
although  treason,  it  may  be  tried  as  felony, 
it  is  at  jjfdgpBent  of  parliament  that  it  was 
net  treason  before;  and  wher^*  the  legis- 
k^se^  in  enectingan  ofienceto  be  felony, 
haa  employed  woraa  which  might  embrace 
the  comn^asion  of  it  under  dicumistancee 
w^dtk  would  make  it  Ueasob,  it  is  an  es- 
tablished rule  of  law,  that  stfoh  enaotment 
applies  only  to  oaaes  where<the  offence 
doeS'Uot  amount  to  treason.  It  is,  there* 
fore,  only  necessary  for  the  prisoner  to 
shoW)  with  regasd  to  the  ofience  menfeioDed 
in  the  ac^  tl^t-l^ere  are  caoes  in  which 
its>  commission  would  no^  amount  to 
treason,  in  order  to  relieve  your  lordshipe 
from  any  difficulty  yeu  Rifgbi  .fied>yeur- 
selves  undtfr,  if.  you  iK^re*  bound  eidier  to 
'decide  against  the  weight  of  au^rity. 


•  Cokeys  3rd  Inst.  3&. 


-*t- 


.    »l'HaleaU.  •tXW<i,2eo,2W.    jFoetery 
200,  201. 


4811 


Jw  AdmnuUring  unbut^ful  Oalhsi 


A.  D.  1817. 


1483 


that  has  been  produced,  or  else  to  hold  as 
nugatory  the  'nntpart  of  this  enactment 
of  these  statutes.  But  there  k  no  occa- 
sion for  any  such  difBcolly. . 

In  the',^rtr  place,  the  words,  ^  any 
treason/'  are  necessary  m  the  statute,  in, 
order  to  embrace  the  ease  of  an  oath  to 
commit  petit  tretmmj  which,  your  lordships 
know,  is  an  aggraTated  species  of  murder, 
and  which  otherwise,  in  England,  woM 
not  have  fallen  under  the  words  of  the  tUdute. 
Whether  it  might,  notwithstanding,  have 
been  held  within  its  meaning,  it  is  unne- 
cessary to  discuss.    It  is  certain,  that  in 
all    general    pardons   which  have  been 
pass^  for  a  century  aod  a  half,  the  ez- 
eeption  of  petit  treason,  eo  nomine^  has 
been  constantly   inserted    with  that  of 
wil/ul  murder;  and  such  is  now  the  usual 
wording  of  acts  of  parliament.*   Seccndfy, 
there  are  not  wanting  cases  of  oaths  to 
commit  high  tremon  to  which  it  applies. 
Thus,  an. oath,  or  engagement  to  join  in 
a  «onspiraicy  to  obtain  any  public  purpose 
by  open  force  and  Tiolence,  as  to  raise 
the  rate  of  wages  generally ;   to  destroy 
all  machinery,  not  merely  in  one  parti- 
cidar  place,  or  of  one  particular  descrip- 
tion ;  or  to  redress  any  public  grieyance ; 
in  short,  to  join  in  any  of  those  acts  of 
open  Tiolence  and  tumult,  which  are  dis- 
tinguished in  law  as  a  constructive  lerying 
of  war  against  the  king  in  his  realm, 
would  he  witkm  the  Uatute ;  and  the  ad- 
ministering and  taking  sach  oath  would  not 
mmnaU  to  an  overt  act  aftreaton  wnder  any 
emitting  law.    For  the  compassing  to  leyy 
suoh  a  war  as  tliis,  is,  as  your  lordships 
weH  know,  not  treaaon :  and  the  compas- 
sing or  eonspiring  to  levy  ami  war,  unless 
it  amount  to  an  overt  act  of  compassing 
the   king's   death,  as  only    treasonable 
under  the  statute  of  the  36th  «of  his  pre- 
sent majesty. 

In  no  view  could  this  word  treason  have 
been  omitted  out  of  the  statute  consist- 
ently with  the  main  object  for  which  it 
was  passed,  namely,  the  putting  down 
certain  disturbances,  threatening  very 
•erions  consequences.  As  it  was  obvious 
that  all  nnaderoiu  engagements  would 
not  be  included  without  the  insertien  of 
the  word  /reoKm,  sp  it  was  easy  to  see 
that  the  projected  disturbances  might  be 
•f  a  nature  amounting  to  a  constructive 
levying  of  war,  and  that,  without  the  in- 
sertioB  of  the  word  treason,  a  diflSculty 
anght  occur,  since  an  engagement  to 
eommit  this  sort  of  treason  would  not  fall 
under  the  description  of  an  engagement 
to  oommit  felony.  Another  reason  may 
Ve  supposed  to  have  had  its  weight, 
naiMly,  that  the  act  86th  of  the  king, 
rendering  the  compassing  to  levy  war  for 
■  certain  purposes  therein  set  forth  in  itself 

•  Fnrter'i  Cro.  Law,'  325. 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


eenwd  of  high 'treason,  kenl^  atemi 
fary  statute,  which  espires  with  the  life 
of 'his  present  majesty,  whereas  this  act 
of  the  '53nd  of  the  king  is  perpetuid. 

IVo  things  only  remain.  To  give  your 
lordships  an  example  of  the  course  which 
the  legislature  adopts,  when  its  object 
really  is  that  which  the  prosecutor  would 
attribute  to  it  in  the  present  instance,  and 
to  show,  in  very  few  words,  that  no  such 
conclusion  as  he  would  draw  can  be  fairly 
inferred  from  the  last  -section  of  the  act, 
on  which  he  seems  mainly  to  rely. 

At  the  time  of  the  detestable  attack 
made  on  his  majesty  in  the  year  1800,  it 
was  thought  advisable  to  place  direct  at- 
tacks upon  'thC'king's  person  on  a  difi^rfent 
footing  from  other  acts  -of  treason  with 
regard  to  the  mode  of  trial,  and  to  assi- 
milate them,  in  this  respect,  'to  the  Kke 
murderous  attempts  on  the  person  of  a 
subject.    That  the  actual  murder  of  the 
king  does  not  itself  constitute  treason,  but 
can  only  be  tried  as  an  overt  act  of  com- 
passing his  death,  was,  as  your  lordships 
know,  solemnly  decided  in  the  case  of 
those  who   put  to  death  king  Charles 
1st.*  It  never  occurred  to  any  one,  that  it 
was    possible  to   try  these  persons  for 
mti-dar.    And  by  statute  9th  Geo.  1st.  c. 
22.,  it  is  enacted,  "  that  if  any  person 
vrilfuUy    and  maliciously  shoot  at    any 
person,  he  shall  be  adjudged  guilty  of 
felony,  without  benefit  of  clergy."    But 
it  was  not  thought,  that  by  this  act,  the 
shootina  at  the  Tang  could  be  proeeeuted  ae 
each  felony  f  nor  was  it  thought  possible  to 
enact  the  treason  of  attacking  the  king's  ^ 
life  into  a  felony.    Accordingly,  the  act 
39th  and  40th  Geo.  3rd.  c.  93.  was  passed, 
reciting  in  the  preamble,  that  **  whereas 
it  is  expedient,  in  cases  oihigh  treaun^  in 
compamng  and  imagining  the  death  of  the 
king,  where  the  overt  act  alleged  shall  be 
the  assassination  -or  killins  uie  king,  or 
any  direct  attack  against  his  life,  6cc.  the 
trial  for  such  offence  should -not  be  dif- 
ferent from  trials  for  murder,  or  wilful 
and  maMcioHS  shooting  ;**  it  then  enacts, 
^  that  the  person  shaH  be  imdieted,  ^rro^gn- 
edy  triedy  and  attainted  in  the  same  manner, 
and  according  to  the  eame  coune  and  order 
■of  trial  in  every  respect,  and  upon  the  Uke 
evidence  f  at  jf  mth  person  or  persons  stood 
'Charged  toUh  murder  J*    And  so  thoroughly 
aware  was  the  legislature  that  treason 
could  not  be  tried  as  felony,  and  that  acts 
passed  for  the  benefit  of  the  subject  could 
not  be  repealed  by  implication,  that  that 
act  contains  a  special  clause,  enactiDg, 
**  Hiat  none  of  the  provisions  contaioM 
in  the  several  acts  of  the  7th  year  of  king 
William  drd^  and  the  7th  of  queen  Anne 
respectively,  touching  trials  m  cases  of 
treason,  Stc' shall  extend  to  any  indict- 


21 


*  Kelyng's  ]Up.  8. 


4831 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  nfAi^tfm  M^SmU]/ 


r484 


iD€Bt  of  high  treaiOD,  in  compaitiBf  &e. 
'where  the  overt  act  shall  be  such  as  afore- 
said,  buty  upon  con^ictiony  judgnjient  shall 
nevertheless  be  given,  and  execution  done, 
as  in  other  cases  of  high  treason*  any  law, 
statute,  or  usage  to  the  contrary  notwith* 
standing.*' 

It  is  believed,  that  the  act  of  the  pre- 
sent session,  for  the  better  preservation 
of  the  prince  regent's  person,  is  of  the 
same  tenor. 

The  prisoner  has  now  to  show,  that  the 
words  in  the  last  section  of  the  act,  relied 
on  by  the  prosecutor  to  prove  that  an 
option  is  given  of  prosecuting  treason  as 
felony,  not  only  authorise  no  such  infer- 
ence, but  that  such  an  inference  would 
be  attended  with  consequences  the  most 
preposterous*  and  the  most  dangerous. 

It  must  be  recollected,  that  this  statute 
is,  bot\|  by  its  title  and  preamble,  to  be 
considered  as  an  extension  of  the  act  37th 
of  the  king,  which  it  vfas  passed  for  the 
purpose  of  rendering  more  effectual.  By 
this  acty  37th  Geo.  3rd,  c.  123,  '^  the  ad- 
ministering or  taking  any  oath,  purport- 
ing or  intending  to  bind  the  person  taki".g 
the  same  ta  engage  in  any  mutinous  or 
seditious  purposes,  or  to  disturb  the  public 
peace,  or  to  be  of  any  association,  society, 
or  confederacy  formed  for  any  such  pur- 
pose, or  to  obey  the  orders  or  commands 
of  any  committee  not  lawfully  constituted, 
or  of  any  leader  or  commander,  or  other 
person  not  having  authority  by  law  for 
that  purpose,  or  not  to  inform  or  give 
evidence  against  any  associate,"  &c  is 
declared  felony,  and  punished  by  trans- 
portation for  seven  years.  The  last  section 
of  that  act  is  in  the  same  words  vrith  the 
last  section  of  the  act  now  under  consi- 
deration. So  that,  by  the  same  rule  of 
construction,  it  must  be  maintained,  that 
in  passing  the  act  37th  of  the  king,  it  was 
the  intention  of  the  legislature,  that  per- 
sons guilty  of  high  treason  might  be  tried 
for  this  felony,  and  be  sentenced  to  trans- 
portation for  seven  years,  and,  being  so 
tried,  should  be  for  ever  quit  from  all 
question  as  to  their  treason.  And  if  the 
words  of  that  statute  be  attended  to,  and 
such  be  its  construction,  the  offence  might 
obviously  amount  to  no  less  an  act  of 
treason  than  the  enlisting  in  a  regular  body 
sworn  to  obey  the  orders  of  a  leader  or 
commander  in  open  rebellion.  The  pri- 
soner has  already  shown,  that  the  direct 
and  general  words  in  the  jint  teeimri  of 
the  act  on  which  he  is  indicted*  vrill  not 
abrogate  the  rule  of  the  common  law. 
There  is,  therefore,  to  this  effect*  no  dif- 
ference between  the  two  statutes.  If  the 
inference  is  to  be  drawn  from  the  last 
^katae,  it  is  equally  applicable  to  the  87th 
of  the  king  as  to  the  latter  act  of  the  52nd. 

To  engage  in  a  mutinous  or  seditious 
purposie  'may  mclade  p,  treasonable  en- 


gag«mettt ;  and  to  administer  or  take  an 
oath*  binding  to  any  such  engagement* 
may  most  easily  be  an  overt  act  of  treason. 
To  disturb  the  public  peace*  may  include 
treasbn;    to  become''  bound,  or  engage 
another*  to  be  of  any  confederacy  formed 
for  such  purpose*  if  the  purpose  be  trea- 
sonable* which  it  may  well  be,  nay  be  an 
overt  act  of  tteason.    To  administef  or 
take  an  oath  to  obey  the  commands  of 
any    body   of    men*  not   lawfully  con- 
stituted, or  of  any  leader  or  commander* 
not  having  authority  by  law*  if  such  body 
or  leader  be  engaged  in  any  treasonable 
purpose,  may  be  an  overt  act  of  treason* 
and  in  many,  perhaps  most  of  the  in- 
stances* in  which  a  leader  and  commander 
could  be  supposed  appointed,  is  more 
likely  to  be  an  act  of  treason  than  other- 
vrise.      If  to   these   considerations   be 
added  the  last  clause  of  the  said  act  of 
the  37th  of  the  king,  declaring,  *«lliat 
any  person,  who  shall  be  tried  and  ac- 
qmtted*    or   convicted    of  any    ofience 
against  this  act,  shall  not  be  indicted* 
prosecuted*  or  tried  again  for  the  same 
offence  or  fact,  as  high  treason*  or  mis* 
prision  of  high  treason*  and  that  nothing 
m  this  act  contained  shall  be  construed 
to  extend  to  prevent  any  person  guilty  of 
any  offence  against  this  act,  and  who  shall 
not  be  tried  for  the  same  as  an  oAence 
against  this  act,  from  being  tried  for  the 
same  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of 
high  treason*  in  such  manner  as  if  this 
act  had  never  been    made;^   then  the 
prosecutor  has*  according  to  Ait  reasoning* 
eomplete    evidence*   that*   ^it  is  quite 
dearly  the  meaning  of  this  law*  to  make 
the  administering  or  taking  an  oath*  pur- 
porting in  terms  of  the  statute*  triable 
acoordmg  to  the  ordinary  course  of  jus- 
tice (that  is*  as  a  felony)*  whether  it  be 
treason  or  not;"*— that  is,  that  **it  is 
quite  clearly  the  meaning  of  the  law***  to 
make  high  treaaon  triakU  as  a  irmmportabie 
fekfmf ;—  to  give  the  power  to  every  in- 
former, perhaps  an  accomplice*  of  laying 
an  information  under  this  act,  to  tlie  eifect 
of  obtaining  the  culprit  to  be  indicted 
under  it  at  the  quarter-sessions,  so  that* 
although  die  offence  should  turn  out  to 
be  truly  an  act  of  high  treason,  amounting 
to  actuid  rebellion*  and  a  conspiracy  to 
take  up  arms,  provided  it  be  also  an  en- 
gagement to  embark  in  any  mutinous  or 
seditions  purpose*  and  it  cannot  wdl  be 
otherwise*  or  to  obey  a  body  or  leader, 
not  having  authority  bv  law*  he  can  only 
be  convicted  under  the  act*  and  tiams- 
ported  for  seven  years. 

There  is*  as  your  korddiips  know*  in 
England*  nothing  to  pfevent  any  man 
from  bringing  another  ta  justice  for  a 
public  crime ;  and  if  it  be  the  law*  that 


^  Information*  p.  390^ 


4»o\ 


Jbr  AdmiMiteriiig  unlamfid  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C486 


it  it  no  objefitton  to  an  iodictmeDt  and 
trinl  under  the  ttatatey  that  the  faot  com" 
mitted^  is  hi^  treaaoa,  then,  on  tnch  in- 
CMftnatioa  being  giiwn  to  the  grand  jury, 
V  *  they  may  hwiul^  tndid  one  gnilty  of 
treason  as  for  this  felony;  and  if  the 
treasonable  matter  be  kept  back  from  the 
knowledge  of  the  grand  jniTy  ^ey  have 
no  choice  bnt  to  indiot  him  or  the  felony, 
and  then,  though  it  appear  manifestly  on 
the  trial  that  the  crime  was  high  treason 
of  te  moet  dangerooa  nature,  there  is  no 
legal  remedy ;  but  the  cnlprit  must  escape 
with  a  pnnishment  ab§oliaeiy  ludicrous 
when  compared  to  thi  txteni  Sf  kk  guilt. 
Is  it  not  obrious,  that  if  this  were  the 
intention  of  the  legislature,  the  title  of 
the  statute  has  been  mistaken,  and  that  it 
ought  to  have  been  intituled,  '^  an  act  for 
abolishing  the  plains  and  penalties  of  high 
treason  in  certain  cases,  and  substituting 
the  punishment  of  transportation  for 
seven  years  in  lien  thereof  ?'  Nor  under 
the  last  act,  the  52nd  of  the  king,  is  the 
oondusion  much  less  absvrd ;  for  though 
the  admimtieritig  a  treasonable  oath  ren- 
ders the  person  subject  to  a  capital 
pnnishment,  the  tMng  it  is  oi^  a  trans- 
portable offence ;  so  tiMCt  for  an  oath  taken 
to  kill  the  king  I  though  n  weapon  were 
provided  for  the  pnrpose,  and  omer  steps 
taken  to  aeoomptish  it,  a  man  might  yet 
be  only  liable  to  transportation ;  and  this, 
k  is  gravely  supposed,  wae  in  ihe  view  of 
the  legislature  in  passing  this  act. 

We  ate  here,  in  a  question  not  wholly 
without  ambigtttsy,  endeavonring  to  as- 
certain the  antentioB  of  the  legtriature  in 
passing  an  act  of  parliament.  .The  act 
creates  two  descriptions  of  felony,  one 
without  beneftt  of  mergy,  and  capital,  the 
other  within  beneik  of  clergy,  and  trans- 
portable. The  legislature  must  therefore 
nnve  been  aware^  not  only  that  acts  of 
high  treason  might  be  tried  under  the 
statute  at  a  tapiial  /dtmy,  but  that  acts  of 
the  same  nnture  might  be  tried  of  a  trwu' 
forUibie  ftlcmtf,  ^<yt  the  act  says,  any 
pereon  takkig  an  oath  to  commit  treason, 
shall  be  transported  for  life,  or  for  such 
terra  as  the  Court  shall  adjudge.  And  if 
the  legislature  meant,  in  one  case,  that  high 
trason  might  be  punished  a*  •  aj^pitalfdony^ 
it  is  equally  clear,  that  it  meant  in  the 
other  that  it  might  he  punished  at  a  trant' 
poHabie  fiUnhf,  And  lu  passing  the  37th 
of  the  king,  it  meant,  that  high  treason 
flhonld  be  punished  hif  tr^mtfoirta^km  for 
$men  yean  onfy.  The  prisoner  will  not 
sajr«  that  it  is  dilBcuk  to  suppose  any 
ihmg  more  unlikely;  but-  he  uSrms,  that 
nothing  can  be  supposed  more  impossible. 
'Eo.asotibe  this  intontion  to  the  legislature 
in  im  vtter  ahenrdity.  He  possesses  no 
Means  of  Htnstrating  what  appears  so 
plain  and  undeniable,  to  which  lie  enroot 
even  imagine  an  aasvrety  and  whicbi  if  it 


required  additional  support,  is  amply  con- 
firmed by  the  uniform  doctrine  of  all 
writers  of  authorit}r — Coke,  Hale,  Foster 
•— foAo  agree  thai  iiitnot  tobe  imputed  to 
tkt  legitlattaref  thai  it  ever  intended,  by  any 
statute,  to  enact  treason  into  felony.  If  the 
words,  therefore,  of  this  last  clause,  of 
these  two  statutes  should  remain  utterly 
nagatory  and  unintelligible  to  the  end  of 
the  world,  this  would  not  involve  half 
the  difficultv,  or  a  tenth  part  bf  the 
absurdity,  of  imputing  to  the  legislature 
an  intontion  such  as  has  been  supposed. 

Instead,  therefore,  of  assuming  such  a 
proposition  as  this,  the  prisoner  will 
rather  endeavour  to  ascertain  what  mean- 
ing this  clause  can  have,  consistently  with 
the  plain  rules  of  law  and  common  sense. 
And  in  so  doing,  he  is  happy  to  think 
there  is  no  extraordinary  difficulty. 

The  clause  consists  of  two  parts.  The 
prisoner  will  beg  leave  to  begin  with  the 
last*  It  is  in  these  terms,  "That  nothing 
in  this  act  contained,  shall  be  construed 
to  extend  to  prohibit  any  person  guilty  of 
any  offence  against  this  act,  and  who  shall 
not  be  tried  for  the  same  as  an  offence 
against  this  act,  from  beiog  tried  for  the 
same  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of 
high  treason,  in  such  manner  as  if  this 
act  had  not  been  .made.'* 

Now,  what  is  this  but  a  clause  of  the 
nature  of  that  toary  douse,  whicH  lord 
Hale  remarks  in  the  statutes  of  Philip 
and  Mary,  Edward,  and  Elisabeth,  making 
several  offences  felony,  **  the  same  not  being 
treason  by  statute  %5th  Edward  ZrdV*  The 
legiskUure  was  aware,  that  the  enacting 
these  offences  into  felony  was  a  judgment 
of  parliament  that  they  were  not  treason ; 
and  therefore  to  avoid  the  risk  of  any 
such  intorpretation,  where  the  oifences 
were  treason,  this  clause  was  introduced. 

In  the  same  manner,  the53nd  of  the  king 
deelares,  that  nothing  therein  contained 
shall  be  construed  to  prohibit  any  offence 
against  this  act  from  being  tried  as  hieh 
treason ;  lest  it  should  be  argued,  that  the 
general  terms  of  the  statuto  were  a  de- 
daration  of  parliament,  that  such  offence 
was  no  longer  to  be  considered  a  treason, 
but  a  felony.  The  general  terms  of  the 
enacting  clause,  that  the  admiaisteiing  or 
takiuff  any  oath  binding  to  commit  any  trea» 
son,  shall  be  deemed  felony,  would  take 
in  all  the  cases  of  administering  or  taking 
such  oaths,  though  such  administering  or 
taking  should  amount  to  treason.  It  is 
tnie,  that  according  to  just  rules  of  con- 
struction, and  agreeably  to  the  precedents 
and  principles  whichhave  been  mentioned, 
it  ought  not  to  be  so  construed.  But  it 
was  justly  thought  proper  not  to  leave 
this  to  construetion,  but  to  declare,  by 
this  express  olanse,  that  it  was  not  in- 
tended that  the  statute  slmuld  apply  to 
cases  where  the  oAence  actually  amounted 


4871         tn  GEORGE  III. 

to  kigh  trcsson,  but  thai  thwe  should  be 
lri«d  in  the  same  inamier  as  before.  And, 
a»  Jvudge  Foeter  very  justly  remaiks, 
^  thoagh  it  is  a  goodi  general  role,  that  the 
pariitmeni  doth  miking  m  vainy  yet  this  is 
▼ery  well  known  not  to  be  universally 
trae.  For  many  valnable  purposes,  which 
wisdom,  and  a- just  oonoern  for  the  public 
welfitre,  will  suggest,  may  be  answered 
by  an  express  |>rovision,.  not  in  itself  of 
absolute  indispensable  necessity;  some- 
tines  for  remoTing  doubts,  where  different 
opinions  have  been  entertained,  and  at 
other  times  out  of  abundant  caution,  for 
obviating  doubts  which  possibly  may 
arise/'* 

But  the  words,  **  who  shall  not  be  tried 
ibr  the  same  as  an  offence  against  this 
act,*  are  supposed  to  aliudC'  to  this  alter- 
native power,  which  the  a^t  must  there- 
fore  be  held  to  havecreate4«  Tliis  alludes 
to,  and  is  connected  with,  the  former  part 
of  the  clause,  and  will  be  best  understood 
by  examining  what  the  meaning  of  this 
former  part  is^  I 

It  is^  in '  these  weids :  *i  Provided  also, 
and  it  is  hereby  declared,  that  any  person 
who  shali  be  tried  and  acquitted,  or  con- 
victed of  any  offence  against  this  act, 
•hall  not  be  liable  to  be  indicted,  prose- 
cuted, or  tried  again  for  the  same  offence 
or  fact  as  high  treason,  or  misprision  of 
hieh  treason/' 

The  prisoner  readily  admits,  that  to 
persons  not  accustomed  to  <iuestions  of 
legal  ceastmction,  it  may  at  first  sight 
appear  as  if  the  legislatore  had  contem- 
plated the  possibility  of  trying  the  same 
•flbnoe  either  as  high  treason  or  felony,  at 
the  pleasure  of  we  prosecutor,  or  the 
indictors,  vii.  the  grand  jury.  But  it  is 
^uito  obvious,  that  without  any  supposi- 
tion of  this  sort,,  it  must  have  beei»  fore- 
seen, that  cases  might  readily  occur  where 
the  facts  might  approach  very  close  to 
tieasoQ,  and  where  it  might  be  doubtful 
whether  to  proceed  for  treason,  or  for  the 
folony  under  the  statute.  If  the  latter 
eourse  were  adopted,  and  it  came  out  in 
evidence  to  be  treieon,.  the  pcisoner, 
thougliJUi()nitted,  was  yet  subject,. accor- 
ding t»  the  law  of  England,  to  be  tried 
over  t^n-  for  the*  same  fact,  under  the 
denommataeo  of  the  higher  crime.  It 
was  this  hardship  the  legislature  meant  to 
It  meant  to  extend  to  the  sub- 


Triul  ofAhdi^mo  M^tSnUff 


r48S 


.*■ 


jpct  in  Rnghnd  b]r  sutute  in  »^  ««»«, 
t^  benefit  to  which  he  is  entitled  in 
Scotland  by  the  coaunoa  law  in  all  cases, 
that  he  shall  not  be  tried  on  diiforent  ac- 
cusations, and  nodes  differentdenomina- 
tions  of  guilt,  more  than  once  for  the 
samf  fact.  There  is  nothing  either  so 
anomalous,  or  so  jextraordinary,  in  a  pro- 
vision by  the  legislature  to  remedy  this 


I.,ft0,f984. 


*  hardship,  when  il  was  ereatiag  new 
offences,  to  be  punished  by  the  latter 
statute  with  great  severity,  thai  we  should 
rather  have  recourse  to  the  extravagant 
supposition  suggested  by  the  prosecutor, 
to  account  for  the  insertion  of  these 
words. 

But  it  may  be  said  that  this  reasoning 
relates  only  to  a  case  of  aeqmtuli  and  it 
may  be  asked,  To  what  purpoee  is  it 
declared,  that  a  person  comrieted  of  an 
offence  against  this  act,  shall  not  be  tried 
again  for  the  same  offence  or  foct  as  high 
treason,  if,  the  foct  amountiug  to  high 
treason,  he  could  not  be  legally  convicted 
of  that  offence  or  fact  under  this  actf 
The  solution  of  this  difficulty,  if  it  be 
one,  is  not  very  intricate.  In  the  Jini 
place.  The  prisoner  is  not  aware  that  the 
legisUture  has  ever  declared,  that  where 
an  acquittal  on  one  indictment  shall  be  a 
bar  to  another,  a  conviction  shall  not  be 
equally  so;  and  it  would  seem  a  singular 
hardship  if  it  were  otherwise.  In  the 
seoonrf  place.  It  was  obvious,  that  circum- 
stances might  come  out  afterwards,  shew- 
ing the  fiMts  committed  to  have  amounted 
to  treason,  which  might  not  appear  at 
the  trial.  And  the  legislature  thought  it 
would  be  too  rigorous  a  proceeding,  on 
acconnt  of  after  discoveries,  which,, 
though  the^  might  vary  its  legal  com- 
plexion, might  not  vary  the  fo^  of  the 
case,  again  to  put  the  ofiinider  on  his 
trial,  which  might  be  by  the  common  law. 
For  a  eonvietion  or  acquittal  on  a  charge 
of  Mooj  could  not  be  pleaded  in  bar  of 
a  dmrge  of  high  treason  by  the  common 
hw. 

In   the  Hdrd  place,  An  offence  not 
amounting  to  treason  when  committed  or 

'  tried,  may  become  treason  by  a  subse- 
quent event,  and  the  possibiiity  of  this, 
was  more  obvious  in  those  offences  whidi 
were  in  tlie  particular  view  of  the  legisla- 
ture in  passing  these  acts.  The  species 
of  treason  to  which  the  engagements  con- 
templated- were  the  most  l&ely  to  lead, 
vras  evidently  the  levying  of  war.  Now, 
if  the  war  proposed  to  be  levied^  were  not 
directly  against  the  king's-  person  or  go- 
vernment, or  cominff  under  the  86th  of 
the  king^  but  only  what  is  termed  a  con- 
structive levying  of  war  against  the  king, 
then  the  bare  oooapiracy  would  be  no 
treasoUi  unless  the  rising  were  effected, 
or  the  war  levied.  But  **  in  that  ease, 
the  conspirators,  as  well  as  the  actors, 
will  be  all  equally  gutlt]^;  for  in  high 
treasons  of  all  kinds,  the  ^eritcfMS  cnms- 
fiip  are  principals.*^  .  '*  And  if  divers 
conspire  to  levy  war,  md  some  of  them 
actually  levy  it,  tUe  is  high  treason  in  all 
the  eonspirators;  becanse  in  tseeeon  all 
are  principals,  and  hare  is  a  war  levied." 


»» 


^  FoMr,  %IZ. 


4801 


fiiit  Aimi»t^t»timg  wnitn^iA  Oalht. 


A.  o.  mi* 


C490 


So  it  was  declared  at  the  arraignment  of 
sir  Ni6holat  Tbrogmorton,  by  the  opi- 
nions of  the  jodgesy  that  tf  two  or  aore 
oonspire  to  commit  treason,  as  in  loTying 
war,  and  any  of  them  afterwards  pot  it  in 
execntion,  that  is  treason  in  all,  and  this 
by  the  common  law  before  the  declaration 
was  made  in  3^th  Edw.  3rd."*  Thus,  if 
one  were  indicted  under  the  37th  of  the 
king,  (or  adminiirtering  or  taking  an  oath, 
binding  to  be  of  an  association  for  any 
mntinoos  or  seditious  purpose,  or  to  obey 
the  orders  or  commands  of  anr  commit* 
tee  or  bodv  of  men  not  lawfiuiy  oonsti- 
toted,  or  of  an^  leader  or  commander  not 
baring  aathonty  by  law,  there  being  at 
the  time  of  his  arrai^ment  no  war  levied, 
he  could  not  be  tned  for  treason.  But 
beinp;  either  acquitted  or  convicted  under 
this  indictment,  if  afterwards  the  associa- 
tion or  committee,  or  body  of  men,  or 
leader,  or  commander  with  whom  he  had 
so  conapirM,  should  actually  jAroceed  to 
effect  the  rising  contemplated,  such  rising 
amounting  to  a  losing  of  war,  he  would 
be  thereby  rendered  ex  part  facto  guilty  of 
treason ;  and  but  for  this  clause  in  the 
act,  might  be  tried  for  treason  accord- 
ingly; nor  could  he  plead  in  bar,  his 
former  acquittal  or  conviction  of  the 
felony. 

Tkiese  considerations  rendered  this 
clause  indispensable.  So  to  interpret  the 
intention  pt  the  legislature  infers  no  ab- 
surdity, but,  on  the  contraiT,  is  for  the 
advancement  of  justice,  and  for  the  fre^ 
dom  of  the  subject  from  vexatious  and 
oppressive  prosecutions.  The  only  incon- 
venience th^t  can  be  supposed  to  arise 
from  it  is  this,  that  if  an  offender  be  tried 
under  either  of  these  actt,  and  it  come 
out  on  evidence  that  his  offence  amounts 
to  high  treason,' he  must  be  acquitted 
under  the  general  rule  of  law,  that  trea- 
son cannot  be  tried  as  felony.  But  this 
by  no  means  follows ;  for  if  it  be  the  in- 
tention of  the  legislature  that  treason 
shall  not  be  tried  as  a  felony  under  this 
act,  he  cannot  be  lawfolly  put  upon  his 
tnal  for  this  felony,' if  his  offence  amounts 
to  treason.  If  the  (acts  so  appear  to  the 
magistrate,  he  ought  to  be  committed 
for  treason,  and  not  for  fslony.  If  they 
so  appear  to  the  grand  jurv,  he  cannot  be 
Immily  indicted  for  the  idony,  and  the 
Mm  will  not  waSat  him  to  be  put  on  his 
trill  on  such  indictment.  If  it  so  appear 
to  your  lordships,  yon  will  not  pronounoe 
an  interloenlor  of  relevancy*  If  in  Engi- 
land,  **  throni^  mistake  on  the  part  of 
the  prosecutor,  or  through  the  ignorance 
or  inattention  of  the  officer,  a  bill  were 
preferred  as  for  ^ts  felony,  and  it  should 
cone  out  on  evidence  u»t  the  offence 
treason,  the  judge  would  not 


•  1  Hale,  133. 


think  it  byanymteis  advisabU  to  direct 
the  jury  to  give  a  verdict  of  ae(|uittal :  for 
a  person  «iarged  with  a  ohme  of  so 
heinous  a  nature,  ouf^t  not  to  have  the 
chance  given  him  by  the' Court,  of  avail- 
ing hinuelf  of  a  plea  of  amicrfiiH§  aequU." 
— **  In  such  a  case,^  in  the  words  of  Mr. 
Justice  Foster,  ^  he  would  make  no  sort 
of  difficulty  of  disdiarging  the  jury  of  that 
indictment,  and  ordering  a  fresh  indict- 
ment for  the  treason/  In  this  method,  the 
prisoner  would  have  the  advantage  of  his 
peremptory  challenges,  and  the  public 
justice  would  not  siaSfer."* 

That  the  Court  has  authori^,  agreeably 
to  the  law  and  practice  in  Enf^d,  to 
discharge  the  juiV  after  the  prisoner  has 
pleaded,  and  evidence  given,  where  the 
purposes  of  justice  require  i^  has,  from 
before  the  time  of  Lord  Hale  been  ad- 
mitted by  the  best  authorities.t' 

The  case  of  a  trial  on  this  statute, 
where  the  offence  amounts  to  high  trea- 
son, is  precisely  in  point  with  that  put  in 
by  Mr.  Justice  Foster,  of  a  trial  for  mur- 
der where  the  offence  amounts  to  petit 
treason. .  For  in  that  case  it  is  laiddown 
by  all  the  authorities,  that  an  acquittal 
upon  an  indictment  of  mwder;  is  a  good 
bar  to  an  indictment  of  petit  treason  in 
the  same  way  as  an  acquittal  of  this  felony 
created  br  the  statutes  of  the  king,  would 
be  a  good  plea  in  bar  of  an  indictmtot  of 
high  treason  for  the  same  offence,  though 
neither  in  the  case  of  petit  treason,  even 
in  Judge  Foster's  opinion,  ought  a  con- 
viction to  foUow,  nor  by  the  aeneral  rule 
of  law,  in  an  indictmmit*  under  this  sta- 
tute, as  the  prisoner  trusts  he  has  shown, 
can  a  conviction  follow,  if  the  offence 
amount  to  high  treasott.t 
'  According  to  the  construction  which 
Ihe  prosecutor*  would  put  on  the  in- 
tention of  the  legislatiire  in  passing  the 
sutute  on  which  he  has  laid  the  present 
indictment,  he  would  impute  to  the  legis- 
lature this  inconceivable  injustice  and  ab- 
surdity—That on  the  one  hand  the  highest 
and  most  dangerous  species  of  treason, 
>,  involving  a  m^itated  atttack  on  the  life 
of  the  sovereign,  sanctioned  by  the  so- 
lemnitv  of  cams,,  and  extending,  as  is 
alleged  in  this  casci  to  a  conspiracy  of 
hundreds  or  thousands  of  persons,  threats 
ening,  as  is  here  also  alleged,  '^  to  effect 
the  subversion  of  the  established  |;ovenH 
ment,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this  king- 
dom,'' by  means  which  must  involve  the 
whole  nation  in  bloodshed  and  fai  open 

*  Foster,  Crown  Law,  8t8. 

t  1  Hale  35,  523,  657-  2  Hale,  295. 
Kelyng*s  Rep.  36, 47, 52. 

t  Foster,  38,  39.  Foster's  C.  L.  pp.  30, 
et  seq.  lb.  328.  Leach's  case  in  C.  1.  Case 
233.  Ibid.  Ca.  257.  Foster,  329.  2  ilale, 
246,  252.    8  Coke  Inst.  213. 


4911 


S7  GEORGE  III. 


Triat  o/j^ndnm  M'Kinlty 


[402 


war,  ma^  bt  triad  as  ^  felony,  puniibable 
only  with  tnuispoitation;  and  like  in- 
dictaant  bainy  onea  piefarvad,  wbather 
by  a  grand  jury  in  £D|^d,  or  ihe  public 
piosacutor  in  Scotland,  no  ranady  re- 
ntaini,  but  the  offauden  mvat  be  for  erer 
disduurged  by  this  means  fioa  all  further 
coaaaquenoes  of  their  goilt.  And  on  the 
•ther  hand,  by  the  cootrivanoa  of  the  offi- 
cers of  tha  CrowD,  the  anbjaots  of  this 
country  may  ba  biottght  to  trial,  and 
placed  in  hasard  of  their  U?as  on  a  State 
prosacutioD-— with  tha  whole  weight  and 
influence  of  goremment  to  oppress,  them 
•^the  overheated  zeal  of  iu  officers  ex- 
dtedy  perhaps  their  interest  and  reputa- 
tion at  stake  on  the  issiia--as  well  as  the 
passions  of  the  Custious,  the  tenors  of  the 
tiaud,  the  just  indignatioa  of  tha  weU* 
affiicted  against  crimes  inTolving  the 
common  suety.  overpowering  the  natural 
disposition  to  demeney  and  deliberation, 
•'—an  combining  to  deprive  the  aocnsed  of 
the  security  which  in  ordinary  cases  they 
possess,  for  a  fair  and  impartial  trial ; — 
while  they  are  at  the  same  time  stripped 
of  those  safeguards,  which  it  has  been  the 
ceaseless  eodeavour  of  the 'law  of  Eng- 
land, from  the  most  aacieai  times,  e?ei^ 
in  the  midst  of  tyranny  and  disorder,  to 
provide  for  tha  protection  of  the  subject 
against  that  oppression,  and  that  danger, 
to  which  it  has  always  felt  and  adinow- 
ledged  him  to  ba  in  these  drcumstances 
exposed.  The  prisoner  will  only  add, 
that  io  p«t  sneii  a  constmctaon  upon  these 
acts  of  pariiameat,  would  not  be  to  ex- 
pound the  laws,  bat  to  libel  those  who< 
made  them.  At  your  lordships'  hands, 
he  is  certain  there  is  no  danger  of  their 
receiving  such  a  oonstniction,  equally 
disposed  as  yon  feel,  at  once  to  protect 
the  subject  from  oppression,  and  to  vindi- 
cate the  necessary  justice  oflJic  country. 
In  rtsped  wktrtef^  4^. 

J.  P.  Grant.  . 


Cowueljbr  ike  Panel, ' 


COURT  OF  JUSTICIARy. 
JULT  18, 1817. 

Freteni, 

Rjt.  Hon.  David  Bo^le,  Lord  Justice  Clerk. 
Jiord  Hermand, 
I/>rd  GUlki. 
Loid  FUmiify. 

Caumeljbr  ike  Crcmt. 

BX,  Hon.  Mexm^det  Maoonodde  of  Meadow- 
bank,  His  Majesty's  Advocate  [afterwards  a 
lotd  of  Session  and  Justiciary,  with  the  title 
of  Lord  Meadowbank.l 

Jmi»  ffaUvtorvi,  Esq.  Solioitor-Ganeral. 

H,  flome  Drvmnmdf  Em|.  Advoaate-Depnia. 


Jofo  Clerks  Esq. 
Qea.  OrwuUmn^  Esq. 
2^.  TAomson,  Esq. 
Framm  J^frtM^  Em}. 
X  P.  Gnmr,  Esq. 
J.  A,  Murray f  Esq. 
J&noB  Momcrkfff  Esq. 
Heary  Cockkumf  Esq. ' 

[The  Panel  was  placed  at  the  bar.] 

LmiJmtUx  CMc— Vonr  loadships  will 
collect,  that,  at  a  former  diet,  objections  were 
stat^  at  great  length  to  the  relevancy  of  the 
indictment  against  the  panel,  which  objections 
.  were  considered  by  yon  so  important,  mat  yon 
ordered  them  to  be  embodied  in  informations. 
The  informations  are  now  before  you,  and 
yovr  lordships  will  now  give  yonr  opinions 
upon  them. 

Mr.  Clerk, — I  attend  your  lordships  for  tlie 
panel,  and,  I  trust  I  may  be  permitted  to  say 
a  few  words  upon  the  indictment  in  addition 
to  what  is  stated  in  the  informations ;  and  I 
shall  not  detain  you  long. 

Lord  Advocate.--^The  genHemtn  have  given 
in  two  informations  when  tha  order  was  for 
oae ;  and  yonr  lordships  will  judge  whether 
we  are  now  to  go  into  a  new  pleading.  . 

Mr.  Clerk, — You  know,  that  before  the  in- 
dictment was  ready,  it  was  concerted  there 
should  be  informations.  That  appointment 
was  renewed  after  the  indictment  was  pre- 
pared and  after  hearing  counsel ;  but  it  was 
uefore  the  last  indictment  was  prepared 
that  it  was  fixed  there  should  be .  infor* 
mations;  and  your  lordships  have  not  yet 
nven  any  opinion  at  all  upon  this  indictment. — 
The  informations  were  ordered  upon. the  under- 
standing, that  the  indictment  would  be  nearly 
the  same  as  the  former  one,  only  correc^ng  the 
slovenly  statement  of  the  former.  It  would 
be  strange  if  your  lordships  were  not  to  hear 
counsel.  I  shall  not  detain  you  long,  bul  shall 
on^  call  your  attention  to  some  passages  that 
had  escaped  the  acuteness  of  my  learned 
friend  Mr.  Moncrieff. 

As  to  the  other  argument,  by  Mr.  Gout,  I 
do  not  mean  to  touch  upon  it  at  all.   ^ 

Lord  Juftiee  Clerk, — ^It  is  neoeesary  to  attend 
to  the  ahape  in  which  the  case  comes  before 
OS.  Mr.  Clerk  in  his  statement  is  correct  in 
point  of  fact ;  bnt  I  distinctly  intimated,  when 
a  new  indictment  wais  servad  on  tha  panel, 
that  na  atad  voce  additional  arguments  would 
ba  looked  for  bv  the  Canit  Aom  the  bar,  but 
that  tl|e  counsel  for  the  ftfiaaner  should  em- 
body thair  whole  arguments  in  the  informa- 
tians — whea  we  would  ocnsidor  tiMn  and  give 
dnr  opinicns.  I  oonaidetad  it  inad,  that  no 
tether  atvd  aaos  disooisians  were  to  taka  place 
in  this  case.  There  was  n  discnssicn  aa*  to  the 
time  to  be  given  for  preparing  the  informatioos, 
and  we  listened  to  tbe  cotrasAy  for  further  time 


1 


Jot  AdtUhmtmng  mtinifui  Oatht. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[4M 


to  the  gcnUemati  who  fins  to  di«w  tht  infor- 
BMtioii  far  the  p«mL  Mr.  Coekbnni  was  th» 
eouBfel  who  toade  an  appUettion  09  the  sub- 
ject. We  gave  to  the  paners  covnsel  the 
foUest  and  most  ample  opportunity  for  prep** 
mtion ;  and  not  only  u  there  an  able  aigument 
for  the  panel  by  Mr.  Moncrieff,  but  one  abo 
by  Mr.  Grant.  I  have  folly  considered  the  in- 
fermationSy  and  I  presume  your  lordships  are 
all  prepared  to  give  your  opinioos  npon  them. 

Lord  Hermand. — I  am  of  the  same  opinion 
with  your  lordship,  and  I  beg  leave  to  make 
an  addition  to  your  statement;  that  in  this 
case  the  information  for  the  Crown  was  drawn 
first.  It  was  put  into  the  hands  of  the  ablest 
band  of  counsel  that  could  appear  for  any 
panel,  and  I  do  not  see  for  what  reason  we 
should  reverse  the  usual  course  of  proceeding, 
and  a^ain  take  a  day  or  two  to  consider  what 
Mr.  Clerk  or  othen  may  bring  forward. 

Lofd  OUUn. — Any  thing  additional  ahonld 
have  been  stated  at  an  earlier  period. 

Lord  PiimiSy  was  of  the  same  opinion. 

Lord  HemumtL — ^This  case  has  been  truly 
stated  to  be  a  case  of  great  importance.  It  is 
of  the  last  importance  to  the  panel  at  the  bar, 
for  it  is  a  question  of  capital  punishment ; 
wbi<A,  whatever  may  be  done  in  another 
quarter,  we  have  no  power  to  mitigate.  But 
it  is  of  greater  consequence  in  another  view : 
it  is  of  infinite  oonsequence  to  every  one  who 
now  bears  me,  every  one  who  has  a  dse 
ref^trd  for  the  exoelleBt  constitution  VBder 
which  we  have  the  happiness  to  live. 
.  The  questioii,  however,  is  extremely  simple 
in  itself;  and  I  cannot  say  I  am  mnoh  afraid 
of  Che  hint  of  impeachaeBt  thrvwn  out,*  if 
wo  xeAne  to  give  effeet  to  what  is  cafied  a. 
jodgment  of  Parliament  in  the  days  of  a 
fofiner  Sovereign.  I  sit  here,  in  the  reign  of 
George  the  thinl,  to  give  my  opinion  how  far 
am  indictment  is  well  laid,  upon  the  stat  52nd. 
G«o.  3rd.  cap.  104,  an  act  called  for  by  the 
cirenmslances  of  the  times ;  and  to  which, 
every  man  having  a  due  sense  of  the  consti- 
tntion;  should  wuh  to  give  fair  and  iiiU  effect. 

it  is  upon  that  statute,  therefore,  I  have 
formed  my  opinion ;  and  to  it  I  beg  leave  to 
call  the  attention  of  the  Court.  It  enacts, 
''That  every  person  who  shall,  in  any  manner 
or  form  whatsoever,  administer,  or  cause  to 
be  administered,  or  be  aiding  or  assisting  at 
the  administering,  of  any  oath  or  engagement, 
purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the  person 
taking  the  same  to  commit  any  treason  or 
mnrdter,  or  any  felony  punishable  by  law  with 
death,  shall,  on  conviction  diereof  bv  due 
course  of  law,  be  adjudged  guilty  of  felony, 
and  sofTer  death  as  a  felon,  without  benefit  of 
ciergy.'''  Yet  in  the  foce  of  this  clear  enact- 
ment vire  are  gravely  told,  that,  by  some  rule, 
of  the  fiibmerston  of  one  crime  into  another, 
said  to  be  found  in  English  law  books,  of 

*  2nd  Inf.  p.  4S5. 


whieh  I  prttendfo  ktiow  littloi  it  isndt  ia  dur 
power,  without  violating  our  duty,  to  pfo» 
nounce  judgment  in  this  case  as  in  a  fblony, 
though  we  are  commanded  to  do  so  by  a. 
solemn  act  of  the  legislatare.  The  term/ctony 
occurs  in  almost  every  cLanse  of  the  statoto, 
particularly  that  whicb  I  have  just  now 
feed.  And  the  minor  proposition,  duly  fid* 
lowing  out  the  words  of  the  statute,  states 
that,  '<You  the  said  Andrew  M'Kiuley 
are  guilbr  of  the  said  crimes,  or  of  one  or 
more  of  them,  actor,  or  art  and  part : 
i»  so  far  as  you  the  said  Andrew  M'Kinl^ 
did,  at  secret  meetings,  and  on  other  occasions, 
at  Glasgow,  and  in  the  viciniw  thereof,  in 
the  course-  of  the  montiis  of  November  and 
December  1816,  and  Jamtaiy  and  Februiry 
1817,  vrickedly,  maliciously,  and  feloniously 
administer,  or  cause  to  be  administered,  or 
did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administering,  to  a 
great  number  of  persons,  to  the  amount  of 
several  hundreds,  an  oath  or  engagement,  or  an 
engageinent  or  obligation  in  the  nature  of  an 
oath,  purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the 
person^  taking  the  same  to  commit  treasoB| 
by  obtaining  annual  parliamenti  and  univer* 
sal  suffrage  by  physical  strength  or  force,  and 
thereby  dSfecting  the  subversion  of  the  estab* 
lished  government,  lavrs,  and  constitution  of 
this  kingdom,  by  unlawful  and  violent  means." 
It  is  inconceivable  to  me,  that  a  statement 
more  in  terras  of  the  act  of  parliament  could 
be  made. 

After  reciting  the  oath,  the  indictment 
charges  the  administoring  it,  at  various  tecrtt 
meetings,  to  sundry  persons,  many  of  them 
secured,  and  seme  of  whom  bave  absconded. 
The  material  <^estiott  therefore  turns  upon 
the  oath,  which  is  here  recited  : 

^Inawfol  presence  of  God,  I,  A.  B.  do 
voluntarily  swear,  that  I  will  persevere  in  my 
endeavonring  to  form  a  nrotherhood  of 
affection  aasongst  Britons  of  cveiy  description, 
who  are  considered  worthy  of"^  confidence ; 
ami  ^atl  will  persevere  in  my  endeavoun  to 
obtain  for  all  the  people  in  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland,  not  disqualified  by  crimes  or  insanity, 
the  elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of  twenty- 
one,  with  free  and  equal  representation,  and 
annual  parliaments,  and  that  I  will  support 
the  same  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  eiUMr  by ' 
mord  or  physical  strength  (or  force),  as  the 
case  may  require :  And  I  do  further  swear, 
that  nei&ier  hopes,  fears,  rewards  or  punirit* 
ments,  shall  induce  me  to  inform  on,  or  give 
evidence  against  any  member  or  members, 
collectively  or  individually,  for  any  act  or 
expression  done,  or  made  in,  <or  out,  in  this  or 
similar  societies,  under  the  punishment  of  death, 
to  beinfiicted  on  me  b^  any  meatfaeror  oaembea 
of  such  societies;  so  help  me  Ged,  and 
keep  me  stedfast/' 

I  think  thia  is  the  blackest  oailjh  I  ever  read. 
I  think  it  bears  treason  and  blasphemy  on  the 
face  of  it.  It  shocks  me  to  see  the  name  of 
God  used  for  such  purposes.  With  that  name 
this  strange  o^di  begins  and  ends. 


49Si 


87  geouge  III. 


TriaiofAndrtn 


[400 


Is  ity  however,  an  oath  undor  the  ^tatate  f 
And  with  evefy  mpect  for  the  ability  displayed 
in  contesting  it,  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is ;  for  it 
did  purport,  or  intend  to  bind  the  persons 
taking  it,  to  commit  treason,  murder,  or  other 
felony  punishable  with  death.    A  brotherhood 
was  to  be  formed  of  persons  worthy  of  confi- 
dence, a   tecrgt    brotnerhood,    for  purposes 
8ub7ersive  of   the  constitution.    What  more 
so  than  uniyersal  suffrage,  or  annual  electimis 
to  parliament  f  I  take  the  words  of  my  learn- 
ed friends  on  tliis  subject.    One  gentleman 
said  the  plan  was  productive  of  anarchy  or 
despotism.    I  took  down  this  from  Mr.  Cran- 
stoun.    Mr.  Clerk  said  the  oath  was  wicked 
enouffh,  indicating  a  very  bad  intention.    I 
iind  the  very  same  proposition  stated  by  Mr. 
Moncrieff.    I  agree  with  them  in  tiiis;  and  it 
amuses  me  to  see  that  >the  gentleman  who 
drew  the  one  information,  does  not  say  a  word 
upon  the  other.    On  the  contrary,  Mr.  Clerk, 
who  stood  up  a  little  ago,  said  he  would  take 
no  notice  of  it  whatever.    I«fay,  in  the  infor- 
mation to  which  I  referred,  there  is  a  passage 
which  I  do  not  understand,  and  which  I  tkiXX 
therefore  read,  that  it  may  be   explained  in 
conformity  to  the   panel's  argument,    if    it 
admit  of  such  explanation.    ^It  may  be  ad- 
mitted, that  without  reference  to  some  other 
objects,  this  oath  was  in  a  high  degree. im- 
proper, that   it  was  highly  criminal;   that  it 
was  of  an  extremely  dangerous  tendency; 
th!at  it  was  the  duty  of  the  public  prosecutor 
to  take  notice  of  it,  if  the  fiicts  were  true ; 
and  that  it  might  with  the  utmost  propriety 
have  been  made  the  subject  of  an  inaictmenU 
Supposing    all   ihis,   the  question   remains, 
whether  it  is  an  oath  binding  the  party  to 
commit  a  treaton?  Nothing,  therefore,  can  be 
more  irrelevant  'or  incondnsive,  than  to  state 
circumstances    in   the   oath   which  indicate 
iinproper-or  criminal  views.    They  may  be 
very  relevant  to  shew  jucA  intentions ;    but 
what  your  lordships  are  bound  to  determine  is, 
whether  the  oath  purports  to  bind  the  party 
to  commit  treason  V* 

It  appears  to  me,  that,  with  the  utmost 
propriety,  the  oath  has  been  made  the  subject 
of  indictment ;  and  I  cannot  characterise  it 
more  strongly  than  is  done  in  this  passage. 
Nay,  more,  ^  The  prosecutor  may  state,  amd 
thoee  who  arffue  the  case  of  the  informant 
will  agree  wim  him,  that  nothing  more  uncon- 
stitutional, nothing  more  absurd,  nothing 
more  nuschievous,  nothing  more  neoevarily 
leading  to  despotism,  and  to  the  destruction  of 
the  liberties  of  the  country,  could  be  suggested, 
than  this'proposal  of  universal  suffrage  and 
annual  paniaments."t  Better  language  than 
I  could  nave  used ;  but  it  expresses  the  very 
Ustling  of  mv  heart,  and  the  sentiments  of 
every  one  who  has  ever  turned  his  attention 
to  such  a  snlject  as  that  unfortunately  now 
before  the  Court. 

We  were  told  that  lawful  means  might  be 

•  Ist  Inf.  p.  446.        t  lit  Inf.  p.  447. 


employed  to  accomplish  all  these  objects.  Ther« 
is  a  good  deal  of  inconsiatency  in  this ;.  and, 
in  a  question  of  relevancy,  such  lawful  meaas 
are  not  to  be  implied.  They  are  not  ta  \m 
implied  in  tvying  the  relevancy  of  this  indict* 
ment,  though  they  may  be  the  subject  of  afler- 
proof. 

The  Question  recurs.  If  there  be  treason  in 
all  this  t  or  rather  does  the  oath  purport,  or 
intend  to  bind  to  the  commission  of  treason^ 
murder,  or  other  felonv  punishable  with 
death?  Now,  laying  aside  the  other  crimes 
specified,  if  the  measure  contemplated  be 
subversive  of  the  constitution,  it  is  treason 
against  the  state.  And  though  the  king^s 
name  be  employed  by  lawyers,  as  compassing 
the  J^mg*$  death,  levying  war  against  the 
kifigy  it  is  as  the  representative  of  the  state^ 
thepreservation  of  which  is  the  great  object. 

Tnis  is  well  explained,  in  a  passage  from 
one  of  the  first  lawyers  and  judges  that  £ng« 
land  ever  saw,  quoted  in  the  information  for 
the  crown. 

**  In  every  insurrection,  which,  in  judgment 
of  l(^w,  is  intended  against  the  perFon  of  the 
king,  be  it  to  dethrone  or  impnson  him,  or 
to  oblige  him  to  alter  his  measures  of  govern- 
ment, or  to  rempve  evil  counsellors  from  about 
him,  these  risings  all  amount  to  levying  war 
within  the  statute,  whether  attend^  with 
the  pomp  and  circumstances  of  open  war  or 
not.  And  any  conspiracy  to  levy, war  for 
these  purposes,  though  not  treason  within  the 
clause  of^  levying  war,  is  yet  an  overt  ad 
within  the  other  clause  of  compassing  the 
king's  death.  For  these  purposes  cannot  b» 
effected  by  numbers  and  open  force,  without 
manifest  danger  to  his  person."'^ 

And,  in  another  passage,  ^  Insnrrectionn 
likewise  for  redressing  national  grievances,  or 
for  the  expulsion  of  foreigners  in  genersl,  or 
indeed  any  single  nation,  living  here  under 
the  protection  cl  the  king,  or  for  the  r^op- 
mation  of  real  or  imaginary  evils  of  ^  ftMc 
ruUvre,  and  in  which  th€  imwgemU  haoe  no 
nedal  interat ;  risings  to  effect  these  ends,  by 
force  and  numbers^  are,  by  consthiction  at 
law,  within  the  clause  of  levying  war,  for 
they  9fe  levelled  at  the  king's  crown  and 
royal  dignity."  That  is,  I  conceive,  the  law 
upon  this  subject ;  and,  though  I  speak  with  the 
highest  respect  of  the  great  man  (Hale),  in 
one  part  of  whose  works  there  is  a  pSAsage 
from  which  this  learned  judge  (Foster)  differs, 
the  quotations  which  I  have  read  express 
the  true  law  of  the  case,  so  far  as  I  cub 
presume  to  understandit.  Indeed,  so  uhanswer* 
able  is  this,  that  the  counsel  for  the  paml 
admits  it,  and  adduces  the  authority  of  sir 
Matthew  Hale  in  these  words : 

^^Tt  is  obvious  that  no  other  treason  eta 
be  meant  than  that  of  levying  war  against 
the  king.  It  may  involve  the  compassing  and 
imagining  the  death  of  the  kifkg,  beeaose  the 
levying  of  war  against  the  king  may  well  bo 

*  1st  Inf.  p.  381. 


49f] 


Jar  AdmnUtering  unlawfial  Oaths. 


A.  li.  1817. 


[4d8 


an  oTert  act  of  such  coi^^passtng  and  imagining. 
For  your  lordships  know  that  it  is  laid  doWn 
by  lord  Hale  (1  Hale,  1 22)^  that  '  ao  assembly 
to  levy  'war  against  the  king,  either  to  depose, 
6r  restrain,  or  enforce  him  to  any  act,  or  to 
tome  to  his  presence  to  remove  his  counsellors 
or  ministers,  or  to  fight  against  the  king's  lieu- 
tenant, or  military  commissionate  oflScers,  is 
an  overt  a^t,  proving  the  compassing  the 
death  of  the  king ;  for  such  a  war  is  directed 
against  the  very  person  of  the  king,  and  he 
t£^  designs  to  fight  against  the  king,  cannot 
but  know  that  at  least  it  must  hsueard  his 
lift).'  And  in  sir  John  Friend's  case,*  who 
was  convicted  of  high  treason  in  compassing 
and  conspiriTie  the  death  of  the  king,  lord 
cbi^f-jostice  llolt  lays  down  the  law,  that, '  If 
there  be  only  a  conspiracy  to  levy  war,  it  is  not 
treason ;  but  if  the  design  and  conspiracy  be 
either  to  kill  the  king,  or  depose  him,  or  im<* 
prison  htmy  or  put  any  force  or  restraint  upon 
nimy  and  the  way  and  method  of  effecting  of 
these  is  by  levying  a  war,  then  the  consultation 
and  conspiracy  to  levy  a  war  for  tl\at  purpose 
is  high  treason,  thoudi  no  war  be  levied ;  for 
SQch  consultation  and  conspiracy  is  an  overt 
fuAf  proving  the  compassing  the  death  of  the 

king.S 

In  the  other  information  for  the  panel,  we 

are  told,  that  the  kind  of  treasion  is  not  specified 
in  the  indictment;  but  here,  another  of  his 
learned  counsel,  tells  us  that  it  is  specified. 
He  sayiy  it  can  be  nothine  else  than  levying 
war  against  Uie  king.  And,  in  another  passage 
still  more  fiivourable  to  the  indictment,  ^  But 
to  effect  this  subversion  by  unlawful  and  violent 
means,  through  the  obtaining  annual  par* 
liaments  and  universal  suffrage  by  physical 
fiwce  or  strength^  if  they  are  words  slifficiently 
Certain  and  predse  to  amount  to  a  legal  alle- 
gation of  any  sort  of  treason;^can  mean  nothing 
else  Uian  a  levying  of -war,  in  order,  by  force 
and  constraint,  to  compel  the  kiqg  to  change  his 
measures  or  counsels,  or,  at  any  rate,  in  order 
to  pat  force  or  constraint  upon  both  houses  or 
either  House  of  Parliament.'^  The  word  sub- 
ixrsion  was  quarrelled  vrith ;  but  it  is  cured 
here,  ^  since  annual  parliaments  and  universal 
suffrage  cannot  be  obtained  but  by  an  act 
pasted  by  ^e  two  houses  and  by  the  king,  and 
ff  this  passing  be  obtained  by  violent  means; 
which  violence  amounts  to  treasonable  violence, 
it  can  be  no  other  than  the  putting  such  force 
or  constraint  either  upon  his  majesty,  or  upon 
one  or  othei^  house  or  parliament,  as  is  above 
nentioned." 

When  I  read  this,  i  looked  to  the  title  of  the 
paper.  I  took  it  to  have  come  fropa  the  counsel 
fer  the  crown — for  I  cannot  conceive  a  stronger 
argument  they  could  have  urged.  Figure. then 
the  effect  of  this  ttniversal  suffrage  and  these 
annual  mrliaments^  t.  e.  annual  eUctionSy  not 
/  annual  stsnom  of  parliament..  The  life  of  the 
king,  of  every  oth^r  good  man,  and,  'among 

•  4.  State  Trials,  625,  626;  [13  How.  St. 
Tr.  61.1        •♦•  2nd  Inf.  p.  457.        %  Ibid. 
yOL.  XXXIII. 


them,  I  regret  to  saj^  it,  the  lives  of  the  panel's 
zealous  defenders,  would  be  in  the  ^tuafion  of 
republican  France.  The  lantern  afrd  the 
guillotine  would  be  the  order  Of  the  day ;  atni 
my  learned  friends  would  probably  go  tbii  first* 
Every  revolution  begins  with  the  lowest  of  the 
people;  and  experience  shows,  that,  those 
whom  they  deemed  their  friends  are'  the  first 
to  be  sacrificed.  It  is  absurd,  therefore,  to 
suppose,  that  legal  means  can  be  used  for  such 
deplorable  ends.  Bad  intention  is  inherent  inr 
the  oath,  constituting  a  formed  plan  to  subvert 
the  constitution,  which  only  would  wont  ad 
overt  act  to  convert  it  into  treasofr. 

In  the  present  deliberation,  it  is  essential  to 
remark,  that  there  is  oo  charge  of  treason  in' 
the  indictment,  a  circumstance  which  cuts  up 
the  panel's  argument  by  the  root.  The  charge 
is  wtt  a  charge  of  treason.  The  indictment 
mentions  treason  indeed,  but  it  does  not  say 
that  treason  has  been  committed.  -  It  has  nut 
been  committed ;  and,  under  the  providence  of 
Ood,  may  never  be.  Yet  we  are  told  that  the 
indictment  is  irrelevant,  because  it  does  not 
mention  what  species  of  treason  the  parties  to 
the  oath  had  in  their  minds.  The  charge  is  of 
quite  a  difierent  nature.  It  is,  that  the  panel 
administered  an  oath,  purporting  to  bind  to 
the  commission  of  treason.  By  what  means 
was  that  object  to  be  attained  ?  The  oath  re-^ 
moves  every  doubt,  ^  That  I  will  support  the 
same  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,  either  by 
moral'or  physical  strength,  as  the  case  may  re*^ 
quire," — in  the  judgment,  no  doubt,  of  the 
brotherhood  supposed  to  have  been  already 
established. 

These  words  require  no  commentary. 
Moral  strength  consists  in  argument :  physical 
strength  is  strength  of  arms ;  and  these  arc  to 
be  employed  as  the  case  may  require — the  ne 
cessiiy  being  to  be  determined  by  the  framers 
of  the  oath,  and  the  brotherhood  •  which  it 
mentions.  All  this  is  under  the  dreadful 
sanction,  *'  And  I  do  further  swear,  that  neitlier 
hopes,  fears,  rewards,  or  punishments,  shall 
tnauce  me  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence 
against,  any  member  or  members,  collectively 
or  individtially,  for  any  act  or  expr^ston  done 
or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  societies, 
vnder  the  punMment,qf,  death^  to  be  inflicted  on 
me  by  any  member  or  members  of  such  so- 
cieties. So  help  me  God,  and  keep  me  stedfast.'' 
I  think  that  the  indictment  need  not  have  been 
confined  to'  the  charge  of  an  oath  binding  to 
commit  treason*.  It  might  have  been  also 
stated  that  this  was  an-  engagement  binding  to 
commit  murder. 

From  the  fii^C  I  thought  this  a  simple  case ; 
and.  after  all  I  have  heard  and  read  upon  the 
subject,  I  still  consider  it  in  that  light.  It  may 
not  be  improper,  however,  to  say  a  few  words 
upon  the  arguments  of  the  panel  hi  his  two  in- 
formations. 

It  is  said,  and  seems .  to  be  .the  great  argu- 
ment in  the  first,  that  this  indicl|pent  is  va^ue, 
as  not  specifying  any  particular  treason ;  and 
we  have  a  long  quotation  from  Mr.  Hume,  to 


400J        57  GEORGE  UT. 


Trial  aJAiuifem  M^Khiey 


r5oo 


"Yt 


shewy  what  wu  neTer  disputed,  that  q>eciflbt« 
tion  is  necessax^  in  eveiy  criminal  charge. 
But  that  is.  nothing  to  the  present  question. 
The  cha^  is  not  a  diarge  of  treason  but  of 
administering  an  oath  which  purports  to  bind 
to  commit  treason.  It  is  not  libelled  that 
treason  was  toromitted ;  and  it  is  impossible 
that  the  species  of  what  ne?er  existed 
could  be  stated  in  the  indictment.  The 
oath  itself  is  sufficiently  special,  bearing  an 
obligation  to  bring  about  uni?ersal  sufnage 
and  annual  pariiaments^  either  by  moral  or 
physical,  streo^,  as  the  case  may  reqniire. 

Reference  is  made  to  the  case  of  Kendal.* 
In  that  case  sir  James  Montgomery  stood 
committed  on  a  charge  of  treason ;,  and  it  was 
therefore,  by  mere  inaccuracy,  that  the  public 
prosecutor  did  npt  specify  what  he  knew ;  he 
bad  only  to  look  at  Ine  bill  found  by  the  grand 
to  see  the  species  of  treason  charged. 

[t  is  said,  that  ta  specify  the  purport  of  the 
oath  is  not  sufficient.  K  might  not  be 
sufficient  in  the  case  of  incendiary  lettera 
and  other  instances,  but  here  the  objection 
is  in  the  fieu^e  of  the  act  of  parliament, 
which  enacts,  that  it  shall  be  sufficient  to  set 
forth  the  purport  of  such  oath  or  engagement, 
or  some  material  part  thereof. 

A  question  was  put.  What  is  the  antecedent 
to  the  wordS)  ^  the  same"  in  this  oath  ?  It  is 
neither  eleffant,  nor  classical,  nor  correct ;  but 
the  antecedent  may  be  trukmnurt  or  it  may  be 
annual  fiarliaments  and  universal  suffirage ;  in 
either  view,  though  clumsily  eipressed^  the 
meaning  is  sufficiently  clear. 

The  case  was  figured,  that  the  oath  had 
been,  "  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,''  without 
addition:  which  words  imnly  every  power. 
Here,  howerer,  there  would  be  room  for  con- 
struction, and  that  which  was  iaYourable  for  the 
panel  might  have  been  adopted.  In  the  pr^ 
sent  case,  .the  oath  is  too  clear  X<y  admit  it. 
But,  it  is  obvious,  that  they  were  to  emplojr 
every  sort  of  force.  Where  there  is  a  possr- 
bility  of  a  fiwourablie  eonstruction  for  the 
panel,  it  ever  will  reeeive  effect  from  me ;  but 
the  words  of  the  oath  exclude  that  construc- 
tion. I  see  a  clear  obligation  to  employ 
physical  strength  to  Mag  about  these  detes- 
table ends.- 

The  supplementary  information  contains  a 
new  idea  contradictoiy  to  the  statement  in  the 
first.  ^*  The  pisoner  has  next  to  submit  to  the 
Court  a  view  of  the  question,  totally  different 
from  those  he  has  already  offered,  and,  in 
arguing  which,  he  is  to  proceed  on  the  assump- 
tion, that  those  views  which  he  has  alreaaj 
stated  are  erroneous.  For  the  purpose  of  this 
argument  he  is  to  assume,  that  the  oath  does^ 
in  its  terms,  necessarily,  and  by  due  construc- 
tion, purport  and  intend  to  bind  the  persona 
taking  the  saOBe  to  commit  treason ;  and  that 
the  specific  treason,  to  the  commission  of 
which  it  did  purport  and  intend  to  bind,  is 
sufficiently  set  forth  in  this  indictment.^    I 


■1^ 


IS  How.  Si.  T^  1369. 


cordially  agree  with  the  proposition  **  That  the 
oath  does  in  its  terms  necessarily,  and  by  due 
construction,  purport  and  intend  to  bind  the 
persons  taking  the  same  to  commit  treason  > 
and  thai  the  specific  treason,  to  the  commission 
of  which  it  did  purport  and  tend  to  bind,  is 
sufficiently  set  forth  in  this  indictment^"  But 
what  I  desiderate  is,  how  any  thing  favouraUa 
to  the  unhappy  man  at  the  bar  can  be  elicited 
from  this  contradiction  of  bis  former  argument* 
Both  propositions  cannot  be  true,  but  both  may 
hejkue. 

The  first  information  ^ates  the  indictment 
as  fiiulty,  as  not  charging  the  oath  as  binding 
to  any  particular  treason,  or  to  any  treason  at 
all.  To  this  I  have  already  alluded.  The 
second  information  admits,  that  the  oath  doe» 
purport  and  intend  to  bind  to  the  conunission 
of  treason;  and  the  argument  is,  that  because 
it  binds  to  commit  treason,  it  cannot  be  tried  as 
a  felony,  though  the  act  expressly  makes  it 
triable  as  such. 

Here  it  is  necessary  to  attend  to  ^e  dif- 
ference between  the  law  of  England,  so  far  a9 
I  understand  it,  and  the  law  of  Scotland ;  and 
in  the  former  there, may  be  reason  why  felony 
should  meiige  in  treason.  For  1.  Cnmes  are 
there,  in  general,  tried  at  the  instance  of 
private  prosecutors,  who,  from  corruption  or 
irom  lenity,  nuiy  be  induced  to  screen  the 
greater,  by  bringing  the  trial  for  the  lesser 
offence.  2.  £ven  aner  going  to  a  jury,  a  new 
trial  is  competent  in  England. 

The  law  of  Scotland  differs  in  both  these 
important  particulars.  1.  Trials  h^e  proceed 
a\  the  instance  of  a  public  prosecutor,  placed 
fiir  above  the  influence  of  such  a  motive.  2. 
After  going  to  a  jury,  die  panel  cannot  be  sub* 
jected  to  a  second  tnaU 

But  it  is  unnecessary  to  go  into  tiiis  deduo* 
tion.  The  act  of  parliament  is  the  rule  ;  and 
upon  an  oath  binning  to  commit  treason,  or 

Surportiag  to  bind  to  commit  treason,  it  in- 
icts  the  punishment  of.  felony.  And  the  fi>l- 
lowing  clause  is  highly  material  in  the  argu- 
ment :  **  Provided  also,  and  it  is  hereby  de- 
clared, That  any  person  who  shall  be  tried  and 
acquitted,  or  convicted  of  any  offence  against 
this  act,  shall  not  be  liable  to  be  indicted, 
prosecuted,  or  tried  again  for  the  same  offence 
or  £Eu:t,  as  high  treason  or  misprision  of  higk 
treason ;  and'  that  nothing  in  this  act  contained, 
shall  be  construed  to  extend  to  prohibit  any 
person  guilty  of  any  offence  against  this  act, 
and  who  shsdl  not  be  tried  for  the  same  as  an 
offence  against  this  act,  from  being  tried  for 
the  same  as  high  treeson,  or  misprision  of  high 
treason,  in  suot  manner  as  if  this  act  had  not 
been  made."  This  necessarily  implies,  that 
the  same  act  may  be  treason  or  mlony,  and 
tried  under  either  denomination.  And  in  case 
of  acquittal  on  a  trial  under  this  act,  no  trial 
for  treason  can  afterwards  take  place  i-  And  if 
there  be  no  trial  under  this  act,  then  trial  for 
treason  may  proceed. 

On  this  pomt  the  counlei  for  the  panel  was 
much  at  a  loss.    **  We  are  beie,  in  a  queatioa 


5011 


^foflr  Admimstering  uniawfid  Oaths, 


A.  D.  iai7. 


[502 


not  wholly  without  ambiguity,  endeaTOuriog  to 
ascertain  the  intention  of  the  legislature  in 
passing  an  act  of  parliament.  The  act  creates 
two  descriptions  of  felony ;  one  without  benefit 
of  clergy,  and  capital;  the  other  within  benefit 
of  clergy,  and  transportable.  The  legislature 
musty  tnerefbre,  have  been  aware,  not  only  that 
acts  of  high  treason  might  be  tried  under  the 
statute  4a  a  coital  Jdmf^  but  that  acts  of  the 
same  nature  might  be  tried  as  a  transportable 
felony.''* 

And  in  another  passage,  ''The  prisoner 
readily  admits,  that  to  persons  not  accustomed 
to  questions  of  l^ptl  oonstmotion,  it  may  at 
first  sight  appear,  as  if  the  legislature  liad  con- 
templated the  possibility  of  trying  the  same 
offence^  either  as  high  treason  or  felony,  «t  the 
pleasure  of  the  prosecutor  or  the  indictors,  TVk. 
the  grand  jury,  f  Of  that  possibility  we  have 
only  to  read  the  act  of  parltament  to  have  an 
absolute  certainty. 

It  is  not  however  npon  critical  niceties,  but 
«pon  the  plain  common  sense  construction  ef 
the  acts  of  the  legislature,  that  judges  are  en- 
titled and  bound  to  proceed.  Indeed,  much 
of  the  aiifument,  however  proper  in  the  House 
ef  Commons,  though  even  of  that  doubts  maty 
be  entertained,  comes  in  an  irregular  shape 
before  this  Court,  who  must  apply  the  statute 
that  has  actually  passed,  without  entering  into 
speculations  as  to  the  propriety  of  the  enact- 
ment itself.  At  the  same  time,  I  feel  it  in- 
cumbent upon  me  to  declare,  that  in  my  ap- 
prehension, called  for  by  the  situation  of  the 
timesy  consummate  wisdom  and  enlightened 
humanity  are  the  genuine  characteristics  of  the 
statute. 

Having  said  so  much,  I  cannot  conclude 
better  than  in  the  words  of  a  great  and  ez- 
ceQent  man :  ^  In  favour  of  lite,  great  strict- 
nesses have  been  in  all  times  required  in  points 
of  indictments;  and  the  truth  is,  that  it  is 
grown  to  be  a  blemish  and  inconveniencv  in 
the  law  and  the  administration  thereof.  More 
offenders  escape  by  the  orer  easy  ear  given  to 
exceptions  in  indictments,  than  by  their  own 
innocence;  and  many  times  gross  murders, 
burglaries,  robberies,  and  other  heinous  and 
oying  offences,  escape  by  these  unseemly 
niceties,  to  the  reproach  of  the  law,  to  the  shame 
of  the  government,  and  to  the  encouragement 
of  villainy,  and  to  the  dishonour  of  God.  And 
it  were  very  fit  that,  by  some  law,  this  over- 
grovni  curiosity  and  nicety  were  reformed, 
which  is  now  become  the  disease  of  the  law ;  and 
will,  I  fear,  in  time  grow  mortal,  without  some 
timely  remedy."  Tbe  editor  adds,  in  a  note : 
''This  advice  of  our  author  would,  if  complied 
with,  be'  of  excellent  use  :  for  it  would  not  only 

Erevent  the  guilty  from  escaping,  but  would 
kewise  be  a  guard  to  innocence ;  for  thereby 
would  be  removed  the  only  pretence  upon 
which  coonsel  is  denied  the  prisoner  in  cases 
of  felony ;  for  if  no  exceptions  were  ^to  be 
allowed  but  what  went  to  the  merits,  th^re 


•  SMl  Uf.  p.  485. 


t  p.  467. 


would  then  be  no  reason  to  deny  that  assistance 
in  cases  where  life  is  concerned,  which  yet  is 
allowed  in  every  petit  trespass."* 

Lord  GiUici. — I  wish  I  could  agree  with  the    y 
4eanied  judge  in  thinking  this  a  very  easy  and 
simple  case.    It  has  cost  me  much  time  and 
Deflection  to  make  up  my  mind  upon  it. 

The  debate  opens  four  important  questions, 
leach  of  considerable  diffioiutjr.  I  shall  state 
them  in  what  appears  to  me.to  be  their  natural 
order.  It  is  a  little  different  from  that  which 
has  been  adopted  by  the  learned  counsel  for 
the  panel,  in  the  ^erv  able  p^er  which  has 
been  drawn  by  Mr.^Moncreiff.  But  this  is  of 
no  consequence.  I*shall,  in  Ihe  course  of  de- 
livering my  opinion,  take  notice  of  each  of  the 
(points  which  lie  has  brought  under  our  con^^ 
sideration. 

1.  The  first  question  in  the  order  in  which 
I  propose  to  consider  them  is,  whether  the 
oath,  as  set  forth  in  the  indictment,  is  of  the 
description  alleged?  Does  it  purport  or  in- 
tend Ao  bind  to  commit  any  treason,  or  mur- 
der, or  any  capital  felony? 

2.  The  second  question  is  this,  if  it  shall 
appear  that  the  oath  is,  or  may  be  of  the  de- 
scription alleged,  h  it  inoumbent  on  the  pro- 
secutor to  specify  «r  describe  in  his  indictment 
the  crime,  to  the  commission  of  which  he  states 
that  the  oath  imports  an  obligation  P 

3.  The  third  question  is,  whether  the  prose-  ' 
cutor  was  bound  or  not  to  specify  the  crime, 
has  he  in  this  indictment  specified  'Or  described 
it?  And,  if  so,  is  his  specification  or  descrip- 
tion of  it  accurate  and  correct,  and  such  as 
your  lordships  can  sustain  as  a  proper  definition 
of  a  capital  felony,  or  of  a  treason  ? 

4.  Tne  fourth  and  last  question  to  which  I       • 
propose  to  speak  is,  does  the  offence  disclosed 

m  this  indictment,  as  explained  by  the  prose- 
cutor, amount  to  a  case  of  treason  7  and,  if  so, 
«an  it,  or  ought  it  to  be  tried  as  a  felony  T 
Tliis  last  is  the  question  treated  in  the  supple- 
mentary information  for  the  prisoner. 

I  shall  speak  to  these  questions  in  the  order 
in  which  I  have  stated  them.  But  first  of  all, 
I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  your  lordships 
to  the  terms  of  the  indictment  itself,  and  to 
those  ru4es  and  principles  by  wtiich  it  appears 
to  me  that  we  must  be  guided  in  judging  of 
its  relevancy. 

I  need  not  tell  your  lordships,  that  in  all 
criminal  cases,  the  crime  which  the  prosecutor 
means  to  charge*  must  be  distinctly  stated  in 
the  major  proposition  of  the  indictment ;  and 
in  this,  as  in  every  other  indictment,  we  must  ' 
k>ok,  and  have  only  to  look  at  the  major  pro- 
position in  order  to  discover  what  the  crime  is 
of  which  the  prisoner  is  accused.  That  crime, 
whatever  it  may  be,  statutoiy  or  not,  mahm 
prohibitum^  or  tmdum  in  «e,  so  set  forth  in  the 
major  proposition  of  the  indictment,  is  the 
crime  cnarged,  and  that  crimen  alone,  and  no 
other,  can  be  proved  by  the  public  prosecutor. 

Now,  in  the  major,  proposition  of  this  inr 

•  2  Hale's  P.  C.  193. 


5031 


57  GEORGE  HI. 


Trial  of  Andrem  M^Kbieif 


C504 


dictment,  what  is  the  criine  set  forth?  The 
crime  there  set  forth,  so  far  as  regards  any 
acts  dobe  by  the  prisoner,  is  merely  that  of 
administering  an  oath.  There  is  no  other  fact 
charged  against  him.  The  single  solitary  act 
charged  is  that  of  administering  an  oath  of  a 
isertain  description,  viz^  an  otSh  **  purporting 
or  intending  to  bind  the  person  taking  the 
same  to  commit  anv  treason,  or  murder^  or  any 
felony  p^nisl^qble  by  law  with  death.'' 

The  mere  act  of  administering  this  oat}i,  is 
the  crime  charged.  And  for  the  tri^l  ,of  this 
charge  there  are  just  two  points  which  this  in- 
^dictment  brings  under  the  consideration  of  the 
tribunal  which  has  to  judge  of  the  guilt  or  in- 
nocence of  the  prisoner.  It  is  to  be  considered 
Jint,  whether  tne  act  was  done — whether  the 
oath  was  administered  ?  and  tecandfy,  whether 
the  oath  be  of  the  description  alleged  in  the 
indictment  f  The  pur]^se  or  intention  of  (he 
party,  except  that  he  intended  to  administer 
the  oath,  is  not  charged  here.  Whether  his 
intentions  were  guilty  or  innocent  is  not  stated, 
and  is  therefore  excluded  from  our  inquiry  as 
not  essential  to  it.  From  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  major  proposition  of  this  indictment^ 
you  will  not  find  any  thing  alleged  as  to  the 
criminal  intention  of  the  prisoner  further  than 
what  the  charge  necessarily  implies,  namely, 
that  he  intentumaUy  administered  an  oath  of 
the  description  th^re  meutioned. 

Such  is  the  charge  stated  in  the  major  pro- 
position of  this  indictment,  and  I  need  hardly  ; 
observe  to '  your  lordships,  that  this  <;harge 
cannot  be  extended  or  rendered  broader  by  , 
any  thing  contained  in  the  minor  proposition, 
or  subsequent  part  of  the  indictment.  In  this 
partof  it.the  prosecutor's  allegations  must  be 
confined  to  the  charge  contained  in  the  major 
proposition^  and  to  such  facts  as  may  be  proved 
in  support  of  th^t  charge,  and  in  so  far  as  they 
go  beyond  that  charge  his  allegations  must  be 
rejected  and  dismissed  from  our  minds  in 
judging  of  the  present  case  in  all  its  stages. 
,  In  the  minor  proposition  of  this  indictment 
It  }s  stated^  that  the  panel  "  wickedly,  malici- 
ously, and  feloniously  administered,  or  caused 
to  be  jid^inistered,  an  oath  binding,"  Sec.  in 
the  terms  there  set  forth.'  The  word  *'  traitor- 
ously *  ,wl)ich  stood  in  the  former  indictments, 
is  omitted -here,  and  the  omission  is  certainly 
a  proper  i^nc;  but  the  act  is  here  said  to  have 
been  done  wickedly  and  feloniously.  These 
words  are  very  properly  used  with  reference 
to  the  statute  which  declared  this  act  to  be  a 
felony,  and  prohibits  it  ynder  the  sanction  of 
a  capital  punishment,  byt  not  in  reference  to 
any  thing  extraneous  to  die  statute^  which  the 
purpose  and  intentions  of  the  party,  except  that 
be  intended  to  administer  the  oath,  certainly  are, 

If  the  crime  be  descrit>ed  as  it  must  be,  and 
IS  set  forth  in  the  major  proposition,  the  pro- 
secutor is  entitled  to  prove  that  the  prisoner 
intended  to  administer  the  oath ;  that  he  did  it 
intentionally ;  and  this  he  justly  calls  a  wicked 
iand  felonious  intention  ;  lor,  it  is  so,  because 
he  intends  to  do,  and  does,  that.  Mfhlch  this  act 


prohibits  and  ponishes  with  deatfi  as  a  capital 
crime. 

The  circumstances  stated  in  the  minor  pro* 
position,  of  doing  it  at  secret  meetings,  &c. 
tuither  than  explanalovy  of  administering  the 
oath,  are  extraneous,  as  they  are  not  ingre- 
dients of  the  crime  charged  in  the  major  pro- 
position. If  murder  be  changed  in  the  major 
proposition  of  an  indictn^nt,  a  proof  of  mali- 
cious intention  stated  in  die  minor  proposition 
is  idlowable.  If  sedition  be  chained  in  the 
major  propoeition,  you  allow  it  to  be  proved 
that  the  party  intended  to  excite  disturoance, 
as  that  is  an  essential  ingredient  in  the  crime 
of  sedition.  But  here  the  cnme  charged  is 
different.  The  mere  act  of  administering  a 
certain  oath  constitutes  Uie  whole  crime,  if  the 
oath  is  of  the  description  alleged. 

I  observe  it  ^ated,  in  the  ingenious  pleading 
for  the  pnblic  prosecntor,  that  the  intention  of 
the  parties  and  not  of  the  oath  must  be  consi- 
dered, and  that  it  is  absurd  to  ascribe  intention 
to  an  oath,  **  As  if  there  were  any  sense  in 
personifying  an  oath  and  giving  it  uie  powers 
of  the  understanding  and  the  will."  But  aa 
oath,  or  the  words  of  an  oath,  nuiy  be  said  to, 
intend,  vrith  the  same  propriety  as  they  are 
said  to  mean  so  and  so,  and  there  js  no  per- 
sonification in  the  one  case  more  than  in  the 
other.  What  the  legislature  refers  to,  is  the 
intendment  of  the  oath  and  not  the  intention 
of  parties.  They  refer  to  an  oath  binding  to 
do  so  and  so ;  and  this  is  clear  froiQ  a  fpnqep 
act  of  parliament  in  which  the  words  proploye^l 
are  ^  purporting  or  intended*"  In  thp  majpr 
proposition  of  the  indictment,  is  any  thing 
said  as  to  the  intention  of  pBurties  except  as  to 
administering  this  oath  ?  The  intention  of  the 
pauel  to  4p  &ny  other  thipg  than  administer 
the  oath  is  extraneous,  and  is  not  charged 
against  him. 

Whether  he  can  be  allowed  to  prove  that 
his  intentions  in  what  he  did  were  innocent  is 
another  question.  I  must  hold  he  is  so  entt-. 
tied,  because  we  cannot  convict  any  man 
whose  intentions  are  proved  to  be  innocent. 
The  words  of  the  act  of  parliament  say  nothing 
of  the  intentions  of^rties;  not  that  the  legis- 
lature held  that  where  intention  is  innocent, 
any  person  is  to  be  punished ;  but  the  legisla- 
ture may  hold,  and  seems  here  to  hold,  that  the 
criroind  intention  is  to  be  presumed  from  the 
commission  of  the  fact  which  it  prohibits — 
that  there  is  a  presumption  that  any  person 
who  administers  such  an  oath  is  actuated  by  a 
wicked  and  felonious  intention.  The  view  of 
the  case  which  I  have  now  taken,  is  supported 
by  the  terms  of  the  indictment  itself;  for  crimi* 
nal  intention,  except  as  to  adminbtering  the 
oath,  is  no  where  alleged ;  and  this  is  right,  as 
nothing  else  is  comprehended  in  the  major 
proposition. 

This  brings  me  back  to  the  major  protposttion, 
what  is  the«crime?  Administering  an  oath. 
What  else  is  included  in  the  charge?  Only 
the  nature  of  the  oath  or  obligation.  It  must 
be  one  purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the 


far  AdmfOitenMg  unlawfid  OtUhsM 


505] 

penofos  taking  tbe  tame  to  commit  tMaion. 

Assuming  the  fact,  as  to  the  oath  being  admi- 
nisteredy  whid)  in  this  sti^e  of  the  proceeding 
we  are  bound  to  assume,  nothii^  ramains  for 
us  but  to  interpret  the  oath  said  to  have  been 
administered,  and  the  purport  of  which  is  set 
forth  in  this  indietment.  This  we  must  do,  in 
judging  of  the  relevancy,  and  a  most  delicate 
task  it  IS. 

Is  it,  or  not,  an  oath  purporting  or  intending 
to  bind  to  commit  treason  1  We  have  no  al- 
ternative; we  must  reijam  an  answer  to  this 
question  either  in  the  negative  or  affirmative-^ 
the  former  if  we  reject,  the  latter  if  we  sustain 
the  relevancy  of  the  indictment.  And  What  is 
the  ooitfequence  of  a  judgment  to  the  last  effect 
sustaining  tbe  relevancy  of  this  indictment? 
By  that  judgment  we  declare,  by  our  deliberate, 
opinions,  that  the  oath  i|  of  the  import  alleged 
in  tbe  indictment,  and  declared  in  the  statute. 
And  what  is  the  conse<)nence  ? — that  the  ad- 
ministrator of  the  oath  ought  to  be  punished 
with  death.  I  do  not  question  ihi  right  or 
power  of  the  jury  to  return  a  verdict  of  not 
guilty  although  we  find  the  indictment  relevant, 
and  although  the  fact  of  having  administered 
the  oath  be  proved ;  but  such  a  verdict  would 
directlv  contradict  our  judgment.  The  Court 
finds  me  oath  purporting  or  intending  to  bind 
to  commit  treason,  and  the  jury  says  it  is  not 
of  that  import.  Tlie  case  is  different  from 
other  trials,  where  the  direction  given  to  the 
jury  forms  no  part  of  the  record.  If  we  sustain 
the  relevancy  of  the  indictment,  we  put  an  in- 
terpretation upon  this  oath ;  and  that  interpret 
tation  is  to  be  contradicted  if  the  fact  of  admi- 
nistering be  proved,  and  the  jury  find  the 
panel  not  guilty.  IThe  solemn  judgment  of 
your  lordships,  pronounced  under  the  sanction 
of  your  oaths,  is  to  be  contradicted  by  a  verdict 
of  tbe  jury  pronounced  b^  them,  under  the 
sacred  sanction  and  obligation  of  their  oaths. 

Such  is  the  situation  in  which  we  are  placed, 
and  it  is  one  peculiar  to  ourselves;  for  in 
Kngland  there  is  no  such  proceeding  as  this 
— there  is  there  nothing  analogous  to  tbe 
proceeding  in  which  we  are  now  engaged, 
nothing  analogous  to  our  judgment  upon 
fbe  televancy.  We  are,  as  in  former  times, 
when  by  special  indictments,  and  special  find- 
ings upon  the  relevancy,  the  Court  usurped 
tbe  power  of  the  iury.  Certainly  nothing  could 
be  further  from  toe  inteution  of  the  legiskture 
than  to  occasion  this;  but  England  being 
chiefly  contemplated  by'  them,  such  is  the 
effect  of  the  statute  in  question,  that  by  our 
deliberate  recorded  judgment,  declaring  the 
administration  of  the  oatli  to  be  a  capital 
crime,  the  junr  cannot,  if  the  facts  adminis- 
tering the  oath  be  proved,  find  the  panel  not 
guilty,  without  directly  contradicting  the  jo* 
lemn  recohied  decision  of  the  Court. 

Wz.  charge  of  Sedition,  I  sustain  the  rele- 
vancy without  minutely  or  critically  examin- 
ing the  words  charged,  because  I  send  the 
whole  to  the  jury,  who  jadge  of  the  seditious 
intention  as  well  as  of  the  nature  of  the  words. 


A.  D.  1617. 


C506 


In  Sedition  the  eaaence  of  the  crime  is 
intention ;.aqd  as  the  juiy  is  to  jnd|^e  of  that, 
the  Court  can  seldom  reject  an  mdictment 
for  sedition.  Here  the  question  is  otherwise. 
All  is  before  us  that  goes  before  the  jury. 
The  intendment  of  the  oath  is  to  be  collected 
from  the  oath  itself,  and  the  intention  of  the 
party  is  out  of  the  question.  I  can  well  con- 
ceive,  as  was  pointed  out  by  the  public  prose- 
cutor, that  an  oath  might  be  framea  and 
administered,  containing  words  in  a  different 
sense  from  the  common  one — a  terni  might 
be  used  to  denote  .war,  and  another  to  desig- 
nate the  king,  "Sec.  These  terms  might  bo 
explained  by  proof.  But  here  there  is  nothing 
of  that  kind  alleged.  Here  the  natural  and 
necessary  purport  is  charged.  There  is  here 
nothing  to  oe  supplied  but  proof  of  the 
administration  of  the  oath.  The  words  of  the 
oath,  taken  in  the  natural  sense,  are  said  to 
import  an  obligation  to  commit  treason.  We 
are  to  say,  whether  the  words,  as  set  forth 
in  the  indictment,  do  so  or  not ;  and  in  this 
we  are  going  into  the  proper  province  of  the 
jurv.  The  Court  and  jury  are  united  in  fact ; 
and  a  judge  who  sustains  the  relevancy  of  this 
indictment  must  be  prepared  to  say,  that,  as 
a  juryman,  if  the  fact  of  administering  the  oath 
be  proved,  he  would  return  a  verdict  of  guilty. 

Am  I  then  prepared  to  return  a  vierdict  of 
guilty  in  this  case?  This  is  a  very  serious 
question,  and,  permit  me  to  say,  it  is  an 
awful  and  a  difficult  question.  As  to  the  oath 
itself,  I  agree  with  lord  Hermand  in  saying 
it  is  abominable  and  shocking.  It  is  impossible 
to  look  at  it  without  -suspecting,  and  thinking 
it  probable,  it  imports  an  obligation  to  commit 
a  capital  crime.  That  has  been,  and  is  my 
impression.  But  the  presumption  in  favour 
of  innocence  is  not  to  ne  redargued  by  mere 
suspicion.  I  am  sorry  to  see,  in  this  infor- 
mation, that  the  public  prosecutor  treats  tliis 
too  lightly;  he  seems  to  think  that  the  law 
entertains  no  such  presuniption  of  innocence. 
I  cannot  listen  to  this.  X  conceive  that  this 
presumption  is  to  be  found  in  every  code  of 
law  which  has  reason,  and  religion,  and 
humanity,  for  a  foundation.  It  is  a  maxim 
which  ought  to  be  inscribed  in  indelible 
characters  in  tbe  heart  of  every  judge  and 
juryman ;  and  X  was  happy  to  hear  from  lord 
Hermand,  he  is  inclined  to  give  full  effect 
to  it.  To  overturn  this,  there  must  be  legal 
evidence  of  guilt,  carrying  home  a  degree  of 
conviction  short  only  of  absolute  certainty. 
Here  suspicion  is  not  sufficient,  there  must  be 
sufficient  proof  that  this  oath  imports  an 
obligation  to  commit  treason,  to  entitle  us  to 
sustain  the  relevancy  of  this  indictment. 
With  this,  I  shall  proceed  to  the  consideration 
of  this  oath,  for  that  is  the  principle  upon 
which  I  am  bound  to  proceed. 

Since  this  case  came  before  |is,  a  verr 
material  alteration  has  been  made  upon  this  oath 
or  its  purport*  In  die  two  former  indictments 
against  the  panel,  the  word  ^  force**  did  not 
appear.    Here  it  is  introduced,  anddoesy  iii 


507]        ^  GEORGE  IIL 


Triai^A«imt  M'KinUjf 


isos 


my  opinKHi^  make  a  very  materidtl  iteration 
in  die  nature  and  import  o^  the  oath.  ludiall 
first  consider  it  as  without  the  wend  **  force/' 
and  I  hare  great  doubts  as  to  this  oath  ftJling 
within  the  act  of  pariiament.    I  shall  state  die 

founds  of  this  aonbt,  after  mentioning  why 
think  the  import  given  lo  the  oath  groundless. 
These  oonsideratiotts  whidi  indicate  a  criminal 
import  here  are  obvious.  FSnt^  The  secret 
meetings.  Second^  Physical'  strength  con- 
trasted with  moral.  llM,  The  exertion  of 
▼iolenoe  to  obtain  an  alteration  of  law^  parti- 
cularly if  by  numbers.  Th^  oath  shews,  by  a 
brotherhood,  that  a  number  of  persons  were  to 
act  Therefore,  takinf^  the  whole  words 
together,  I  suspect  the  import  is  criminal.  I 
am  now  talking  of  the  oath  as  it  stood ;  and 
I  am  considering  it  as  any  written  instrument 
is  considered.  I  take  the  whole  of  the  oath 
together, '  and  this  I  conceive  to  be  the  way 
to  proceed.  In  the  common  case,  we  give 
the  effect  to  a  written  instrument  which  appears 
agreeable  to  its  general  tendency.  If  A.  and 
B.  dispute  about  a  will,  I  take  what  I  conceive 
to  have  been  the  intention  of  the  testator. 
But,  here,  the  case  is  different.  My  opinion 
of  the  instrument  must  guide  me  in  both 
cases ;  but  the  sort  of  proof  which  makes  me 
prefer  A.-  to  B.  is  very  different  from  that 
conviction  which  I  must  feel  before  I  can 
declare  a  prisoner  to  be  guilty  of  a  capital 
crime.  I  cannot  do  this,  if  a  meaning  other 
than  the  one  alleged  can  reasonably  be  as- 
cribed to  the  words. 

I  have  great  doubts,  taking  the  oath  as  it 
originally  stood,  whether  I  be  entitled  to  say 
it  is  an  oath  falling  under  this  act  of  parlia- 
ment. I  agree  with  my  brother,  as  to  the 
consequences  of  the  wild  scheme  of  introducing 
universal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments.  They 
strike  us  as  leading  to  anarchy,  and  issuing  in 
military  despotism.  This  feeling,  as  to  the 
political  expediency  of  the  objects  expressed 
m  it,  naturally  creates  in  the  mind  a  strong 
suspicion 'of  its  treasonable  import.  But  I  do 
not  think  it  a  legitimate  ground  of  suspidon, 
and  therefore  it  ought  to  be  discarded  from 
our  minds.  This  object  has  been  recommended 
by  men  of  high  name.  It  has  been  stated  to 
be  an  essential  part  of  the  constitution  by 
men  of  whose  fidelity  and  loyalty  there  cannot 
be  a  doubt;  and  therefore  our  view  of  the 
object  ought  not  to  influence  our  determination 
on  this  occasion.  It  has  appeared  laudable 
and  constitutional  to  men  of  upright  intentions, 
and  it  may  have  appeared  in  the  same  light 
to  the  party  here.  In  short,  we  are  bound 
to  make  a  distinction  which  is  often  very 
essential  to  the  ends  of  justice,  and  which  has 
not  here  been  sufficiently  attended  to— we  are 
bound  to  distinguish  between  the  end  and 
the  means.  Whatever  opinion  we  entertain 
as  to  the  mid,  we  ought  not  from  that  to  judge . 
of  the  means.  However  ruinous,  the  conse- 
quences of  introducing  universal  suffrage  and 
^nual  parliaments  may  be,  the  crime  of 
^^ "      to   introduce  Uiese  is  not   charged 


against  the  panel.  l}ie  object  is  not  criminal. 
The  means  by  which  they  proposed  to  attain 
it  constitute  the  crime,  and  not  the  object 
itself;  and,  because  we  think  the  end  would 
destroy  the  constitution,-  we  must  not  infer 
that  treason  is  the  means  employed  for  attain- 
ing it.  This  very  end  has  been  recommended 
by  men  of  the  highest  name.  The  duke  of 
Richmond  *  introduced  into  Parliament  a 
bill,  stating  that  universal  sufiVage  and  annual 
parliaments  are  the  birthright  of  the  inhabi- 
tants of  this  countty,  and,  until  so  constituted, 
the  country  could  not  be  considered  free.  No 
man  ever  imputed  to  him  treasonable  inten- 
tions, or  a  desire  to  subvert  the  constitution. 
In  short,  in  order  to  get  at  the  import  of  the 
oath,  we  must  separate  the  object  in  view  of 
tile  parties  from  the  means  employed  to  attain 
it;  tor  the  means  alone  were  criminal. 

Suppose  that  these  men  had  come  under  a 
similar  oath,  and  that  their  object  had  been 
to  obtain  a  repeal  of  the  law  as  to  the  slave 
trade ;  that  it  had  been  either  to  obtain  the 
law  abolishing  the  slave  trade,  or  a  repeal  of 
it;  or  any  other  object,  as  a  repeal  of  the 
coach  tax — you  cannot  say  this  oath  is  an 
obligation  to  any  crime  unless  you  could  say 
that  the  same  oath  for  such  purposes  would  he 
a  capital  crime.  'It  is  therefore  our  duty  to 
separate  all  consideration  of  the  object  in 
view  from  the  means  employed  to  carry  it 
into  effect.  We  must  look  to  the  terms  of 
the  oath  itself,  and  see  whether  the  means 
would  be  criminal  if  employed  to  obtain  any 
other  alteration  of  any  existing  law  of  the 
country. 

Viewing  the  matter  in  this  light,  I  may 
suspect,  but  how  can  I  be  sure  any  thing 
illegal  was  meant  by  the  parties?  If  the  oath 
had  stopped  at  the  obligation  to  obtain  and 
support  **  the  same  to  the  utmost  of  my  power,** 
the  meaning  would  have  been  the  same.  Then 
as  to  the  words  '^  physical  strength,**  how 
could  I  know  it  was  to  be  illegally  exerted  ? 
How  can  I  know  violence  was  to  be  used, 
when  strength  does  not  denote  violence  ?  The 
question  is  not  whether  the  oath  moy  or  doe$ 
import  an  obligation  to  commit  a  capital  crime, 
but  whether  it  neceuarify  doa  so.  As  to  the 
material  words  of  the  oath  engaging  to  exert 
physical  strength,  physical  strength  may  be 
exerted  for  politicsa  purposes,  or  influencing 
the  legislature,  where  nothing  is  done  or 
contemplated  at  all  of  a  criminal  nature. 
There  are  instances  of  this  which  may  be 
given.  We  lately  have  seen  a  case  of  a* num- 
ber of  misguided  and  guilty  men,  setting  out 
to  wander  on  foot  from  Mancbester  to  London. 
These  were  to  exert  physical  strength,  and  no' 
small  share  of  physical  strength,  in  that  expe- 
dition. They  were  guilty,  but  that  they  wtfe 
l^ty  of  a  capital  crime  I  doubt.  That  is  an 
instance  of  the  exertion  of  physical  strength^ 
Higher  instances  may  be  found.  When  it  wa^ 
proposed  to  recognize  the  independence  of  Ame 

•Vide  21  New  ParL  Hist  686. 


SQ9\ 


for 


uiUanfiil  Oalkt. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[«10 


rica, Chatham  an»e  froma bed  of  siclcDessy  came 
down  to  the  House  of  IxHdsy  and  «iimloyed 
his  voice  againat  what  he  thottght.was  fraught 
with  disgrace  to  his  countrr.  He  exerted  ia- 
tellect^  he  exerted  physical  strength,  and  the 
exertion  proved  fatal  to  him.  I  say,  therefore, 
it  is  impossible  for  us  to  infer  that  the  mere 
exertion  of  physical  strength  infers  crime.  It 
does  not  jiecessarily  do  so,  and  therefore  I  am 
not  prepared  to  return  a  yerdict  of  guilty 
against  the  prisoner. 

Such  is  the  opinion  I  have  formed  upon  the 
oath  as  it  stood.  It  is  now  materially  altered. 
The  word  "force"  is  introduced;  and  the 
terms  of  the  oath,  as  it  now  stands,  are :  ^'I 
will  support  the  same  to  the  utmost  of  mv 
power,  either  by  moral  or  physical  strength 
(or  force),  as  the  case  may  reauire,''  *'  Force" 
IS  within  parendiesis ;  but  tnis  has  not  been 
sufficiently  explained.  It  is  said,  the  terms 
were  used  "  not  only  synonymously  but  pro- 
miscuously.*' Wheuer  th^  were  used  in  the 
same  sense,  or  sometimes  the  one  and  some- 
times the  odier,  I  cannot  tell,  I  must  take  it  as  in 
the  indictment;  and  this  oath  does  appear  to 
me  one  which  does  fall  under  the  act  of  par- 
liament ;  one  to  which  the  statute  does  apply ; 
for  *^  Ibrce"  necessarily  denotes  violence, 
and  in  soch  a  case  must  iiaVe  amounted  to  a 
d^tttalcrime.  But  while  I  say  that,  in  this 
view,  the  oath  &lls  under  the  statute,  it.  yet 
remains  to  inquire,  what  is  the  crime  to  com- 
mit which  this  oath  is  an  Ql>ligation?  And 
this  leads  me  to  consider  tiie  second  question, 
which  is. 

If  it  flhall  appear  the  oath  is,  or  may  be,  of 
die  description  alle^^,  ia  it  incumbent  on  the 
prosecQtor  to  speafjr  in  &e  indictment  the 
crime  to  the  commission  of  whicb  he  says  the 
oath  imports  an  obligation  ? 

The  public  prosecutor  contends  he  is  not 
jMmnd  to  specify  the  crime.  It  is  very  true  he 
has  said  the  crime  is  treason ;  but  this,  accord- 
ing to  his  argument,  was  unnecessary  and 
superfluous;  and  so  for  he  is  right  and  con- 
sistent. For  if  it  be  necessary  to  describe  the 
crime  at  all,  to  call  it  treason  is  no  description. 
Treason  is  a  generic  term  as  well  as  felony; 
and  some  treasons  do  not  differ  mora  from 
feloay  than  one  treason  from  another.  The 
prosecutor  is  sensible  of  this ;  and  though  he 
nas  stated  the  crime  to  be  treason,  he  says  he 
is  not  bound  to  give  it  any  further  ^)ecifica- 
tion.  It  is  only  necessary  to  look  at  pages  13 
and  14  of  the  prosecutor's  information,  to 
find  his  doctrine  on  this  subject.  On  the 
fofmer  page,  he  savs :  **  Now,  what  can  the 
potecntor  set  forth  of  the  puiport  or  the 
intendment,  which  is  the  essence  oi  the  crime, 
except  the  terms  of  the  oath  itself  and  such 
other  cireumstances  as  accompanied  the  ad- 
ministration of  it,  as  may  throw  light  upon 
the  meaning  of  the  a4ministrators  or  takers  ? 
All  this  he  has  done,  and  more  he  cannot  do. 
Heeanaot  state  more  of  the  facts  than  he  knows ; 
nor  oan  be  state  more  than  was  actuaUv  perpe- 
trated; and  the  oath  is  the  whole  tact  and 


onlysource  of  information.  Still  less  can  he  be 
called  upon  to  draw  an  inference  in  law  ftum 
facts  that  have  never  existed.  The  minor 
proposition  is  a  detail  of  facts,  and  has 
nothing  to  do  with  law ;  and  if  he  had  dmwn 
the  inference  required  by  the  panel,  he  would 
not  have  added  one  ioia  to  the  relevancy.  He 
has  told  your  lordships  all  Uiat  was  done ;  the 
whole  focts  of  the  case ;  and  it  is  the  principal 
^art  of  those  fiicts,  that  there  was  an  obliga- 
tion to  commit  a  crime.  That  this  crime,  if 
committed,  would  have  been  of  a  p^irticular 
description,  and  effected  in  a  particular  way, 
is  nothing  to  the  purpose,  as  it  is  not  the 
intended  crime,  but  the  ooUgation  to  commit  it, 
that  is  the  point  of  dittay.''  On  page  14,  the 
doctrine  is  explained  in  still  clearer  and  more 
unambiguous  terms ;  ^  He  is  bound  to  tell  the 
panel  the  facts  he  intends  to  prove  against  him, 
and  the  law  by  which  they  are  punishable,  in 
order  that  he  may  be  prepared  for  his  defence  ; 
but  he  does  not  know  how  it  can  help  the 
panel  to  shape  his  defence,  to  tell  him  what 
would  have  been  the  legal  consequence  of  an 
act  of  which  he  is  not  accused,  and  which  be 
only  intended  to  commit.  He  might  as  well 
be  required,  in  a  case  of  an  indictment  for  an 
attempt  to  poison,  to  specify  the  mode  of 
death,  and  the  legsd  consequences  of  murder. 
It  is  maintained,  that  this  indictment  would 
have  been  perfectly  relevant,  if  it  had  merely 
libelled  the  wicked  and  malicious  administra- 
tion of  the  oath  charged,  without  a  syllable 
as  to  what  its  purport  or  intendment  is ;  for 
if  the  oath  means  what  the  prosecutor  alleges, 
the  prosecutor's  gloss  upon  it  is  mere  surplus- 
age. If  it  did  not  mean  any  thing  that  comes 
under  the  acL  then  to  be  sure  it  would  be 
necessary  to  libel  the  hidden  meanine  and 
purpose  with  which  it  is  administered  and 
taken,  otherwise  there  would  be  no  relevancy 
in  the  charge.  But  if  it  openly  express 'the 
unlawful  meaning,  s^  in  the  present  case,  it 
is  itself  the  minor  proposition,  the  connecting 
link  between  the  major  proposition  and  the 
conclusion;  and  the  prosecutor  knows  no 
addition  that  can  make  the  syllogism  more 
perfect.  Mm,  The  administering  an  oath  of 
a  particular  description  is  a  crime :  Min.  You 
did  administer  the  following  oath :  Ergo,  You 
ought  to  be  pimished.** 

In  consistency  with  this  argument,  the  pro- 
secutor in  the  commencement  states,  that  "the 
prisoner's  argumenjt  rested  on  the  fallacy  of 
treason  being  the  crime  charged;'*  and  the 
prosecutor  says,  ''this  is  not  a  charge  of 
treason.  The  crime  of  administering  an  oath 
alone  is  charged,  and  the  crime  contemplated 
in  the  oath  is  not  diamdi^  and  need  not  there- 
fore be  speci6ed.''  This  argument  is  plain 
and  intelhgible,  and  states  accurately  the  true 
question  which  is  here  raised,  namely,  whether 
an  indictment  under  this  statute  is  to  be  held 
relevant,  because  it  sets  forth  the  purport  of 
the  oath  merely,  without  stating  whether  such 
oath  intended  the  person  taking  it  to  commit 
murder,  or  treason,  or  felony,  and  still  less 


'511i         57  ^fiORGE  III. 


tri4  ifAndrtm  M'Kiniof 


C513 


Stating  the  treasofi,  6r  iht  felony  cotitetnpkted. 
Hiis  is  truly  the  question.  Tike  setting  forth 
that  th«  huh  bound -to  the  commission  of 
treason  ii  surplusage.  So  the  prosecutor  says, 
and  condstetktly  says.  For,  if  he  is  bound  to 
explain  \vhether  it  is  treason  or  felony  that  is 
contemplated,  he  is  bound  on  the  same  prin- 
ciple to  explain  what  treason  it  is  that  is 
contemplated. 

Now  I  cannot  hold  an  indictment  on  this 
statute  relevant  which  does  not  explain  what 
the  crime  is  to  which  the  oath  binds.  I 
cannot  do  so  upon  any  principle  of  reason,  or 
any  principle  of  law.     The  oaths  contem- 

Slatea  by  die  statute,  are  oaths  binding  to 
o  a  certain  act  or  acts,  which,  when  done, 
would  be  treason,  murder,  or  felony.    Bat  is 
it  consistent  wtth  reason  to  allow  the  prosecu- 
tor to  tell  us  of  the  act  which  it  is  thus  sworn 
to  commit,  that  he  cannot  or  will  not  say 
whether  it  be  treason,  or  murder,  or  felony,  or 
what  treason,  or  what    felony  P     Dreadfhl, 
indeed,  would  be  the  import  of  this  statute, 
were  die  prosecutor's  interpretation   to   be 
sanctioned.    A  taan  is  to  be  put  on  trial  for 
his  life,  because  he  administered    an   oath 
binding  to  do  an  act  of  which  the  public 
prosecutor  infers  that  it  may  be  murder,  or 
that  it  may  be  any  of  the  numerous  treasons, 
or  that  it  may  be  any  of  the   numberless 
felonies  which  are  punished  with  death.    At- 
tend for. a  moment  to  the  consecjuences   of 
this  doctrine.    If  a  verdict  of  guilty  be  re- 
turned, what  is  found  by  such  a  verdictP  That 
the  prisoner  administered  an  oath  binding  to 
commit  any  treason  or  murder,  or  any  felony, 
punishable  with  death.    A  general  yerdict  on 
this  indictment  is  just  an  uncertain  special 
yerdict.    The   essence  of  the  guilt    of    an 
offence  against  this  statute  consists  not  in  the 
oath,  but  in  the  crime  which  the  oath  purports 
to  commit.    But  here  is  a  yerdict  of  guilty, 
and  neither  from  it,  nor  from  the  record  can 
we  learn  what  the  crime  is,  the  intention  or 
instigation  to  commit  which  forms  the  essence 
of  the  prisoner*ii  ^uflt.    Now,  is  this   con- 
sistent with  any  notions  that  are,  or  ever  were 
entertained  of  criminal  law  and  justice  f  But 
the  matter  does  not  end  here,  it  involves  con- 
sequences  still  more  absuni  and    dreadfiil. 
Such  a  yerdict  of  guilty  may  be  returned, 
although  there  are  not  any  two  jurymen  agreed 
in  opinion  as   to  the   prisoner's  guilt.    On^ 
juryman  may  think  the  oath  binds   to    one 
felony  or  one  treason,  and  another  to  a  differ- 
ent felony  or  a  different  treason.    In  this  very 
case  this  may  happen.    Treason  is  alleged; 
but  this  matters  not,  for  there  are  ten  different 
treasons,  and   of  eight  jurymen  each  may 
thiiik  a  different  treason  contemplated  in  the 
oath.    But  the  principle  contended  for,  and 
truly  at  issue,  is,  that  no  crime  need  b^  speci- 
fied or  described,  and  such  an  indictment  we 
must  sustain,  if  we  sustain  this  indictment. 
Can  this  doctrine  be  tolerated,  or  b  it  more 
consistent  with  law  than  with  reason?  Mr. 
Hwnie  has  well  expUtned  tbe  law  of  indict* 


ment»-{Here  his  lordship  quoted' the  doctrine^ 
of  Mr.  Hume  on  this  subject] — It  is  true,  the 
prosecutor '  says,  that  that  which  the  oath 
bound  to  commit  is  treason.  But  can  he  be 
allowed  to  allege  that  an  oath  binds  to  com- 
mit treason,  when  he  will  not  or  cannot  ex- 
plain what  the  treason  is  which  it  binds  to 
commit?  How  would  this  do,  if  a  capital 
felony  instead  of  treason  were  alleged,  and 
the  sort  of  felony  were  not  descrit^  ?  But 
the  prosecutor  says  that  the  purport  of  the 
oath  supplies  all  the  deficiencies.  But  how 
can  this  be  ?  Either  the  oath  is  quite  clear,  or 
it  is  not.  If  the  purport  of  the  oath  be 
perfectly  clear,  if  that  which  it  bin&  to  do  is 
so  obviously  an  act  df  murder,  or  of  treason', 
or  of  capital  felony,  why  should  not  the 
prosecutor  tell  us  what  it  is?  If  treason,  what 
treason  it  is? — If  felony,  what  felony?  It  is  a 
rule  of  common  sense,  as  well  as  of  law,  on 
the  one  hand  not  to  require  from  the  prose- 
cutor any  information  or  explanation  which, 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  it  may  be  im- 
possible or  difficult  for  him  to  give.  But,  on 
tbe  other  hand,  he  is  certainly  bound  to  giv^ 
every  information  and  explanation  which  is 
material  to  the  case,  and  which  he  can  give 
without  diffi^culty.  Now,  if  the  purport  of 
the  oath  be  so  clear,  what  prevents  him 
from  doing  that  which  he  can  have  no  difficulty 
in  doing,  namely  describing  the  crime  whidk 
it  binds  to  commit  ? 

On  the  other  hand,  if  the  putport  of  fbd 
oath  be  not  clear,  if  it  does  not  distinctly 
appear  from  it  what  the  crime  is  to*  which  ii 
bound,  then  it  never  can  supply  the  deficiency 
in  the  indictment,  or  '*^  form  the  connecting 
link  between  the  major  proposition  and  th^ 
conclusion,*'  or  render  it  unnecessary  for  the 
prosecutor  to  describe  the  criiae  to  which  it  is 
alleged  to  bind. 

"Ae  prosecutor  puts  the  case  of  an  oath 
binding  m  termmU  to  commit  treason.  Thb 
is  an  extravagant  supposition,  and  I  cannot 
reason  on  it.  An  oath  may,  no  doubt,  be  ad- 
ministered, binding  to  commit  murder,  treason, 
or  felony,  in  termm.  But  such  an  oath  conld- 
not  be  in  the  contemplation  of  the  legiylature, 
and  it  would  be  a  proof  of  lunacy  raSier  than 
an  instance  of  guilt;  but,  at  any  rate,  this  is 
not  the  case  here.  This  oath  makes  no  meiF* 
tion  of  murder,  treason,  or  felony ;  and  ita 
terms,  therefore,  neither  do*  nor  can  remove 
the  necessity  of  explanation  ;  and  we  recur  to 
the  true  question,  which  is,  whether  it  be  ne«^ 
cessary  to  specify  in  the  indictment  any  crime 
at  all,  either  murder,  felony^  or  treason?  I 
am  clearly  of  opinion  that  it  is. 

Zi  But  the  prosecutor  has  specified  treasonr, 
and  this  leads  me  to' the  third  question  whidk 
I  have  mentioned— whether  the  specfficatioA 
and  description  in  this  indictment,  oftlye 
treason  said  to  be  contemplated,  be  accnimte 
and  correct,  and  such  as  the  Court  can  sustain? 

The  indictment  sets  forth,  that  .the' oath 
purported  or  intended  to  bind  the  "persons 
taking  the  tame  to  commit  treason;  by  obiaitt* 


413] 


Ji)r  ^'dminuftnng  unlai^ui  Oqtht. 


A-.P-^ISI?. 


lAU' 


iag  iimaal  parluunents  ftnd  udTenal  suffrage^  | 

5  physical  strength  w  fonoty  and  thereby 
ecdag  the  subvenioi  gf  the  eetablUhed  go* 
verameDt,  Uwe,  and  copstitntioa  of  this  king- 
don^  by  ualawfol  aad  Yiolent  means.  This  is  a 
description^  and  the  only  description  contained 
in  this  indietmenty  of  the  crime  charged. 
TbeR)  at  it  appears  to  me*  the  treason  of  ob- 
taining annual  pariiaments  and  aniversal  su^ 
fiage  bj  physical  strength  or  force,  is  the 
treston  to  which  the  oath  is  alleged  to  bind. 
Now,  is  this  a  treason  ?  The  prosecutor  says 
he  has  done  avbat  he  was  not  Imund  to  do. 
He  has  tet  forth  the  treason  in  the  words  I 
hate  read.  If  it  be  treason  to  obtain  annual 
pariisBients  and  univ«isal  suffrage,  by  phy- 
aioal  strength  or  force,  muUo  majm  must  it  be 
tveeson  to  eifect  the  sulyvezsioa  of  the  eata- 
hiiahed  government,  law8>  and  constitution 
of  this  kingdom,  by  unlawful  and  violent 
aseans.  Yet  this  latter  has  been  solemnly  ad- 
judged not  to  be  treasMi.  Hie  indictment  is 
the  saaie,  as  if  it  had  said,  that  the  oath 
booad  to  obtain  annual  parliazttents,  &c.»  and 
thflvafay  lo  commit  treason ;  or  to  effect  the 
fabversion  .of  the  established  government,  Ice. 
and  dierel^  to  ceaamii  treason.  In  short,  if 
we  snstssn  this  indictment,  we  most  declare 
thai  it:  is  tttason  to  obtain  annual  parliaments, 
aad  so  on;  or  to  effect  the  subversion  of  the 
•alablisbed  government,  and  so  on ;  we  must 
iind  this  to  be  treason,  that  is^  we  mast  de- 
clare a  new  treason. 

The  case  of  Treailian  is  fiuniliar  to  us,  I  can* 
not  speak  of  dt  so  lightly  as  the  learned  judge 
.trho  apoke  last.  Tresilian  suffiMred  most  justly ; 
aad  ot  this  I  am  sure,  there  ia  not  one  of  us 
•but  would  rather  suffer  his  punishment  than 
incBr  his  guilt.  But  the  case  of  Sttafibrd,  at 
least,  cannot  be  thus  spoken  of.  He  was  im- 
■peached  and  attainted,  as  we  all  know,  of  high 
iaaason,  for  mdeaxmnug  to  wkvert  the  ancient 
mdfim&mnfnl  itmm  mid  ^pvermneni  of  hi$  ma- 
j/m^MTttimt^t  almost  the  identical  words,  and 

vds  otynnauXj  the  same  import  with  those 

x^ia^pn.  to  designate  treason  in  this  indtet- 
We  an  know  the  result.  The  attainder 
of  lord  Stsaffbid  was  reversed  by  parliament, 
and  whatever  may  be  the  opinion  entertained 
of  the  oondutt  of  that  unhappy  nobleman,  I 
brieve  there  never  bas  been  but  one  sentiment 
as  ao  tbe|ms|metj  of  this  act  of  reveisal.'  Now 
the  preamble  of  this  act  expressly  bears,  that 
^  the  late  earl  of  Stnfibrd .  wras  impeached  of 
high  treason,  upon  pretence  of  eadeavouriag 
to  sabved  the  tnndamental  laws ;  that  he  was 
omdeanied  uxin  accumulative  treasons,  none 
a#  the  pcetenaed  crimes  being  treason  apart.'' 
And  for  theae  and  other  causes,  the  act  of 
attainder  was  repealed,  revoked,  and  reversed. 

Consider  the  two  questions  I  have  stated 
«iid«r  this  head,  combined  togeUier,  and  you 
'*ill  sea  that/we  are  .reduced  to  this  dilemma ; 
•itber  we  most  find  that  this  oath  binds  to 
tamadi  a  capital  ciimc^  when  the  prosecutor 
tall  vvbat  tiut  crime  is»  «r  we  must  de- 
i  new  treason*  Sea  bow  your  record 
VOL  XXXHL 


will  appear.  A  man  is  tried,  convicted,  and 
executed,  and  for  what?  "Why  for  ad  minis* 
tertng  an  oath  bindinj;  to  commit  treason. 
And  what  is  the  treason  ?  Why  it  is  the  trea« 
SOD  of  obtaining  annual  parliaments  ind  uni* 
versal  suffrage  by  physiciELl  strength  oir  force ; 
or  else  it  is  a  treason  which  the  prosecutor 
cannot  describe — a  treason  without  a  name. 

1  come  now  to  the  fourth  question  which  I 
propose  to  consider.  This  is  the  question 
treated  in  the  supplementarv  information  for 
the  prisoner.  There  is  nothing  inconsistent 
in  this  argument.  It  proceeds  on  the  assump' 
tion,  that  upon  the  other  points  of  the  case 
the  prosecutor  has  been  successful,  and  then 
it  is  said  this  diflSculty  remains,  that  if  he  have 
sufficiently,  described  the  oath  as  binding  to 
commit  high  treason^  then  he  has  made  out 
that  the  administering  suoh  an  oath  is  in  itself 
an  act  of  high  treason,  and  cannot  be  tried  as 
a  felony. 

Now,  whether  this  indictment  discloses  a 
case  of  treason,  I  cannot  tell,  as  the  crime  is 
not  specified.  It  may,  or  it  may  not  be  trea- 
son, and  this  is  a  very  powerful  additional 
argument  for  the  necessity  of  the  prosecutor's 
specifying  and  describing  in  his  indictment 
the  crime,  to  the  commission  of  which  he 
states  that  the  oath  imports  an  obligation. 

Though  the  authorities  on  this  point  are 
English  authorities,  yet  the  question  is  one  of 
Scotch  law,  and  I  cannot  be  permitted  to  say 
that  I  am  ignorant  of  the  law  of  England  on 
this  subject,  for  it  is  the  law  of  Scotland  also. 
It  appears  to  me  to  be  a  point  made  out,  that 
fblony  merges  in  treason.  As  to  this,  the 
aiMhorities  in  pa|[es  14  and  15  of  the  supple* 
mentary  information  for  the  prisoner  are  con- 
clusive, particularly  Foster's  observation  on 
the  ci^e  in  Dyer ;  and  this  being  the  law  of 
England,  I  think  that,  in  cases  of  high  treason, 
it  most  be  the  law  of  Scothmd.  By  the  act  of 
Anne,  high  treason  must  be  tried  in  Scotland 
in  the  same  manner  as  in  England.  That 
which  is  high  treason  may  also  be  a  felony. 
But  if  it  be  tried  here  as  a  felony,  the  act  of 
Anne  is  violated*  By  that  statute,  any  act  or 
.acts  amounting  to  higl^  treason  must  be  tried 
as  high  treason  is  tried  in  England.  The  law 
has  in  view  what  the  crime  »,  not  what  it  may 
be  dmammaUd;  and  if  the  crime  charged  hie 
treason,  the  trial  of  it  must  proceed  in  the 
manner  directed  by  this  statute..  And  further, 
the  law  of  high  treason  in  England  is  the  law 
of  high  treason  i|i  Scotland.  The  law  of  high 
treason  is  the  same  in  both  countries.  But 
the  law  of  high  treaspn  in  Scotland  must  be 
altogether  di&rent  from  the  English  law  of 
high  treason,  if  an  offence  may  be  tried  as  a 
felony  in  Scotland,  which,  in  Eogland,  must 
and  could  only  be  tried  as  high  treason.  The 
mode  of  proceeding,  no  doubt,  in  such  a  case, 
in  the  two  coi|ntries,  is  different.  The  case 
supposes,  that  if  the  offence  is  charged  as  a 
felony,  consequently  the  procedure,  in  the 
first  instance,  will  be  aooording  to  the  law  of 
ielony  in  eacb  country,  and  tbur  law  ol  Mmy 

2  L 


A 15]       ^7  GEORGE  lU. 

•8  different,  although  their  law  of  high  treaaon 
be  the  same.  Bat  for  this  reason  we  are  bound 
not  to  permit  an  offence  amoonting  to  high 
treason  to  be  tried  here  as  a  felony.  The 
thing  cannot  be  done  here  in  the  same  way  in 
which  it  is  done  in  Engtand,  but  ttill  it  mutt 
be  done.  In  England,  the  trialy  after  it  ia 
begun,  may  be  stopped.  This  is  not  so  here. 
But  here,  if  the  nets  are  disclosed  as  they 
ought  to  be  in  the  indictment,  the  Court 
must  thence  see  whether  it  be  a  case  of  treason, 
and  stop  it  if  it  be  so,  before  sending  it  to  a 
jury.  Keferenoe  has  been  made  to  cases  for- 
merly tried  here  of  sedition.  I  remember  per* 
ibctly  well  what  was  said  on  one  of  diose  oc- 
casions) br  one  whose  name  can  nerer  be 
mentioned  in  this  place  without  Teneration; 
I  mean  the  late  president  Blair,  who  was  then 
solicitor-general.  It  was  the  case  of  Gerrald. 
I  was  counsel  for  the  prisoner.  I  was  then  a 
very  young  man  at  the  bar,  and  the  circum- 
stance miule  a  corresponding  inipression  on 
me.  It  was,  in  fitct,  one  of  the  first  cases  of 
importance  that  I  had  been  concerned  in.  I 
stated  that  the  Acts  charged,  if  an]f  thing, 
amounted  to  high  treason.  Mr.  Solicitor  O^ 
neral  Blair  did  not  state  that  it  was  no  matter 
—that  he  was  at  libertr  to  proceed  either  as 
for  high  treason,  or  as  n>r  felony,  at  his  plea- 
sure. But  he  stated,  that  if  I  could  make  \i 
out  to  be  a  case  of  treason,  he  would  be  mudi 
obliged  to  me,  that  he  would  take  the  hint: 
that  he  would  abandon  that  indictment,  and 
would  proceed  against  the  prisoner  for  high 
treason  a/ccordingly.* 

T  will  put  the  case  of  an  indictment  for  theft, 
aggravated  bv  house-breaking,  and  that  the 
Acts  disclosed  in  the  minor  proposition  are  the 
attack  and  capture  of  the  castle  of  Edinburgh 
by  an  armed  force,  and  the  plundering  it  of 
its  stores  and  ammunition.  No  doubt  this  is 
a  theft  and  housebreaking ;  but  would  we 
consent  to  try  this  as  a  felony?  or  should  we 
not  dismiss  such  an  indictment?  Such  is  the 
case,  independent  of  the  terms  of  this  act  of 
pariiament,  the  59nd  of  the  king,  on  which 
this  indictment  is  laid.  But  it  is  said,  that 
the  last  clause  in  this  act  excludes  the  common 
law  doctrine  of  felony  mernng  in  treason. 
This  clause  is  in  these  words,  pierehis  lordship 
read  the  clause/]  This  is  the  clause  on  whicn 
tKe  prosecutor  founds  his  argument.  The  pre- 
ceding part  of  the  statute  would  afford  no  room 
for  arguing"  that  the  doctrine  of  merging  did 
not  apply  to  cases  under  this  act  as  much  as 
to  any  other;  and  this  clause  appears  to  me 
to  go  very  far,  though  I  doubt  it  it  goes  fkr 
enough  to  support  (he  prosecutor's  argument. 
Tor  what  is  his  gloss  on  the  clause  ?  He  says, 
first,  that  by  this  clause  offiences  amounting  to 
treason  are  made  Helonies,  or  are  triable  as 
felonies ;  and,  secondly,  that  by  this  clause 
these  offences  may  be  tried  and  punished  either 
as  felonies  or  as  treasons.    Now,  if  such  be 

the  import  and  effect  of  this  clause,  jt  must  be 

*—     . . 1  _  ■  -        ^  ^ ^ ^ 

.   •  Gerrald's  Case,  2  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  866. 


M  tfAndrtm  M'Kmletf 


1816 


admitted  thai  h  makes  an  immenae  inroad* 
both  on  eommen  and  statutory  law.  Further^ 
it  must  be  admitted,  that  aU  this  is  done  by 
implication  merely .  If  this  were  the  intenlion 
of  the  legiriatnre,  why  did  it  not  say  so  «i- 
pressly  ?  First,  it  is  said  it  deelares  a  treason 
to  be  fekwy,  or  to  be  triable  aa  fekmT*  See 
how  an  act  <^  the  same  sort  is  treated  of  by 
the  first  authorities  in  the  law,  the  first  antho* 
ritiesinoiir  law,  for  the  laws  are  the  same 
[Here  his  lordship  read  from  p.  97,  and  p.  28 
of  the  supplementaiy  information,  the  act  3id 
H.  7th,  C.14;  lord  Coke's  obaenratioQ  thereon. 
Lord  Hale's  P.  C.  pages  111,  260,  261 ;  and 
Foster,  pages  200,  201.]  Lord  Coke  and 
lord  Hale  state  the  euaeting  an  oflfenoe  to  be 
a  felony  to  be  a  judgosent  ^  muiiamei^t,  ihA 
it  was  not  treason ;  and  judge  roster  laysy  that 
Hale's  reasons  for  bare  words  not  beiae  an 
overt'act  of  treason,  founded  on  acts  which 
make  the  speaking  those  words  felony  or  ni»- 
demeanor,  are  unanswerable*  For,  heaaya^ 
if  those  words  had  been  deemed  o?cct-acts  by 
the  statutes  of  treasons,  the  legislative  coum 
not  with  any  sort  of  consistency  have  treated 
them  as  felony  or  aoisdemeanor.  And,  he 
adds,  in  a  note  to  the  same  purposey  I  rely  oa 
those  acts  which  make  words  folony  or  misda- 
meanor.  The  prosecutor  says,  that  that  is 
done  by  this  act,  which  Hale  says  it  cannot 
be  thought  that  parliament  would  do }  and 
what  Foster  says,  it  could  not  with  any  sort  of 
consistencT  do.  But,  I  admit,  that,  if  the 
words  of  the  act  were  explicit,  it  would  be  of 
no  use  to  quote  those  authorities.  The  k^gia- 
lature  «Mgf  dp  that  which  Hale  says  it  cannot 
be  supposed  it  would  do,  and  which  Foster 
says  it  could  not  do  with  any  seit  of  oonsial* 
ency,  and,  if  it  does  so,  we  must  bend  to.ita 
authority.  But  where  it  has  not  done  so  ex- 
pressly, and  where  by  inference  and  implica- 
tion such  a  meaning  is  to  be  extracted,  the 
authorities  referred  to,  seem  sufficient  lo  pi«- 
yent  our  adopting  sudi  an  interpretatiom 
But  there  is  another  act  which  does  make  cer^ 
tain  treasons  triable  as  felonies,  the  act  of  die 
89th  and  40th  of  tlie  king,  which  is  quoted 
in  this  information ;  and  see  in  what  aaanner 
it  has  proceeded,  in  order  to  aceomplisb  this 
matter— {Here  his  lordship  read  the  act  3dtk 
and  40th  Geo.  3rd,  c  98.] 

But  the  prosecutor  says,   secondly,  suck 
offences  are  triable,  and  may  be  prosecuted, 
either  as  felonies,  or  aa  treasons.    This  ^^ 
pears  to  me  to  be  the  most  extraordinary  jpan 
of  the  whole  argument — In  saying  this,  I  look, 
to  the   consequences   that   must   inevitably 
follow  from  such  a  regulation — 1st,  as  they 
affect  the  safety  of  the  subject  who  may  thas 
be  tried  substantially  for  treason,  and  punishaA 
with  death,  although  deprived  of  all  those 
benefits  and  safeguards,  which,  in  cases  of 
treason,  hare  been  deemed  necessary  for  kis 
protection.     I  look  next  to  tiie  safety  aiaid. 
dignity  of  the  Crown  itself.     The  greatftW 
crimes  against  the  Crown  may  thus  escape  IhMaa 
justice.    I  put  the  c4se  of  an  oath  to  providbe 


4173 


Jm  Admiidtteniig  wttcnifiA  OiOkt, 


■A.  D.  1817. 


l«I* 


pouoB  for  the  king^  or  of  a  penon  taking  an 
Mth  to  administer  poison  to  the  king,  and  that 
the  poison  is  actnal^  provided ;  yet  Siis  peisoo 
■ay  be  tried  only  'for  a  tmnmrtable  telony, 
— may  even  be  tried  under  toe  S7th  of  the 
kingy  by  which  he  can  only  be  transported  for 
seven  yean.  It  appears  to  me  a  very  difficult 
matter  to  put  sooi  an  interpretation  on  this 
act.  I  think  tMs  clause  not  unattended  with 
diffieuity;  bur,  oeT  the  whole^  I  inctine  to 
adopt  me  exptanation  which  is  very  ingen^ 
oosly  given  by  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner  in 
dM  sopplemtetary  information. 

It  b  not,  however,  necessary  for  me,  in  the 
view  I  have  of  this  case,  to  determine  tlus 
'point.  I  have  not  got  so  for.  I  am  clesoly  of 
epimooy  that  the  indictment  is  not  relevant  on 
Ibe  other  grounds  which  I  have  stated,  and 
that  ileaaoot  be  remitted  to  the  knowledge^ 
inasriae. 

Lard  ^'imtf/j^ — ^In  forming  my  opinion 
upon  the  relevancy  of  the  indictmenl,  I 
md  it  neeessarylo  begin  by  fixing  the  true 
unport  of  the  oathy  for  administering  which 
the  indictment  hiis  been  raised  against 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  In  considering  this 
pointy  these  are  two  questions  to  be  attoided 
to,  one  a  ouestioo  of  foct,  the  other  a  question 
of  law.  We  must  first  fix  in  our  minds,  what, 
in  paint  of  foot,  the  acts  were,  what  the  line  of 
conduct  eras,  whidi  the  personi  taking  this 
eaih  were  bound  to  perform  and  to  follow ; 
and  next,  we  must  determine,  in  law,  whether 
these  UelMf  and  that  line  of  conduct,  would 
have  amounted  to  treason. 

In  considering  the  first  of  these  matters,  viz. 
the  hnpoft  of  the  obligation,  I  agree  com- 
pictdy  with  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner,  that 
we  are  to  consider,  not  what  the  administrator 
inleaded,  bnt  what  the  oath  itself  purports. 
Ike  act  of  patiiament  speaks  of  an  oath  put- 
pBrtiRg  or  iiUaidmg  ;  and,  as  has  been  remark- 
ed by  lord  Gillies,  in  that  respect,  this  act  is 
dniinguished  from  the  former  act  37th  George 
M,  which  speaks  of  an  oath  purporimg  or  in- 


At  the  same  time^  this  observatiqp  is  sub- 
feet  to  a  certain  degree  of  explanation.  The 
net  speaks  of  an  oath  pmrporUng  or  mtendmg. 
Ihe  woad  '*  mteudiiK,*'  cannot  be  taken  as 
•iiphisBge.  It  must  have  a  meaning  different 
•fien  the  meaning  of  the  word  **  purportmgJ' 
The  caae  in  the  view  of  the  legislature  must 
have  been  the  case  of  an  oath  which  is  ambi- 
guously or  my*toriously  expressed,  the  pmfori 
ef  which  nunr  not  be  clear  to  those  who  have 
■ei  the  key,  but  the  uUaUkm  of  which  may  be 
muter  of  proof.  In  illustration  of  this,  I  may 
nmind  your  lordships  of  a  late  trial  for  forgery , 
ift  which  we  had  a  letter  from  an  aooompllce, 
.tothe  prisoaer,*fvoduced,  desiring  him  to  send 
'^^gooig^'*  or  ^  aaftyanh**  meaning bjr  this 
»|weiiiun  as  appeared  from  the  evidence, 
f^ifffii  notes.  Mow  this  isas  a  letter  nU^tdmg, 
-MBgh  notjuopor/u^a  commission  for  forsM. 
-haak.of.£i^land  notes.  This  is  the  kind  ot 
whidi  must  have  beenin  the  vi^w  of  the 


legislature,  when  these  words,  jmrportrng  or 
mtemiing  were  inserted  in  this  act  of  parlia- 
ment. 

It  is  evident,  however,  that  this  remark  has 
little  practical  application  at  preeent :  For  the 
public  proeecutor  does  not  say  that  the  oatU 
given  in  the  indictment  had  any  secret  mten- 
tion  different  from  its  purport^  and  he  d^oes  not 
state  facts  on  which  such  an  allegation  might 
have  rested. 

I  also  agree  vrith  the  prisoner's  counsel, 
that  in  considering  the  import  of  this  oath,  if 
there  be  any  thing  doubtfot  in  it,  the  presump- 
tion must  be  in  fovour  of  innocence.  I  do 
not  indeed  see  that  there  is  room  for  the  ap- 
plication of  the  maxim  referred  to  by  counsel, 
^  id  tmii^  pomumm  fttod  de  jurt  pouumm,^^ 
But  we  are  not  to  presume  giult  because  the 
public  proeecutor  aUeges  guUt  We  must  see 
guilt  made  out  before  yielding  our  belief^  and 
until  guilt  is  established,  we  must  hold  the 
presumption  to  be  in  fovour  of  innocence. 

In  the  next  place,  it  is  plain,  that  in  cXin^ 
struing  the  oath,  we  must  take  the  whole  oadi 
together,  and  consider  it,  as  one  part  of  it 
bears  upon  another;  not  as  five  or  six  dif- 
fSerent  oaths,  but  as  different  parts  of  the  same 
oath. 

Now,  when  this  is  done,  it 'does  not  ap» 
pear  to  me  that  diere  is  room  for  any  douol 
about  the  tsipori  of  the  oath.  The  leading 
proposition  is,  that  the  taker  is  to  support  the 
same,  that  is,  to  support  his  endeavours  **  to 
obtain  for  all  the  people  in  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland,  not  disqualified  by  crimes  cf  insanity, 
the  elective  franchise,  at  the  age  of  21,  with 
free  and  equal  represent|ition,  and  annual  par- 
liament^ to  the  utmost  of  his  power,  either  by 
moral  or  physical  strength  (or  force),  as  ths 
case  may  require."  Here  it  must  be  observed, 
first,  that  physical  strength,  or  force,  is  directly 
opposed  to,  and  contradistinguished  from  moru 
strength ;  and,  next,  we  must  attend  to  the  cir- 
cumstances in  which  this  great  struggle  was  to 
be  made.  The  taker  of  the  oath  is  to  prepare  for 
the  attainment  of  the  objects,  **  by  endeavour- 
ing to  form  a  brotherhood  of  affection  amongst 
Britons  of  every  description,  who  are  consi- 
dered worthy  of  confidence."  Then  he  is  to 
make  his  endeavours  to  obtain  annual  parlia- 
ments, and  universal  suffrage,  **  by  moral  or 
physi<»l  strength  (or  force),  as « the  case  may 
require;"  not  defining  or  Umitingsthe  extent 
or  nature  of  these  endeavours,  except  by  the 
necessity  of  the  case.  And,  having  stated  a)! 
diis,  he  swears  ''  that  neither  hopes,  fears,  re- 
waidsi  or  punishments,  shall  induce  me  to  in- 
form on,  or  give  evidence  against  any  member 
ormemben,  collectively,  or^individually,  for 
any  act  or  expression  done  of  made,  in  or  out, 
in  this  or  similar  societies,  under  the  punishr 
ment  of  death,  to  be  inflicted  on  me  by  any 
member  or  members  of  such  societies.  So 
jhelp  me  God,  and  keep  me  steadfast."  Thus 
the  oath  plainly  refers  to  numbers ;  to  those 
numbers  oeing  linked  in  associations  in  the 
strictest  confidence ;  to  their  acts  being  such 


519]         57  GEOftOE  lU. 

u  might  bring  upon  them  trial  and  pnnisb- 
nent,  and  reqnmng  that  they  shonld  swear 
not  to  inform  upon  one  another  under  pain  of 
death. 

I  have  read  this  oath  again  and  again,  at- 
tending, as  I  am  bound  to  do,  to  all  its  parts 
•—not  sepaoiting  the  parts,  but  taking  them  as 
they  bear  upon  one  another ;  and  it  is  impos- 
sible for  me  to  put  any  but  one  construction 
upon  it. 

No  doubt  the  introduction  of  the  word 
^*  force,"  into  this  indictment  strengthens  the 
case  on  the  question  of  relevancy,  but  the  word 
**  force''  does  not  appear  to  me  so  necessary 
as  it  does  to  my  brother.  For,  I  take  the  oath 
altogether.  If  the  clause  in  which  the  woril 
**  force  **  appears  had  stood  by  itself,  the  in- 
sertion or  omission  of  this  word  might  have 
been  serious;  but,  taking  the  clause  along 
with  the  rest  of  the  oath,  Uie  meaning  of  the 
whole  is  clear. 

It  is  in  vain  to  say,  that  the  oath  amounts 
to  nothing  more  than  if  it  had  contained  a 
mere  vague  ehgagement  to  support  universal 
suffrage  and  annual  parliaments,  to  the  utmost 
power  of  the  persons  taking  the  oath.  The  differ- 
ence between  such  an  oath  and  the  one  in  %he 
indictment  is,  that  the  former  miglU  compre- 
hend all  that  is  in  the  latter,  but  it  would  not 
have  necessarily  done  so.  There  would  have 
been  room  for  the  legal  presumption  of  inno- 
cence, 

It  is  also  in  vain  to  say,  there  are  roa^y 
ways  in  which  lawful  endeavours,  by  moral  or 
physical  strength,  or  force,  may  be  employed 
Co  obtain  universal  suffrage  and  annual  parlia- 
ments; as  making  journeys;  making  speeches; 
erecting  hustings ;  keeping  off  crowds,  &c.  It 
is  certainly  true,  the  person  taking  the  oath 
may  be  bound  to  do  these  things,  bat  ts  he 
hound  to  do  nothing  more?  What  means  the 
brotherhood  of  affection— the  oath  of  secrecy 
— tlie  infliction  of  death  in  case  of  revealing-^ 
if  all  that  was  intended  was  to  do  the  inno- 
cent things  above-mentioned  P  It  is  impossible 
for  any  man,  consulting  soberly  his  reason,  to 
think  such  was  the  meaning  of  the  oath. 
There  is  no  presumption  of  innocence,  no 
stretch  of  charity,  which  can  warrant  such  a 
conclusion. 

It  is  said,  there  are  unlawful  acts  by  which 
universal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments 
might  be  obtained,  which  are  not  treasonable 
acts,  as  arresting  members  of  parliament,  8cc. 
This  is  true ;  and,  as  the  particular  acts  to  be 
done  are  not  defined  in  the  oath  itself,  it  is 
necessary  to  take  the  whole  oath,  and  to  con- 
fid  er  what  is  the  true  import  of  the  engage- 
ment. If  there  were  any  aoubt,  I  should  con- 
strue it  in  favour  of  innocence ;  but  I  cannot 
have  any  doubt,  when,  for  an  object  that  could 
only  be  legally  obtained  through  parliament, 
phyf  ical  strength  or  force,  with  fill  the  conco- 
mitanU  mentioned  in  the  oath,  was  to  be  em- 
ployed. 

. .  .1  do  not  lake  it  in\K^  iiatb  acconift  in  con* 
sidepixg  the  caee,  that  i^  ohfect  to  \>e  attmed ' 


Trial  ofAndrm  M*Kinleg 


[59V 


was  tnnnil  parliaments  aadtrnvveml  snfiige. 
Ifa  the  mind  of  every  eool  inquirer,  the  efftoift 
of  universal  suffrage  and  annual  partiameata 
must  be  deprecated ;  but  I  put  the  case  on  the 
same  footing  as  an  attempt  to  effect  any  law 
whatever,  llie  difference  is  only  this,  that 
the  extravagance  of  the  object  here  in  view 
shows  more  distinctly  that  the  parties  wara 
determined  to  resort  to  strong  measures.  It 
is  the  means  to  be  resorted  to  for  the  attitin- 
ment  of  an  object  of  general '  oonoem— the 
employment  of  physical  strength  or  force — ^and 
the  whole  circumstances  referred  to  in  the  oath, 
that  leave  in  mj  mind  no  doubt  as  to  the  na- 
ture of  the  criminal  intentions. 

It  is  in  this  view  that  it  appears  to  me  thia 
#ord  '*  force  **  is  not  so  important  as  has  been 
supposed.  I  shall  just  take  the  case  that  ha» 
been  put,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  in  die  veiy 
able  and  ingenious  paper  by  Mr.  Monerieff.  I 
shall  suppose  that  the  oath  might  have  been 
binding  in  a  court  of  law,  and  that  the  taker 
were  told,  the  blow  is  now  to  be  stnack ;  coift- 
pulsory  measures  are  to  be  used,  and  yoa  mvat 
join  us  in  them.  Is  it  possible  to  say  that  he 
might  answer,  I  will  mdce  speechee,  and  print 
them  :  I  will  assist  in  putting  up  hustings,  and 
so  forth,  but  I  will  do  nothing  illegal.  **  Id 
tartHim  potnmna  quod  de  nire  ponumutJ*  The 
reply  would  have  been.  You  are  bound  to  do 
the  things  you  mention ;  but  if  yon  did  not 
mean  to  do  a  great  deal  more,  you  need  not 
have  come  under  such  an  obligation. 

Having  said  this  much  on  the  import  of 
the  oath,  the  next  question  is  an  inqimyia 
point  of  law. 

Does  the  oath  amount  to  treason  ?  Upon 
this  subject  the  authorities  have  been  ao  m- 
quently  referred  to,  so  often  quoted  In  yottr 
presence,  and  read  by  us  in  private,  and  are 
so  well  stated  in  two  or  three  pages  of  die  in- 
formation for  the  prosecutor,  that  I  shall 
not  detain  you  by  going  over  them.  The 
principle  is  simply  this :  that  an  attempt  to 
obtain,  by  open  force,  such  objects  as  were  in 
view,  with-  or  without  warlike  instruments,  is 
the  crime  of  treason.  And  I  shall  only  take 
this  observation,  that,  even  if  the  neasares 
complained  of  by  the  parties  to  the  oath  wera 
not  sanctioned  by  law,  yet  it  woidd  be  the 
crime  of  treason  to  introduce  new  neasores  of 
general  concern  by  force,  and  without  the  in- 
tervention of  parliament;  and  still  more  when 
the  attempt  is  to  overturn  what  is  sanctioned 
by  law.  1  shall  just  beg  leave  to  read  what 
Judge  Foster  says,  in  stating  the  case  of  Da- 
maree :  **  If,*'  says  he,  **  the  meciing^hoiisas 
of  the  Protestant  dissenters  had  been  eracled 
and  supported  in  defiance  of  all  law,  a  ttsiag 
to  destroy  such  houses  in  general  would  have 
fallen  tinder  the  rule  laid  down  In  Kailing, 
with  regard,  to  the  demolishing  all  bawdy- 
houses.  But  since  the  *meetinig  &nses  of  Pi^ 
testant  dissenters  are,  ^y  the  toteifllSott  act, 
taken  under  the  piptectien  of  the  Urtr,  Uut  iti- 
*farrm\6ii  in  'tie  prescibt  «a^  wasilo  be^^eo- 
Mc^  iff  a  j^«be  ^HkT&tkdft  ly  tala  MbM 


5SU3 


fm  AimMtUnrng  uniUmfid  OotiU. 


A.  D.  1817. 


iaest 


agaiiisttliBl  ftkt»  and  an  aitempt  la  render  it 
iMiectxial  by  nmnbers  and  open  force  ;'*  an' 
atlempl  by  force  and  violenoe  to  take  law  into 
ibeir  bands,  and  bring  about  a  matter  of  ge- 
netal  ooncem. 

WitboiU  adding  more  on  this  point  of  the 

caae»  I  am  dearly  of  opinion,  that  the  oath 

pi^Kports  and  intends  an.  obligation  to  do  cer- 

tSEiP  things ;  which  things,  if  dooey.wooki  have 

'  ^  -  Uw  to  the  crime  of  treason.    In 

n,  I  fed  all  the  consequences- 

so  eloonentl^  stated  by  my 

^  that  it  Uie  jury  shall  think 

ffill  differ  from  the  opinion  of 

lis  I  cannot  help— I  am  bonnd 

on  upon  the  rdevancy  of  the 

n  bound,  in  doing  so,  to  judge 

the  oath.    I  do  it  conscien- 

insy  will  do  the  same. 

tion  is,  wliether  the  indictment 

ccause  it  does  not  spedfy  the 

rhidi  the  peisons  taking  the 

to  commit  ?    This,  I  appro- 

md  entirelj^  a  .question  about 

I  of  an  indictment  by  the  law 

loes  not  appear  to  me  to  em- 

»  of  the  law- of  treason  what- 

a  qnestion  of  fonn  only,  and 

ad  by  general  prindples  ap- 

;  cases,  as  well  as  to  that  of 

3position  does  not  charge  the 
•n.     It  charges  the  statutory 
istering  an  oath,  purporting  or 
imit  treason.    It  is  founded  en- 
tirely itpuu  ..     let  of  the  53nd  of  the  king.   It 
■wfdy  reeites  the  act;  it  quotes  the  whole 
three  cUmses  engrossed  in  the  act  of  parlia^- 


What  then  does  the  mnot  proposition  do  ? 
First,  it  asserts,  as  is  necessary  in  STery  in- 
dictment, that  the  panel  is  guilty  of  one  or 
other  of  the  crimes  charged  in  the  major  pro- 
position. After  making  this  assertion,  it  goes 
«n  to  the  assumption;  and  it  mentions di»- 
tiaetly  the  times  when  this  is  said  to  have 
been  done,  the  places,  the  persons  to  whom 
the  ottth.  is  said  to  have  been  administered 
All  this  is  distineily  pdnted  out.  The 
onnner  of  t^e  criminal  act  is  next  an- 
— nnced,  in  the  best  wav  it  could  be  done,  by 
•ogroesing  the  oath  itself.  The  minor  propo- 
dtioB  goes  on  to  say,  that  the  oath  purports  to 
bind  to  commit  treason.  This  is  an  infenmce 
in  law  that  is  to  be  judged  of  from  the  oath 
Hadf. 

Thitmattermay  be  illustrated  by  an  example. 
Soppose  an  ihdictment  accused  a  person  of 
mmikr.  The  minor  pA>podtion  must  state 
the  manner  of  committing  the  crime,  whether 
it  whs  by  stabbing,  or  poisoiiing,  or  otherwise. 
To  state  generally  the  crime  of  murder  would 
nmdo;  but  the  manner  of  oommittitig  it  most 
be  mentioned.  But,  if  it  were  an  inoictnent 
Indtf  the  5ted  of  the  king,  for  administerfng 
en  oaih  pniportine  or  intending  to  bind  to 
cemmttiiinhfcry  and  ht^o^k  b^ve  in  general, 


lirithont  further  spedfication,  that  the  taker 
was  to  murder  dl  wno  shoul4  oppose  him,  it, 
would  not  be  necessary  to  doanv  thing  more  i|it 
the  indictment,  than  just  to  libel  the  oath  itself,, 
and  then  assert  in  general  terms  that  it  pur* 
ported  to  bind  to  commit  murder. 

It  is  said,  there  are  many  fekmies,  and- 
many  treasons;  and  thelitis  necessary  therefom 
to  spedfy  the  kind  of  treason  contemplated* 
Cases  were  ingeniously  pnt--one  ef  idooyv 
and  one  of  treason.  The  case  of  an  oatk 
binding  to  commit  a  felony  was  first  stated  by^ 
Mr.  Cranstoun :  the  case  was  put  of  a  perBon 
bound  to  carry  away  a  certain  quantity  of  com; 
and,  it  was  said,  the  public  proaeeutor  codd. 
not  redte  the  oath,  and  then  generaUy  and 
Tagudy  assert,  that  it  bound  to  commit  a 
felonv,  as  it  might  be  one  of  many  diffnrent 
felonies.  In  the  same  way,  a  case  was  put  of 
a  treason  jtaid  to  be  committed,  by  an  oativ 
binding  the  taker  to  deliver  goods  or  monejr  to 
a  person  in  France,  which  it  was  add  might 
amount  to  one  or  oth^r  of  various  treasons. 

But  observe,  there  is  in  the  cases  put,  not  w 
mere  generd  engaffement  to  do  whatever  mav 
be  required,  as  in  die  casein  the  oath  libdled, 
but  an  engagement  to  do  a  particular  act, 
carrying  away  com  in  the  one  case,  and  do* 
Uvering  soods  to  a  person  in  France  in  the 
other.  In  such  cases,  it  may  be,  that  the  pub- 
lic prosecutor  should  inquire  about  the  par* 
ticular  felony,  or  treason  in  contemplation,  and 
explain  it  in  the  minor  proposition. 

But  there  appears  to  me  to  be,  independent 
of  what  has  now  been  observed,  a  dedsive 
answer  to  this  objection  to  the  indictment  under 
consideration.  The  jeb|ection  is,  that  tbein-» 
dictment  ought  to  have  spedfied  the  particular 
treason  which  the  takers  are  sdd  to  oe  bound 
to  commit.  That  without  such  spedftcatiott, 
one  tt  more  jurymen  may  have  one  kind  of 
treason  in  view,  an<i^  ofters  may  contemplate 
other  treasons. 

Now,  it  is  admitted  in  the  information  foi 
te  pane),  and  no  lawyer  could  venture  to 
dispute  it,  that  the  case  midit  have  been  laid 
ahemativdy  as  an  oath  binawg  to  commit  one 
spedfted  treason,  or  otherwise  a  different  kind 
of  treason  dso  spedfied,  and  so  on  throngh  the 
whole  catdogue.  The  words,  of  the  pandas 
information  are,  ^  The  informant  is  not 
at  present  advised  of  any  objection  that 
could  be  made  to  an  indictment  in  this  court, 
which  Idd  the  case  aUematkefy,  as  an  oath 
binding  to  compass  the  king's  death ;  or  oiher^ 
ioitt,  an  oath  binding  to  levy  war ;  or  otktrwH 
an  oath  binding  to  conspire  to  levy  war,  &c.^ 
In  short,  the  pcd>lic  prosecutor  had  nothing  te 
do  but  to  enumerate  all  the  difTerent  kinds  of 
treason.  He  mig^t  have  taken  the  range 
of  aU  the  treasons  known  in  the  hiw ;  and, 
it  is  admitted,  that  this  wodd  have  been  a 
relevant  libel. 

Now,  I  vrodd  ask,  what  better  information 
OQidd  have  been  given  to  the  prisoner  by  sncb 
an  indiotmem,  to  enable  him  to  prepare  for  his 
tria^  or  to  us  to  judge  of  the  relevancy  ef  the 


5031 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  qf  Andrew  M'KinUy 


[4(04 


dictmenty  what  is  the  crime  set  forth?  The 
crime  there  set  forth,  so  far  as  regards  any 
acts  dotie  by  the  prisoner,  is  merely  that  of 
administering  an  oath.  There  is  no  other  fact 
charged  against  him.  The  single  solitary  act 
charged  is  that  of  administering  an  oath  of  a 
certain  description,  viz^  an  o&th  **  purporting 
0T  intending  to  bind  the  person  taking  the 
^ame  to  commit  any  treason,  or  murder^  or  any 
felony  punishable  by  law  with  death.'' 

The  mere  act  of  administering  this  oath^  is 
the  crime  charged.  And  for  the  tri^l  of  this 
charge  there  are  jost  two  points  which  this  in- 
^dictment  brings  under  the  consideration  of  the 
tribunal  which  has  to  judge  of  the  guilt  or  in- 
nocence of  the  prisoner.  It  is  to  be  considered 
first,  whether  tne  act  was  done — ^whetlier  the 
oath  was  administered  ?  and  secondly,  whether 
^be  oath  be  of  the  ^jniption  alleged  in  the 
indictment  P  The  pnr{>o8e  or  intention  of  the 
party,  except  that  ne  intended  to  administer 
the  oath,  is  not  charged  here.  Whether  his 
intentions  were  guilty  or  innocent  is  not  stated, 
and  is  therefore  excluded  from  our  inquiry  as 
not  essential  to  it.  From  the  beginning  to  the 
end  of  the  major  proposition  of  this  indictment, 
you  will  not  find  any  thing  alleged  as  to  the 
criminal  intention  of  the  prisoner  further  than  j 
what  the  charge  necessarily  implies,  namely, ' 
that  he  intentionally  administered  an  oath  of 
the  description  there  mentioned. 

Such  is  the  charge  stated  in  the  major  pro- 
position of  this  indictment*  and  I  need  hardly  ; 
observe  to' your  lordships,  that  this  charge 
cannot  be  extended  or  rendered  broader  by  ! 
any  thing  contained  in  the  minor  proposition, 
or  subsequent  part  of  the  indictment.  In  this 
partof.it. the  prosecutor's  allegations  must  be 
confinefl  to  the  charge  contained  in  the  major 
proposition^  and  to  such  facts  as  may  be  proved 
in  support  of  that  charge,  and  in  so  far  as  they 
go  beyond  that  charge  bis  allegations  must  be 
rejected  and  dismissed  from  our  minds  in 
judging  of  the  present  case  in  all  its  stages. 

In  the  minor  proposition  of  this  indictment 
k  >s  stated^  that  the  panel  **  wickedly,  malici- 
pusly,  and  feloniously  administered,  or  caused 
to  be  administered,  an  oath  binding,''  ^.  in 
the  terms  there  set  forth.*  The  word  ''  traitor- 
ously *  ;vvl)jch  stood  in  the  former  indictments, 
is  omitted  -here,  and  the  omission  is  certainly 
a  proper  i^ne;  but  the  act  is  here  said  to  have 
been  done  wickedly  and  feloniously.  These 
words  are  very  property  used  with  reference 
to  the  statute  which  declared  this  act  to  be  a 
felony,  and  prohibits  it  v^^^er  the  sanction  of 
a  capital  punishment,  byt  not  In  reference  to 
any  thing  extraneous  to^e  statute,  which  the 
purpose  and  intentions  of  the  party,  except  that 
he  intended  to  administer  the  oath,  certainly  are, 

If  the  crime  be  described  as  it  must  be,  and 
IS  set  forth  in  the  major  proposition,  the  pro- 
secutor is  entitled  to  prove  that  the  prisoner 
intended  to  administer  the  oath ;  that  h^  did  it 
intentionally ;  and  this  he  justly  calls  a  wicked 
and  felonious  intention  ;  for,  it  is  so,  because 
he  intends  to  do,  and  does,  that,  which  this  act 


prohibits  and  punishes  with  death  as  a  capita 

crime. 

The  circumstances  stated  in  the  minor  pro* 
position,  of  doing  it  at  secret  meetings,  &c. 
turther  than  explanatory  of  administering  the 
oath,  are  extraneous,  as  they  are  not  ingre- 
dients of  the  crime  charged  in  the  major  pro* 
position.  If  murder  be  chaiged  in  the  major 
proposition  of  an  indictment,  a  proof  of  mali- 
cious intention  stated  in  the  minor  proposition 
is  allowable.  If  sedition  be  charged  in  the 
major  proposition,  you  allow  it  to  be  proved 
that  the  party  intended  to  excite  disturoance, 
as  that  is  an  essential  ingredient  in  the  crime 
of  sedition.  But  here  the  crime  charged  is 
different.  The  mere  act  of  administering  a 
certaju  oath  constitutes  the  whole  crime,  if  the 
oath  is  of  the  description  alleged. 

I  observe  it  stated,  in  the  ingenious  pleading 
for  the  public  prosecutor,  that  the  intention  of 
the  parties  anci  not  of  the  oath  must  be  consi- 
dered, and  that  it  is  absurd  to  ascribe  intention 
to  an  oath,  "  As  if  there  were  any  sense  in 
personifying  an  oath  and  giving  it  the  powers 
of  the  understanding  and  the  will.^  But  an 
oath,  or  the  words  of  an  oath,  may  be  said  to 
intend,  wiUi  the  same  propriety  as  they  are 
said  to  mean  so  and  so,  and  there  is  no  per- 
sonification in  the  one  case  more  than  in  the 
other.  What  the  legislature  refers  to,  is  the 
intendment  of  the  oath  and  not  the  intention 
of  parties.  They  refer  to  an  oath  binding  to 
do  so  and  so ;  and  this  is  clear  from  9  fprmer 
act  of  parliament  in  which  the  words  employed 
are  ^*  purporting  or  intended)."  In  th^  major 
proposition  of  the  indictment,  is  any  thing 
saia  as  to  the  intention  of  P^^  except  as  to 
administering  this  oath  ?  The  intention  of  the 
panel  to  dP  any  other  thing  than  administer 
the  oath  is  extraneous,  and  is  not  charged 
against  him. 

Whether  he  can  be  allowed  to  prove  that 
his  intentions  in  what  be  did  were  innocent  is 
another  question.  I  must  hold  he  is  so  enti-* 
tied,  because  we  cannot  convict  any  man 
whose  intentions  are  proved  to  be  innocent. 
The  words  of  the  act  of  parliament  say  nothing 
of  the  intentions  of  ^rties ;  not  that  the  legis* 
lature  held  that  where  intention  is  innocent, 
any  person  is  to  be  punished ;  but  the  legisla- 
ture may  hold,  and  seems  here  to  hold,  that  the 
criminal  intention  is  to  be  presumed  firom  the 
commission  of  the  fact  which  it  prohibits — 
that  there  is  a  presumption  that  any  persom 
who  administers  such  an  oath  is  actuated  by  a 
wicked  and  felonious  intention.  The  view  of 
the  case  which  I  have  now  taken,  is  supported 
by  the  terms  of  the  indictment  itself;  for  crimh* 
nal  intention,  except  as  to  administering  the 
oath,  is  no  where  alleged ;  and  this  is  right,  as 
nothing  else  is  comprehended  in  the  major 
proposition. 

This  brings  me  back  to  the  major  proposition, 
what  is'the<«rime?  Administering  an  oath. 
What  else  is  included  in  the  charge?  Only 
the  nature  of  the  oath  or  obligation.  It  most 
be  one  purporting  or  intending  to  bind  the 


for,  Admimahriftg  unlawfid  Oaths* 


pcnoos  taking  the  tame  to  commil  tseason. 
Assuming  the  fact,  as  to  the  oath  being  admi- 
nisteredy  which  in  this  stage  of  the  proceeding 
we  are  bound  to  assume,  nothing  remains  for 
us  but  to  interpret  the  oath  said  to  haye  been 
administered,  and  the  purport  of  wliich  is  set 
forth  in  this  indiotment.  This  we  must  do,  in 
judging  of  the  relevancy,  and  a  most  delicate 
task  it  IS. 

Is  it,  or  not,  aii  oath  purporting  or  intending 
to  bind  to  commit  treason  ?  We  have  no  al- 
ternative; we  must  re^m  an  answer  to  this 
question  either  in  the  negatiTe  or  affirmative — 
the  former  if  we  reject,  the  ktter  if  we  sustain 
the  relevancy  of  the  indictment.  And  What  is 
the  consequence  of  a  judgment  to  the  last  efiecl 
sustaining  the  relevancy  of  this  indictment? 
By  that  judgment  we  dedare,  by  our  deliberate, 
opinions,  that  the  oath  i«  of  the  import  alleged 
in  ibe  indictment,  and  declared  in  the  statute. 
And  what  is  the  consequence  ? — that  the  ad- 
ministrator of  the  oath  ought  to  be  punished 
with  death.  I  do  not  question  ih4  right  or 
power  of  the  jury  to  return  a  verdict  of  not 
guilty  although  we  find  the  indictment  relevant, 
and  although  the  fact  of  having  administered 
the  oath  be  proved ;  but  such  a  verdict  would 
diredlv  contradict  our  judgment.  ITie  Court 
finds  the  oath  purporting  or  intending  to  bind 
to  commit  treason,  and  the  jury  says  it  is  not 
of  that  import.  Tlie  case  is  different  from 
other  trials,  where  the  direction  given  to  the 
jury  forms  no  part  of  the  record.  If  we  susUin 
the  relevancy  of  the  indictment,  we  put  an  in- 
terpreution  upon  this  oath ;  and  that  intetpre* 
tation  is  to  be  contradicted  if  the  fact  of  aomi- 
nisiering  be  proved,  and  the  jury  find  the 
panel  not  guilty.  The  solemn  judgment  of 
your  lordships,  pronounced  under  the  sanction 
of  your  oaths,  is  to  be  contradicted  by  a  verdict 
of  the  jury  pronounced  b^  them,  under  the 
sacred  sanction  and  obligation  of  their  oaths. 

Such  is  the  situation  in  which  we  are  placed, 
and  it  is  one  peculiar  to  ourselves;  for  in 
England  there  is  no  such  proceeding  as  thb 
— there  is  there  nothing  analogous  to  the 
proceeding  in  which  we  are  now  engaged, 
nothing  analogous  to  our  judgment  upon 
the  relevancy,  We  are,  as  in  former  times, 
when  by  special  indictments,  and  special  find- 
ings upon  the  relevancy,  the  Court  usurped 
the  power  of  the  iui^.  Cfertainlv  nothing  could 
be  further  from  the  intention  of  the  leffislature 
than  to  occasion  this;  but  England  being 
chiefly  contemplated  by  them,  such  is  the 
effect  of  the  statute  in  question,  that  by  our 
deliberate  recorded  judgment,  declaring  the 
administration  oX  the  oath  to  be  a  capital 
crime,  the  jury  cannot,  if  the  facts  adminis- 
tering the  oath  be  proved,  find  the  panel  not 
guilty,  without  directly  contradicting  the  jo^ 
iemn  recohied  decision  of  the  Court. 

\tt9,  charge  of  Sedition,  I  sustain  the  rele- 
vancy without  minutely  or  critically  examin- 
ing the  words  charged,  because  I  send  the 
whole  to  the  jury,  who  judge  of  the  seditious 
intention  a^  well  as  of  the  nature  of  the  words. 


A.  D.  I«i7« 


[«06 


-In  Sedition  the  essence  of  the  crime  is 
intention  ; .  ai^  as  the  jury  is  to  jud  j;e  of  that, 
the  Court  can  seldom  reject  an  indictment 
for  sedition.  Here  the  question  is  otherwise. 
All  is  before  us  that  goes  before  the  jury. 
The  intendment  of  the  oath  is  to  be  collected 
from  the  oath  itself^  and  the  intention  of  the 
party  is  out  of  the  question.  I  can  well  con- 
ceive^  as  was  pointed  out  by  the  public  prose- 
cutor, that  an  oath  might  be  framed  and 
administered,  containing  words  in  a  different 
sense  from  the  commpn  one— a  terni  might 
be  used  to  denote  .war,  and  another  to  desig- 
nate the  king,  ^.  These  terms  might  be 
explained  by  proof.  But  here  there  is  nothing 
of  that  kind  alleged.  Here  the  natural  and 
necessary  puiport  is  charged.  There  is  here 
nothing  to  be  supplied  but  proof  of  the 
administration  of  the  oath.  The  words  of  the 
oath,  taken  in  the  natural  sense,  are  said  to 
import  an  obligation  to  commit  treason.  We 
are  to  say,  whether  the  words,  as  set  forth 
in  the  indictment,  do  so  or  not ;  and  in  thb 
we  are  soing  into  the  proper  province  of  the 
jury.  The  Court  and  jury  are  united  in  fact; 
and  a  judge  who  sustains  the  relevancy  of  this 
indictment  must  be  prepared  to  say,  that,  as 
a  juryman,  if  the  fact  of  administering  the  oath 
be  proved,  he  would  return  a  verdict  of  guilty. 
Am  I  then  prepared  to  return  a  verdict  of 
guilty  in  this  case?  This  is  a  very  serious 
question,  and,  permit  me  to  say,  it  is  an 
awful  and  a  difficult  question.  As  to  the  oath 
itself,  I  agree  with  lord  Hermand  in  saying 
it  is  abominable  and  shocking.  It  is  impossible 
to  look  at  it  without  -suspecting,  and  thinking 
it  probable,  it  imports  an  obligation  to  commit 
a  capital  crime.  That  has  l^n,  and  is  my 
impression.  But  the  presumption  in  favour 
of  innocence  is  not  to  be  redargued  by  mere 
suspicion.  I  am  sorry  to  see,  in  this  infor- 
mation, that  the  public  prosecutor  treats  tliis 
too  lightly;  he  seems  to  think  that  the  law 
entertains  no  such  presumption  of  innocence. 
I  cannot  Ibten  to  this.    I  conceive  that  this 

{)resumption  is  to  be  found  in  eveiy  code  of 
aw  which  has  reason,  and  religion,  and 
humanity,  for  a  foundation.  It  is  a  maxim 
which  ought  to  be  inscribed  in  indelible 
characters  in  the  heart  of  every  judge  and 
juryman ;  and  I  was  happy  to  hear  from  lord 
Hermand,  he  is  inclined  to  give  full  effect 
to  it.  To  overturn  this,  there  must  be  legal 
evidence  of  Ruilt,  carrying  home  a  degree  of 
conviction  short  only  of  absolute  certainty. 
Here  suspicion  is  not  sufficient,  there  must  be 
sufficient  proof  that  this  oath  imports  an 
obligation  to  commit  treason,  to  entitle  us  to 
sustain  the  relevancy  of  this  indictment. 
With  this,  I  shall  proceed  to  the  consideration 
of  this  oath,  for  that  is  the  principle  upon 
which  I  am  bound  to  proceed. 

Since  this  case  came  before  ps,  a  veiv 
material  alteration  has  been  made  upon  this  oath 
or  its  purport.  In  Uie  two  former  indictments 
against  the  panel,  the  word  **  force**  did  not 
appear.    Here  it  is  introduced,  and  does,  in 


^►a?] 


S7  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  o/Andren  M^JOdiey 


{SM 


tutioQ  of  this  kingdom  by  unlawful  and  Tiolent^ 
means/' 

In  this  part  of  the  minor  proposition  of  the 
libel,  the  public  prosecutor  eonnnes  his  charge 
to  the  panel  having  administered  an  oath,  *' pur- 
porting or  intending  to  bind  to  commit  irea- 
soHf**  without  defining  orintenditig  to  define 
the  particular  species  of  treason  which  the 
oath  bound  him  to  commit ;  and,  he  then  gives 
his  own  commentary  upon  the  oath  which 
was  taken . 

The  minor  proposition  then  gives  the  tenor 
of  the  oath. 

This  being  done,  the  libel  then  states  the 
particular  instances  in  which'  this  oath  was  so 
administered,  and  the  circumstances  in  which 
it  was  administered  by  the  panel.  It  specifies 
that  it  was  administered,  and  at  secret  meet- 
ings, at  Hugh  Dickson's,  on  the  20th  of  De- 
cember, 1816.  ^y,  At  William  Legget's  on 
the  1st  of  January,  18ir.  3<%,  At  Niell 
Munn's,  on  the  4th  of  that  month ;  Athfy,  At 
the  house  of  John  Robertson,  on  the  5th  of 
February;  and  lastly,  that  ^e  prisoner  was 
apprehended  at  another  meeting  held  for  the 
same  purpose,  and  that  on  that  occasion  he 
assumed  a  ftdse  name. 

This  is  the  indictment  we  are  called  upon 
to  judge  of;  end,  upon  it,  three  questions 
have  arisen,  upon  which  it  is  necessary  that 
we  should  have  distinct  opinions. 

In  ihtjirtt  place  (and'  I  agree  in  consider- 
ing this  the  main  point  at  issue), — ^whether 
the  oath  be  of  such  a  nature  as  to  come  within 
the  statute? 

The  Kcond  question  is,  whether  the  indict- 
ment (supposing  the  oath  to  be  such  as  to 
.  make  room  for  the  application  of  the  statute) 
be  drawn  widi  such  precision  as  to  warrant  it 
to  be  sent  to  a  jury  ? 

And,  the  latt  is  the  new  question  eloquently 
argtied  in  the  supplementary  information.  It 
is  here  assumed  that  the  oath  is  sufficient, 
and  the  specification  complete;  and  it  is 
argued,  that,  upon  this  supposition,  the  oath 
must  have  purported  or  intended  an  obligation 
to  commit  the  species  of  treason,  known  by 
the  name'of  levying  war  against  the  king;-^ 
that  such  oath  must  be  an  overt  act  of  treason, 
under  the  head  of  compassing  or  imagining 
the  death  of  the  king,  and  actual  treason, 
under  36th  George  dra.  c.  7.  as  compassing 
to  levy  war  against  the  king,  or  overawe  par- 
liament ;  that,  therefore,  Uie  panel  cannot  be 
'  tried  under  the  52nd  of  the  king,  but  for  trea- 
son only ;  because,  according  to  the  maxim 
of  the  English  law,  which  in  treason  is  the 
law  of  Scotland,  the  felony  merges  in  the 
treason.  These  'are  the  three  points  upon 
'  which  it  is  necessary  to  form  our  epinions ; 
and,  upon  eadi  of  them,  I  shall  make  a  few 
observations. 

The  first  question  is,  what  is  the  import  of 
the  oath  here  administered  ?•  Upon  this  sub- 

est,  my  view  is  so  obvious,  that  it  could  not 
1  to  TC  anticipated  by  the  judges  Who  have 
already  spoken ;  and  it  ha»  been  anticrpated 


br  lord  PStmilly. '  Bat,  because  my  view  is  aa 
obvious  one,  it  is  not,  upon  that  account,  the 
less  likely  to  be  well  founded ;  for,  I  conceive^ 
that  in  such  questions,  the  most  natural  view 
is  the  most  likely  to  be  that  which  is  correct. 
When  the  crime  consists  in  the  language  em- 
ployed, the  most  obvious  meanhig  of  that 
language  is  the  safest  and  fairest  to  apply  to 
the  situation  of  the  panel.  Crimes  are  gene- 
rally committed  by  persons  in  the  lower  ranks 
of  life;  and  we  must  consider  in  what  sense 
the  language  employed  m^ust  have  presented 
itself  to  their  muds  when  they  employed  it. 
Your  lordships  will  never  allow  the  public 
prosecutor,  by  forced  construction,'  to  infer  a 
criminal  meaning,  where  tiie  words  are  obvi- 
ously innocent.  But  on  the  other  hand,  as 
litde  wiM  you  allow  the  counsel  for  the  panel, 
by  ingenious  refinements,  to  make  that  inni>- 
-cent,  which,  according  to  the  common  meaning 
of  words,  is,  in  the  minds  of  impartial  persons, 
criminal.  In  such  case,  your  fordships,  first, 
and  the  jnry -afterwards,  u^il  fsdl  to  mediate 
between  the  different  parties,  and  draw  an 
impartial  condnsion  from  the  whole  circum- 
stances of  the  case. 

Here,  I  conceive  the  purport  or  intention  of 
the  oath  nnist  be  Ifeiken  chiefly  fh>m  the  terms 
employed ;  bat  I  do  not  ooosider  it  is  wholly 
incompetent  for  the  public  piosacntor,  in  thi^ 
case,  to  have  recouise  to  circumstances  which 
do  not  appear  esfide  of  the  oath.  I  think 
he  is. not  to  be  confined,  to  the  pitecise  words 
of  the  oath.  Here,  there  are  two  words  em- 
pldyed,  pi&porting  or  uUendmg, '  On  looking 
vito  the  dictionary,  I  find  ^t  ^  to  purport** 
is  ^  to  intend.''  If  the  word  Intend,  haa  not 
been  ased  in  the  statute,  I  should  have  under- 
stood that  purport  and  intend  were  to  be  con- 
sidered  as  syttbnymous ;  but  the  statute  uses 
both  words,  and  I  conceive  that  it  must  have 
employed  tiiem  as  having  different  meanings; 
I  appralnad^  that,<  when  both  are  uMd, 
we  oxastoen^ider  their  difference.  SupposHe 
;the  imrtiea'had  Osed  a  dpher,  and  that  it 
(badttumtted  m  theiAse  oc  oommon  words, 
witfa^.  another  meaning,  it  would  .be  com- 
petent, i  nnder.  tim  act, .  to  libel  this  oath, 
and  pii^ve'whai  was.  tmCsn^.  bythe  cipher. 
The  prosecutor  might  havelibetted  that  the 
mUntim  wsiS:<irimiiial,  though  the  woods  of  the 
oath  /were  Mafm^  innQcent.  He  might  have 
dotae  sb  nodes  the  word  f  intend,"  in  the  act 
.o£  parliament.  As  the  two  words  must  be 
understood  to^have  differeitf  iOieaningt  here,  I 
ihaUd  'f  puipoit*'  to  .denote  the -common  mean- 
iast  of .  wonis,  and  f^  intend/'  any  meaning 
attached  to  the  words  by  the  parties,  though 
diffeteni  fipomthe  senie  generally  nven  to  them. 
.  In  thatTiew,  I  consider  the  pubac^proseeutor, 
in  thie<eaeej»  is  entitltd  to  lU>eiaQdor(iv»circam- 
stanoea  indicatitre  of.  intention.  lie  has  libel- 
led, and  is  entitled  to  prove  such  mdieim  of 
intention,  as,,  that  the  oath  was  administered 
at  flaeret^meelings,  and  to  great  niunbeta  of 
persons. 
Buty  in  the  present  case^  in  oider  to  asoer- 


«39} 


Jar  AdntittiAeriiq^  unbaefid  Oaths. 


A.  D<  1817. 


[530 


tpdntbe  kBport^and  intentioii  of  this  oath^ 
there  ie  no  oeceelon  to  go  beyond  the  terror 
•mpl^ed  in  it.  To  understand  the  meaning 
of  ihe  oath^  it  is  just  requisite  that  a  person 
shall  read  it  from  beginning  to  end,  and  say 
what  is  the  meaning  it  conveys  to  his  mind. 
It  is  iupossibie/in  my  harabie  opinion,  ta 
Nad  it  with  no  other  object  than  to  ascertain 
tlie  meaning  and  intention,  without  being  con- 
▼iaced  that  it  was  highly  criminal.  It  implies 
Aat  there  was  to  be  an  association  consisting 
of  many  peiaonSy  bound  by  an  oath — that 
their  ijiroccedtngs  were  to  be  kept  secret-*Hind 
aU  this  under  the  sanction  ot  the  deadi  of 
inlbrmers,  to  be  inflicted  by  any  member  of 
the  association.  The  object  in  view  was  to 
Imng  abonty  by  physical  strength  or  force, 
wha^  if  brought  abottt,  wonld  have  been  a 
oompleCe  subyersion  of  the  present  goyern- 
nent — annual  parliaments,  and  uniyersal  soff- 
npe^  **  the  electiye  franchise  at  the  age  of  21, 
fpith  free  and  eqnal  representation,,  and  annual 
IMrliaments." 

That  is  the  meaning  which  the  oath  con- 
f^js  to  my  mindy  on  reading  it  with  no  other 
view  than  to  discover  its  meaning.  But,  t 
hove  no  objeetion  to  analyse  the  oath  in  parts. 
The  obpotion  I  have  to  the  argument  for  the 
panel  w,  that  it  considers  tho  oaUi  as  com- 
Miedof  different  ioAo2es,  capable  of  standing 
OJ  tbeniBeWes ;  whereas  there  is  only  one 
ooih  consisting  of  different  parts. 

I  shall,  however,  consider  them  separately. 

T^tt  oatbi  sets  out  with  taking'  the  parties 
l^onnd  to  *^  penetere  in  endeayouring  to  fomv 
^hiocherhooi  of  affection  amongst  Britons  of 
oteiy  desenptiooy  who  are'  considered*  worthy 
o^  oonfidenoa."  To  fomt  such  brotherhood  of 
aflhction  under  the  sanction  of  an  oath  is  not 
Ma  itself  a  criase,  but  there  is  something  so 
feealiar  in  this,  that  it  mast  excite  attention. 
One  would  imiuix^ir  what  was  to  be  Uie  mean- 
m%  of  this  brotherhood  ?  Could  aoob  a  brother- 
iKMd  be  formed  ibr  the  mere  purposes  of 
ohaii^  and  benevolence?  Would  there 
be  the  formality  of  an  oath  for  any  thing 
d  this  kind?  It  might  be  innocent,  but 
vaodld  be  unintelligible^  We  think  what  is  to 
ioUow.  It  is  enough  to  excite  attention  and 
suspicion  as  to  the  ^ject.  For  this,  we  must 
go  to  tho  next  clause : .  "  I  will  persevere  in 
mj  endeavours  to  obtain  for  all  the  people  in 
l^peat  Britain  and  Ireland,  not  disqualified  by 
«nm«s  or  insanity,  the  elective  franchise  at 
tile  age  of  21,  wiUi  free  and  equal  reptesenta- 
lioo,  and  annual  parliaments/'  The  object, 
therefore,  was  clearly  political.  It  was  not  an 
institution  for  charity  or  general  acts  of  ffiend- 
•hip;  but,  it  was  a  political  institution.  Poli- 
tico alone  were  in  .the  view  of  the  parties ;  and 
nhat  was  the  species  of  politics  in  view  ?  The 
object  was,,  to  bring  about  annual  parliaments 
mUd  uniyersal  sofliage,  which  all  sooer-miuded 
penoos  coiiider  as  a  complete  subversion  of 
tb»  gofefBOMD^  and  quite  inconsistent  with 
mf  u<wuJ  ideas  of  liberty,.  Such  was  the 

ohieat  of  thi«  biQjiheKhood  wlm  (9raiedi  . 
VOL.  xxxto.  ^  *       I 


Even  this  might  not  have  been  matter  of 
accusation  against  the  parties,  if  they  bad 
merely  confined  themselves  to  speculation  and 
discussion.  There  might  have  been  nothing 
to  find  fault  with,  if  they  had  confined  tliem- 
selves  to  mere  philosophical  speculation  on  the 
different  kinds  of  government,  and  given  the  pre- 
ference to  that  which  i«  stated  in  the  oath.  But 
associations  were  formed ;  not  one,  but  many,  in 
order  to  bring  about  the  change  in  the  govern- 
ment. They  were  treading  upon  dangerous 
ground ;  and  it  would  depend  upon  the  roeiins 
they  were  to  have  used,  whether  their  conduct 
was  to  be  considered  criminal  What  were  the 
means  they  had  in  view }  See  the  next  para- 
graph: ^*  And  that  I  will  support  the  same  to 
the.utmost  of  my  power,  either  by .  moral  or 
physical  strength  (or  force),  as  the  case  may 
require.  I  say  here  the  object  waa  to  be 
brought  about  by  illegal  means.  It  is  illegal 
to  bring  about  this  complete  change  and  sub- 
version of  the  constitution,  by  physical  forqe. 
The  association  wa»  formed  for  a  political 
purpose;  the  object  was,  to  introduce  what 
was  dangerous  wad  irrational  i  and  this  was  to 
be  done  by  illegal  means. 

And  the  consciousness  of  the  parties  thera- 
selvesi  that  they  were  to  act  illegally,  appears 
from  the  last  clause.  The  meetings  were 
secret.  ^And  I  do  further  swear,  that  neither 
hopes,  fears,  rewards,  or  punishments  shall 
inaoce  me  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence 
against  any  member  or  members,  collectively 
or  individually,  for  any  act  or  expression  done 
or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  societies, 
under  the  punishment  of  death,  to  be  inflicted 
on  me  by  any  member  or  members  of  such 
societies.  So  heip  me  (jrod,  and  keep  me  sted- 
fa«tl"  Here  is  complete  demonstration  that 
the  parties  engaged  in  this  business  under- 
stood the  means  to  be  employed  were  illegal* 
Their  conduct  was  illegal,  and  they  were 
conscious  of  iL  Else,  why  had  they  recourse 
to  an  oath  of  secresy  ?  This  clause  aoews,  too, 
that  many  people  were  to  be  engaged,  and 
various  associations  formed,  and  all  to  be 
united  together  under  the  sanction  of  the 
oath.  And  to  whom  was  to  be  given  the  right 
of  punishing  by  death  a  breach  of  secrecy  ? 
To  any  member  or  members,  not  only  of  that 
particular  society,  but  to  sdl  members  of  any 
other  society  of  the  same  description.  So  that 
they  were  all  to  constitute  one  society,  and 
the  power  of  life  and  death  was  to  be  given 
to  any  member  of  the  association. 

1  say,  therefore,  that,  considering  the  oath 
either  as  a  whole  or  in  parts  in  subordination 
to  each  other,  it  i»  clearly  illegal,  and  it  pur- 
ports and  intends  to  do  that  which  the  parpes 
Uiemselves  knew  to  be  illegal. 

.  All  this  would  have  been' highly  criminal, 
suppose  no  aot  of  parliament  had  been  passed. 
All  this  would  have  been  a  high  crime  ,at 
ooflimon  law.  pqt  here*  w^are  caUed  to 
judge  of  a  particular  aet  of  parliament,  and  to 
judge  whether  this  crime  is  whM  is  meant  by 
tbfit  act  of  pariieii^wt«    The  act  of  pirUament 

2  M" 


S3Xj        57  GtOJlGE  ilU 


l^fial  qfAndrmM^Kudey 


C533 


makes  ibe  cfxmt  consist  ip  tbe  oath  ifself  y**  abd 
it  entitled  the  public  prosecutor  to  apprehend 
persons^  aud  to  deal  with  them  as  gxiilty  when 
Ihe  oath  is  taken. 

In  order  to  understand  the  character  of  the 
oatby  I  must  figure  to  myself  what  are  the  acts 
the  oath  led  the  parties  to  commit.  If  the 
parties  had  not  rested  upon  the  oath,  but  had 
gone  into  action — if  they  had  been  successful, 
what  would  have  been  the  consequence?  They' 
must  have  overturned  the  government  and  the 
present  constitution  of  things.  We  have  not 
at  present  universal  suffrage  and  annual  par- 
liaments. And  tlie  parties  must  hare  effected 
this  change  l^  those  means  which  they  kn^ew 
to  be  illegal.  Had  the  prosjecutor  waited  till 
they  attempted  to  carry  their  plans  into 
ezecotion,  and  were  unsuccess^l,  what  would 
have  been  their  crime?  Treason — levying  war 
against  the  king.  I  conceive  this  is  the 
species  of  crime  of  which  they  would  have 
been  guilty.  It  is  -impossible  to  go  with  tmy' 
minuteness  into  the  kind  of  conduct  they 
might  have  adopted.  Had  they  been  allowed 
to  act  upon  the  oath,  and  been  unsuccessful,  their, 
crimes  might  have  been  charged  as  compass* 
ing  and  imagining  the  king's  death.  The  facts 
charged  lead  necessarily  to  such  conclusion. 
And  therefbre,  under  this  statute,  I  can  have 
no  doubt,  that  what  is  stated  here  amounts  to 
the  major  proposition  in  the  libel,  and  that  this 
is  an  oath  pttrportino^  and  binding  the  person 
taking  it  to  commit  treason.  I  therefore 
answer  the  first  question  in  favour  of  the 
public  prosecutor^ that  the  oath  is  sufficient 
to  bring  the  parties  within  the  act  of  parlt»- 
ment. 

*  The  next  question  is,  how  far  the  charge  is 
snfiiciently  explicit;  and  this  is  the  only  point 
upon  which  I  have  ever  entertained  difficulty. 
I  first  supposed  tKe  want  of  specification'  of 
the  species  of  treason,  inust  have  east  the 

-  itidictment  altogether.  I  am  now  of  opinion, 
^at  it,  does  not.  Though  still  the  case  app^rs 
to  me  not  altogether  without  difficulty.  In 'no' 
case  will  impossibilities  be  asked  of  a  public 
|)rosec(itor.  In  the  present  case,  the  libel  is 
cm  this  act  of  parliament.  You  cannot  oblige 
him  to  charge  any  overt  act  beyond  the  act 
itself.  The  act  entitles  him,  after  the  oath  is 
administered,  to  consider  the  crime  completed, 
and  therefore,  all  that  can  be  asked  of  him,  is 
to  charge  the  tim%,'  place,  and  circumstances 
in  "Miich  the  oath' was  administered,  and  the 
treasonable  nature  of  it.  That  is  all  that  can- 
sbsolutely  be  demanded  of  him  to  do ;  and 
he  has  done  this  in  the  present  indictment. 

'He  has  S]^i<ie4  four  different  meetings,  at 
which  the  oath  was  administered,  and  a  ^fth 
fbr  th^  pur{>08e  of  its  being  administered. 
He  hat  mentioned'  the  places  aikd  the  circum- 
etances  "in  whieh  tiheoath was  adtiftiristered.  H* 
has  ihentidned- that  it  w^ -administeted  at 
secret  meetings.  He  hac,  therdbi^  in  the 
lA&jor  pi^^tioa,  staM  f^  eiime  *wblch  he 
«Wt«*»^  aadlh  th^inittor  all  ^'  filM  trithin 
bis  k«a«r}e4g(> ;  ^tf  d  tbere^sre,  1  Urn  «tf  <]|Aiiioti^ 


helitadone  every  thing  which  he  was  l>6und 
to  doi  He  was  not  bouwl  to  State  inference^' 
more  than  he  has  dode.  'He  has  stated  all  the 
act  rtsquired  of  him;  although  nothing  was 
done  in  consequence  of  it. 
•  At  the  same  time,  that  does  not  altogether 
free  us  from  difficulty  ih  this  cise.  I  think  the 
public pi1)secutor has  done  everything  which' 
technically  he  was  bound  to  do.  He  wae 
bound  to  state  the  specific  charge  against  the' 
prisoner.  He  has  fairly  cited  the  cbuses  of 
the  act  of  parliament.  In  the  miilbr,  heliar 
stated  all  the  factii  consistent  with  his  know* 
ledge.  I  at  first  thought  he  dught  to  have 
done  a  little  more,  though  I  now  incline  to 
think  he  was  not  bound  to  do  more.  Tlie 
crime  consisting  in  adminislering  an  oath  )Mir- 
porting  or  intemlingto  bind  to  comniit  treason/ 
the  public  prosecutor  could  not  allege' that  the 
oath  applied,  at  once,  to  all  the  classes  of 
treason.  The  statute  applies  to  the  whole' 
range  of  treasons ;  but,  when  any  individual 
oath  comes  under  consideration,  the  prosecutoi: 
might  state  the  particular  species  of  treasba 
apparendy  contemplated.  '  I  catee  to'  thi^ 
conclusion  the  more  readily,  that  this  was  just 
the  process  of  reasoning  by  which  I  came  t9 
be  satisfied,  that  the  oath  is  within  the  act  of 

Sarliament.  When  I  read  the  oath^andre^ 
acted  what  was  the  crime  intended  to-  be' 
committed,  unless  I  had  been  satisfied  that' 
the  parties  were  bound  to  commit  some  indi-^ 
vidual  kind  of  treason,  I  could  not  have  been 
satisfied  that  the  act  applied  to  the  case.  I 
read  the  oath,  I  then  reflected  what  would  havtf 
been  the  crime  if  the  oath  had  been  acted 
upon.  I  thought  the  fair  inference  from  it 
was,  that  those  who*  took  it  bound  themseltree' 
to  commit  treason,  by  levying  war  against  the 
king.  Therefore,  I  first  thought  it  was  the 
duty  of  the  public  prosecutor,  if  be  fbllowed' 
the  same  train  of  reasoning  I  diift,  to  state 'the 
result  of  that  reasoning ;  but  though  thii  might 
have  been  done,  I  now  thinU  it  is  net  required 
to  be  done  in  the  technical  foralation  of  an 
indictment  on  this  statute.  This  is  a  statutorjr 
offence,  and  the  public  prosecutor  is  not  bound 
to  be  more  specific  than  the  statute 'itself  is. 
In  the  minor  proposition  he  states  all  the  facts 
within  his  knowledge,  and  is  not  bound  to 
state  evenr  inference  that  occurs.  I  should 
have  liked  the  indictment  better  if  it  had 
stated  the  species  of  treason  in  Tiew ;  hat  T 
cannot  think  it  irrelevant  on  account  of  its  not 
having  done  so.^  The  objection  at  best  is 
merely  technical  ;^  and  the  publio  prosecntef 
has  not  failed!  to  de  any  thing  he  was  techni- 
cally bound  to  d\(h 

The. only  other  question  is,  how  fur  the 
felony  merges  in  the  treason.  By  the  dbmraon 
taw  of  England,  if  I  understand  it,  the  inf^irior 
always  merges  in  the  higher  denomination  of 
crime.  Trespass  is  drowned  in  a  felony,  and' 
on  the  same  principle  felony  is  ditnv ned  iar 
treason;  and  there  is  netMn^peaiiiartodk^' 
law  of  treason  in  this  respect.  On  the  ooier 
haod|  it^-iit  clear,  that  the  law  of  Scotland  ie 


533] 


Jot  AimtAdtring  ladav^l  XhAt. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[534 


directly  the  msene.  Ther€  it  no  such  mergiog 
in  oar  Ww  of  the  inferior  in  the  higher  crime, 
amd  the  public  prosecutor  may  always  choose 
.  "which  he  pleases ;  he  m^  take  either  the 
lower  or  the  higher  species.*  It  is  easy  to  see 
the  reason « of  this  difference  between  the 
practice  of  the  two  countries.  In  the  one 
.country  there  is  a  public  prosecutor,  and  in 
the  other  none.  I  shall  not  say  which  institu- 
tion is  best;  both  are  well  administered,  and 
answer  well  the  purposes  of  justice. 

There  are  two  questions  which  naturally 
arise  h^ie.  The  first  is,  whether  the '.common 
iaw  of  Scotland,  in  this  respect,  was  put  an 
end  to  bv  7th  queen  Anne,  c.  21.  Into  this 
point  I  do  not  think  myself  bound  to  goat 
4^at  length,  as  the  actof  parh'ament,  ou  which 
the  indictment  h  fouaded,  fixes  the  matter  ^ 
to  this  indictment.  With  all  Mr.  Grant's  in- 
genuity, however,  he  has  not  convinced  me 
that  the  common  law  of  Sootland  here  is  put 
fkn  end  to.  Its  preamble  proceeds  on  tlie  ex- 
pediency, f'that  the  laws  of  both  parts  of 
Great  Bdtain  should  agree  as  near  as  may  be, 
especially  those  which  relate  to  high  treason, 
andr.the  proceedings  thereupon;  as  to  the 
Aatore  of  the  crime ;  the  method  of  prosecu- 
tion and  trial ;  and  also  the  forfeitures  and 
punishments  of  that  offence,  which  are  of  the 
greatest  consequence  to  the  crown  and  the 
subject.''  It  then  enacts,  that  the  same  acts 
should  constitute  high  treason  in  both  parts  of 
the  kingdom,  and  proyides  for  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  court  of  oyer  and  terminer  tor  trial 
of  higli  treason  in  such  manner  as  is  used  in 
£iiriand. 

£  this  to  beheld  by  implication  to  put  an  end 
toa  oominon  law  principle  previously  existing, 
or  of  jUie  public  prosecutor  having  his  choice  of 
charging  the  higher  or  lower  denomination  of 
offence  as  may  appear  to  him  to  be  proper? 
1  am  not  prepared  to  sav  so. 

1  felt  more  difficulty  from  Mr.  Grant's  able 
fmd  ingenious  commentaiy  on  the  third  clause 
o£  the  act,  which  provides,  thai  **  the  justice- 
court,  and  other  courts  having  power  to  judge 
in  cases  ef  high  treason,  and  misprision  of 
high  treason  in  Scotland,  shall  have  luU  power 
wii  authority,  and  are  hereby  required  to 
iaquixe,  Inr  the  oaths  of  twelve  or  more  good 
and  lawful  men,  in  the  shire  or  stewartry  vHiere 
the  courts  shall  ait,  of  all  high  treasons,  and 
Busprision  of  high  treason,  committed  within 
the  shiies  or  atewartries;  and  thereupon  to 
proceed,  hear,  and  determine  the  said  offences 
whereol  a^y  person  shall  be  indicted  before 
them,-  in  such  manner  as  the  court  of  QueenV 
bench,  or  justices  of  oyer  and  terminer  in 

igyfatkdjD»yAo»** 

'  If  I  had  understood  that,  in  consequence  of 
thia  dause,  part  of  the  power  of  the  public 
moaecutor  was  oonferred  upon  the  Court  of 
Joaticiary,  to  find  out  when  treason  is  com- 
initted,  and  not  merely  to  judge  of  cases 
soming   bef<we   them,  then   I   should  have 

«  3  Hume,  276. 


thou^t  our  judges  should  prtfeeed  as  the  Eng- 
lish judges  are  said  to  do.  But  I  do  not  un- 
derstand this  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  clause, 
but  that  it  is  merelv  following  out  the  first 
clause,  establishing  the  same  form  of  process 
in  the  two  countries.  I  do  not  think  it  would 
entitle  us  to  qi^ash  an  indictment,  or  discharge 
a  jury  once  impanelled,  as  Judge  Poster  says 
he  would  have  done,  so  as  to  make  way  for  a 
second  trial  for  the  same  facts,  under  the 
denomination  of  treason ;  and,  I  do  not  think; 
it  is  to  be  implied  from  the  statute,  that  the 
public  prosecutor's  power  of  choosing  his 
libel  is  taken  from  him. 

But,  in  the  tecond  place,  the  case  here  is 
simple,  and  all  difficulty  is  removed  by  the 
act  of  parliament  on  which  the  indictment  is 
founded.  I  am  not  able  to  appreciate  the 
value  of  all  the  authorities  quQted  by  Mr. 
Grant  on  this  branch  of  the  case.  I  am  bound 
to  understand  them  as  well  as  in  my  power ; 
but,  I  must  admit,  I  have  not  been  able  to  go 
far  in  an  examination  of  them.  They  seem, 
however,  to  amount  to  this,  that  an  exception 
to  the  common  law  is  not  to  be  extended 
beyond  the  letter,  and  that  this  holds  particu- 
larly where  the  law  is  taking  away  something 
favourable  to  the  subject.  I  am  vrilling  to 
hold  that  the  statute  upon  which  the  indict* 
ment  is  founded,  shall  not  be  held  by  impiicatiom 
to  make  any  change  in  the  law  on  this  subject; 
biit,  at  the  same  time,  its  terms  must  be  at- 
tended to,  and  fair  play  given  to  them.  When 
I  look  to  the  enactment,  it  applies  to  amf  treason. 
It  is  "  any  oath.or  engagement,  purporting  or.^ 
intendinfjP  to  bind  the  person  taking  tlie  same 
to  commit  any  treason,''  &c.  It  is  by  implica- 
tion only  that  I  am  to  exclude  the  obligation 
to  commit  any  species  of  treason  where  the 
obligation  comes  up  to  treason  itself.  The 
oaths  are  all  stated  as  of  one  description,  and 
as  coming  under  the  act. 

But  this  is  not  all.  It  is  not  merely  left  to 
implication.  The  statute  §  8,  has  evidently  in 
contexnplatioo  that  the  saipe  facts  which  should 
give  rise  to  a  .prosecution  under  it,  might, 
independent  of  tne  statute,  have  been  treason 
itself,  so  that  though  felony  merge  in  treason 
in  common,  this  cannot  be  held  in  such  a  case 
as  the  present.  It  provides,  **  that  any  person, 
who  shall  be  tried  and  acquitted,  or  convicted 
of  any  offence  against  this  act,  shall  not  be 
liable  to  be  indicted,  prosecuted,  or  txM  again, 
for  the  same  offence  or  fact,  as  high  treason 
and  misprision  of  treason." 

I  cannot  suppose  the  act  here  mesns  any 
thing,  but  that  a  party  might  be  Ugalli/  ac- 
quitted or  convieied  under  this  act,  who,  but 
for  this  act,  might  have  been  tried  for  treason^. 
It  is  declared  that  if  tried  under  this  act,  he 
cannot  be  tried  as  he  might  oUierwise  have 
been.  The  legislature-  was  aware  that  an 
offence  under  Uiis  Bfii  might  be  treason  inde- 
pendent of  it. 

^e  same  observation  applies  to  the  other 
branch  of  the  clause  **  that  nothing  in  this  act 
coatained  shall  be  ^sonstnied  to  extend  to 


5351 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ^Andrm  M^Kikle^ 


prevent  any  person  guiky  of  gfey  «ffMiee 
against  this  act,  and  who  ^all  not  b«  tned  for 
the  same  as  an  oflfenca  against  this  aot,  ftmsk 
being  tried  for  the  same,  as  high  treaBon,  or 
misprision  of  high  treason,  in  such  manner  as 
if  this  act  had  aot  been  made.'' 

The  legislature  was  afraid  that  it  might  be 
held  that,  if  any  person  had  been  gnilty  of 
what  is  described  as  criminal  io  the  act,  it 
took  away  the  power  of  charging  the  same  as 
treason,  and  it  does  not  say  that  a  guilty 
person  shall  not  be  tried  otherwise  than  under 
the  act ;  but  that  if  he  had  been  tried  imder 
the  act,  he  shall  not  again  be  tried  in  any  way 
for  the  offence.  The  legislature  thus  guarded 
against  the  inference  ttiat  the  power  of 
the  prosecutor  to  choose  his  mode  of  trial 
<was  taken  away ;  and  also  provided^  tbat  no 
repetition  of  trial  should  take  place  in  any 
form,  for  an  offence  as  to  which  a  person  has 
once  been  acquitted  or  connoted.  It  is  clear 
to  me,  therefore,  that  (he  legislatnre  had  in 
▼iew,  that  the  same  aet  migbt  be  a  subject  for 
trial  under  the  statute,  and  likewise  a  subject 
for  trid  as  high  treason ;  and  that  therefore, 
here  at  least,  felony  does  not  merge  in  treason. 

Jjfrd  Jmtiee  Clerk, — I  am  as  fuUy  convinced 
as  any  one  of  your  lordships  can  be,  that,  in 
considering  the  indictment  in  this  case,  w^  are 
called  upon  to  perform  a  most  important  and 
delicate  duty.  Important  and  delicate,  I  feel 
it  to  be,  in  reference  both  to  the  panel  at  the 
bar,  and  to  the  public  at  large.  I  am  as  much 
impressed  as  my  brother  on  my  left  hand 
(lord  Gillies),  by  the  situation  in  which  the 
Court  19  placed,  from  the  necessity  which  is 
imposed  upon  us  of  deciding  on  the  relevancy 
of  this  indictments  but,  as  this  necessity  is 
one  inmosed  upon  ns  by  th€  law  of  the  country, 
to  whiiH)  we  are  bound  to  give  obedience,  it 
is  impossible  for  me,  for  one  moment,  to 
he:ittate,  or  shrink  from  the  performance  of 
that  duty.  Looking  to  nothing  but  the  dis- 
charge of  my  duty,  I  am  at  all  times  prepared 
to  perform  it  consdentiottsly,  whatever  may  be 
the  consequences. 

The  indictment  in  this  case  is  the  first  which 
has  been  brought  before  this  Court,  on  the 
statute  59nd  of  the  king ;  and,  considering  the 
ability,  the  ingenuity,  ihe  intelligence,  and  the 
learning  of  those,  who,  in  this  case,  have  ren- 
dered their  united  services  in  support  of  the 
defence  of  this  unhappy  man,  it  is  not  suiw 
prising  that  objections  nave  been  stated  to  this 
charge,  both  with  regard  to  its  essence,  and 
to  the  form  and  character  of  the  indictment. 
These  objections  have  been  %iade  the  subject 
of  most  eloquent  and  learned  vivi  voce  plead- 
ings }  to  which  it  is  impossible  to  do  justice 
without  declaring,  that,  in  point  of  ingenuity 
and  ability,  they  have  not  been  exceeaed  at 
any  period  of  the  history  of  this  Court.  The 
argument  appeared  to  vour  lordships,  in  re- 
ference to  the  nanite  of  the  case  itself,  to  be 
of  svich  grave  and  weighty  importance,  as  to 
deserve   to  be   embodied  in    ipformatjons. 


t88« 

These  an  now  htfare  «s;  and  as  to 
the  ability  and  leamiBg  with  which  ihqr  faafvc 
been  prepared,  I  enliRly  conoar  in  the  opi- 
nions which  have  been  expressed  l^y  your  loi4- 
ships. 

The  ohjeaioBS  are  of  a  fourfold  nature,  f 
shall  mention  them  in  the  order  in  wbidi  Ih^ 
are  presented  i^  us  in  the  informations,  tha«fh, 
in  delivering  my  opinion,  I  shiil  feel  it  my 
duty  to  proceed,  in  ikefitt  place,  to  the  eon- 
sideration  of  the  third  of  these  objections. 

The  objections  are,  fret,  that. in  this  case, 
founding  upon  this  act  of  pariiament,  it  was 
necessary  for  the  public  prosecutor  to  speeify, 
in  his  indictment,  the  particular  treason  vrhi^ 
he  alleges  the  oath  purported  or  intended  tp 
bind  to  commit.  In  the  eeeond  plaoe,  that^ 
whether  this  be  his  duty  or  not,  he  has  nndei^ 
taken  to  perform  it,  and  has  done  it  in  an  im- 
perfect manner,  having  specified  and  defined 
no  treason  that  is  known  in  tUs  kingdom. 
The  third  objection  is,  that  the  oath  itself  is 
not  one  which  comes  up  to  the  sanction  of  the 
act  of  parliament,  or  which  yon  onn  sustsia  as 
sufficient  in  the  minor  preposition,  end  noHt 
to  a  jury.  The Jwrth  and  last  otjectioo,  and 
whidi  has  been  brought  befoee  us  in  an  able, 
persptottOtts,  and  aigameatative  manner  is, 
that  supposing  the  panel  wrong  in  these  thne 
nbjeetioos ;  and  taking  the  case  as  submitted 
by  the  public  prosecutor,  the  principle  that 
folony  merges  in  treason  must  apply  to  this 
case,  with  all  the  consequenoes  whidi  woold 
attend  it  in  England. 

1  shall  proceed  to  consider  the  third  of  these 
objections,  because  it  must  be  obvious  tp  dl 
of  your  lordships,  that,  if  the  oath,  which  is 
the  whole  essence  of  the  diarge  befoie'yoQ,  ha 
not  of  the  description  which  the  pnUie  ptnse* 
outor  avers,  namely,  an  oath  pnrpocting  9t  in- 
tending, in  itself,  to  bind  t»  the  oommission  of 
treason,  all  the  other  inquiries  aao-sqparfinons, 
and  it  would  be  uaneoessary  to  cansnom  your 
time  with  any  consideration  ofthsm. 

In  considering  the  meaning  of  this  oath,  it  is 
proper  to  keep  in  mind,  that  the  act  of  psrtiai* 
ment  upon  which  the  indtotosont  b  laid,  'an4 
on  die  terms  of  which  alone  it  is  reslad, 
was  preceded  by  the  statute  87th  ot  the  khsg. 
The  words  of  that  act  ase  before  ns*  Yonr 
lordibips  will  see,  that,  for  the  pnrpoee  of  fm^ 
venting  the  evils  which  then  «ckted  in  tba 
country,  that  act  was  passixl,  <declafiag  ithsU 
the  administering  or  takinff  any  oath  ^  puiw 
porting  or  intending  to  nind  the  paiaofla 
taking  the  same,  to  engage  in  aaymntiaaas  ar 
seditious  purpose;  or  to  disturo  4ha  pnbHc 
peace ;  or  to  be  of  any  society  or  .coBfedasacj 
formed  for  any  such  purpose,  4cc.  should  ba 
held  to  be  arfelony  ponisbahia  widi  tMmspett»- 
tion  for  seven  years.''  This  statute,  ike  371^ 
of  the  king,  had,  till  the  year  1812,  been  0011^' 
sidered  by  the  legislature  as  suffioient  to  meet 
the  evils  intended  to  be  remedied ;  b«l.ik  an 
happened,  that,  in  181t,  prooeedingi  toA 
place  in  England,  in  the  very  heart  of  this 
kingdom,  of  such  an  akrming  complaxiQn,jui 


sanl 


for  AJbmlmsterhg  wdatgfiil  Ogihs. 


A.D.  1817. 


[1186 


te  cafl  for  ilie  Mibtnite  attCBtioii  of  partis- 
ia«Dt ;  ^icb  wm  then  led  to  consider  tiie 'ex- 
isting state  of  t&e  law,  aod  provide  a  naedy 
for  the  pnhlic  safetf .  The  act,  the  clauses  <n 
^ich  have  been  referred  to  in  this  indictment, 
was  aocovdingij  passed,  proceeding  on  the 
preamble^  that  *'  it  is  expedient  that  more  eflec- 
tnal  provisions  should  be  made  as  to  certain 
oaths."  This  is  the  way  in  which  the  statute 
under  consideration  was  introdoeed,  and  made 
a  part  of  the  law  of  the  land.  Th6  act  pro- 
ceeds, ^  Be  it  therefore  enacted,'  Ice.  that 
every  person  who  shall,  in  any  manner  or  form 
whatsoever,  administer,  or  cause  to  be  admi- 
nistered, or  be  aiding  or  assisting  at  the  admi- 
nistering of  any  oath  or  engagement,  purport- 
ing or  intending  to  bind  the  person  taking  the 
same  to  commit  any  treason,  or  murder,  or  any 
felony  punishable  by  law  with  death,  be  ad- 
judged guilty  of  felony,  and  suffer  death  as  a 
felon,  without  beneiit  of  clergy,"  &c.  The  in- 
dictment after  reciting  this  and  other  clauses, 
proceeds  to  state,  that  the  panel  is  guilty  of 
the  said  crimes,  or  of  one  or  more  of  them,  actor, 
or  art  and  part ;  and  it  goes  on,  in  the  usual,  re- 
gular, and  tedinical  mode,  to  set  forth  the 
oath,  which  the  panel  is  averred  to  have  ad- 
ministered, at  secret  meetings,  to  a  great  num- 
ber of'  persons,  amounting  to  several  hun- 
dreds; iad  which  Oath  the  prosecutor  avers  to 
be  an  oath,  **  purporting  or  intending  to  bind 
the-  persons  taking  the  same  to  commit 
treason,  by  obtaining  annual  parliaments 
and  universal  suffl-age  by  physical  strength, 
(or  force),  and  thereby  effecting  the  sub- 
version of  the  established  government,  laws, 
and  constitution  of  this  kingdom,  by  unlaw- 
ful and  violent  means.*'  Your  lordships  are 
therefore  under  the  necessity  of  giving  your 
opinions,  whether  this  act  which  is  so  set 
forth  in  the  minor  proposition — ^the  act  of  ad- 
ministering a  certain  oath  at  the  particular 
times  and  places  therein  mentioned,  and  to 
the  individuals  alleged  to  have  taken  the  same, 
and,  with  regard  to  which,  the  public  prosecu- 
tor undertakes  to  satisfy  you  and  the  jury,-~ 
ia  conform  to  the  major  proposition,  and  is, 
or  is  not,  of  the  description  given  of  it  by  the 
public  prosecutor. 

In  determining  this  question,  I  think  it  riglit 
to  say,  I  am  of  the  opinion  expressed  by  your 
lorduupa,  that,  by  the  words  of  tins  act 
of  parliament,  as  well  as  in  reason,  and  ac- 
cording to  the  rules  of  the  common  law 
sqpplicable  to  such  a  case,  it  it  only  to  the 
words  of  the  oath  itself  we  have  to  attend ; 
and  that  we  are  not  in  a  question  as  to  the 
pmposea  or  intentions  of  the  administrators,  or 
takers  of  the  oath,  in  so  tax  as  they  cannot  be 
made  to  appear'  upon  the  face  of  the  oath  it- 
self. As  to  the  assertion,  that  it  was  admi- 
aistered  to  numbers,  and  at  secret  m'eetings, 
iipon  that  part  of  the  libel  I  poncur  with  the 
able  argmnent  for  the  prisoner. 

It  appeait  to  me  necessary  to  come  to  a 
dter  viid#rstanding  of  the  rules  of  interpret 
latlon,  ivbich  we  arfi  to  (pply  in  entering  upon 


ynsiiiquify.  lam  (tf  ofuaipi^  thai  it  Is  ant 
by  for-fotched,  abstruae,  tntrieste,  or  subtle 
rules  of  ooQstraetion,  yoor  lordships  are 
eatitled  to  jndge  of  the  mrwntng  of  this  oath. 
You  are  to  pnt  upon  it  the  pbum  meaning 
which  the  words,  in  which  tt  is  conceived, 
would  liave  conveyed  >  and  must  be  held  to 
have  conveyed  to  persons  of  plain  mdersland- 
ing,  dealing  with  that  oath.  I  am  further  of 
opinion,  that  you  ave  not  entitled  to  listen  to 
refined  criticisms  on  die  terms  of  the  oath ; 
and  for  less  to  listen  to  any  aUegations  that 
mere  suspicion  or  conjecture  might  offer  as  to 
what  was  the  real  object  of  such  an  oatli. 

It  appears  to  me,  however,  to  be  indispen- 
sable, mat  the  whole  of  the  oatii,  from  begia- 
ning  to  end,  should  be  taken  into  consider- 
ntion.  We  ate  to  take,  not  a  detached  pert  of 
this  oath  here  and  there,  and  extract  a  meaa- 
iag  from  it—- we  are  to  comfaiae  die  whole  of 
it,  and  take  it  as  one  single  instrument,  and 
putapon  It  merely  a  plain,  common  sense, 
legitimate  meaning,  laying  aside  every  thii^ 
like  refinement  in  extracting  vrfaat  is  its  true 
unport. 

I  feel  myself  bound,  where  the  oath  may  be 
of  a  doubtful  or  uncertain  nature,  to  let  the 
doubt  lean  in  forour  of  the  accused ;  but,  on 
the  o^er  band,  if  the  words  be  plain,  aad 
convey  only  one  meaning  to  my  mind,  I  am 
called  upon  to  give  effect  to  that  meaning, 
without  paying  tlM  slightest  regard  oa  the  one 
hand,  to  its  bringing  the  prisoner  within  the 
law ;  or,  on  the  other,  letting;  him  escape,  if 
he  was  truly  guilty  of  a  violation  of  it. 

Keeping  these  considerations  steadily  in 
view,  and  taking  the  whole  instrument  into 
consideratioo,  I  agree  with  my  brother  on  my 
right  hand,  that  in  looking  to  what  is  the  true 
purport  or  intention  of  this  oath,  particular  at- 
tention must  be  paid  to  the  solemnity  with  • 
which  it  is  introduced  and  concluded.  An  in- 
vocation in  the  most  solemn  manner  to  the 
Almighty,  is  the  commencement  of  the  oath ; 
and  the  conclusion  is,  **  So  help  me  Ood,  and 
keep  me  steadfast."  A  more  solemn  and  de- 
libemte  call  upon  God,  in  entering  into  an  en- 
gagement ;  one  which  is  attended  with  every 
thing  that  can  render  it  awfully  impressjve  on 
the  minds  of  administrator  and  taker  than  this, 
it  is  impossible  for  me  to  figure  to  myself  for 
a  single  moment. 

The  oath  then  proceeds,  **  I  will  persevese 
in  m^  endeavours  to  form  a  brotherhood  of 
affection  amonpt  Britons  of  every  description, 
who  are  considered  worthy  of  confidence.*' 
That  this  brotherhood  which  the  taker  of  the 
oath  binds  himself  to  persevere  in  endeavour- 
ing to  form,  can,  upon  any  fair  or  .legitimate 
principle  of  interpretation,  be  supposed  to 
allude  to  the  case  of  such  abrotherhooa  of  affeo- 
tion  as  was  ingeniously  put  to  your  lordships 
at  the  vwA  voce  discussion  of  this  case,  appeass 
to  me  to  be  negatived  by  another  part  of  the 
oath,  which  refers  to  the  penalty  for  the  dis- 
closure of  any  thing  done  by  the  brotherhood. 
I  For  these  two  pasaaget  taken  logethar  most 


539J 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ^Anir^m  M^Kudey 


tatiafy  vftrf  (air,  candid,  and  impartial  miad, 
that  it  wa«  the  formation  of  brotherhoods,  as- 
sociations, or  bodies  of  men  united  tog^ether 
for  one  common  purpose,-*-not  a  brotherhood 
of  affection  amdng  all  mankind  in  general,  or 
all  the  people  of  this  pountry  in  general,  bat 
among  those  only  who  are  considered  voorthf 
of  <m^idehu.  Look  to  the  subsequent  part  of 
this  oath ;  «to  the  sanction  of  secrecv  as  to  the 
proceedings ;  the  punishment  of  death  to  be 
inflicted  by  any  member  or  members  of  such 
sooiefifs ;  which  affords  the  clearest  evidence 
that  there  was  to  be  a  union  of  numbers ;  that 
these  numbers  were  to  be  nnited  together  in  a 
-  variety  of  different  societies ;  and  then  say  if 
it  is  possible  in  common  sense,  or  giving  fair 
play  to  language,  to  suppose  that  a  brother- 
hood, with  innocent  pnrposoB,  was  really  in 
view  ?  There  is  a  positiire  obligation  to  form 
an  union  of  indiTiiiuab,  composing  different 
societies,  linked  together  in  this  solemn  and 
deliberate  manner;  it  is  therefore  quite  im- 
possible to  suppose  that  a  brotherhood  of  af- 
reetion  was  alone  intended. 

The  obligation  of  secrecy,  of  absolute  con- 
ceaiment  of  eVery  thing  that  was  to  be  done, 
of  ereiy  description  whatsoever,  in  or  out  of 
these  societies,  is  a  most  remarkable  feature 
of  this  oath ;  and  I  have  no  difficulty  in  stating, 
that  this  has  appeared  to  me,  from  the  very 
first  moment  I  deliberately  considered  it,  to 
be  one  of  the  fairest  and  most  unexceptionable 
tests  in  order  to  ascertain  what  is  the  true 
purport  or  intendment  of  this  oath.  The 
words  are,  **  And  I  do  further  swear,  that 
'neither  hopes^  fears,  rewards,  or  punishments, 
shall  induce  me  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence 
against,  any  member  or  members,  collectively 
or  individually,  for  any  act  or  expression  done 
or  made,  in  br  out,  in  this  or  similar  societies, 
under  the  punishment  of  death;  to  be  inflicted 
on  me  by  any  member  or  members  of  such 
societies.''  Suppose  an  oath  to  have  been  ad« 
.ministered,  containing  in  it  nothing  but  what 
I  have  now  read,  and  without  its  having  dis- 
'  dosed  upon  the  face  of  it  the  object  of  such 
secret  associations  as  are  here  linked  together, 
is  there  any  one  of  your  lordships  who  would 
not  l^ve  pronounced  it  to  be  a  criminal  oath, 
and  inferring  a  criminal  purpose  in  the  view  of 
both  administrator  and  taker  ?  I  apprehend 
that  not  a  shadow  of  doubt  could  exist  upon 
the  point. 

But  we  are  at  no  loss  to  discover  what  was 
.  the  object  this  oath  contemplated.  For,  af^er 
providing  for  the  formation  of  this  brotherhood, 
your  lordships  know  in  what  m^ner  the  ob- 
jects of  the  union  are  disclosed  in  the  passage 
■  80  often  read,  relative  to  the  engagement  to 
persevere  in  endeavours  to  obtain  the  elective 
tranchise  to  every  person  in  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland,  not  disqualified  by  crimes  or  insanity, 
and  annual  parliaments  f— ''  and  thai  I  will 
support  the  same  to  the  ttmost  of  my  power, 
either  by  moral  or  physical  strength  (or  force), 
as  the  case  may  reqntaK."  In  putting  upon 
these  expressions  thk  tmnning  which  .fairly 


[640 

Attaches  to  them,  it  b  impossiMe  fbrine  to 
bring  my  mind  to  the  interpretation  .whirii  has 
been  endeavoured  to  be  impressed  upon/your 
lordships — that  this  engagement  to  use  physical 
strengtn,  or  force,  ,is  referable  merely  to  the 
securing  of  annual  parliaments  and  nniverMl 
suffrage  after  they  snail  be  obtained.  It  is  im* 
possiSe,  upon  any  principle  of  construction 
that  I  am  acquainted  with,  to  put  this  forced 
and  unnatural  meaning  upon  tnese  wocds.  I, 
on  the  contrary,  must  infer  this  engagement  to 
mean,  that  all  endeavours,  by  monu  or  phy- 
sical strength,  were  to  be  employed  to  obtain 
these  objects,  as  the  case  might  require.  But 
even  if  another  construction  was  adopted, 
namely,  that  the  above  mentioned  words  were 
to  be  held  to  refer  to  the  whole  preceding 
members  of  the.  o^th,  then,  as  there  is  no  limi- 
tation, no  confinement  of  this  co-operation  of 
efforts  to  any  of  tho^e  whjoh  are  ^called  inno- 
cent proceedings,  your  lordships  must  still  be 
left  to  draw  the  same  conclusion  of  physical 
strength,  or  force,  being  pledged  to  be  resort- 
ed to,  as  the  case  miffbt  require.  It  is  ma* 
nifes^  on  the  words  of  the  oath,  that  Uie  party 
administering,  as  well  as  the  party  taking  it, 
had  their  attention  most  particularly  cail^  to 
the  distinction  between  the  two  kinds  of 
strength,  or  force,  that  are  here  to  be  Htaoited 
to.  This  is  marked  in  the  most  en^phatic 
manner  by  the  words,  ^  oi  ike  cote  mcy  rtqmrei*. 
the  obligaHou  being  to  use  the  one,  if  the  case 
required  only  that  one,  but  to  betake  them- 
selves also  to  the  other,  if  tlie  case  should  re- 
quire its  aid. 

Putting  upon  these  words,  then,  the  only 
interpretation  they  can  iustlv  bear;  holding 
that  there  is  no  room  u>r  the  innocent  con- 
struction that  has  been  pressed  upon  your 
lordships ;  and  taking  into  view  that  the  oath 
binds  numbers  to  the  obligation  in  question ; 
that  it  is  averred  that  it  was  administered  to 
great  numbers ;  that  various  societies  were  in 
contemplation ;  and,  above  all,  that  the  clause 
of  concealment  to  which  I  formerly  alluded^ 
has  a  direct  reference,  not  only  to  exprfuwm 
made  use  of  by  any  member  or  members,  but  to 
oc/ff  done  by  them  *'  in  or  out  of  this  or  similar 
societies  ;*'  the  conclusion  cannot  be  avoided, 
that  it  was  in  regard  to  the  endeavoura  to  ob- 
tain their  objects,  that  recourse  was  to  be  had 
to  moral  or  physical  strength,  as  the  case  might 
require.  If  there  was,  therefore,  in  the  pre- 
ceding parts  of  the  oath,  any  doubt,  any  am- 
biguity, any  difiiculty  whatever,  your  lordships 
have  it  completely  removed  hj  this  most  re- 
markable and  emphatic  part  of  it.  Indeed,  I 
well  recollect,  that  the  good  sense  of  the  senior 
counsel  for  the  panel,  while  he  was  endeavour- 
ing to  give  his  view  of  this  part  of  the  case, 
prevented  his  grappling  with  this  part  of  the 
oath,  nChich  he  admitted,  in  unqualified  terms 
(and  in  so  doing  he  has  been  follow^ed  by. the 
learned  counsel,  who  draws  the  injformation  for 
the  panel),  did  contain  criminal  and  dangerous, 
matter.  But,  I  apprehend,  this  most  dan- 
gerous and  criminal  part  of  the  engagemeni, 


Ml] 


far  AttAudttinQ  yoAatj^l  1kikt\ 


A.  D.  1817. 


\B»^ 


is  that  whtdk  your  lordships  may  jttstly  rtsoit 
to  as  a  test  for  tfyi&g  the  other  parts  of  it,  if 
there  does  exist  any  diffieulty  in  regard  to 
their  tme-  meaning.  This  passage  of  itself 
goes  "Ar  to  remoTe  any  doubt  which  could  exist 
as  to  the  criminality  of  this  oath;  When  was 
it  erer  heard'  of,  that  an  obKgation  to  perform 
only  innocent  acts,  to  engage  in  nothing  but 
lawrol  proceedings,  was  enYeloped  in  snch 
terms  as  we  have  here ;  and  that  ttie  mere  per- 
formance of  the  bounden  and  sacred  duty  of 
eveiy  nfember  of  this  association,  who  might 
be  called  upon  in  a  court  of  law  to  disclose 
the  truth,  was  to  be  followed  with  the  punish- 
ment of  death  ?  That  the  obligation  must  be 
held  to  attach  even  to  the  persons  who  should 
give  CTidence  in  courts  of  justice  seems  clearly 
d^inced  by  the  words  used.  A  more  tre- 
mondous  obligadon  can  hardly  be  conceired, 
than  that  of  binding  a  person  by  a  solemn 
oath,  not  to  give  evidence  as  to  the  proceed- 
ings of  an  association,  under  the  penaltr  of 
being  murdered  by  any  of  its  members.  That 
part  of  the  osth  alone,  therefore,  renders  it 
altogether  impossible  to  doubt  asto  its  purport 
and  intendment  being  of  the  most  criminal 
nature. 

If  this  be  the  conclusion  which,  upon  a  care- 
ful consideration  of  this  oath  (and  sure  I  am, 
no  case  ever  met  with  more  anxious  attention) 
we  must  come  to,  the  nextquestiou  is,  whether 
an  obligation  sudi  as  this,  to  resort  to  the  use 
of  physical  strength  or  force,  -in  endeaToorinff- 
to  obtain  annusd  parliameofs  and  uniVersu 
suffrage  to  the  subjects  of  this  country,  does 
come  up  to  what  the  indictment  states  it  to  be, 
— ^<m  oath  or  engagement  purporting  or  intend- 
ing to  bind  the  taker  to  commit  treason  ? 
'  I  take:  this  opportunity  of .  stating,  that  the 
Tiew  which  I  have  taken  of  this  case,  is  the 
same  that  it  would  have  been,  had  this  oath 
been  presented  to  your  lordsMps  in  the  shape 
which  it  first  assumed.  I  concur  in  opinion 
with  lord  Pitmilly,  that  the  use  of  the  words 
physical  strengtli,  in  the  clear  and  marked 
manner  in  which  it  is  manifestly  to  be  employ- 
ed on  d)e  face  of  this  oajth,  would  have  been 
sufficient  to  satisfy  roe  as  to  the  purport  of  the 
oath,  independently  of  the  addition  of  the 
word^/Me.  But,  at  the  same  time,  I  agree 
with  my  brother  on  my  left  hand,  that  if  there 
be  any  doubt  as  to  the  word  strength,  it  is  en* 
tirdy  removed  by  the  wojd  force  being  used 
piromiscuously  in  one  and  the  same  sense. 

That  universal  suffrage  and  annual  partly 
ments  make  at  present  no  part  of  the  consti- 
tution of  this  realm  (and  that  they  may  make 
no  part  of  it  till  the  end  of  time,  must  be  the 
devout  wish  of  every  man  who  has  the  interest 
of  his  country  at  heart  I)  is  a  proposition  vrhich 
cannot  be  disputed  for  a  single  moment.  That 
the  obtaining  and  accomplishing  these  objeots, 
by  the  use  and  application  of  physical  strength 
or  fbree,  by  ntunDers  united,  mid  associ^ied 
B^itMi  by  sudi  an  obKgktion  as  is  now  be- 
fbre  ifv;  that  the  effectiriff,;  by  such  means,  the 
establislmient  of  universM  s«4rsge  and  annuel 


pariiatnents,  and,  conse<{aenfl^,  OTMikminfl^ 
the  present  constitution  of  the  kinmoms,  would 
clearly  amount  to  high  treason,  I  presume  no 
man  breathinff  can  doubt.  i 

That  the  obtaining  of  an  aHeratidn  of  law* 
by  numbers,  and  the  employment  of  physical 
strength  and  force  to  accomplish  it,  does  con-* 
stitttfe  high  treason,  none  of  your  lordships, 
or  any  one  acquainted  with  the  law,  can  hesi« 
tate  in  betieving.  Tbe  authorities  on  thissub-* 
^ect  are  distinctly  brought  before  your  lordshipe 
in  the  information  for  the  public  prosecutor^ 
p,  10,  11.  You  there  find  cited  the  authorities 
of  Hale,  of  Foster,  and  of  lord  Mansfield,  ja 
announcing  the  law  in  the  case  of  lord  George 
Gordon;  which  authorities  have  since  beenr 
referred  to  by  every  judge  who  has  had  oce»-^ 
ston  to  address  a  jury  in  any  charge  of  treason^ 
and  their  opinions,  I  will  sayi  (altfaon|^  » 
slight  was  thrown  out  as  to  the  weight  due  \» 
him),  have  been  ia  a  most  accurate,  satis-i 
factory,  and  lawyer4ike  manner,  summed  u|» 
by  Mr.  Hume.  Looking  to  these  authorities, 
there  cannot  be  the  slightest  doubt,  that  to  ac- 
complish such  objects  as  we  are  now  considers 
ing^  by  means  of  numbers  and  pk^ical  strength, 
would  be  high  treason,  as  an  actual  levying  of 
war  against  the  king — ^in  the  words  of  jfidge 
Foster,  who  wiU  he  admitted  to  have  given  a 
correct  account  of  die  law  of  treason.  Ibat 
^  these  objects  are  of  a  public  and  general  nature, 
cannot  be  ouestiooed  \  and  that  die  accom- 
plishment ot  objects,  which  are  of  that  descripr 
tion,  and  not  private,  if  sought  to  b^  brougnt. 
about  by  a  rising  of  persons,  and  the  applica- 
tion of  force,  even  vnthout  any  of  the  pageantry 
of  war,  is  high  treason,  and  a  levying  of  war 
against  the  king,  is  tbe  united  import  of  all 
the  authorities  which  have  been  referred  to ; 
no  lavryer  having,  indeed,  ever  doubted  that 
the  rising  of  a  number  of  persons  for  efiectine: 
public  purposes  \s§  force,  is  high  treason  ana 
levying  vrar. 

As  this  oath  contemplates  events  to  be  kc- 
complisbed — acts  not  doing  or  done,  but  to  be 
committed — ^wUch  would  amount  to  high 
treasoir,  I  think  yoitr  lordships,  in  considering 
the  import  of  it^^aie  bound  to  look  to  the  con- 
sequences, as  demonstrating  what  it  purported 
or  intended  to>  lund  to.  Having  said  this,  I 
most  take  leare  to  say,  that  I  am  not  in  the 
slightest  degi%e  conscious, .  that,  in  holding 
this  opinion^  I  am  about  to  establish  any  new 
treason — thst  I  am  giving  any  countenance  to 
the  establishment  of  constnictive  treasons — or 
that  I  am  transgressing  any  decision  of  par- 
liament or  courts  of  justice — a  hint  which  haa  . 
been  held  out,  as  if  ia  terroran  to  your  kosd- 
ships.  I  am  persuaded,  that  the  learned  gen- 
tlemen vrho  have  Vesorted  to  this  mode  of 
argument,  did  not  purport  or  intend  to  make 
the  allusion,  by  way  of  warning  to  your  lord- 
ships, or  to  convey  any.  thing  like  a  supposed, 
picture  of  Uie  consequences  that  are  likely  to 
tbllow  ftom  the  decision  we  may  be  called 
upon  to  pronounce:  If  I  were  capable  of 
thinking  such  was  tbe  object  of  the  quoutions 


8431 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  ^Andran 


Cl4i 


i  aHncb-te^  I  can  only  say  for  myself  that  I 

AoiM  htn^  ticated  tkcai  with  Um  seotB  and 

oaataaqpt  tbey  iinn.    Sittiof .  kara^  i»  the 

discharge  of  a  most  iiiifOTtaDt  and  dalieata 

ftnctte,  I  kB0V  .tlw  daty  I  have  to>  perfonn. 

I  har»  to  perfovaa  k  accofdicg.  to  ny  ooBcep- 

tioft  ol  tfaa  nilaa  of  laiap^  aad  &e  conviotioB  of 

my  iran  aonacianaa ;  and  I  da  so  withoal  tha 

lUgfatatt  ragaid  to  those  conseqiieDoas  whidk 

BHLy  he  floppoaed  to  he  alhided  to  in  Uie  p«B- 

aa^a  to  lAmh  I  lefatf.    Bat  I  maat  do  tha 

gawdaiactt  the  jastice  to  sappoae,.  tl|is  waa 

ataaad  -wadioat  any  saoh  Tiew.    But  baring 

•  heard  it  alao  in-  the  awd  voce  pleadings,  I  have 

iiit  it  inoaaaheat  oD-aoe  to  mahe  these  ohser« 

vatioiia..   If  aay  man  can  pennade  me,  by 

aofeer  and  legai  asgnment,  by  a  reitrenoe  to 

aalbanliaa  to  which  I  am  hoand  to  pay  obe» 

dieacey  that  the  opiaioQ  I  have  fonned  haa  a 

tondenoy  to  estaUish  a  tieason,  by  amhiguons 

aad  geneial  weida,  ^  as  aocroaehing  of  loyal 

peiwoty  sahrertiag  of  faadamcntal  iaws^  and 

the  liftuB^'' I  woaU  listen  to  the  ailment.  But 

I  jnai  say,  in  one  wnd«^Let  that  wan  show 

Mtef  qpan  ike  aathority  of  any  judge  or  lawYer 

in  Bngland,  th^  what  was  manife&y  intended 

tO"  be  done  on  the  face  of  Uiis  oath— the  alter* 

iag  the  established  lawsy  and  constitution  of 

piuiiaiDent^  by  physical  strength  or  force— if 

McompliahiBd^  is  not  high  treason^  and  I  will 

give  the  aalheciiy  ohedienoe. 

•  H  aw^  iian-  oe  the  tnie  import  of  this  oadi^ 

tiier  qiMBtiofi  lemaina  for  ^t  lordahipe  to 

determine^  whether  tke'pubhe  proaecutor^  rest- 

ina  his  ehaage  on  the  act  of  parliament,  and 

aubauning  in  tiie  miaet  pcepositioB  that  the 

panel  is  gpsilty  of  thai  change,  oy  administering. 

this  oath  to  a  vasiety  of  persons,  on  various 

oocasioBB^  aad  at  ieeret  meetings— has  shaped 

the  mdicttaent  in  each-  a  manner  as  to  wariant 

ua  to  femit  it  to  an  assiie  ? 

'Shia  toads  to  the  ol^eotiona  aUnded  to^that 
it  was  the  duty  of  the  public  prosecutor,  to 
define- the  treason  which  neaMeges  the  purport 
of  the  oath  was  to  bind  to  commit ;  and  that 
the  attempt  he  has  made  to  do  so  is  abortive. 

In*  refuence  to  these  objections,  if  it  were 
at  all  time,  as  ia  stated  in  th^  information  for 
the  paneiy  that  the  praaecotoi'  is  here  asking  to 
obtana  the  chance  of  a  verdict  from  a  jury, 
upon  vague  infisrenee  from  facts  inapplicabto 
to  the  natore  of  the  charge,-  and  without  fully 
expiaining  himself  to  nr  or  the  jury,  it  wonld 
he  the  du^  and  instant  inclination  of  your 
lordships  to  chedc  each  an  attemptr  You  are 
hound  to  take  care  of  the  interest  of  the 
public  at  huge,  and  of  the  party  accused,  by 
checking' such  attempts,  and  nndingthe  charge 
iirelevant.  But  the  facts  of  this  case,  as 
appeariag  oa  the  face  of  the  indictment,  wap' 
rant  ne  such  asanmption,  » 

It  thtnk  it'neoeasary  to  notice,  that  I  cannot 
OODCOV  in  one  poaition  of  my  learned  fiiend 
who  drew  the  mfbrmation  for  the  prosecutor 
—that,  ia  a  ease  oi  this  despription,  we  can 
|ive*any  credit  to  the  public  proseeutor  aa  to 
iheaiMiiagaf  theoath)  aales»webeaataified 


ouflseivef,  icpea  the  ftice  of  the  oafth,-  that  the 
meaning  which  he  states  is  eorrect.  If  secb 
he  his  steteasent,  I'  beg  to  say  I  difier  frott 
him.  Ia  the  majos  proposition^  the  indict-' 
meat,  xefereace  ia  had  to  the  act  of  parli^ 
aaent ;  and  it  ia  for  us  to  say,  Aether  the 
&ct^steted  in  the  miaor  proposition  come  up 
to  the  major  propoaition.— Lsee,  however,  the 
public  prooeeutor  doaa  not  mean  to  oarry  his 
argument  to  that  length.       » 

But,  supposing  the  objeets  of  the  parties  m 
the  oath  were  to  be  prosecuted  by  levying  war, 
it  appears  to  me,  that,  in  order  to  make  a  re- 
levant charge,  it  is  not  necessary,  on  any 
principle  of  tow,  nor  is  it  required  by  thia 
statote,  that  the  public  prosecutor  should  enter 
into  a  definition  of  the  precise  treason  which 
he  avers  the  oath  purported  or  intended  to 
bind  the  parties  to  commit.    I  say  sa,  under 
this  qualification,  that  he  must  aver  and  show, 
on  the  fiiee  of  the  oath,  that  it  purports  or 
intends  to  bind  to  commit  treason. 
•  I  cannot  enter  into  the  idea,  that,  to  fooM 
a  legal  charge  under  Uiis  act,  which  refers  to 
three  distinct  species  of  oaths,  binding  to 
commit  any  treason  or  murder,  or  any  felony 
punishable  with  death,  it  would  be  sufficient 
to  narrate  the  act,  and  not  say  whether  the 
oath  bound  to  commit  some  particulai^ne  or 
other  of  these  species  of  crimes.    I  am  for 
the  prisoner,  as  to  this  point ;  and  I  think,  on 
the  principle  of  fiiir  detding,  the  apeciea  of 
oath  imputed  to  him,  should  be  aistinctly 
stated^   But,  having  arrived  at  that  condusion, 
I  am  tiiea  to  say,  whether  or  not  there  ie 
any  thing  in  the  nature  of  this  act  of  parlia- 
ment, and  charge  that  is  made  under  it,  whicb 
requires  the  prosecutor  to  go  fiirther,    I  must 
beg  leave  to  say,  with  all  deference  to  the 
opinion  of  my  brother  (lord  Gillies),  Aat  it 
is  possible  to  figure  cases  of  oaths  uponwhtcb 
ohaigea  under  Uiis  act  might  accurately  be 
laid,  and  as  to  which  it  is  impossible  to  eon- 
tend  thatf  the  public  prosecutor  is  bound  t^ 
specify  and  denne  the  treason.    I  allude  to 
an  oath  whidb  professes  to  have  in  view,  any 
alteration  of  the  law,  for  instance.    If  such 
shall  appear  to  be  the  object  of  the  oath,  and 
there  sn^l  be,  on  the  face  of  it,  words  which 
clearly  purport  or 'intend  to  bind  the  taker  t» 
persevere  in  the  accomplishment  of  the  object 
oy  any  means  whatever,  and  to  peiaevere  even 
in  ireoMmable  means  if  necessary,  I  contend, 
that  it  vrould  be  sufficient  for  a  prosecutor  to 
say  here  is  an  oath  in  violation  of  the  statute 
52nd  of  the  king,  intending  to  bind  the  tdiers 
to  commit  treason.    I  take  for  granted,  that 
the  oath'  binds  to  persevere,  by  the  use  of  all 
means,    not  excepting    treasonable   means. 
Could  any  man  aoubt,  here  is  an  oath  in 
violation  of  the  act  of  parliament  f    Then  I 
ask,  what  is  the  duty  the  public  prosecutor  ia 
caNed  on  to  perform^— To  define  the  treason 
which  the  party  at  that  time  taking  the  oatla 
had  not  at  the  time hittiaelf  defined?    Hehad 
aierely  hoand  himself  te  the  parfonnanee'  of 
treaaonabto  acts^  whiok  ia  a  violataon  of  xbe- 


«45l 


fat  AdmhikUring  unttnffld  CMhs. 


A.D.  1817. 


i6*6 


•ot  oi  pMlisM^Bl,  In  this  iasttiice,  il  is  an 
•bioluto  impMiibility  to  say  a  correct  special 
ileiMti«D  of  tfa»  tMMon  coold  be  given.  I 
abirays  eay  this,  under  the  quaJification  to 
'whieb  I  Ibnaei^  alluded^  that  the  oath  itielf 
aball  l^  oae  which  purports  or  intends  to  bind 
<•  tbo  oommistioB  of  treason  at  least.  If  it 
^neve  oo«ched  in  such  lanftiiage  as  no  Mortal 
oa«M  nndentsM*  it  woold  be  jostlo  hold  it 
not  sufficient  that  the  preaecntor  thoofht  it 
bawd  to  eoouBit  treason ;  bat  if  this  appears 
ott  the  tee  of  the  oath  itself  the  charge  must 
be  bekl  to  be  seleTantly  laid. 

I  go  a  Utile  ftirther  $  for  it  is  not  merely  in 
refiBrenee  to  treseooable,  but  to  nraiderons, 
and  MIODiotts  oaths^  that  this  observation  would 
be  fomd  strictly  to  apply.    I  take  the  case  of 
an  oalb,  as  was  pot  bf  lord  Pitmilly :  not  that 
Ihere  is  an  obhgatioa  on  the  face  of  it,  to 
nmrder  an  individual,  bat  to  preserve  secrecy^ 
and  to  persevere  in  endeavouring  to  aoooin»> 
plish  oertam.  objects,  and  even  to  put  to  death 
all  those  who  should  oppose  t(ie  accomplish- 
BMDl  of  then.    Here  is  an  oadi  which  might 
be  jchtfged  as  in  violation  of  that  part  of  the 
net  of  pniiiament  directed  against  oaths  pniw 
noidng  OS  intendinf  to  bin^  tooommitmnr- 
dev.    The  pfoseeulor  quotes  the  oath,  whidi 
eentains  saah  an  engagement  as  I  have  stated, 
to  pessewre,  even  to  the  ride  of  putting  to 
deadh  those  who  shaU  oppose  the  ;aoooaip]ish<- 
ment  of  the  end  in  view.    If  the  praseoutor 
were  ealtedon  to  deine  the  species  of  murder 
wbieh  Ms-  oath  purported  to  bind  to  commit^ 
would  there  not  be  the  same  impossibility 
ntteapted  to  be  imposed  as  in  the  case  formerly 
supposed,  as  to  the  species  of  tiraason  ?    The 
pesdes  themsdfes  had  not  designated  whom 
they  inteoded  to  murder,  or  the  manner  of 
dmng  so,  esoept  seoeially  those  who  should 
oppoee  them ;  and  therefore  the  public  pro- 
seentor  could  not  describe,  in  the  charge,  the 
partienlar  sort  of  murder,  as  that  does  not 
appear  on  the  fhceof  the  oath  itself.    But,  if 
he  nsitatesthe  act  of  parHaiDeiit,and  cites  the 
oatb^  he  does  all  that  is  iDcnmbent  upon  him 
nnder  this  act  of  parliament.    I  say  the  same 
as  to  an  oath  bindiDg  to  commit  felony.    Sup* 

eie  parties  (and  nothing  is  more  common,  I 
r,  than  associations  in  some  parts  of  the 
kingdom^  of  perMns  to  commit  felonies),  enter 
into  a  combination  to  commit  a  capital  feloa]^ 
and  have  resorted  to  an  oath  binding  them** 
selves  to  seise  on  the  whole  bullion  in 'the 
eoffers  of  the  bank  of  England,  or  to  possess 
diomselves  of  the  regalia  in  the  Tower  of 
London.  The  prosecutor  discovers  such  an 
oodi,  and  libels  upon  it  as  purporting  or 
intwading  to  bind  to  commit  a  felony  punish- 
aMe  witii  deadi.  I  think,  on  attending  to  this 
nd  of  parliament,  and  to  the  circumstances 
mder  whidh  such  im  oath  must  have  becoi 
ndninbleiad  or  taken,  it  would  not  be  neces*- 
any  to  -apeeifo  ttid  define  the- obligation  as 
on*  to  ebmnt  the  crime  of  buigla^,  or  any  ^ 
pHtienkreapitalfolony;  andylf  such  aebarge 
mm  raised  here,  it  woold  not  be  ttfoessenr  to 
VOL.XXXIIL 


staile  thai  theobjects  ware  iq be  accomplished 
by  means  of  theftand  himse-breaking.  It  would 
be  suiiciwi  to  state,  that  the  act  of  parliament 
was  violated  by  such  an  oath,  bearing  on  the 
face  of  it  an  obligation  intending  to  bind  to 
commit  a  felony  punishable  with  death*  The 
prosaentor  cannot  be  eaUed  on  to  define  mose 
pieciselyy  what  it  must  be  impossible  for  him 
todo. 

If  the  oath  itself  beam  the  coastruction 
whidi  is  alleged  of  it,  and  if  the  relative 
cjrcnmstances  of  .time,  and  place  of  adminisr 
terins,  be  set  forth  in  the  indictment,  the  pro- 
secntor  has  done  all  that  is  necessary  for  the 
advantage  of    the  prisoner.      The   prisoner 
sufiem  no  harm  from  i|s  being  stated  in  the 
indictment,  that  it  is  an  oath  intending  to 
commit  treason,  for,  if  he  can  shew  that  suck 
is  not  the  proper  construction  of  the  oath,  and 
that  it  does  not  so  purport,  his  defonoe  remaim 
entire.    That  he  suffers  no  hardship  firom  the 
indictment  being  so  framed,  appears  to  me  to 
be  quite  dear.  An  admission  Was  made  on  the 
part  of  the  panel  at  the  bar,  in  dear  terms^  by 
Mr.   Moncridl^  that  this  indictment  would 
have  boen  relevant  if  it  had  narrated  all  the 
difiamnt  treasons  ahenativdy,  as  bound  by 
the  purport  of  the  oath  to  be  oemmitted  by 
the  takers  of  it.    This  is  a  truth  of  which  I 
have  no  doubt  whatever:  But,  if  so,  is  it 
possible  to  say  any  benefit  would  have  resulted 
to  t^e  panel  from  following  such  a  proceeding? 
But,  it  has  been  said,  that,  erto,  it  is  not 
incumbent  to  define  the  treason  in  an  indicl- 
meoton  thisstatate;  yet  te  prosecutor  has 
undertaken  the  task,  and  has  not  performed 
it  ssitishctonly.r— Now,  we  are  all  agreed,  that, 
in  a  trial  fon  treason,  die  particular  ^eetes  of 
it  srast  be  speeifioally  set  forth.;  but,  I  oq»- 
ceive,  for  one,  that  the  present  ol^ectiott  for 
the  prisoner  proceeds  altosetber  on  a  mistake, 
and  that  thsn  is  no  such  uiing,  as  is  alleged, 
undertaken  on  the  phrt  of  tlm  public  pnia»- 
outor.    The  panage  founded  on,  is  not  to  be 
found  in  that  part  of  the  indictment  where 
you  would  have  expected  the  prosectMor  to 
have  made  such  a  diarge.    The  words  termed 
vague  and  unsatisfactory,  are  merely  expres- 
sive of  the  proeecutor*s  opinion  as  to  the 
nature  of  the  oath;  I  shall  not  fotigue  your 
loidships  by  reading  that  part  of  the  Indict- 
ment— I  rcfor  to  it  as  fonuliar  to  all  of  your 
lordships^   The  prosecutor  goes  on  to  deicrihe 
the  oath  as  an  obligation  tq  obtain  annual 
parliaments  and  nnivemal  suffirage,  by  physi- 
cal 'strength  or  force,  and  thereby  ^ectinr 
the  subvenion  of  the  govamment,  laws,  and 
noQSlitution  of  tUs  kingdom,  by  violent  and 
unlawful  means.    This  is  clearly  descriptive 
of  the  •oelh,  not  of  the  tteasoa ;  for  them  im^ 
mediately  follows :   ^'Whiefa  oath  or  engage- 
ment, or  obligation,  in  the  form  of  an  oath, 
was'inthe  following  terms/'    On  this  part  of 
the  case,  it  is- obvious  to  me,  that  'tha*  which 
is  alleged  to  have  been  an  iinpeifect  «^ecution 
of  a  task  undertsken  by  the  pibUciiraaeontor, 
Ms  entimly  to  the  gioond;   for  the  public 
2  N 


>•  « 


«4'ri 


57  GEORGE  nr. 


Trkt  ^AnAmt 


[648 


prosecutor  has  not  entered .  into  any  wioh 
undertaking — ^he  disclaims  it ;  and  the  words 
of  the  indictment  show  he  had  not  pledged 
himself  to  any  such  task.  Agreeing,  therefore, 
with  the  coansel  for  the  panel,  that,  if  this 
were  a  trial  for  treason,  those  wwds  in  the 
indictment  would  not  be  sufficient;  I  say,  the 
rule  requiring  a  specification  of  th^.  tnaaon 
does  not  apply  to  the  present  case,  and  has 
not  beetf  attempted  to  be  acted  upon  \xh  tiie 
piblic  prosecutor.  The  case  is  quite  dimrent 
from  that  of  lonl  Strafford.  Without  at  all 
interfering  with  the  law  of  treason,  or  asking 
tis  to  find  the  indictment  relevmnt,  as  charging 
treason,  the  public  prosecutor  midLCS  the  aver- 
neat,  that  the  oath  here  is  one  purporting  or 
intending  to  biod  to  commit  treason ;  and  he 
says  it  was  so  by  obtaining  annual  parliaments 
and  universal  suffrage  by  pb^ical  strength  or 
force.  This  is  his  description  of  the  oath, 
and  we  are  referred  by  him  to  the  oath  itself; 
and  if  we  are  right  in  our  oonstmction  of  it, 
it  is  an  oath  purporting  or  intending  to  bind 
to  commit  treason,  because  it  states  that  phy- 
sical strength  or  force  was  to  be  employed  in 
the  accomplishment  of  those  objects;  which 
never  can  be  accomplished  withom  producing 
those  consequences  which  the  prosecutor 
states.  Those  words  of  the  indictment  are  no 
more  than  the  enlarged  view  the  prosecutor 
giTcs-  of  the  consequences  of  his  aTerment  as 
to  the  nature  of  the  oalh  itself.  That  they 
are  not  descriptive  of  the  means  to  be 
employed,  is  obvious.  Neither  are  they 
descriptive  of  the  objects  in  view ;  for  these 
are  annual  parliaments  and  nnivenal  suflh^^. 
They  are  no  more  than  an  amplifled  detail 
•f  tiie  evil  result  of  the  accomplishment  of 
ttiose*  objects,  which  cannot  taketyff  the  effect 
of  the  treasonable  nature  of  iIm  oath. .  That 
the  words,  *^and  thereby  effecting  the  sub* 
version,  of  the  established  government,  laws, 
and  constitnlion  of  this  kin^om,.  by  nalawfol 
and  violent  means/'  cannot  therefore  be 
viewed  as  any  thing  like  an  attempt  to  deBne 
Ihe  treason,  is  to  me  quite  obvious.  Suppose 
the  indictment  had  specified  the  treason  of 
levying  war,  and  then  these  words  had 
followed,  ^  and  thereby  effecting  the  subver- 
sion of  the  established  government,  laws,  and 
constitution  of  this  kingdom,  by  unlawful 
nnd  violent  means  *r  will  i^ny  one  maintain, 
that  the  addition  of  these  words,  which  are 
merely  descriptive,  could  vitiate  the  rest  of 
this  indictment?  lliat  view  of  the  import  of 
these  words  is  decisive,  that  the  use  of  Uiem 
iothis  case  cannot  emount  to  a  vitiation  of 
the  diarge,  or  render  it  in  any  reepect 
irretevant# 

In  all  cases,  of  this  naturey  it  is  right  for 
•the  public  prosecutor  to*  deal  foirly  with  the 
accused,  ana  to  put  him  in  possession  of  wbait 
Jm  bottoms  bis  charge  upon,  sneeiiyiBg-  the 
•time,  manner,  circumstances,  and  individoals, 
'With  regani  to  which  the  guiHy  ads  are  said* 
to  htive  been  ooramitted.  When  I  look  to 
4hit  indictment,  J  find  all  this  is  done.    The 


major  proposition  cites  llie  .act  of  pmrliament. 
It  IS  then  charged,  that  the  pnnel  was  goil^ 
of  having  administered  an  oath,  the  terns  <n 
which  are  set  forth ;  the  places^,  persons,  and 
nature  of  the  meetings  at  which  it  was  admin* 
istered  are  detailed;  and  the  psoceontee, 
having  done  this,  kas  done  all  that  ean  be 
demanded  ef  him,  according  to  any  principlea 
with  which  I  amr  acquainted,  for  the  focmatjm 
of  a  criminal  charge. 

But  there  does  remain  another  objeetiea 
which  has  attracted  the  attention  of  all  year 
lordships,  as  brou^t  under  our  oonaideratios 
in  an  aignmentative  and  learned  manner,  in 
a  supplementary  information  for  the  paneL.  I 
have  no  inclination  to  find  any  fault  with  tW 
course  of  proceeding;  for,  it  was  otliecwise 
impossible  to  do  justice  to  that  argument^ 
because  it  proceeds  on  the  supposition  that 
the  other  argument  had  altogether  failed.  But 
I  have  humbly  to  submit  to  your  lordships  a 
view  upon  this  part  of  the  case,  iriiidi  has  not 
been  uken  by  any  of  the  Court,  and  whiek 
has  appeared  to  me,  on  a  thorou^  considera* 
tion,  to  be  deserving  of  great  attention.  For, 
independently,  altogether,  of  the  weight  of  |he 
answers  which  have  been  made  to  the  pre* 
Uminary  objections,  it  is  obvious. that  Mr* 
Grant's  argument  is  bottomed  on  assuming 
this  fact,  that  the  administration  of  the  oaili 
itself,  now  before  your  lordships,  does  amount 
to  an  overt  act  of  treason  under  the  statsUe 
36th  of  the  king ;  that  is  an  overt  act  of  that 
particular  treason  of  compassing  or  imfigining 
to  levy  war  for  the  purpose  either  of  compdU 
ing  the  king  to  change  hb  meaeuies,  or. to 
over-awe  either  House  of  Parliament;  and 
that  administering  to  numbers  at  secret  meet- 
ings such  an  oath,  i»  to  be  hdd  as  a  substan- 
tive overt  act  of  this  particular  treason.  Beferu 
I  can,  bowever,  amve  at  this  conclusion^  it 
must  be  made  out  to  me,  in  a  more  satiefoctory 
way  than  has  hitherto  been  done,  that,  by 
giving  mv  sanction  to  this  assumption,  I  am 
not,  in  met,  proceeding  to  establish  a  con* 
structive  treason.  Your  lordships  will  peroeive 
that  what  I  allude  to  is  this,  that  it  is  india^ 
pensably  necessary,  to  the  pennitting  sueh  aa 
oath  as  this  to  be  received  as  an  overt  act  of 
the  particular  treason  to  which  I  have  referred^ 
under  the  statute  36th  of  the  king,  that  the 
conspiracy,  the  compassing,  imagining,  and 
devising  to  levy  the  war  should  be  matured 
and  specially  directed  to  the  levying  of  war, 
at  a  certain  time,  and  at  a  certain  pUice^  and 
for  a  certain  speeial  purpose,  ^ch  as  the  db- 
jecU  stated  in  Ais  case--the  obtaining  annual 
parliaments  and.  universal  snffirage,  or  any 
alteration  of  the  law.  This  to  me  is  dear 
from  the  principles  we  find.  ap|iUed  to  thf 
sUtute  of  Edward  3rd;  4Aft>  before,  a^ 
particuhur  fact  shall  he  founded  on  ae  an  evert 
act  of  a  compassing  and  imagining  the  ds^tk 
of  ■  the  -kiogf  or  tevying  was,  it  is  neQa»- 
saiy  to.make  out  satiMactoriW  that  there  wne 
euehuconspracy  devised  and  matasad.  TV* 
is  a  clear  prin«i^  in  the  In^  of  treason,  wd 


44»] 


fit  Adimtmiering  nkbnjfid  (kUkt* 


A.  D.  1817/ 


1550 


I  thtll  be  tki  last  man  to  interfete  with  it. 
To  make  bb  argament  on  this  point  apply  to 
the  piwent  case— tp  entitle  him  to  taiie  the 
€|ttestioii,  whether  we  can  in  this  way  4ry  what 
is  in  itself  «  irmunf  it  is  incnmbent  <on  the 
peael  at  the  har  to  assume  it  as  proved,  that 
there  was  this  matured,  spediied,  fixed,  and 
deliberate  eonspivacy  .and  plan  formed  to  lery 
war.  This  he  must  assume,  before  he  can 
avail  himself  of  the  argument  which  his 
eotesel'has  suggested*  It  is  material,  howeDSc, 
to  bbserre,  that  the  indictment  does  not  itate 
this  to  be  the  fiact;  and  I  ask,  vRbelher  there 
is  any  one  of  your  lord^ps,  upon  the  piin« 
dple  which  has  been  so  strongly  impressed 
upon  yoo  by  lord  Gillies,  who  can  take  this 
important  (act  for  granted  ?  I,  for  one,  am  not 
prepared  to  do  so.  In  my  conscience  I  am 
wmnd  to  say,  that,  though  there  appears  on 
the  shewing  of  the  indictment  to  have  been 
ancontemplatioo,  that  which,  if  accomplished, 
would  hare  amounted  to  high  treason,  I 
asust  give  the  parties  credit  in  believing, 
that  there  was  not  a  digested,  specific,  de& 
bttrate, .  fixed  plan  for  a  rising.  And,  having 
tint  dear  oproion,  and  having  seen  nothing 
to  ibtkt  it,  ue  whole  basis  of  Uie  argum«it  in 
thii  part  of  the  case  fiills  to  pieces,  and  there 
veniains  no  foundation  for  stating,  that  you 
hanre  here  an  oath  founded  on  in  support  of  a 
charge  of  a  capital  felony  whieh  is  itself  an 
•vert  act  of  high  treason. 

The  object  of  the  statute  of  the  52nd  of  the 
king,  was  to  guard  against  the  state  of  sub- 
serviency and  subjection  of  men's  mind  to 
the  influence  of  leaders,  some  of  whom  were 
even  concealed  from  the  persons  who  were 
eoacemed,  both  -in  taking  and  administering 
these  oaths.  It  was  to  prevent  the  con- 
sequences of  such  dangerous  influence  over 
the  minds  of  the  peop^,  and  of  their  blind 
sttbmisBiottto  these  leaders.  It  contemplates, 
theiefoie,  the  cases  of  prospective  conspiracies 
not  yet  matured,  not  brought  into  the  shape 
«f  actual  coneert  of  rising  into  rebellioo.  It 
vfueto  guard  against  those  evils  that  the  act 
was  firamed.  It  has  a  reference  to  what  is 
Is  be  eoaunitted,  not  to  what  ti  comipitted. 
If  this  be  a  correct  view  of  the  true  intent 
of  the  act  in  question,  that  it  was  made  to 
prevent  the  creation  of  such  undue  influence, 
and  the  sutijeotion  which  seems  to  have  been 
the  object  of  the  administrators  in  regard  to 
tboee  who  took  the  oath ;  then  it  follows,  that 
it  is  relevant,  in  forming  a  charge  under  this 
act,  for  the  public  prosecutor  to  set  forth  that 
this  is  an  oath  purporting  or  intending  to  bind 
to  cosamit  treason,  in  violation  of  the  act  of 
parliament.  But,  being  of  opinion,  that  it 
bas  not  been  made  out  in  a  clear  and  satis- 
foctory  manner,  that  the  adminiltering  of  this 
oath,  as  charged  in  the  indictment,  is  an  overt 
act*  of  the  nature  taken  for  granted  in  Mr. 
Gtant'sargument,  I  have  here  nothing  to  do  with 
the  pfopositioa  that  felony  merges  in  treason, 
even  if  there  were  no  sneh  clause  as  the  last  one 
of  the  statute  in  question.  -  . 


7 

la 


As  to  the  doctrine  in  general,  that,  without 
precedent,  case,  jot  opinion  of  any  lawyer  of 
authority,  it  is  to  be  held  at  cnce  and  decided 
in  this  case,  that,  by  the  act  of  queen  Anne, 
which  renders  the  law  of  treason  the  same  in 
both  countries,  we  have  imported  the  whole 
principles  of  the  common  law  of  England  in 
reference  to  such  a  crime,  it  is  a  proposition 
to  which  I  am  not  prepared  to  accede.  Your 
lordships  have  alreaay  seen  one  marked  disitinc- 
tioQ  between  the  systems  of  the  law  of  the  two 
countries,  which  renders  it  impossible  to  hold, 
that  the  whole  law  of  England  has  become  a 
part  of  the  common  law  of  Scotland.  I  should 
nave  wished  to  have  beard  any  authority  given 
to  your  lordships,  from  which  it  could  possibly 
be  held  that  any  judges  who  ever  sat  in  this 
Court,  could  permit  any  man  who  has  been 
sent  to  an  assise  on  acharse  of  crime  founded 
on  an  allegation  of  certain  facts,  to  be  remitted 
on  the  same  facts  to  another  assise,  to  be  tried, 
for  a  crime  of  higher  denomination,  without 
the  express  authority  of  parliament  ?  I  never 
can  go  any  such  length*  This  is  one  feature 
in  our  law  which  must  show  that  we  have  not 
et  embodied  into  it  the  rules  of  the  common 
aw  of  England.  It  is  clear,  from  Foster,  that, 
if  in  the  course  of  an  investigation,  as  to  a  trial 
for  felony,  he,  as  a  judge,  should  discover 
treason,  he  would  discharge  the  jury^  and 
direct  a  new  indictment  for  treason  to  be  raised. 
Such  proceeding  is,  however,  impossible,  ac- 
cording to  the  law  of  Scotland.  No  instance 
of  it  has  been  produced  to  your  lordships — no 
authorities  hAve  been  founded  on  to  establish 
such  a  rule ;  and  I  am  certainly  not  prepared, 
to  adopt  it  here:  If  I  understand  the  princi-< 
pLe,  it  goes  to  the  length  that  a  judge  should 
discharge  the  jury,  whether  they  were  about  ta 
convict  or  acquit  the  panel.  That  we  sliould 
adopt  so  extraordinary  a  rule,  without  autho- 
rity, is  out  of  all  sight ;  and,  at  present,  I  can 
only  say,  that  I  entertain  the  greatest  doubts  of 
the  doctrine  of  felony  merging  in  treason, 
being  applicable  in  this  Court. 

I  am  happy,  however,  to  think,  that  from 
the  view  I  have  taken  of  the  act  of  parliament, 
and  the  oath  in  question,  there  are  on  the  face 
of  this  statute,  the  most  invincible  grounds  for 
holding  that  the  indictment  which  has  beeu 

5 referred  ought  to  be  remitted  to  a  jury,  and 
lat  we  are,  in  fact,  left  no  discretion  by  the 
legislature  itself.  The  clause  upon  which  this 
part  of  the  case  is  rested,  I  need  not  again 
read ;  but  I  think  it  necessary  just  tp  advert  to 
one  circumstance  which  was  strongly  pressed, 
and  seems  to  have  had  great  eflect  upon  the 
opinion  of  my  brother,  lord  Gillies..  I  refer  to 
the  course  of  procedure  which  parliament  is 
supposed  to  adopt,  when  it  makes  any  deviai- 
tion  from  former-  statutes,  as  is  supposed  to 
have  happened  in  this  case.  Tlie  statute  al- 
luded to,  was  the  39th  and  40th  of  the  king. 
Mr.  Grant,  after  referring  to  the  statute  9  Geo. 
1st,  goes  on  to  state,  that  it  was  not  thought, 
that  by  this  act,  the  shooting  at  the  king  oould 
be  prosc.'Uted  as  felony.    lie  goes  on  io  recite 


541]         57  GEORGE  OI. 


Trutaf^mbtm  H^KUkj/ 


f 


e«rtain  parts  of  the  39th  and  40tfc  of  the  kitagy 
and  then  calls  your  attention  to  the  express 
statement  in  the  latter  part  of  the  act ;  ^  that 
none  of  the  provisions  contained  in  the  several 
acts  of  the  7th  year  of  king  William  8rd,  and 
the  7th  of  queen  Anne,  respectively)  touching 
trials  in  cases  of  treason,  eoc.  shall  extend  to 
any  indictment  of  high  treason,  in  compassing, 
fcc.  where  the  overt  act  shall  be  snch  as  afore- 
said; but,  upon  conviction,  judgment  shall 
nevertheless  be  given,  and  execution  done,  as 
in  other  cases  of  high  treason,  any  law,  statute, 
or  usage  to  the  contraty  notwithstanding." 
Tliis  reference  to  this  particttlar  statute  led  me 
to  look  to  the  act  itself;  and,  I  think,  when 
your  lordships  attend  to  its  tenns,  yon  will 
ind  there  the  clearest  and  most  invincible 
reasons  for  those  particular  dsuses  being  in- 
serted in  -it.  ^Vhat  is  the  tiUe  of  the  act  ? 
*^  An  act  for  regulating  trials  for  high  treason, 
and  misprision  of  treason  in  certain  cases.''  It 
then  proceeds  to  enact  what  is  stated  in  the 
panel's  information,  and  concludes  with  pro- 
viding, that  nothing  in  the  acts  touching  trials 
for  high  treason,  &c.  shall  affect  that  statute, 
because  there  is  a  new  n^ode  of  trial  prescribed ; 
and  that  wherever  the  chaige  is,  Unt  of  com- 
passing and  imagining  the  death  of  the  king 
(the  most  detestable  of  all  treasons),  and  the 
overt  act,  the  actually  shooting  at  him,  foe.  it 
shair  be  lawfol  and  competent  to  proceed  to 
try  those  guilty  of  that  offence  a»  jbr  murder, 
and  on  the  same  evidence  as  in  trials  for 
murder.  Such  is  the  object  of  the  act  of  par- 
Hament.  That,  however,  clearly,  was  not  to 
do  away  the  crime  of  high  treason  and  make  it 
a  felony,  but  to  regulate  the  mode  in  which 
such  acts  of  high  treason  might  be  tried ;  and 
the  enactment  is,  that  they  shall  be  tried  ac- 
cording to  the  form  of  trials  for  murder,  and 
upon  the  same  kind  of  evidence.  Seeing  this 
was  a  new  regulation  for  the  trial  of  what  was 
actually  hish  treason,  was  it  not  njecessary, 
having  mMe  this  new  provision,  to  declare, 
that  nothing  contained  in  the  two  former  sta^ 
tutes,  with  regard  to  trials  for  high  treason, 
should  be  oonstnied  to  extend  to  this  act  of 
parliament?  This  was  the  only  coarse  whidi 
tould  be  followed,  vrheki  a  new  regulation  was 
to  be  made  ibr  the  higheM  spedies  of  high 
treason.  The  whole  weight  and  effect  of  this 
authority,  therefore,  is  done  way,  npon  looking 
to  tlte  act  itself  and  its  tme  object,  which  was 
to  make  a  new  ^tem  of  trial  for  certain  acts 
of  treason.  Such  being  the  tnie  object  of  the 
statute  39th  and  4<Mh  of  the  king,  it  was  neces- 
sary to  subjoin  that  part  of  the  clause  which 
has  been  founded  on,  as  so  decisive  in  tins 
ease. 

.-  There  is  another  view  thttt  may  be  taken  of 
this  act  which  appears  to  me  to  iJford  an  un- 
answerable reply  to  the  statement  made  on  the 
part  of  the  panel,  as  to  its  being  absurd  and 
incredible  to  suppose  that  the  legislature,  in 
pastsing  the  statute  52nd  of  the  fringy  conld 
have  contemplated  the  poasibility  of  declaring 
that  to  be  a  capital  (elpny  wkioh  amoitttf  to 


hightitason.  That  ad,  89«k nisd 4«(h of  the 
king,  was  passed,  in  order  to  regidate^  as  I 
have  just  s«d,  the  trial  of  the  highest  degree  of 
treason  which  it  is  possible  for  «  suhieet  to 
commit.  It  enacts,  that  where  the  overt  aot 
shaH  be  even  theaetnal  assassination  of  the  kiag^ 
die  trial  shall  neHrtheless  proeeed  in  the  same 
manner,  in  every  respect,  and  upon  the  lika 
evidence,  as  in  trials  for  mnrder.  The  ad 
then  inserts  the  dense  founded  on  by  Mr* 
Grant,  and  concludes  With  dedahn^  **  Jwdg 
ment  shall,  nevertheless,  be  given,  and 
tion  done,  as  in  4>ther  cases  of  high 
any  law,  statnte,  or  usage,  to  the  oontoary  new 
withstanding."  What,  thee,  has  tiie  legisla- 
ture here  done  ?  It  has  declared,  that,  in  re- 
ihrenoe  to  this,  the  highest  and  most  aggravated 
spedes  of  treuon,  all  the  privileges  oftrsasea 
trial  shall  for  ever  be  taken  from  die  eufaiect, 
and  that  he  shaU  not  have  the  usnal  benefit 
attending  trial  for  treason.  Where  the  everi 
act  diarged  is  the  assassination  of  the  king, 
the  aocitfed  may  be  tried  as  for  a 
murder,  and  be  eonvieted  npon  the 
dence  as  in  a  trial  for  mnrder.  Here  is  a  de- 
daration  of  the  legislature  in  regard  !•  the 
highest  species  of  treason;  and  yet  it  >praB 
pressed  npon  your  lordships,  as  the  aieet  oh 
credible  and  absord  of  all  piopooitioos,  diat  m 
reference  to  other  treasons,  .as  vreU  as  to  this^ 
the  legislature  should  ever  have  intended  to 
declare,  that  certain  oaths,  purporting  or  in* 
tending  to  bnad  to  commit  treason,  should  be 
dedar^  a  capital  felony  and  liable  to  punish- 
ment as  snch ;  -and  that  there  would  be  the 
utmost  danger  to  the  sofajects  of  this  eountiy, 
and  to  the  person  of  the  king  himself,  by  the 
adoption  of  any  such  construction  as  is  here 
contended  for  on  the  part  of  the  preaeonler. 
This  very  act,  founded  upon  by  the  paoely 
affords,  however,  a  satisfoctoiy  proof,  that, 
whenever  the  legislature  thinks  it  necenaiy  to 
to  make  an  alteration  of  the  law  as  to 
it  does  so  without  hesitatJNm,  If  it  thinhs 
alteration  is  for  the  benefit  of  the  pnldie  hft 
large ;  and  we  see  that  it  aoeordingiy  providea^ 
not  only  that  the  cases  of  treasotoaMe  odhn 
and  prospecdve  treasons,  but -of  Overt  nets  •£ 
die  highest  kind  of  treason  diemsdves,  may  h« 
ti^ed  as  capital  felonies. 

But  thedansein  the  52nd  of  the  king  leaven 
no  donbt  as  to  the  conclusion  we  oedit  to 
draw.  Admitting  the  correctness  of  Mr. 
Grant's  statement  as  to  felony  meiging  iti 
treason,  I  say  there  is  an  anthotity  beHMe  your 
lordships  to  which  we  most  bend,  and  as-eo 
which  we  have  no  discredon.  It  is  said  to  \m 
an  ambigttoos  elauie^  but  we  are  bound  to  givo 
a  meaning  to  it:  and  I  think  it  has  dedarad 
expressly,  that  a  feet,  orantBlfoiioe,  wliiehiMy 
be  diarged  inTiolation  of  diis  act  of  pariio* 
ment,  may  be  diarged  as  an  ^ct  of  high  tren- 
son ;  under  this  qualification,  hovpeVer,  that 
the  accused  has  not  been  brought  to  trial  before 
for  the  lesser  offenee.  I  cannot  hesitale,  or 
doubt,  that  the  English  tewyen  who  drew  this 
actof  parliament,  mwt  hssnft  Ind  in^ioir  the 


1 


fiof  MmmUlerit^  unlaftfml  Oaths* 

possibility  of  o«iIm  being  adimBisttte4»  wbich, 
m  certain  drounsluioeay  nigbl  amount  to 
bi|^  tTsaaon ;  for.  they  most  have  had  before 
lihcm  tbe  statute  36th  of  the  king,  as  well  as 
that  of  Edward  aid. 

Having  sobmittad  to  yonr  lordshiiM  those 
obsenratioMy  at  neihape  too  great  a  length 
(but  in  juitice  to  ue  panel  at  the  bar,  to  the 
law  of  the  country,  smd  in  discharge  6f  my 
duty,  I  wished  to  deliver  my  opinion  fully  and 
ezpttdUyX  I  hanre  no  difficulty  in  saying,  that, 
upon  attending  to  every  thing  that  hu  been 
urged  with  so  much  ability  for  the  panel,  I 
Iwve  no  alternative  but  to  find  this  inoictment 
lelevuntf  and  remit  it  to  an  assize. 

There  will,  no  doubt,  remain  an  important 
and  sacred  duly  to  the  juiy  to  perfonn,  and 
which  they  irill  discbarge,  i  hare  no  doubt,  as 
Qprigfatly  and  carefully  as  we  have  endeavoured 
to  peribnn  ours.  Hiey  will  have  to  take  the 
wbUe  case  into  consMleiation,  and  make  up 
their  minds  upon  the  oath,  as  the  Court  hu 
done,  and  will  have  to  say  whether  the  panel, 
if  ooBcemed  in  administering  it,  is  guilty  of 
the  crime  laid  to  his  charge.  It  is  possible 
the  jury  may  differ  from  us  as  to  the  import  of 
the  oath,  but  I  feel  that  as  a  difficulty  of  no 
magnitude  in  the  case.  There  are  many  oases 
where  we  are  bound  to  give  our  opinions  to 
juries  on  the  subjects  upon  which  they  have  to 
return  verdicts  ^  and  I  should  be  the  last  man 
to  wish  that  thc^  should  feel  themselves  in  the 
least  degree  fettered  in  their  judgment  by  our 
opinions.  It  is  my  duty,  after  stating  the  facts 
of  a  case,  to  explain  my  view  of  the  law,  and 
Irequentlv  to  pronounce  my  opinion  as  to  the 
import  of  the  facts,  after  they  are  disclosed  in 
evidence.  In  a  late  trial  for  sedition,  I  was 
called  upon  to  state  that  there  was  sedition 
upon  the  face  of  the  speech,  in  that  case ;  but 
I,  at  the  same  time,  told  the  jury  that  they 
were  to  make  up  their  minds  upon  that  point, 
and  decide  for  themselves.  Suppose  the  jury 
bad  found  for  the  panel  in  that  case,  should  I 
have  felt  any  uneasiness.'  Being  confident 
that  I  had  done  my  own  doty,  I  should  have 
given  them  credit  for  uprightness  and  integrity 
in  the  discharge  of  theirs.  Having  performed 
my  duty,  to  the  best  of  my  abilitiesy  I  care 
nothing,  in  any  case,  for  the  consequences. 


A.  IX  18IY* 


[U4 


*^  The  Lord  Justice  Clerk,  and  Lords 
Commimioneis  of  Justiciary,  having  ccm- 
sidered  the  criminal  indictment  raiswl  and 
pirsued  at  the  instance  of  his  majesty's 
advocate,  for  his  majesty's  interest^  against 
Andrew  M'Kinley»  panel,  with  the  infor- 
mations given  in  for  the  prosecutor  and 
panel  in  terms  of « the  order  of  Court, 
dated  the  2dFd  day  of  June  last,  and  be- 
fore recorded,  and  the  supplementary  in- 
formation given  in  for  the  said  Andrew 
if ^KinUy,  a]«o  before  recorded ;  they  re- 
pel the  ol^eetions  stantd  to  the  relevancy 
of  *th6*indiatmeBt:  fifad  the  indictment 
vdtv  ast  Id  infer  the  paios  of  law  ipodfied 


in  the  act  of  parliament  libelled  on;  but 
allow  the  panel  to  prove  all  facts  and  cir- 
cfumstanoes  that  may  tend  to  eaoulpat* 
him,  or  alleviaite  his  guilt,  and  remit  the 
panel  with  the  indictment  as  found  rele- 
vant to  th^  kaovrledge  of  an  assite. 

«  D.  BoYUi,  L  P.  D."  , 


Lord  Adoocati.'^'To  mmmm  is  Saturday. 
Although  I  do  not  anticipate  a  very  long  trial; 
yet,  to  avoid  unnecessary  discussion  to  morrow, 
which  might  eventually  lead  to  an  encroach- 
ment upon  the  next  day,  I  wish  to  know  now 
if  any  ground  for  fbrther  delay  is  to  be  stated  ; 
and  what  witnesses  are  to  be  examined  for  tha 
paiiel. 

Mr.  GnoR/.— The  agent  for  the  panel  informs 
me  that  the  witnesses  are  not  all  come  forward. 

Lord  Juttioe  Clerk. — An  application  was 
made  to  the  Court,  on  the  part  of  the  paneL 
to  know  whethec,  supposing  the  retevi^cy  of 
the  lodictment  to  be  sustained,  we  should  pro- 
ceed next  day  with  the  trial  ?  and  we  stated, 
that,  in  that  event  (as  to  which,  however,  we 
could  anticipate  nothing),  we  should  be  pr^ 
pared  to  proceed. 

Lord  Admcaie.  --^  I  am  entitled  lo  have  a 
list  of  their  witnesses  the  day  before  the 
Truating,  however,  to  receiving  this  Jist 
the  deimces  (which  have  not  yet  been  lodeed) 
in  the  course  of  the  evening;  and  to  &eM 
being  no  discussion  on  any  of  these  prelimi- 
nary points  in  the  morning,  I  should  still  beg 
leave  to  suggest  that  your  lordships  should  not 
meet  later  than  nine  o'clock. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk, — Gentlemen  o^  the  jury, 
I  have  to  repeat  that  the  Court  r^rets  ex- 
tremely this  ^case  has  been  productive  of  so 
much  trouble  to  you.  This  had  been  from  no 
fault  of  the  Court ;  and,  I  trust,  yon  will  not 
grudgre  giving  yourselves  a  little  further  trouble 
m  A  case  of  such  importance  to  the  panel  and 
to  the  country. 

**  The  Lord  Justice  Clerk,  and  Londa 
Comm'ssioners  of  Justiciary,  continue  the 
diet  against  the  panel,  and  whole  other 
diets  of  Court  till  to  morrow  morning,  at 
nine  o'clock,  in  this  place ;  and  ordain  all 
concerned  then  to  attend,  under  the  pains 
of  law ;  and  the  panel,  in  the  mean  tirne^ 
to  be  carried  back  to  the  castle  of  Edin- 
burgh.*' 

HIGH  CbUET  OF  JUSTICIARY. 

July  19,  1817. 

present. 

Ht  Hon.  DtM  Bo^  Lord  Jurtice  Clerk. 
Lord  Hermaad. 
Lord  GiUies. 
Jjovd  Fkanlfy. 
Lord  Re^on, 


<(4ULl      .^7  GEORGB  Ul. 


Commtfit  ike  Oroitm. 

Rt.  Hon.  Akxmider  Maannochk^  of  Mettdow- 
banky  His  Mijesty's  Advocate  [afterwards 
a  lord  of  Sessioii  and  Justiciary,  with  the 
title  of  Lord  Meadowbank.] 

Jonei  WMuhimt  Esq.  Solicitor-General. 

H.  Bom  Drumnumi,  Esq.  Advocate-Depute. 

Commlfor  tkt  PmmL 

Jokn  Clark,  Esq. 
Geo.  Crtautaim,  Esq. 
IHbof.  HWmisofiy  Esq. 
.    Frmick  Jejfrw,  Esq. 
J.  F.  Gnm<,  Esq. 
J.  A.  Murrmfp  Esq. 
JoHiei  Moncritffy  Esq. 
flimry  GsofcdrNy  £«i. 

Jfubw  jnCm/ey  was  placed  at  the  bar.   ' 

lord  Jdvocofe.— Before  a  jury  is  impaneled 
in  this  case,  I  think  it  right  to  state  to  yoar 
lordships,  Uiat  one  object  which  I  had  in 
view  in  laying  this  indictment  upon  the  statute 
upon  which  it  is  founded,  has  been  accom« 
pufhed.  Your  lordships  by  your  decision 
yesterday,  hate  promulgated  to  the  people  of 
this  country,  thai  the  offence  with  which  the 
panel  is  dbarged,  is  one  -  of  the  most  aggra- 
TOted  description,  and  that  the  lives  of  the 
gi^tj  are  forfeited  to  the  law.  I  trust  most 
sinoerely»  that  your  lordships,  by  this  judg- 
ment, have  opposed  a  barrier  against  the 
eomrolssion  or  this  offence  in  future,  and 
lh«reby  put  a  final  stop  to  a  crime  so  utteriy 
-mihvenive  of  the  puMic  tranquillity. 

In  this  reliance,  and  considering  all  the 
circumstances  of  die  case,  as  well  as  yielding, 
I  hope  not  improperly,  to  the  dictates  of  my 
own  feeling,  I  trust  that  I  am  doing  what  will 
not  meet  with  the  disapprobation  of  your 
lordships,  when  I  state  that  I  mean  to  restrict 
this  indictment  to  infer  merely  an  arbitrary 
punishment. 

At  the  time  that  I  do  so,  I  trust  I  shall  be 
permitted  by  your  lordships  to  make  a  single 
observation  on  some  of  the  pleadings  for  the 
nrisonen,  in  whidi,  I  apprehend,  1  have  been 
brought  more  penonally  forward  than  is 
usual  in  the  ]>leadings  of  this  court  I  regret 
the  circumstance,  not  on  .my  own  account, 
because  I  can  receive  such  insinuations  as 
they  merit,  trusting  that  a  conscientious  dis- 
charge of  my  duty  will  suflBciently  protect 
me  against  them,  however  injurious  they  may 
be;  but  I  sincerely  regret  that  my  learned 
friends  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  bar  should 
have  advisedly  insinuated  that  I  have  been 

Juided  by  ^'an  over-heated  zeal,'*  by  **a 
esire  to  take  away  the  life  of  .the  panel  upon 
undigested  notions  which  I  could  not  define." 
And  yet  these,  and  many  other  insinuations 
of  a  tfimilar  ■  nature,  iiave- been  made  in  the- 
broadest  manner  i^nst  me,  which,  I  must  be 
allowed  to  think,  it  would  have  been  in 
better  taste  had  my  learned  iheDds  thought 
proper  to  avoid. 


In  like  aanatr,  it  w^mm  watX  straiige,  that,* 
without  any  o^pect  in  which  their  clients  can 
have  an  interest  (or  rather  the  interest  which 
they  have  lies  directly  the.  other  wav),  and 
when  by  the  form  of  pleading,  I  had  no 
means  to  refiite  it, -a  proposition  has  been 
maiatained  by  the  learned  centlemen,  utiertv 
unfounded  in  law,  and  whidi  nevar  vras  heard 
of  till  it  appeared  in  this  information.  The 
doctrine  I  allude  to  is,  that  the  remedies  of 
the  statute  1701  are  not  competent  to  a 
prisoner  incarcerated  upon  a  charge  oC 
treason.  •  This  doctrine,  I  say,  never  was 
before  maintained.  It  is  utterly  unfounded, 
and  in  opposition  as  well  to  the  terms  of  the 
statute  itself,  as  to  the.  concurrent  testimonies 
of  all  the  lawyers  both  of  England  and  Soot^ 
land,  since  the  Revolution.  For  the  same 
statutes  that  have  suspended  the  writ  of 
habeas  corpus  in  matters  of  treason,  have  also 
suspended  the  operation  of  the  act  1701,  in 
the  case  of  persons  imprisoned  on  sioular 
charges,  and  on  these  alone. 

I  hope  it  will  not  be  deemed  improper  that 
I  should  thus  have  repelled  what  I  must  hold 
to  be  a  libel  on  the  law  of  Scotland,  especially 
when  it  seems  to  be  so  much  the  fashion  to 
traduce  it.  But  I  shall  trespass  no  further 
than  by  giving  in  a  minute  restricting  the 
libel. 

Mr.  Oottsfotcn.— I  have  just  one  word  to 
say,  in  consequence  of  the  address  which  we 
have  now  heard.  I  confess  I  am  totally  un- 
aware of  the  allusions  in  either  the  verbal  or 
printed  pleadings,  with  regard  to  which  his 
lordship  has  now  addressed  the  Court.  In  so 
fer  as  I  was  concerned,  I  had  no  intention  to 
reflect  upon  him. 

Lord  Aioocatt. — ^I  do  not  allude  to  you, 
and  I  refer  chiefly  to  the  printed  proceedings. 

Mr.  Cfwwtwn,'^!  believe  I  may  say  the 
same  thing  for  my  learned  brethren  as  for 
myself.  We  viewed  the  indictment  in  one 
light,  and  his  lordship  did  in  another;  but  it 
never  was  our  intention  to  oMke  personal 
imputations  upon  him. 

If  there  were  to  be  any  discussion  in  this 
matter,  there  are  some  observations  in  the 
information  for  the  crown  which  bear  hard 
upon  the  counsel  for  the  panel.  It  is  stated 
in  that  information,  that  one  of  the  prisoner'a 
counsel  had  bestowed  a  panegyric  upon  the 
association  of  thpse  persons  who  took  the 
oath  founded  upon  in  the  indictment,— which  is 
an  entire  mistake  and  misrepresentation. . 

With  regard  to  whether  the  act  1701  applies 
to  oases  of  treason,  that  has  not  been  argued 
in  either  the  written  or  verbal  pleadings.  '  Per* 
haps  a  doubt  may  have  been  thrown  out  oa 
the  subject,  and  all  that  I.  can  say  is,  that 
none  of  the  prisoner's  counsel  have  made  up 
their  minds  one  way  or  another  with  regard  to 
it,  nor  do  I  know  that  any  judgment  has  ever 
been  pronounced  ^  upon  the  point.  •  Th^ 
prisoner  has.  perhaps. aktady  run  his  letters. 


a&n 


Jvt  Admbtkkiiag  mte^l  <hMt. 


%.  D.  1817. 


IM8 


I  am  sofTf  if  woj  expranon  hat  been  madr 
vie  of^  that  could  gnm  di^eaaure  to  the  lord 
.advocate.  No  penonal  impntatioos  wbateter 
were  inleiided  against  hiai. 

Bir.  GroNi.— I  rather  think  I  ana  called 
upon,  and  in  a  manner  Tery  unnsnal,  to  make 
a  few  obaeryations ;  and  it  ia  by  dint  of 
recollection  of  two  words  whidi  the  lord 
advocate  employed,  that  I  think  it  is  the  last 
paragraph  or  the  second  information  for  the 
prisoner,  which  waa  written  by  me,  that  has 
-excited  his  lordship's  animadversions.  I  do 
not  ■  know  that  I  am  very  strictly  in  order 
before  yon  at  present ;  all  I  can  say  iSy  that 
this  paragrai^  runs  in  these  words :  ^  Accord- 
ing to  the  construction  which  the  prosecutor 
would  put  on  the  intention  of  the  legislature 
in  passing  the  statute  on  which  he  has  laid  the 
present  indictment,  he  would  impute  to  the 
legislature  this  inconceivable  injustice  and 
a^rdity,  that  on  the  one  hand  the  highest 
and  most  dangerous  species  of  treason, 
involving  a  meutated  attack  on  the  life  of 
the  sovereign^  sanctioned  by  the  solemnity  o£an 
oath,  and  extendingas  is  alleged  in  this  case,to  a 
conspiracy  of  hundreds  or  thousands  of 
perMus,  threatening,  as  is  here  also  alleged, 
10-. effect  the  subversion  •  of  the  establi&ed 
government,  laws,  and  constitution  of  this 
kingdom,  by  means  which  involve  the  whole 
nation  in  bloodshed  and  in  open  war,  may  be 
tried  as  arfelonyy  punishable  only  with  transpor- 
tation ;  and  the  mdictment,  being  once .  pre- 
ferred, whether  by  a  grand  jury  in  England, 
or  the  public  prosecutor  in  Scotland,  no 
remedy  remains  bat  the  offenders  must  be 
for  ever  discharged  by  this  means^  from  all 
farther  consequences  of  their  guilt.  And,  on 
4he  other  lumdy  by  the  contrivance  of  the 
ofictrs  of  the  crown,  the  subjects  of  thifi 
.eonntry  may  be  brought  to  trial,  and  placed 
in  haiafd  of  their  lives  on  a  state  prosecutipn, 
with  the  whole  weight  and  influenoeof  govem- 
Boent  to  .oppose  them.  The  overheated  teal 
of  its  officers  exoited,  perhaps  their  interest 
and  reputation  at  stake  on  the  issue,  as  well 
as  the  passions  of  the  factious,  the  terrors  of 
the  timid**— The  passage  being  written  in 
the  heat  of  the  last  paragraph,  the  terms, 
perhaps,  are  not  so  eloquent  as  they  are 
muBerons.  It  goes  on,— 'Mhe  just  indigna- 
tion of  the  wefi-affected  against  crimes  id- 
Tolvins;  the  common  safety,  overpowering  the 
natural  disposition  to  clemency  and  deliber- 
ation, all  combining  to  deprive  the  accused 
of  the  security  which,  in  ordinary  cases,  they 
posseas  for  a  feir  and  impartial  trial,  while 
they  are,  at  the  same  time,  stripped  of  the 
sai^uaid  which  it  has  been  the  ceaseless 
endeavour  of  the  law  of  England,  from  the 
•Bioot  aneient  times,  even  in  the.  midst  of 
tytanny  and  disorder,  to  provide  for  ^the 
•pvotection  of  the  subject  against  that  oppresi- 
-sion  and  thai  danger. to  which  it  has  always 
.felt  and  acknowleged  him  to.be  in.  thes^ 
idrcnnili^ices  .  exposed- .  The  prisoner  will 


oikly  add,  that  to  ptitsMh  a  eoHstmcHioD  upon 
these  acts  of  parlianent  would  not  be. to 
expound  the  Imts,  but  to  libel  those  who 
made  them.  At  yonr  lordships*  hands  he;  is 
certain  there  is  no  danger  of  their  reoeiviag 
such  a  construction,  eq^ly  disposed  as  yon 
feel,  at  once  to  protect  the  sulfiect  frooi 
oppression,  and  to  vindicate  the  necessaiy 
iostice  of  the  country .''  The  lord  advocate 
hints  that  he  individually  is  accused  of  over- 
heated zeal,  and  that  tlie  paragraph  is  directed 
against  his  lordship.  I  beg  to  assure  the 
learned  lord  that  no  such  view  occurred  to  me, 
and  that  what  I  stated  I  intended  as  a  general 
proposition,  without  particidar  application  to 
any  individual. 

'  Lord  Advocate, — I  am  quite  satisfied,  in  so 
far  as  I  am  personally  concerned,  and  I  am 
exceedingly  glad  that  I  mentioned  what  oc- 
enrred  to  me  noon  the  subject. 
-  LordJuttktCUrk. — I  am  pleased  to  see  the 
introduction  of  right  understanding  and  har- 
mony, which  I  trust  will  be  iiniatetru{iled 
throughout  the  trial. 

The  following  minute  was  then  read : — 

^His  majesty's  advocate.  represenWd 
that  one  of  the  objects  which  he  had*  in 
view  in  laying  the  present  indictment  for 
a  capital  punishment  having  now  been 
accomplished  by  the  judgment  of  the 
.  Court  sustaining  the  relevancy,  he  now 
restricted,  and  hereby  restricts  the  in- 
dictment and  the  wns  of  law  to  an  ar- 
bitrary punishment.^ 

:   (Signed)         .  Alxx.  MacowoeviE. 

The  following  persons  were  then  nai^ed^as 
Jurymen: 

Jkmd  Qro^y  of  Snipe. 

Jame$  Mutter,  former,  Longstde. 

David  Thomiony  former.  Wester  Cowden. 

John  Andmonf  of  Whitburgh. 

Jamet  WiimHy  former;  Bolton. 

WiUiam  WUhe,  of  Magdalens. 

John  ThonuoOf  fanner,  laneravon. 

James  M^Kenzie,  goldsmith,  Edinburgh. 

Robert  Green,  watch-maker  there. 

Pa^k  Main,  painter  there. 

Thomat  Edmonstone,  ironmonger  there. 

Archibald  M'DawaU,  merchant  in  Leith. 

James  Ogilvie,  wine  merchant  there. 

Robert  Strachan,  merchant  there. 

Robert  BnaUon,  merchant  there. 

•  Lord  AdoooBte* — ^The  witnesses  who  are  ^e* 
signed  as  prisoners  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh, 
were  oonnned  separately,  and  I  directed  that 
when  brought  down  they  should. be  kept  in 
separate  apartments. 

Lord  Justice  Cterk.-^Tht  rest  of  th^  gentle- 
men who  had  been  summoned  as  jurymen  will 
consider  themselves  as  discharged,  and  the 
Court  has  to  express  its  regret  that  they  have 
.been  put  to  so  much  trouble,  and  probably 
expense,  in  consequence  of  their  attendance 


Biff]       57  G£ORGE  m. 

fcr  thai  trud.  Tim  vontx  be  awart  ihu  ihk 
Ad  not  origpnat*  mm  any  telt  of  «in ;  and 
tilt  dvlf  fbr  wUch  thay  wara  tummonad  baing 
•  pMblio  and  a«  imporum  oaa,  and  the  dalay 
tet  hai  takan  |daea  anavoidable,  I  tratt  that 
iIm^  wil  tka  less  ragrel  tke  ineonrawaaaa 
whidi  tiMy  hxv  aufi^rad. 

fdi,  Jeffrey. — A3  the  persons  we  may  find 
it  necessary  to  adduce  at  evidence  on  the  part 
of  the  prisoner  include  those  cited  on  the  part 
of  the  crown^  and  as  it  has  been  impossible 
for  us  to  get  access  in  order  to  cite  those  who 
are  in  custody^  the  lord  advocate  will  not  ob- 
ject that  we  should  cite  them  when  they  come 
mto  Court* 

Lprd  ilrfrwirrfe.-- Certainly  not ;  I  can  have 
DO  ofcjections. 

Mt.JMty. — ^I  observe  that  my  learned 
frtendy  Mr.  HamiltoOy  and  others  who  are 
eked  at  witnesses  for  the  pubKc  presaeutor^ 
are  in  the  Court.  I  should  object  to  their 
lamatniDg  in  Court,  The  official  gentlemen 
are,  of  course,  above  all  suspicion ;  but  I  wish 
th^  should  not  be  present  till  they  are  ex- 
ammed.  Let  them  withdraw  from  Court,  and 
aueh  of  lliem  as  are  cited  for  us  will  leare 
word  where  they  may  be  found. 

C0ttri.-^They  maygo  into  the  Robing-room. 

Mr.  Jeffrey, — ^I  observe  Mr.  Salmond  pre- 
sent, who  was  cited  some  time  ago  as  a 
witness  on  tbe  part  of  the  prisoner;  and  I 
state  generally,  that  eireumstances  may  occur 
in  the  course  of  the  trial  which  may  render  it 
iry  for  OS  lo  eaamiue  that  gentleman. 


ndri»  M^'Kimhy 


and  these  may  appear  to  the  Court  of  a  nature 
wbieh  ffligbt  render  it  impsoper  that  Mr. 
Salmond  mould  have  been  present.  Ha  is  not 
a  Crown  agent ;  he  is  in  an  olScial  siloation 
at  Glasgow.  We  could  not  pravant  Jlilr.  War- 
rendar,  perhaps,  from  being  present  throughout 
the  trial ;  but  we  have  it  in  our  ppwer  tp  say 
to  our  witness,  Mr.  Salmond,  who  belongs 
rather  to  the  other  party,  that  he  shsdl  not 
bola  intercourse  with  the  prosecutor. 

Lord  Jdvocate.-^!  beg  to  state,  that  Mr. 
Salmond  is  crown  ag^nt  in  this  prosecution. 
I  have  received  great  benefit  from  Mr.  War- 
render's  assistance  in  this,  as  I  do  in  every 
case ;  but  the  fact  is,  that  the  person  who  has 
conducted  the  present  proceedings  is' Mr. 
Salmond,  who  is,  in  law,  one  of  tbe  officers  of 
the  crown  in  the  inferior  Court.  He  has  taken 
tke  manageoMnt  of  these  casca  firom  the  be- 
ginning; and  you  might  u  w^l  ditect  any 
other  person  oondueting  thr  trial  on  the  part 
of  ^  crown  to  withdraw  as  tkat  geatlensan. 
I  have  no  objections  that  he  be  examined  1^ 
the  other  party;  but  as  he  has  been  employed 
as  sgent,.and  is  now  acting  as  agent  in  this 
trial,  I  object,  therefore,  to  bis  being  excluded 
'firom  Court. 

LoriJvMtkx  Clerk**^ln  a  case  of  fliis  parti- 
cular description,  v^here  tbe  prisoner's  counsel 


Cseo 

states,  that  certain  aridenca,  thai  nay  be  of 
advantage  to  tiM  panel,  saay  be  expected  from 
this  proeurato>4bcal  el  Glasgaw,Mr>8alaBomi, 
the  panel  has  a  sight  to  insist  he  shook!  ka 
excluded  if  he  thinks  his  presence  would  be 
disadvantageous  to  kioa.  Mr.  Waisender  is 
in  a  different  ait«alio»-**ka  could  say,  kers  I 
am  in  my  place,  «nd  you  nri^t  aa  well  remove 
any  members  of  the  Court  as  aqrseif. 

.  Lord  Bemumd. — Could  Mr.  Salmond  be  ex- 
amined now  f 

Mr.  Jeffrey, — ^Ha  is  eited  as  a  witness  for 
the  prisoner,  and  can  only  be  enamioed  when 
the  prisoner  comes  to  examine  ^vritnesses  in 
defence. 

Lord Adw>eate»^'NLt.  Warrender  l^  never 
been  recognised  by  the  Court  as  Crown  agent. 
Your  lordship's  predecessors  have  uniformly 
refused  to  acknowledge  any  such  person.  He 
is  no  public  officer.  The  procurator-fiscal  is 
a  crown  officer. 

Lord  Jtutice  Clerk, — Mr.  Warrender  is  per- 

foctly  well  known  to  be  crown  agent. 

♦ 

Lord  Gi^.— The  rule  is  general,  and  there 
can  be  no  exceptions. 

Lord  Advoctite.^l  submit  to  the  Court,  thai 
there  is,  at  this  moment,  nodding  offi»red  to  be 

S roved  by  the  prisoner's  counsel  hf  the  evi- 
enee  of  Mr.  Salmond,  to  lead  the  Court  to 
deprive  me  of  his  services.  There  is  n^^ing 
but  a  broad  averment  that  his  evidence  may 
perhaps  be  necessary.  What  they  propose  is 
oeyond  what  has  been  done  in  any  ease ;  and, 
at  all  events,  they  should  state  what  they  mean 
to  prove  by  his  evidence. 

Lord  JmHee  CMb.-^They  s«r  he  is  a  neea«- 
saiy  witness  for  the  defonce.  I  tiink  it  proper 
to  remark,  thai  Mr.  Saknood,  as  pioenraioiw 
fiscal  at  Glasgow,  would  he  considarsd  as 
Crown  agent  at  the  Cireoits  there;  but,  Mr. 
Warrender  is  Crown  agent  keie^  and  not  Mr. 
Salmond.— Call  tbe  witnesses. 

Irond  Jdvoc0te. — As  the  witnesses  hare  not 
yet  arrived  from  the  Castle,  I  suppose  there 
will  be  no  objection  to  t)ie  declarations  of  the 
panel  being  now  read. 

Csttrf.— There  is  no  objection  to  diis  beings 
done* 

Mr.  Drummottd, — Call  Mr.  Hamilton.  We 
shall  first  prore  the  declarations  oC  the  prisoner 
emitted  before  the  sheriiTof  Lanarkshire. 

Mr.  Jeffr^, — In  order  to  save  the  time  of 
the  Court,  we  admit  the  dedaratioos. 

Ccurt, — Give  in  a  aoinnte  to  that  effect. 

Lord  Bermand. — I  sbonld  wish  to  oonsidefe' 
a  little  more  tk^  okjeotion  as  lo  Mr.  Salmond 
beinff  present  in  Court.  With  consent  of  th^. 
panel  he  might  remain  in  Court.  •  It  is  ad^ 
matted,  that  Mr.  Warrender,  as  Crown  agent, 
could  not  be  inclosed.    HoWy  Mr.  SaiffloM 


Mil 


for  Admnisierbtg  wdao^  Oaths, 


A.  D.  1817. 


[soft 


acts  m  Crow*  agfint  on  tlds  o^casioii ;  and  I 
doabt  whether  he  can  be  inclosed. 

1  should  be  son^  to  do  any  thing  against 
the  panel;  but  let  his  coiinsel  state  more  ex- 
plicitly their  reasons  for  wishing  Mr.  Salmond 
to  be  exdnded.  I  suppose  the  panel  as  an 
dgent  here;  H  the  crown  oonwel  were  to  sav 
lie  ravsC  be  ineloeed  (by  which  the  panels 
defence  might  be  prerented  hom  being  made 
ont),  oould  that  be  listened  to  f 

Lord  GUUa,-^!  thought  the  tnatter  bad  been 
disjposed  of. 

Lord  Jmtm  €lerfc.«-When  a  witness  is  cited 
Ibr  botk  puraner  and  ddendcty  he  is  some- 
times allowed  to  be  examined  for  the  defender 
immediately  after  his  examination  for  the  pur- 
suer. And  the  qnestioa  here  is,  Can  Mr. 
Salmond  be  now  examined  for  the  panel  f 

Mr.  Ji^ey.-^Without  prejudicing  our  de- 
fence most  materially^  we  could  not  examine 
Mr.  Salmond  now.  The  necessity  we  may  be 
under  of  examining  him  ^  all  is  but  contin-' 
l^ent,  and  depends  on  a  certain  part  of  the 
propfy  if  broQgtkt  out  on  th^  part  of  the  Crown.' 

-  Lord  FiimSUy, — If  the  ootmsel  for  tfie  panel 
had  consented,  it  would  have  been  very  well 
to  havtf  allowed  Mr.  Salmond  to  vemain  in 
Court ;  but,  as  Mr.  Jefltoy  says,  this  might  be 
prejndiciid  to  tii0  defence,  it  cannot  Im  ad- 
nitted. 

Mr.  Jeffi'ey  gave  in  the  following  minute : — 

«  The  eotinsel  for  -the  panel  admits  thAt 
the  declaratioos  of  the  panel  libelled  on, 
weie  emitted  by  him  vohintarily  and 
fraely,  of  the  respective  dates  diey  bear, 
and  that  the  panel  wis  then*  sober  and  in 
his  eo«Md  scsQses/' 

The  following  Declaratiops  were  then  read 
by  itie  Clerk  of  Court : 

FIRST  DECLARATION 

or 

AHDRSW  M'KIKLBY. 

At  OWsgow,  the  28th  day  of  Februarjr*  1817 
years — Ip  presence  of  Robert  Hamilton, 
Esq.  Advocate,  Sheriif-cjcpute  of  Lanark- 
shire ;  and  in  the  petition  apd  complaint 
S resented  by,  and  at  the  instance  of, 
reorge  Salmond,  Writer  in  Glasgow, 
Procurator-nscal  of  the  Lower  Ward  of 
'    ^Lanarkshire  for  the  public  interest, 

Corapaaved  Andrew  M^Kinley,  present 

prisoner  in  the  tolbooth  of  Glasgow,  who 

being  jfudidally  euunined  •  and  interro^ 

•  gated,  declares,  That  he  is  a  native  ol 

Ireland ;  is  from,  the  county  of  Aimagh  ; 

"  ^mamjimv  to  this  eonntry  in  the  year 

1709;  was  bred,  aad  has  since  followed 

•floriha  trade  of  a  weaves ;  is  married ; 

lia»  seven  ohildien,  asd  his  wile  is  near 

..    •  *liet  delitfaijr  of  aaother ;    That  the  de- 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


clarant  snbeerlbed  the  Calton  refonn  peti- 
tion>  bttt  the  dechirant  cannot  say  what 
became  of  that  petHio^,  or  whether  or  not 
there  was  a  committee*  appointed  to  for- 
ward it:  That  the  dedasani  has  been  for 
the  last  foortaen  years  n  pifvate  in  the 
volunteers  and  local. lAiKlis  in  thas  place» 
and  he  was  always  very  regular  on  duty . 
Declares  that  it  nefrer  was  propoaed  to 
htm  what  should  be  done  in  case  of  par- 
liament not  grantine  Ae  prayer  of  the  re- 
form petition ;  andhe  never  was  connect* 
ed  with,  or  beard  mf:  any  association  or 
brothefffaood,  who  were  to  take  me«is  for ' 
obtaining  the  desire  of  the  petition  by 
moral  or  physical  forte ;  no?  of  oaths  of 
secrecy  being  taken  under  the  punish- 
ment of  death,  not  to  reveal  the  proceed- 
ings of  snoh  associations,  or  inform  on 
the  members  thereof,  either  individually 
or  collectively:  That  he  never  had  any 
copy  of  the  Irish  rebel  oath,  and  hodoes 
not  know  its  terms :  Denies  that  he  was 
ever  at  any  meeting  in  Niel  Munn's, 
Ingram-street,  or  in  James  Robertson's, 
in  the  Oallowgate ;  Deelases  that  he  does 
not  particularly  seeolleet  where  he  was  on 
the  night  of  Saturday  hist  was  eif^  days, 
but  he  thinks  he  was  in  Arthar  Armour's, 
taylor  in  Bridgegate-street,  and  different 
Ather  places,  looking  for  a  chat  to  one  of 
his  children,  but  he  cannot  be  certain  that 
this  was  the  case:  That  he  cannot  say 
positively  whether  he  saw  that  night  John 
Buchanan,  Andrew  Sommerville,  James 
Robertson,  Hugh  Dickson,  Teter  Gibson, 
James  Hood,  James  Finlayson,  or  Hugh 
Cochran,  who  were  taken  up  with  him  on 
Saturday  last  in  Hunter^i,  in  the  Old 
Wynd  of  Glasgow :  That  oq  the  last  Sa- 
tusday  evening,  the  declarant  celled  at. 
Honier's  house,  and  told  the  mistrsss  that 
he  snmted  a  mom,  and  he  and  John 
47ampbell  who  was  with  him^  were  shown 
into  one ;  but  as  the  deolarant's  foet  were 
wet^  she  seon  afterwards  showed  them 
into  anoUier  o«e,  whefe  there  wu  a  fire ; 
That  this  miglit  be  about  six  o'eloek,  and 
tiiey  were  soon  after  joined  by  some 
others  who  Mrs.  Hunter  showed  into  the 
room,  but  what  they  wanted  the  declarant 
cannot  say,  for  he  left  the  room  soon 
after  he  went  in,  and  went  away  in  quest 
of  the  coat  for  his  boy,  and  he  did  not  re- 
tarn  till  about  ten  minutes  before  the 
Sheriff  and  party  came  into  Huntei's,  and 
apprehended  thara  all :  That  the  declarant 
knows  of  no  other  sftotive  which  oould  in- 
duce tliese  people  to  have  nMt  at  Hitnter's, 
than  that  of  providing  ftxnds- for  enabling 
them  to  carry  on  the  case  relafelve  to  the 
poor's  rates,  or  cause  M'Innes  against  the 
barony  Kirk-session  at  Glasgow :  Denies 
that -he  was  at  Canmnnnock  on  any  occa- 

•  sion  lately,  and  especially  that  he  was 
.there  witlkH  r.  James  Finlay  son ,  jun  ior,  and 
had  a  conversation  with  David  Dryburghi 

2  0 


sea] 


57  GSORGE  III. 


BfAmdf^  M^Kmky 


1:064 


the^bkooliiMilerintbatpiace:  Thtfwhea 
he  was  appfoheoded  in  Huniir's  as  above^ 
dficiarad  tOy  he  called  himself  Andrew 
Brothentone ;  hui  this  was  done  fiem  no 
ill  inienty  and  meielv  to  prevent,  in  case 
of  his  being  detained^  the  landlord  of  his 
house,  to  whom  he  owes  the  last  three 
half  years'  rent,  attaofaing  his  furniture, 
and  exposing  his  fninil^t ; '  but  though  he 
heard  Peter  Gibson,  another  who  was 
thto  taken  up,  call  hilnself  John  M'Kinley, 
yet  he  is  not  acouainled  with  his  motives 
for  doing  so :  That  tfae'dedarant  nevef 
was  at  Cambuslang,  end  he  does  not 
know  rightly  where  that  plaee  is.  In  wit- 
ness whereof,  Iec* 
(Signed)  Avoebw  llf 

R.  Hamiltom.  « 

iMavxiisw  Bunys,  witness.        « 

Jajus  TaeiisoK^  witness* 

i»E€OND  D£CLAAATION 

OF 

ATfDREW  M'KINLEY. 

At  Gloigauf,  the  Ath  JIfordk,  1817, 
Compeared  Andrew  M'Rinley,  present 
prisoner  in  the  Tcdbooth  of  Glasgow,  who, 
being  enained  and  interrogated,  and  his 
dtekuration  of  the  28th  ult  being  read 
over  to'him.  Declares  and  admits,  that 
he  was  preseot  at  the  several  meet- 
ings held  in  Niel  Mann's,  in  the  beginning 
of  the  year ;  in  Fyfe's^  Wilson^treet,  on 
two  occasions,  some  time  lafterwards,  and 
in  Robertson's,  Gallowgate^treet,  on  Sa- 
twday  night,  Uie  ISth  ult.  That  he  was 
also  present  at  a  meeting  which  took  place 
in  one  JLeggat*s,  corner  of  Centrenitreel, 
Tradeston,  on  the  first  day  of  the  year. 
That  die  objects  of  these  several  meetings 
he  cannot  rightly  describe,  a  desultory 
cottvenation  having  generally  taken  place, 
partly  about  the  refonn  petition,  and 
partly  abont  the  poor's  rates.  That  his 
reason  for  denying,  on  his  former  exami- 
nation, that  he  attended  these  meetinn 
was,  that  he  was  averse  to  bring  the 
keepers  of  these  houses  into  trouble,  or 
expese  diem  so  as  tbey.might  be  deprived 
f|f  their  licence.  That  he  knows  two  or 
three  of  the  people  whose  names- are  sub- 
scribed to  the  |Miper  which  is  marked  as 
relative  hereto,  vis«  James  Turner,  to- 
bacconist,. Aleicander  Kennedy,  diange- 
keeper,  Bogie,  John  Ogilvie,  Robert  Kerr, 
manafiMtnier,  and  Alexander  Ridimond : 
Ibat  he  knows  these  people,  some  of 
them  merely  as  members  of  the  reform 
committee :  That  he  also  knows  Lang  Uie 
printer,  having  called  on  him  about  hand- 
biUs  connect^  vrithahe  Calton  reform 
peUtion;  and  .with  this  addition,  he  ad- 
heres to  his  fonner  deelaratiook 
(Signed)  Asdeew  M^Rimlet. 

-<  Oav.  HaiiiLTov. 

Joanra  Rsin,  witness. 

John  Leslie,  witaess, 


(THIRD  DECLARATION 

OF 

ANBRBW  M«RI1IL£Y. 

At  Gkujgaw,  the  5th  Marck^i^\7, 

Compeafed  Andrew  M^Kinleyr  present 
prisoner  in  the  Tolboolh  at.Olae9Q>Wf  who, 
being  examin(Mi  and  inteivogatnd,  and  his 
deUntions  emitted  on  .the  28Ui  of  Feb. 
last,  and  yesterday,  being  read  over  to 
him,  he  adheres  thereto,  with  this  varia- 
tion, that  he  was  at  Carmunnock  with 
James  fidiayson,  abont  atetnight  ago, 
and  was  with  Daxrid  Dryburgh  in  his  own 
house  there :  Declares,'  ^hat  he  knew  no- 
thing of  Dryburgh  before,  and  tliat  Fin- 
layson  took  him  there,  having  raised  him 
out  of  his  bed,  in  Calton,  that  morning  on 
purpose  t  Declares,  that  the  first  time  he 
saw   Finlavson,  was  either  in'  Roberta 
sonS,  or  the  Gallowgate :  Hiat  his  first 
gurticidar  acquaintance  of  him,  was  at 
Robertson's,  where  they  met  about  the 
barony  process*;   and  rinlayson  saiif  at 
that  meeting,  that  he  thought  that  a  jost 
canse,  and  wished  vrell  to  it;  and  the  de- 
clarant does  not  know  what  else  could 
have  brought  Finlayson  to  that-  meeting ; 
and  the  purpose  of  the  meeting  vfas  to 
consider  now  they  might  raise  funds  lo 
carry  on  the  process:   Declares, .that  he 
did  not  use  the  name  of  James  JUack, 
nor  did   any  one   else,   to   his  know- 
ledge, to  obtain  admission  to  that  meet- 
ing :   Declares  that  there  was  no  discus- 
sion at  that  meetingr  or  at  Hunter's, 
about  annual  parliamemts  and  universal 
sufirage.    Interrogated,  Dedaies^  that  he 
did  not  know  for  what  purpose  Finlayson 
wished,  to  go  out  to  Carmimnock,  nor  why 
he  wished  the  deaarant  to  go  with  hijn : 
Declares,  that  be  thought  his  health  would 
be  beoer  of  the  air,  and  that  he  had  some 
oonversation  with  Dryborgb  about  woHl, 
which  was  also  an  object  he  had  for  going 
there :  Declares,  that  he.  had  no  conversa- 
tion with  Dryburgh  about  initiating  peo- 
ple into  any  secret  association,  nor  had 
Finlayson  to  his  knowledge:  Dedarasy 
that  besides  the  meetings  iliove-mention- 
ed  at  Hunter's  and  Robertson's,  he  was 
present  at  another  in  Robertson's,  and 
one  in  Munn's,  as  fbrmeriy  mentioned  : 
Declares,,  that  the  object  of  all  those 
meetings  was  the  same ;   and  it  was  the 
declarant's  opinion  that  trade  would  h&ve 
been  better,  if  they  conld  have  sncoeeded 
in  thai  process,:. as  the  poor's-rates  would 
make  tne  aentlemen:  exert  themselves  : 
Declares,  Siat  any- person  might  come 
into  those  meetiims  who  had  an  interest 
in  that  nrocess :  ^That  the  meetings  were 
net  publicly  called,  as  they  could  not  get 
the  use  t>f  the  bell,  bat  every  one  warned 
another :  That  the  greatest  nnmher  pre- 
sent never  exceeded  twen^,  and  that  he 


fi65l 


Jkxr  AdmhrUkrh^  wAmfitl  (Mhi. 


A.T>.  1817. 


lias  Been  the  b^  cklllhe  people  for  tUch 
a  purpose,  and  not  a  dozen  attend :  That 
he  can  give  no  reason  why  so  much 
greater  a  nnmber 'were  collected  the  ^blj 
3iey  vent  to  Dr.  Boms  frith  a  petition. 
Interrogated  if  he  fferoembers,  if  M*Lach- 
lane,  Campbell,  Dickson,  Hood,  Bu- 
chanan, James  Robertson,  and  Peter 
Otbson,  and  SommerriHe,  were  present 
at  some  of  those  meetings.  Declarer,  that 
he  does;  and  declares  posHiTely,  that 
there  was  no  other  bnshaess-at  any  of 
those  meetings,  except  what  is  abdre- 
mentioTied,  and  nothing  secret  of  any  de- 
«cription.  In  witness  whereof;  fcc. 
(Signed)  Andexw  WKivLvr, 

Hugh  Kxrh, 

FOURTH   DECLARATION 

OF 

ANDREW  M'KINLEY. 

<  JfGto^^w,  tlMMahA,t817, 
In  presence  of  'Robert  Hamilton,  Esq., 
Sheriff-depute  of  Lanarkshire,  compeared 
Andrew  M'Rinley,  present  prisoner  in 
the  tolbooth  of  Glasgow,  whose  dedarar 
tions  emitted  on  the  28tfa  ult.,  4th -and 
5th  current,  being  read  over  to  litm,  he 
adheres  thereto,  and  being  further  in* 
4errogated,  declares,  that  he  is  acquainted 
^rith  a  Mr.  Kerr,  a  manufacturer,  whose 
place  of  business  used  to  be  in  GibsonV 
aCreet,  in  Gallowgate :  That  Robert  Paul 
and  John  M^Lacblan,  sometime  ago,  told 
the  declarant  one  day,  they  were  looking 
for  Mr,  Kerr  to  ask  him  for  money  to  as- 
sist in  carrying  on  the  barony  session 
plea,  but  whether  they  found  him,  or  got 
money  ffbm  htm,  the  declarant  cannot 
tell:  That  in  Leggat's,  on  1st  January 
last,  there  were  present  the  declarant, 
fiagh  Dickson,  Peter  OihsoD,  James 
M'Ewen,  John  M'LachUm,  William  Ed- 
•gar,  and  a  man  from  Long  Goran,  whose 
name  he  does  not  recollect :  That  a  paper 
which  the  declarant  gave  to  Edgar  was 
read  over  to  the  meeting,  but  disapproved 
of:  Thai  the  tenor  of  what  the  declarant 
ao  gave  Edgar  was  in  substance,  that  the 
persons  subscribing  should  bind  them- 
selves to  keep  it  a  secret  among  them- 
selves. Whereupon  the  Sheriff-ezaminator 
•warned  the  decuurant,  as  his  duty,  he  said^ 
directed  him,  that  the  declanfot  was  not 
«rged  to  disclose  any  circumstances  which 
B%bt  alfect  him  in  his  d^ence,  to  the 
^tff  serious  cnmiasd  charge  vrhi^li  was 
brought  against  him ;  and  he,  therefore, 
left  it  entirely  to -his  own  diseretion  to 
meak  forther  out  or  not  as  he  thought  fit. 
Whereupon  the  declarant  said,  that  he 
was  Mcb  alfedied  by  the  distress  that  his 
fiiiilily  was  in,  and  he  hoped  that  mercy 
would  be  shown  him  and  them,  and  that 
he  would  then  state  every  particular  he 
WM  acquaiated  w>ih«    0ql  the  sheriff 


C5d6 

freely  and  explicitly  sfait^  to  him,  that  he 
could  give  him  no  assurance  of  any  kind 
whatever,  and  that  the  declarant  must 
just,  therefore,  conduct  himself  ks  he  had 
already  pointed  out.  The  declanbit  then 
declared,  that  he  was  afraid  he  had  been 
led  into  measures  which  were  highly  wrong 
and  illegal,  and  ihki  he  never  would  have 
thought  of  any  thing  of  the  kind,'had  they 
net  been  broached  to  him  by  John 
M'Lachlan :  That  John  Camnbell,^  be 
thinks,  informed  him,  that  Mr.^err^bove 
deohtred  to  knew  of  the  secret  association 
that  was  set  on  foot:  That  he  was  to 
assist  at,  and  do  what  he  could  in  gMng  or 
getting  money  :•  That  he  heard  otte  John« 
stone,  a  weaver  in  Bridgeton,ina  meeting 
which  took  place  in'Fffo's,  WilsonHrtieet, 
say>  that  therevrat a*  ohib of  honour,  of 
gentlemen,  or  something  of  that  kind, 
whidi  was  existing'in  Glasgow,  who  were 
friendly  to'  their  ^measures,  and  that  this 
body  was  numerous,  and  had  existed  for 
nine  months ;  bu  tupon  recollection,  de- 
clares, that  he  cannot  say  whether  the  word 
club,  was  mentioned  or  not  That  some 
names  of  such  persons  nny  have  been 
mentianed^  but  he  does  not  now  reoollect 
any  of  them*:  That  at  a  aieetifig  at  Niel 
Munn's  upon  the  4th  of  January^ 
JSI'Dowal  Peat  and  James  M^Bw«n  pro^ 
posed  and  said,  that  they  would  so  out 
next  day,  being  Sunday,  to  David  Dry- 
burgh,  schoolmaster  at  Caimunnock,  and 
initiate  him  into  the  matter,  and  M'Ewen 
said  he  was  sure  he  was  a  Oneod,  and  >that 
he  had  been  long  aoquainlad  with  him. 
And  at  the  next  meeting  which  was  held 
at  itobeitsen's  -upon  the  Itth,  James 
M'Ewen  and  Peat  reported  to  the  meeting 
that  they  had  initiated  Dryburght  De- 
dams,  that  upon  a  Wednesday,  about  four 
or  five  weeks  ago,  as  he  thinks  upon  the 
ISth  of  February,  James  fiidaysoa  and  lie 
went  up  to  Caimumuwk  before  broak^t 
to  David  Dryburgh's.  That  this  was  the 
first  time  he  had  seen  Dryburgh,  aiid  they 
found  him  in  bed,  but  he  got  \k]f  and  got 
breakfost  for  them,  and  Uie  said  David 
Diybuirgh  he  yesterday  saw  and  recog- 
nised in  this  room.  That  he  immediately 
found  Dryburgh  to  be  an  initiated  man, 
and  Dryburgh  shewed  him  the  copy  of  the 
^ath  of  secrecy,  or  obligation  of  the 
initiated,  which  had  been  left  with  him  by 
M'Ewen  and  Peat,  with  their  names  sub- 
scribed, and  the  places  where  Drvburgh 
would  find  them.  That  the  object  of 
Finlayson  and  him  in  going  to  Dryburgh, 
was  to  learn  what  progress  he  had  made 
in  the  matter  of  initiating,  and  Drybtirgh 
told  him  that  he  had  given  the  oath  of 
secrecy  to  two ;  and  he  wlded,  that  all  the 
Carmunnock  people  vrere  friendly,  and 
that  it  was  to  no  purpose  to  petition  par- 
.  liament.  That  when  Frnlayson  and  h% 
went  to  Carmunnock,  they  fir»i  asked"  Dry. 


507]        57  GEORGE  ill. 


Tml^fAndrmM'Kk 


burgh  if  he  had  got  ft  letlor  frofti  lohn 
Buchanan^  the  pefsoB  now  a  prisoner  in 
Uie  Tolboolh  of  GJasgow^  and  Diyburgh 
hafing  said  that  he  had  got  sodi  a  letter, 
they  theieupoii  begaa  to  eommiuiicate 
tipoB  the  bttsfaMSB  they  had  eome  upon. 
Toat  he  has  spoken  to  Robert  Kerr  above 
declared  to  in  Younf*8  beamitig-shop, 
where  he  saw  him  upon  some  business 
abou^  webs,  and  he  would  know  him  if  he 
saw  him  agaiA :  Dedaves,  that  be  knows 
James  M^Tev^  who  has  his  school-room 
in  New'-streety  Caltoa.  That  the  said 
James  M^Tear,  he  knews,  gave  the  use  of 
his  school«ffoom  for  the  purpose  of  potting 
together  the  petition  for  reform  from  the 
CaitQDy  prevKMis  to  its  being  sent  away, 
and  he  presumes  that  M'Tear  was  afdend 
to  that  measure^  by  his  having  so  given 
the  use  of  bis  room.  •  That  it  was  talked 
of,  among  them»  that  they  would  certainly 
get  money  from  some  of  these  honourable 
men,  as  they  were  called,  in  and  about 
Glasgow,  who  were  said  to  be  so  friendly 
to  them;  but  he  cannot  say  that  any 
promise  of  money  was  actually  made,  nor 
can  he  fondescend  upon  the  names  of 
any  of  these.  That  at  the  last  meeting  at 
Robertson's  Campbell,  who  used  to  be 
saying  that  he  would  get  money,  stated, 
tiiat  he  had  had  a  communication  with 
some  of  the  honourable  persons  above- 
mentioDedi  but  that  none  of  them  would 
come  fiNrward  with  their  assistanoe  but 
one,  and  though  ha  did  not  mention  his 
i«une,  the  declarant  cot^tured  that  it  was 
Mr.  Kerr  that  he  alhided  to.  That  John- 
eton  in  Bridgeton,  above  dedaied  to,  he 
believes  is  brother  to  the  Johnston  who 
was  tried  and  imprisoned  for  the  weavers' 
combination.    In  witness.  Ice. 

(Signed)       Axnasw  M^Kmuir. 
R.  Hamiltov. 

JeeuPB  Rbib,  witaem. 

Mavtsew  Bimns,  witness. 

FIFTH   DECLARATION 

or 

ANDREW  MCKINLEY. 

.  At  EditUfurghitSth  March,  1817. 
In  presence  of  the  sheriff-substitute  of 
Edinburghshire,  compeared  Andrew 
M'Kinley,  present  prisoner  in  the  Castle 
of  Edinburgh*  and  the  declaxalion  emitted 
by  him  beiore  the  sberiff^epute  of  La- 
narkshire, at  Glasgow,  on  the  11th  day  of 
March  current,  being  read  over  to  him, 
he  declares  that  said  declaration  contains 
the  truth,  with  this  exception,  that  he  is 
certain  of  some  things  which  in  that  de- 
claration he  only  said  he  supposed.  De- 
clares, that  he  knows  that  Mr.  Kerr 
promised  to  get  money,  or  to  use  his  en- 
deavours to  get  money,  in  the  declarant's 
presence,  on  the  occaiiion  meniioned  in 
>aid  declaratioiL    That  Campbelt  said  it 


would  take  eight  or  ten  pounds,  and  ICerr 
said  he  would  endeavour  to  get  that  sum. 
Declares,  that-after  going  to  Hunter's  on 
the  night  they  were  appr tended,  the  de« 
daranty  Finlayaon,  and  Campbell,  went^ 
out  of  the  maettng  to  Mr.  Jkerr's  ware- 
house. That  the  declarant  had  never 
been  there  before,  and  he  and  Finlayson 
waited  a  considerable  time  at  the  bottom 
of  the  stair,  while  Campbell  went  up  and 
talked  to  him.  That  Campbell  then  came 
down  for  them,  and  th^  all  weiU  up  to- 
gether, and  then  the  conversation  alK>ve- 
mentioned  passed  about  the  eight  o»  ten 
pounds.  iW  Ken  spohe  about  a  ]»aper 
which  he  declined  shewing  at  that  time ; 
but  said,  that  he  would  allow  Campbell 
to  come  in  upon  the  Tuesday  following, 
and  take  a  copy  of  it.  That  the  declarant 
understood  from  what  pa^s^y  that  the 
paper  was  some  sort  ot  constitution,  or 
rules  for  the  formation  of  a  dub  or  sodety . 
Dedaresy  that  this  paper  was  to  be  for  the 
use  of  the  same  people  who  met  at  Hunter's 
with  the  dedaxant;  and  Mr.  Kerr  said 
that  he  had  this  constitation  at  the  time 
they  were  in  his  warehouse.  Dedares, 
that  John  Campbell  told  the  declarant, 
and  Hugh  Dickson  also  told^him,  th^t 
Mr.  Kerr  was  in  the  knowledge  of  their 
meetings.  That  Campbell  asked  him  if 
he  would  come  that  night,  which  he 
declined  upon  that  occasion,  saying^  he 
would  give  them  all  the  instmotions  in  his 
power,  but,  being  a  maa  in  busiaess,  it 
might  hurt  him  if  he  attended  mectiDgs. 
Dedaresi  that  Mr.  kerr  eertainlv  must 
have  known  the  cath  that  was  taken  by 
the  people  that  attended  at  Hunter's. 
Declares,  that  Campbell  wad  Diduon 
told  the  declarant  that  Kerr  had  been 
iuiiiaied,  and  certainly  they  wopld  not 
have  gone  to  him  for  moosy  if  he  kid  not 
Dedares^  that  a  fortnii^t  before  tiia,  at 
one  of  the  meetings  at  Robertaon'9»  urtmv 
there  was  a  conveiaation  about  aUownooea 
to  delegates  for  going  toCanaaniiocfc  and 
Paisley,  three  shillings  mid  iwopeiiet  was 
allowed  to  M'Dowd  Peat,  and  M<£wen, 
for  going  to  Carmunnook  to  initiate  Dry- 
burgh»  but  there  was  a  difference  of  oninion 
about  an^  allowance  for  Campbett  and 
John  Buchanan  for  going  lo  Paisl^,  and 
Campbell  declined  taking  any  Hon^  or 
going  to  Mr.  M' Arthur  to  obtHQ  five 
pounds,  which  CampbeU  said  he  was  to 
give  him  a  bill  for  the  loan  o^  as  his  going 
there  might  be  changeable  to  the  meeting. 
Deolares»  that  he  believes  ^e  m&oay 
wotthi  have  been  got  fiNm  Mr.  Kaif  on 
the  Satorday  foUpwing  their  apyrahanaiop. 
Interrogated!  dechues,  that  he  never  hieard 
any  thing  about  arms  Ifom  imy  ponoa 
whatever,  except  James  Robertson,  sairiog* 
that  he  had  heard  that  there  ware  eome 
arms  somewhere,  which  sMue  pemons  had 
been  keeping  mm  tht  ymx  1793,  but 


for  Admkild€rmg.mMta9jfktOUhs. 


oOOS 

B«lfeTlafMi  wr«r  ■nmiiwiBlHtea^nw  of 
mny  penoa  or  pkie»|  9mA  tkt  dedmnt 
floei  Bo4  b«ii8V«  th«t  1m  kooirft  of  any- 
partioikur  plao8|  uid  coosidefod  whai  b» 
aM^tobeanemiuBMNtf*  Deototesylbal 
1m  does  not  knoiw  the  aamM  of  any  of  tb^ 
pemooa  refeiMd  to  in  the  Mh  page  of  #h 
foaer  deolamtioa  above-BAentioaad^  and 
doet  not  know  who  can  tell  Ihe  aa«ei^ 
udIbm  it  bo  Aleaandor  Riohnrnd.  D»* 
Clares,  tint  Campbell  told  the  dodbiaai 
that  Campbell  and  Buchanan  won  to 
attend  the  meetingsy  but  that  tbegr  father 
wisbod  that  Buchanan  shonki  not  be  pio* 
sent,  aa  they  did  not  consider  bini  slrndy 
ononili.  Declares^  that  he  never  saw 
Edgar,  eaeept  at  the  meetiag  at  Leggat^ 
Ihai  be  knew  of,  and  deelaies  that  IMgar 
was  aot  present  at  .tuijr  of  tbe  other 
meetings  when  the  declarant  was  present) 
«nd  all  this  he  dedaras  to  be  tsatb.  In 
witness,  fcc 

(Signed)       AiinaBw  M^Kwlbv. 
Jambs  WiLeon. 
Ab€«b.  Scott. 

"MiT.'Dnanmond. — Maccr,  call  John  Cfimp- 
bell. 


i&;D.  itm 


[tmt 


Mr.  «KB^iey.-^Tbi8  is  one  of  tbe  wtin 
who  is  desefibed  in  the  indictiMnt  by  no 
other  designation  than  as  present  prtsoner  in 
the  ea^e  of  Edinburgh;  and  we  think  it 
nfjtii  to  state  to  the  oourt,  that  thia  is  not  a 
desigaation  sufficient  for  the  information  of 
tbe  priBoner,  and  |hat  circumstances  have 
concnned  with  the  &ct  of  his  being  a  pri« 
scmer  tbere,  wfaM  ealitte  ns  to  object  to  his 
being  received  as  a  witness  at  all.  Tbe  tet 
isy  and  we ean  estabiisb  it  by  evideneey  Ibal' 
Injiiinft  seeainad  only  das  intimatiQii  el  the 
condition  or  quality  of  tbe  peieon  wtmtA  upon  i 
ae  a  witoesa,  we  took  sMpe  te  Mbrm  oar- 
eelree  of  Ana  iadrridnai  penon^  vad  to' 
nabe  tbe  ether  iieeeeaaiy  sn^oMes,  wiA  a 
vmiw  to  wbscb,  tbe  law  Ws  ptroteded  that  a 
Ust  aball  1»  fhren  to  the  ptiioner  of  tbe  wit- 
MC^wi  to  be  addneed  against  him  at  Us  tnal ;  < 
bntweweroobAnictad  eniwely  in  tbe  pnose- 
cntien  of  Aeee  ini|uiiMB,  and  wete  paeveated 
fiomTMieiasng  anjsortof  benefit  or  advin-i 
uge  from  tlust  l»t  of  witnesses  as  to  tbis 
pBvsoB*  We  are  retdy  to  instnict,  that  this 
person  was  net  ia  that  enstody  in  which  per-  < 
sons  addneed  as  witnesses  in  thla  court,  and 
designed  as  pwisougis,  e»e  usuaHy  fsund.  We 
coold-on^  get  sooese  to  this  witness  by  trpply* 
iog  to nM&tary  authority;  and,  in  nbsanoe  of 
tbeyreenwxrf  tbe  castle,  "we  were  veferrad  to 
tbe  K»it4naj<*<;  «ad  on  appliOMion  to  hbn,  we 
were  ottmis  Vot  pereeoptorily  told,  that  be 
taadteeecved  otdets  to  aAnittKA>ody  to  the 
priaenttr  tuntess  by  pefeaisfion  of  the  <!rown 
agent*  Aocordingly,  ihe  dgent  for  tbe  prt- 
aooet^  nfter  rsceiting  this  answer,  -made  a 
legttlar  aoplieation  to  tbe  crown  ag^at,  and 
also>  to  ike  pii|i>lic  pnostciitor,  bis  mi^esty's 


adboaa^;  Silting  ftiBtktKe  ibela  tiMck  I  ba'?e 
already  slatedy  tbaitbis  pesson  waa  among  the 
list  of  witnesass  designed  as  priaawem  in  tfie 
caaHe  of  £dinbnigb|  tbat  application  had 
been  mfede  isr  ntceee  to  the  witnesses  so 
deagned^  in  order  to  learn  who  tbey  were, 
and  lo  pttt  sncb-qnestiQnn  as  law  allowa  to  be 

Ct  to  wiiaeseos,  and '  tbat  appiieation  had 
en  made  to  tbe  iert  nsiyor^  who  retnoMd 
the  answer  winch  I  have  joat  mentioned.  To 
thia  appbcalion  an  answer  was  returned, 
stating^  that,  in  tbe  CMrcumsttneas  of  the  case^ 
the  lend  advooale  relaaed  to  nire  access  to*  the 
prisoneia  in  the  flaolie»  and  declined  giriag 
amhoBtjr  to  tbe  agedt  for  tbe  pnaoncr  at  tbe 
bar,  seeing  the  witnesses  aaentloned  in  tb«  list 
seiTOd  upon  the  penel* 

TUs  is  tbe  shape  of  the  ease.    Weare-now 
brangbl  to  your  har  b^  the  public  prsseontor, 
'9^   prodaees  against  lu  a  witness,  as  to 
wbesr  we  have  not  tbe  benefits  intended  na  by^ 
tbe  iawv  wfaieb  requires  a  list  of  witnesseo  to 
be  serred  f  and  ■although  the  fact  is,  tbat  this . 
penon'a  nnme  dons  sttnd  in  thv  ^t  served 
upon  ns»  yet,  to- all  iatents  and>  parposes^  the 
case  is  the  sasaa  as  if  an  indiridttal^  of  whose  • 
ntme  we  had  ns^er  beardi  were  to  be  ok-  • 
aauoed  against  ue; 

In  diis  court,  whenr  sncb  eubetaotial  and 
important  iiitet»sls  axe  cosMemed,  if  ••  the 
serriag  of  a  list  is  accompanied  with  wch 
acts  as  prevent  us  from  getting  any  benefit 
from  it.  It  is  the  same  thsag  as  if  tbe  list  had 
not  been  served  at  all ;  aad  as  itis  not  a  neie 
matter  of  fi»rm  that  a  list  should  be  served 
upon  a  prisoner,  but  is  intended  to  enable 
him  to  prepare  for  his  defence^  so,  whea  the  * 
public  proaeentor  holds  lyot  a  list,  and  (hen 
interrupts  all  .the  advanta^tf  that  coohi  be 
derived  from  il,  tiiat  onst  be  a  bar  to  tbe 
eaaaainadon  of  tbe  witneeees. 

What  ie  die  purpose  wUeb  the  law  ten* 
tompUtsa  ia  providing  that  a  pwaonts;  ehafged 
tridi  acrime^  shall  have  a  list  aafoed  vpenmm 
of  tbe  vritnesses  who  are  te  be  addweed 
agmnst  bim  at  bis  trial  ?  fflisl,  tbmbe  should 
satisfy  himself  who  the  witnesses  are.  Hmtc 
may  h9  filky  peesous  of  Uife  saaae  name ;  and 
it  is  n  Andt  in  tbe  list  itseti;  if  it  do  net 
contain  such  a  desciiptjron  of  the  wtlnessas  as 
to  1st  «s  discover  wtw  tbe  indiwdoal  is.  1^ 
in  point  of  fact,  the  description  has  been  so 
dencient  as  not  to  enable  tbe  prisoner 
to  discover  who  tbe  witnesfos  are,  it  is  n 
suiBoient  objeoden  to  their  being  euanined  ns 
witnesses.  Now,  this  witutis  was  sbat  up  in 
tlie  casile  of  Bdinbuigb,  and  vpon  making 
apf licatien  to  the  eivil  and  nwltaify  poweie  « 
we  were  dented  access  to  bim.  Yon  have 
found  that  a  dMcription  of  m  Meoo  as  resi** 
ding  in  a  certain  itieet  in  Glasgow  is  not 
enoegh ;  or  of  a  person  as  following  a  par- 
ticntor  profession  in  Hhe  town;  and  is  it 
sufficient  then  to  say  of  a  witness,  tbat  bo '  is  • 
a  prftponer  in  tbe  castle  of  Edinburgh  ?  It  is 
not  a  snilcient  speeificsUon^t  hi  only  tbe 
beginning  of  pne,    Wbat  fuvpest  did  it  aerw 


571]         ^OBOiEaEIlL 

t0  tdl  «s  M  was  &B  the  cufl*  of  Sdiabiufhy 
if  hk  was  not  to  be  eshifaited  to  Hm  priaonerl 
The  pronaitor  prevenlad  us  fifom  iaeotifyiog 
tlie  witness.  How  can  we  know  who  the  wit- 
ness is  ftom  eny  thing  yet  told  vs  ?  He  is  a 
man  shut  up  ill  asealed  Msket  to  whom  we  etn 
bant  no  aocessl  He  iestillaneggintheshell| 
and  is  not  to  eome  out  until  the  proper  proeess 
of  incubation  be  gone  thioogh  b^  his  maiesty's 
advocate.  The  pubKe  prosecutor  has  been 
hatehiog  this  eridence  in  the  castle  of  £din» 
bur^^  and  it  is  not  yet  disclosed^  If  we  go  to 
the  castle,  and  approach  the  sentinels-  to  ask 
admission  to  the  witnesses,  they  ask,  who 
|mes  there,  and  preaent  their  muskets  to  us. 
we  then  go  lo  the  more  civil  fbrt-maior,  who 
tdls  us  to  go  to  the  crown  agent.  He  felbfs 
us  to  tte  lord  advocate.  His  lordship  declines 
civing  US  access.  Have  I  thus  any  benefit 
nam  the  intimatien  of  the  witnesses  name  in 
m  paper  presented  afew  days  before  the  trial? 
There  are  now  five  men,  women,  or  children, 
in  the  castle  of  Edinburgh  who  are  to  be 
produced  as  witnesses  against  the  panel,  and 
whom  we  shall  see  for  the  first  time  when 
they  are  produoed  in  the  witness's  bos.  For 
any  substantial  ^purpose  whatever,  do  I 
feoeive  any  one  part  of  the  benefits  intended 
by  law,  by  the  serving  of  a  list  of  witnesses  ? 
1 4o  not  know  whether,  in  point  of  fatst,  such 
n  person  as  the  witness  proposed  to  be 
adduced,  has  been  in  the  casUe  or  not;  and  I 
have  had  no  opportunity  of  inquiring  what 
sort  of  a  person  this  witness  may  be. 

I  oifer  to  establish  by  evidence  what  I  have 
atatnd,  that,  although  we  took  ali  the  regular 
means  to  get  access  to  the  witness  by  repeated, 
respeetfiil,  and  earnest  applications,  they  were 
all  resisted  by  the  anthority  of  the  public 
ptoeecutor,  who  served  the  prisoner  with  the 
list  of  witnesses.  This  is  apenKHul  nception 
to  the  public  prosecutor,  independent  of  the 
fact  that  we  have  been  prevented  from  iden- 
tifying this  person.  If  we  had  been  prevented 
by  others  from  getting  access  to  the  vritness, 
the  proeeootor  might  have  said,  that  the  law 
wontd  have  aflbrded  redress ;  that  we  ought 
to  have  had  recourse  te  him;  and  that  he  was 
not  to  blame.  But  here  it  was  the  prosecutor 
himself  who  prevented  -us,  the  same  person 
who  presents  a  list  containing  the  name  of  the 
witness,  and  at  the  same  time  tells  me,  he  will 
not  give  me  aocess  to  him. 

Can,  then,  the  public  prosecutor  act  thus  ? 
Can  he  prevent  me  from  identifying  the  wit- 
nesses P  Can  the  person  throurii  whose  direct 
atf 1 1  am  deprived  of  the  benefits  intended  by 
law  from  the  serving  of  a  list  of  witnesses— can 
the  poblic  prosecutor,  who,  while  he  mocks 
me  with  the  ostentation  of  the  witness's  name, 
prevents  me  from  inquiring  who  he  is,  and 
making  other  inquiries  material  for  my 
defence— can  he  be  allowed,  after  such  con- 
duct, to  examine  the  witness  f 

Without  inquiring  into  the  purpose  of  all 
this,  I  am  entitled  to  say  in  law,  that  the 
witness  ha*  not  been  sufficiently  tdentified. 


l^M^AninrnM^Kbte^ 


cwa 


nither  by  deseripliett  or  othemise.  But  the 
cesodoes  not  rest  merely  in  that  Even  aftsr 
YOU  hare  identified  the  witness,  and  come  to 
know,  out  of  the  hre  thousand  John  Camp- 
bells inhabiting  this  Celtic  country,  who  the 
witness  is,  and  what  kind  of  chanicter  he 
bears,  the  law  still  allows  other  privileges  to 
the  panel.  It  is  an  unqoestionaDle  prmlege 
of  a  pfisooer,  by  himself,  his  counsel,  or 
agent,  to  converse  vrith  vritnesses,  and  learn 
mm  them  what  they  have  ^get-to  say.  They 
cannot  be  compelled  to  answer;  but,  from 
intercourse  with  them,  the  prisoner  mieht 
have  had  an  opportunity  of  explaining  what 
might  otherwise  appear  to  his  disadvantage, 
or  might  get  evidence  to  meet  ialse  state- 
ments. But  the  public  proeeeotor  has,  in 
this  instance,  denied  him  access,  even  under 
any  precautions  which  might  have  been 
thought  proper. 

It  is  true,  that  under  the  interposition  of 
this  Court  parties  may^  have  aocess  to  pri- 
soneite  who  are  to  be  adduced  as  witnesses 
against  them;  but  in  this  case,  where  there 
was  a  peremptonr  denial  of  aocess  by  the 
prosecttlor  himself,  who  had  sequestrated  ike 
witness  in  a  garrison,  I  submit  that  I  had  no 
occasion  to  apply  to  the  Court,  because  I  have 
been  obstructed  in  the  exercise  of  the  privi- 
leges which  the  law  allows  me,  by  tbe  lord 
advocate  himself,  who  served  upon  me  the  list 
of  witnesses. 

It  is  not  enongh  to  tell  me,  that  I  might  have 
got  the  better  of  his  repugnancy  by  other 
means;  it  is  sufficient  that  be  opposed  my* 
accem,  and  that  I  have  been  prevented  by  him 
from  identifying  tbe  witness,  and  firom  learning 
what  law  presumes  would  havis  been  bene- 
ficial for  my'  defonce,  by  hearing  Ae  state- 
ments of  the  witness,  preparing  materials  to 
obviate  what  I  might  thank  vrrong,  and  redar- 
guing the  statements  by  other  evUience. 
^  I  am  readf  to  establish  by  evidence  what  I 
hare  stated  vrith  regard  to  this  and  the  other 
vritnesses,  who  are  designed  as  prisoners  in 
the  castle  of  Edinbuigh.  •  My  statement  yon 
will  take  for  granted  in -the  argument,  no 
description  of  the  vritness  is  incomplete,  and  I 
was  prevented  from  access  to  him.  The  pro* 
secutor  has  here,  in. reality,  fonnded  upon 
evidence  vrfaich  was  not  to  be  heard  oi  or 
disclosed,  till  it  appeared  at  the  trial,  and  I 
have  thus  been  prevented  from  ascertaining 
the  facts  that  would  have  guided  me  in 
bringioff  counter-statements  in  defence. 

Mr.  Vnmnnond, — ^You  have  heard  an  ingo- 
nious  statement  on  the  part  of  the  panel;  but 
it  cannot  give  your  lordships  great  trouble  in 
diaposing  of  it.  Two  things  are  alleged -quite 
distinct  uom  each  other.  One  of  them  ceiw 
tainly  is  an  objection  to  the  admissibility  of 
the  witness ;  but,  as  it  is  obvious  that,  standing 

S  itself,  it  cannot  be  listened  to  for  a  moment, 
r.  JeSftej  has  mixed  it  up  vrith  what  is  not 
an  objection  to  the  witness  at  all,  but  a  com- 
plaint as  to  the  impossibility  of  preparing  tbo 
defence,  which  is  quite  out  of  place  nere. 


/(7S] 


f<^  AdmhdihntigyiJmifidOtdkt. 


A.  D;  1817. 


L574 


Ai  to  th«  ol^lflbtioiiy  tHai  tha  witetM  is  not 
suAciently  described  by.  beiog  designed 
**  priieni  pnsoner  in  tbe  casUe  of  £dtnb«rgb/' 
Mr.  Jefiinj  uid,  tluU  tbert  is  a  great  number 
oi  peieeos  of  tbe  name  of  John  Campbell ; 
but  the  qneation  is,  whether  there  is  any 
other  John  Campbell,  present  prisoner  in  the 
castle  of  Edinburgh.  If  there  Are  other  pri- 
soners there  of  the  same  ^  name,  from  whom 
this  witness  is  not  distinguished  by  the  de- 
scription that  is  given  of  him,  there  may  be 
something  in  the  objection.  There  is,  how- 
erer,  no  such  statement  made ;  and  your  lord- 
ships need  not  be  told,  that  it  is  the  daily, 
praetice  of  the  court  to  design  peiaoas  ^B 
prisonefs  in  such  or  such  a  tolbMth. 

As  to  the  other  point,  it  is  noC  an  objection 
to  the  admissibility  of  the  witness  «t  all.  It  is 
n  complaint  that  access  has  not  been  had  to 
the  witness  for  the  pufjpose  of  obtaining  in- 
formation, as  to  what  is  to  be  said  bv  him 
herein  evidence.  But  this  objection  MMwld 
bare  been  stilted  by  the  panel  in  a  motion  for 
delay  of  the  triaL  It  was  said,  thatthe  loid  ad- 
vocate had  the,  witnesses  shut  up,  and  that  he 
eiduded  all  persobs  fioom  having  access  to 
tliese  witnesses.  He  claims  no  authority  of 
die  kind  one  way  or  another,  either  as  to 
giving  access  or  lefosing  it.  In  that  place  of 
confinement,  the  prisoners  were  under  your 
lordships'  authority.  Upon  appUcation  to  you 
from  the  panely  it  was  for  yon  to  say,  whether 
his  counsel  should  have  access  to  the  witness ; 
and  they  did  not  know  their  duty,  if  the^  did 
not  brmg  forward  this  to  the  Court  in  a 
pievuNis  stage. of  these  proceedings.  It  is 
said,  that  the  witness  was  in  the  castle ;  but 
that  is'the  same  thing  as  if  he  had  .been  in  the 
common  tolbooth.  The  oiBoers  there,  under 
wboee  custody  the  prisoners  are  lodged  hj 


'  the  warrant  of  your  lordshipS|  act  as 
iindet  your  oiders. 

This  is  not  a  new  case.  If  the  panel's 
counsel  bad  looked  to  the  case  of  Nairn  and 
Ogilvie,*  they  would  there  have  seen  that 
vsiUieaMs  were  oon&ied  by  authority  of  the 
Court  in  the  castle.  The  confinement  tktre 
was  to  prevent  the  witnesses  from  being  tam- 
pered with,  not  by  mv  learned  friends,  or  by 
any  person  conneoted  with  this  court,  but  by 
<Mlier  persons  of  a  difierent  description ;  such 
as  tbe  memben  of  that  society  or  brotheihood 
mentioned  in  the  oath  quoted  in  the  indict- 
■sent.  It  was  to  guard  against  the  witnesses 
heing  contaminated,  and  nrevented  frrai  telU 
ing  die  truth,  that  they  have  been  confined 
aeppMAtely  and  closel]^  as  was  done  in  the  case 
above-mentioned. 

The'Miiel  should  hate  presented  a  petition 
to  the  Hi|^  Court  of  Justiciars,  as  the  wit- 
nesses stood  committed  by  a  Justiciaiy  war- 
rent,  and  an  order  would  nave  been  ffiren  for 
ndmission  to  them,  if  such  a  proceeding  had 
appeared  proper,  in  presence  of  one  of  the 

*  maceis  of  court,  or  other  fit  person,  in  the 

•  19  How.  St.  Tr.  1235. 


ssm6  ^y  as'  admission  was  aUoved  to  the 
witnesses  who  were  confined  in  the  case  of 
Nairn  and  OgiIvie«  He  has  been  too  well 
advised  not  to  be  informed  what  steps  to  take 
in  Older  tb  obtain  accem,  if  it  had  been  thou^^t 
of  advantage  to  him,  and  he  had  been  legally 
entitled  to  it ;  snd  the  bringing  forward  this ' 
objection  only  now,  is  obTionsly  to  prevent 
tbe  case  going  to  the  jury  at  all»  as  the  same 
objection  wouhl  apply  to  all  the  witnesses.  If 
it  nad  been  wished  to  serve  the  ends  of  justice, 
and  allow  the  facts  to  be  completeljr  disclosed, 
whatever  way  they  may  tend,  this  objection 
wooid  not  have  been  reserved  in  this  manner, 
but  would  have  been  stated  in  a  proper  stagn 
of  the  busim 


Lord  Advocate. — My  legmed  friend  has  giv^ 
a  conclusive  answer  to  the  objections,  and  I 
shall  not  detain  your  lordships  by  enlarging 
on  the  subject.  It  is  proper,  however,  for  me 
to  state  the  concern  I  have  had  from  Uie  be- 
ginning in  this  matter.  When  th«M  persons 
were  first  imprisoned,  I  thought  it  my  duty  to 
relieve  your  lordships,  at  the  expense  of  much 
trouble  to  myself,  from  the  fatigue  of  constant 
applications  from  friends  of  the  parties  for 
admission  to  visit  them ;  and  I  intimated,  that 
if  the  names  of  those  wishing  access  to  the 
prisoners  should  be  communicated  to  me,  I 
would  grant  my  consent  or  not  as  I  saw 
cause;  and  if  I  refused  to  afibrd  it,  it  wis 
competent  to  apply  to  your  lordships  for  re- 
dress. Accordinglv,  when  an  application  was 
made  to  me,  that  the  counsel  or  the  agent  in 
this  case  should  be  admitted  to  the  witnesses, 
I  thought  it  my  duty  to  state,  diat  I  did  not 
mean  to  consent;  and  thejr  then  had  the  means 
of  applying  to  your  lordships,  the  imprisonment 
being  on  your  lord^ips'  warrant,  and  not  on 
mine.  I  stated  accoroingly,  in  point  of  foet, 
that  these  individuals  being  imprisoned  upon 
your  lordships' warrant,  application  might  be 
made  elsewhere,  if  they  considered  themselves 
aggrieved.  But  no  such  application  was 
made.  The  prisoner,  too,  has  been  at  this 
bar  at  difierent  times,  when  he  might  have 
stated  his  wish;  and  no  application  having 
been  made,  it  Im  now  too  late  to  bring  the 
objection. 

Lard  JmOee  CferlL-^Have  yon  any  thing  to 
say  in  reply,  gentlemen  ? 

Mr.  Jeffrey. — ^I  shall  trouble  you  with  a  werf 
few  words.  If  I  understand  the  argument  for 
the  prosecutor,  it  is,  that  our  objection,  so  far 
as  substantial,  is  not  to  the  designation  of  die 
vritness,  but  to  the  obstruction  to  the  prisoner 
in  the  preparation  of  his  defence.  It  is  true, 
that  is  the  ultimate  ground  of  the  objection  ; 
but  is  not  that  always  the  ultimate  |[rou'nd  of 
ol^^ection  to  the  production  ef  any  witnesses  f 
— 4hat  as  to  the  witnesses,  in  some  way  or 
another,  the  conduct  of  the  prosecnt^  Jhas  im- 
properly narrowed  the  power  of  d^enceT 
The  ground  the  Court  l|as  always  aone  upon 
is  just,  whether  the  prisoner  can  make  out  an) 


K75]         ^7  COUSfUBE  III. 

ofoMbb  aw  of  inni^^  9ttknd 
iafnfotmg  his  dciwict. 
Is  it  right  to  say,  I  should  httve  ifpind  to 

'IlioOoiirtf  iliaiiiotI«nlM«d,«rtMiiawitaMB 
IB  ^fodiioed^  to  still  407  thing  in  the  cooduot 

of  the  pvUic  proMcvlM'  by  vdhich  obBtPootioa 

*fi«s  Ihrowv  VI  th«  way  of  pnpariiig  the  de- 

-feneet  Is  itmifieient  to  teplyi  it  is  not  time 
v^pir  10  mdke  die  clijecdonf    If  the  fwhlic 

'  proeujtM  hat  done  toy  'dilng  mmmf^  and 
oattlinuet  ilvp  to  the  d^  of  tffwd,  ii  k  eMmgh 
•oeaylocteiltboold  hare  gonetotheCoort 
aoeiterwith  toy  eoanpMntf    He  isnot  entitled 

•to  pndh  «  plea,  if  the  prisoner  tbiDke  the 
ieadaet.of  the  pdblie  pvoeecntor  gtvet  hita  a 
right  to  object  to  testimony  agahiat  hint,  he  h 
jiot  bound  to  Temedy  the  'blunder  or  impro- 
priety of  the  public  prosecutor.  And^  the 
proper  time  for  mtking  the  olijectiou  is,  when 
the  witness  is  brought  forward. 

.'  Tben^  wfaatis  the  olgection?  The  pbjectioo 
is,  ilut,  in  consequence  of  the  ^ct  of  the 

.  wUoass  beii^g  a  nrisoner  in  the  Castle»  I  hare 
been  Drerented  by  the  public  prosecutor  fiom 
identi^ring  thai  witness,  or  getting. at  the 
jtatea^ynt  he  is  to  make  against  me.  What- 
ever directiops'the  public  prosecnitpr  may  have 
givep.  Ml.  Warreoder  in  his  letter,  says,  "  I 

.am  directed  by  the  lord  advocate  to  ad^now- 

•iedge  the  receipt,  betwigct  ten  and  eleven 
o*cl«ch  last  nigbV.  of  your  letter  to  him  of 

.sestarday,  app\yixigy  as  agent  for  Andrew 
M'Kinley^  io  ff/A  access  to  Hugh  Dickson, 
Peter  Uibsoi^  John  Mliachlan^  William 
Simpsoi^  and  John  Campbdl,  prisoners  in  the 
CasUe  of  JEEdinbuighf  and  James  Hood,  pn- 
aoner  in  the  tolboota  of  Glasgow;  and,  at  the 
same  time,  to  aconaint  vou.  iKai  Ait  lardMn 

ioymr  gffUmgpdiiiMun  to  themper$tms 

**  Ihey  are  all  in  custody,  under  charge  of 

.  being  engaged  in  ofiences  against  the  state, 

and  thcgr  have  been  already  cited  as  witnesses, 

.  to  jave  evidejice  on  the  trial  of  Andrew 

M'KInley.    Upon  both  ihese  accomits.  there- 

(bie,  the  brdtStvocaifi  dum»  it  buwrnenion  him 

to  wUhhold  his  coment,  §s  pAlic»ps^eutorffiram 

Jkar  having  atijf  caamnmicaiioB  wuUevcr  viSi  the 

agentioftne  fonely  Mhovld  oiny  other^gtepi  bt^takgn 

to  obtam  thai  object. 

Our  awmeot  it,  thai  we  teotited  a  pe- 
remptory refusal  of  acoam.    There  «*e  bo  mo- 
dification or  hint  that  we  ipight  apply  to  the 
Court,  but  it  was  a  peremptory  and  positive 
refesa],  the  officer  hating  preriousbr  told  us, 
ihitt,  without  an  order  fi^m  the  lord  advocate 
tft  the  Crown  agent,  we  could  not  obtain  access 
to  the  prisoners^    The  custodiar  did  not  say, 
he  must  have  a  warrant  from  your  loiijtkAiips, 
bpt,  ex(fept  upon  tin  order  frpra  the  crown 
^  agent,  heirouid  tiot  admit  us.    And  w«  went, 
'  therefore,  to  the  only  quarter  to  wMdh  we  were 
'  referred  by  the  actual  custodier  of  the  witness* 
,  •-^T!ie  hfit  is,  that,  w)ien  the  agent  applied 
fo  ihe  eustbdiar^  he  wtis  Aewp'a  letter,  de- 
'  strinff  an  exclusion  of  eSl  penons  except  tliose 
^  eomnig  with  a  warrant  mdi  the  Gtown  agent, 


Trhl  tfAiam»  U^ 


1578 


whoiiepresetrted  the  loid  adhneeate,— «iid  he 
gave  a  peremptory  refusal. 

If  we  had  been  prevented  from  teeing  the 
witness  in  consequence  of  the  opposition  of  a 
thiid  party,  I  could  nnderitand  tne  propriety 
of  applying  to  your  lordships ;  but,  if  the  lord 
advocate,  who  incarcerated  the  witness,  and 
who  was  referred  to,  as  the  only  person  who 
could  grant  liberty  of  access — if  he  refused  it^ 
he  gave  an  illegal  obstruction,  by  his  own  ad- 
mission ;  for  he  admits,  that,  if  1  had  applied 
to  yoa,  I  riioald  have  obtained  the  access. 

JUird  AdaocaUj^  admit  no  such  thing. 


Mr.  Jejfrey, — ^I  am  entitled  to  have  ncceiB 
to  all  the  witnesses  in  the  list  served  nnon  the 
panel.  If  I  have  no  access  to  them,  they  are 
witnesses  against  the  panel,  without  the  natoK^ 
and  advantage  of  tM  premonitien  to  him, 
which  the  law  reqairas.  The  testimony  de- 
pends upon  words  used  by  thoee  individuai» 
moolhs  ago,  and  we  ehould  faaVe  been  entitled 
if  you  had  power  to  grant  it,  to  have  had 
acoess  to  those  peieone.  If  yon  are  of  opinion, 
I  had  right  to  see  the  adtneseet  through  die 
intervention  of  your  lordshipe,  and  if  the  lonl 
advocate,  to  whose  authority  I  was  referred 
by  the  custodier,  barred  my  aocess  to  them,, 
that  I  might  not  have  the  means  of  casting  his 
evidence  ; — in  eoasequeoqe  of  his  eondoet  be- 
fore the  trial,  he  is  not  entitled  now  to  brin^ 
forward  diose  vritnestes.  Such  an  argument 
as  that  of  tiie  psoeeeutor  is  not  alkiwed  in  a 
eouft  of  law.  Suppose  the  faot  wein,  that, 
instead  of  the  Castle  of  EdiidMirgh,  in  cust«fy 
ofamiHtKPfotteer,  nnother  witnem  were  noev 
locked  «p  in  a  etMll  oellar  of  his  majesty's 
advocate  in  Qneen-etraet.  f  knock  at  tile 
door,  «nd  «A  (he  servant  to  admit  itoto  4m 
prisoner  ■  he refere  me  to-lds  mntttr  nnd'Ho 
reftms  the  aeoete  tequirtil— ^oald  it  ho 
enough,  afterwards,  to  say,  i  should  have 
made  application  to  the  Court  Y  Is  It  enough 
to  say,  there  ie  a  remedy  semewheie,  pre- 
viously to  the  trial?  It  is  enoQgh  for  me  to 
tav  eo  (he  wrosecntor.  yon  mu^  mo  €hm  hasnvd 
OMronriuennessy  and  yon  ennnot  oppose  dtfll- 
odJtieefo  sse  and  tell  me  they  niiQr  be  o^ 
Visled  hy4ipplieailon  in  anethor  quavter. 

As  to  iflie  case  of  Waiin  and  Ogilvie,--»ia  the 
list  of  witnesses  there  given,  there  was  nobody 
derfgned  as  prieoner  ia  the  Cattle,  How  then 
^mn  that  case  be  parall^  to  the  present,  wfcau 
«H  ^I  am  told  of  the  witness  is,  that  ho  ia  a 
ptisener  in  theCastle,  and  wlmn  I  go  there,.  I 
find  the  gheet  ef  the  lord  ndvoeateotandinf  «t 
the  prison  bars,  and  nelbody  bnt  tholotd  ad« 
vocate  can  get  admission  to  the  witneat  f  I 
askeibis'lentw  to  see  the  ndtnew,  nnd  he  ro- 
■foseS  me.  JEt  is  quite  unn^oessaiy  to  onqniin 
whether  I  might  hnve  olrtninod  admission  hy 
npp^ngto  the  Court,  and  givea  up  the 
nefit  of  my  stating  the  ol^ottion  noe 
proeecutor  took  upon  him  toveAmento^ 
to  die  vritness,  and  I  found  my  ohjoetien  to 
the  evidence  of  the  witness  upon  that  letost. 
Upon  all  tho'prineiples  of  kw^  this  is  an  ob« 


am 


Jot  Aiffdmsitring  unlav^ul  Oaths* 


A.  D.  181Y, 


[578 


jection  to  wYiich  no*'an»w^r  can  be 'made. 
The  fuhdam^ntal  principle,  #hich  requires  a 
list  of  the  tritnessea -to  be  farnislMd  •  to  the 
panel,  would  be  defeated,  if  the  person  who 
tperres  it  coirid  take  such  measures  with'  regard 
to  the  witnesses  as  to  prevent  the  panel  from 
identifytuf  thein. 

Mr.  Dhanmond. — As  to  the .  case  of  Nairn 
and  Ogplfie,  I  did  not  say  it  was  parallel  to 
the  present  case,  or  that  any  witness  was  there 
designed  *'  prisoner. in  the  castle/'  I  stated 
it  as  a  precedent,  to  show,  where  access  could 
not  be  had  to  a  witness  in  the  castle  of  Edin- 
burgh, the  course  which  should  have  been 
followed  by  the  panel's  counael. 

Mr.  Jeffrey. — But  here— 

Mr.  Clerhf—'MT.  Home  Drummond  is  veiy 
willing  to  make  a  reply  himself. 

I  have  just  a  word  to  remark  on  the  case  of 
Nairn  and  OgiWie. 

In  the  present  case  the  lord  advocate  de- 
scribes the  witness  as  prisoner  in  the  castle  of 
Edinburgh,  Wbat  is  the  principle  upon  which 
yoo  receive  such  a  description }  It  is,  that  it 
IS  in  the  power  of  thcpanel  to  go  to  the  prison 
to  see  the  witness. 

In  the  case  of  Nairn,  the  lord  advocate  did 
what  was  regular  and  proper.  He  designed 
all  the  witnesses.  There  was  no  objection  to 
the  descriptions  of  them.  Tl^ey  were  impri- 
soned, in  the  castle,  apd  the  parties  were  left 
to  apply  to  your  lordships  to. get  access  to 
them. 

But,  it  that  a  similar  case  to  this,  where  the 
lordr  advocate  gives  no- designation  or  means 
to  distingiiish  the  witmts ? . for  though  .he .  de- 
aigns  him  as  -prisoner  in  the  castle,  he  shuts 
bimsp  there,  to  prevent  us. from  knowing 
who  be.is;~-and,  secondly,  he  prevent  us 
from  examining  the  witness. 

There  is  no  resemblance  between  the,  two 
cases.  Nothing  is  done  fairly  here — theie  is 
no  description  of  the  witnesses,  and  the  panel 
is  debarted  from  access  to  them.  If  there  has 
been  any  thing  illegal  in  the  conduct,  of  the 
loid  advpcate,  he  eanno^  cpcamine  the  witness. 

Lord  Hermand,~'li  would  be  very  fortunate 
for  the  panel,  and  I  should  rejoice  at  it,  if  this 
objection  were  well-founded,  because  the 
Court  would  immediately  ad|o«m^  *  and  the 
trial  oouUI  not  go  on. 

A  case  occum  to  me  as. like  the  present; 
amd  it  is  this-^tliat  an  objection  is  purposely 
kept  vp,  and  {which  does  not  apply  here)  for 
tlie  very  puipose  of  defeating  the  «Bdis  of 
JoetiCe.  Where  exhibits  are  mentioned  in  an 
indictment,  it  is  always  stated,  these. shall  be 
lotad  io  -due  time,  so  as  to-be  produced  in 
evwenee.'  I  mnember  the  case  of  Lyal,  in 
1811.  There  the  articles  wesa.  sealed  up  in 
paeketi>  Kiid«:Aey-'camewiiho«t  making*  ap- 
]^liaition  teethe  Omit  upon  the  trial,  and  said 
they  were  not  lodged  indue  tine,  as  they-wera 
slm^iip'wd  could  not  be  seea;*  What  did  the 
Couft  do  ^ .  Theyiopelled  theohjeotioh.  >The 

VOL.  XXXIIL 


same  thing  happened  in  the  case  of  0*Kane, 
1812,   where  bank-ilotes  were  lodged  in  a  .. 
sealed  parcel. 

The  case  of  Nairn  and  Ogilvie  could  iiot 
easily  escape  observation,  as  it  was  a  remark-^  * 
able  trial.  ' 

If  1  were  to  decide  upon  the  letters,  I  would . 
call  for  them,  but  I  do  not  think  that  neces- 
sary. I  think  the  lord  advocate  judged  well. 
I  do  not  know  whether  he  has  a  command  over ' 
the  macers ;  but  he  said  he  did  not  think  it 
rtght  to  interpose  with  regard  to  the  psmefs 
counsel  getting  access  to  the  witness. 

Mr..J«^irey.— I  defly  that. 

Lord  HermaatL-^lf  I  am  mistaken  in  that,  1 
do  not  wanUto  atate  it,  .1  think,  if  there,  had  - 
only  been  a  junior  counsel  here  conducting  the 
deienee,  he  would  have  had  recourse  to  the 
case  of  Naime  and  OgiWie, — ^and,  upon  prin- 
ciple, I  am  clear  that,  the  whole  officers  con- 
cerned, the  fort  major,  crown  agent,  and  .lord 
advocate,  acted  with  great  propriety,  llie 
panel  did  not  take  the  course  pomtea  out .  ^y 
the  decision.  It  is  true,  that  the  case  of  Nairn 
and  Ogilvie  does,not  in  every  particular  apply 
here ;— but  in  every  case,  even  in  dases  in- the 
civil  courtB,  the.  designation  of.  a  man  as  pre- 
sent prisoner  in  a  particular  gaol,*  is  a  common 
designation.  Nor  could  there  be  anymistake 
here,  unless  there  were  a  number  of  prisoners 
of  tlie  same  name*  . 

Lord  GiiUes, — As  (o  the  consequence^  of 
disposing  of  this  objection,  I  lay  them  out  of 
my  consideration.  Let  them  be  what  they 
may,  they  ought  not  to  affect  our  judgment  on 
the  present  point.  I  do  not  sit  here  to  judge 
of  the  propriety  of  the  conduct  of  the  officers. 
The  fort-major,  I  should  believe  to  have  acted 
with  propriety;  but  that  is  not  the  question 
before  us.  And,  I  must  own,  that  before 
giving  any  judgment  on  that  which  is  before 
us,  as  t  wish  to  avoid  stating  any  thing  that 
miffht  be  considered  inaccurate,  I  should  Wish, 
before  giving  an  opinion  upon  the  facts,  to 
have  them  ascertained  by  proof.  For,  it  Is 
very  possible,  that,  in  my  notion. of^ the  Cscts^r  ' 
I  may  be  inaccurate ;  and  in  any  opinion  I 
should  deliver  relative  to  them,  the  one  or 
other  party  nlight  tell  me  I  was  wroDg.  I  am, 
therefore,  against  proceeding  on  supposition^ 
or  on  ^  general  notion  of  them.  I  wish  them 
ascertained. 

As  far  as  this  is  an  objection  to  the  designa- 
tion of  a  witness,  this  is  the  proper  and  only 
Eeriod  for  having  it  brought  forward.  Mr. 
drummond  will  acquiesce  in  that. 
The  designation  "  prisoner  there**  is,  primA 
Jad€f  a  good  designation,  as  the  panel's  counsel 
might  go  there  and  enquire  who  the  prisoner 
is.  But,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  says,  he  was 
deprived  of  the  means  of  doing  so,  and  by  the 
lord  adv'ocate.  Whether  that  is  true  or  not,  I 
know  not ;  and,  till  I  know  that,  I's^aU  not 
give  my  opinion. 

Lord  Pi^i%.—- My  opinion  a  formed^  but 
2  P 


5791       ^7  GEORGE  Uh 


Trhi  of  Andreto  M^Kink^ 


C580 


I  ^hall  defer  giving  it,  tiU  I  find  how  tbe  flitt 
siaodi. 

Loid  Ratm  and  LordJytHec  CkrkwM  iWty 
had  DO  objection  to  an  examination  of  the  fact. 

lonf  JthoctUe^-^A  minute  should  be  given 
ia. 

Mr.  Jeffrey. — I  am  willing  to  give  in  a 
minnte-  My  avetment  is,  first,  that  this  per- 
son, being  under  the  custody  of  the  governor 
tk  the  castle,  an  application  vras  made  to  the 
auAority  there  to  get  access  to  him. 

Lord  Advocate, — A  proof  of  nothing  can  be 
allowed  unless  diere  oe  a  written  statement 
upon  the  reeord  of  the  court.  I  wish  to  state 
wnal  I  admit  and  what  [  do  not  admit. 

Mr.  Jeffrey  gave  in  the  following  statement : 

^  Mr.  J^frgf  olgected,  and  offered  to 
•rove,  iMo.  Xhat  the  witness  in  qoestion 
Mng  only  described  as  present  prisoner 
in  the  caMle  of  Edinburgn,  the  agent  for 
the  panel  applied  in  person  to  ma^or 
Martm  Alvea  for  access  to  him,  which 
was  refused,  until  some  warrant  or  autbo* 
Bty  should  be  obtained  from  the  Crown 
agent;  and  at  the  same  time  themaior 
iUted  to  the  agent,  that  he  had  pe- 
lemptory  orders  from  his  superiois  to  re> 
luse  all  access,  eseept  to  persons  having 
such  anthori^.  2do.  That  the  agent  lor 
the  panel  anerwards  applied  by  letter, 
wbi<m  will  be  produced  both  to  the  crown 
agent  and  the  lord  advocate,  requesting 
aocess  in  that  character  to  this  and  the 
other  witnesses  in  the  castle.  3tw,  That, 
in  return  to  these  applications,  he  received 
a  letter  from  the  crown  agent,  which  will 
be  produced,  stating,  that  he  was  directed 
by  the  lord  advoca^  to  decline  nanting 
any  such  permission,  and  that  uis  was 
apressed  without  any  quafification  what- 
ever, and  in  express  and  peremptory 
terms.'' 


Thft  lord  advocate  wrote  and  gtvt 

Mowing  answer: 


ift  (he 


**  AiMcaha  answered,  thai  when  the 

e loners  were  incarcerated  in  the  castle, 
gave  directions,  that,  in  order  to  save 
trouble  to  die  Court,  under  whose  warrant 
ttev  were  detained,  and  under  whose 
aawority  access  to  them  misfat  at  all 
times,  ifappBedfw  and  found  bv  their 
lordships  to  oe  proper,  be  obtained  ;  that 
it  should  be  intimated,  to  the  officers  in 
the  castle  that  he  or  the  Crown  agent,would 
extrajudicially  grant  his  consent  where  no 
objections  occurred,  that  persons  applying 
to  see  them  mi|;ht  be  admitted,  and  by 
whkh  the  neeesatY  of  a  formal  application 
iu  every  oase  would  be  prevented.  That 
tins  was  all  Uie  public  prosecutor  could 
do,  or  could  be  supposed  to  have  done 
by  such  direction,  having  no  power  him- 
self to  exclnde  any  perto»  ran  the  pr»- 


toners.  That  when  applied  to  by  the 
panel's  agent  to  be  admitted  to  the  other 
Misoners  in  (be  eaiUe^  he  direeted  the 
Crown  aoent  to  intimate  that  he  deemed 
it  incumbent  upon  him  to  withh^d  hia 
consent  from  such  admission  being  gisni- 
ed,  leaving  it  as  matter  .of  cooise  to  the 
mnel  to  apply,  if  so  advised,  to  the 
Court,  to  obtain  their  lordships'  authority 
for  obtaining  such  admission,  but  stating, 
that  if  that  was  made  it  would  be  op- 
posed.'' » 

The  following  iaterlecutor  was  then  pro- 


^rrhe  Lord  Justice  Clerk  and  Lords  com- 
missioners of  Justiciary  having  considerod 
the  foregoing  objections,  with  the  answer* 
thereto,  and  heard  partie:i  procurators 
thereupon ;  before  answer  allow  the  pro- 
curators for  the  panel  a  proof  of  the  tacts 
they  aver,  and  offer  to  prove  in  relation 
to  the  said  objections. 

(Signed)     *»D.  Botle,  J.  P.  D.** 

Mr.  J^^^.^I  shaU  read  to  tlie  Coon  the 
comspendenoe  which  took  piaee  upon  the 
subject. 

Ccoy— LaTTsa   from  Ma.  Ramsat   to  the 
Loan  AovocATXy  dated  2nd  April,  1817. 

^  My  Lofd  ^-I  am  direeted  by  the 
counsel  for  Andrew  M^nlsy,  to  apply 
to  your  Idtdship  for  tttthorirr  toget  aeoess 
to  Huffh  Dickson,  Peter  Gibson,  John 
M'Lachlane,  Wiffiam  Simpson,  and  John 
Campbell,  prisoners  m  the  castf^  and 
James  Hood,  in  theToAoothof  GtMgow; 
havinff  been  informed  by.  Mr.  Wanender, 
that  he  oouid  not  give  sudi  authority. 
The  men  sse  included  in  the  list  of  wit- 
nesses, served  ob  M'Kinley;  and  Ue 
counsd  are  desircms  that  some  peneo,  on 
his  part,  should  have  an  opp«rtnni^  of 
seeing  them.  A»  the  day  or  triri  is  jnae 
at  hand,  I  beg  your  lordship  will  feveor 
me  with  an  immediate  answer. 

*^  I  have  tte  hoBonr  tobe,"  kc. 

— LxTTEB  firom  Ma.  Wabbxvdex  to 
a.  Eahsat,  dated  3rd  April,  181 T. 

^Sir^-I  am  diiected  by  the  loi9  ad- 
vocate to  acknowledge  die  rooeipl,  betwnit 
ten  and  eleven  o'clock  last  ni|^  of  your 
letter  to  him,  of  yesterday,  appiyiiig»  ^ 
agent  for  Andrew  M'Kiidey,  to  get  aetoaa 
to  Hugh  Dickson,  Peter  Gibson^  Jolui 
MOjKhlaBe,  William  8smpeo%  and  John 
Caas^ell,  pvinsMia  in  the  cMtle  of  Bdia. 
burgn,  aaid  James  Hood,  piiaaoep  hi  the 
tolbooih  of  Glasgow;  and  at  the  mmm 
time^  to  aeqnaint  you^  that  his  lordship 
does  not  iml  himealf  wipntaasA  t#  jno 
his  consent  to  yov  gettinjf  artiieaimi  to 
thesepetsons.  -  - 

**  They  axe  all  in  custody,  under 
of  being  engaged  in  offences  againsl 


Copj- 


««1] 


Jar  Adminkienng  HnUmfut  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


CSM 


state,  mA  they  have  been  alreidy  «ited 
as  witDesseSy  to  ^re  eTidence  4>ii  ttie  trial 
of  Andrew  AfWtiley.  Upon  both  theie 
accdants,  therefore,  the  lord  advocate 
deems  it  iiicii«kbent  upon  him  to  with- 
hold his  coDsenl,  as  public  proseoutory 
ftoftt  their  hating  any  oemmnnicalion 
whatever  with  the  agents  of  the  panels 
should  auy  other  steps  be  taken  to  obtain 
that  object. 

"  I  am.  Sir,"  Ice. 

Copy*-LnTEft  from  Ma.  Ramsay  t«  Mft. 
WAR&sHnBft,  dated  28th  May,  1817. 

'/  Sir  ;~1  had  a  letter  frdm  you  some- 
time ago,   in  answer  to  an  application 
I  made  to  the  lord  advocate,  tor  access 
lo  those  witnesses  against  Andrew  M^Kin- 
lev^   who  are  under  close  confinement.- 
Their  names  are,  Hugh  Dickson,  Peter 
Gibson,  John  M<Lachlane,  William  Simp- 
son, John  Campbell,  and  James  Hood, 
all  prisoners  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh. 
As  it  is  of  the  utmost  importance    to 
M'Kinley,  that  some  person,  on  his  part, 
should  have  access  lodiese  men,  I  trouble 
yoa  with  a  reMwal  of  the  vequett  which 
was  then  Fefiised.     The  reasons  which 
induced  this  refusd  may  now  have  ceased 
to  operate  with  the  same  force  ? '  and  if 
so>  I  beg  you  will  give  directions  that  I 
shall  have  access  to  them,  alonjf  with  one 
or  more  of  the  counsel  for  M'Kinley. 
^'  I  remain,  sir,''  &c. 

Copy — Letteb  ffom  Ma.  WAnnuiDEM  to  M^. 
Ramsat,  dated  29th  May,  1817. 

'<Sir; — ^I  am  jnit  now  fiivoimd  with 
your's  of  yesterday.  In  answer  to  which, 
I  can  ool^  refer  to  my  former  letter,  not 
having,  since  that  time,  received  any  in- 
structions contrary  to  what  was  than 
signiiled  to  you. 
^  I  am,  iir,"  &c. 

Copy — ^Lbttxr  from  Mk.  Ramsat  to  M». 
WAaasvoEa,  dated  15th  July,  1817. 

Sia; — Notwithstanding  of  my  former 


If  tteri  on  the  subject,  not  having  tinof 
received  any  further  instructions* 
**  1  am,  sir,"  kc. 

Mr.  Sejfrey, — ^You  will  bear  it  in  mind  that 
it  is  a  part  of  my  averment,  that  the  actual 
costodiar  stated,  and  shewed  written  autho- 
rity for  it,  that  he  had  no  power  to  grant 
admiaeion,  under  any  other  aulhosity  than 
that  of  the  lord  advocate. 

Lord  Gi(£Kf.— Unless  the  lord  advocate 
contradict  what  Mr.  Jeffr^  has  stated  as  to 
the  fort-ms|jo]^  I  think  we  are  bound  to  hold 
the  matter  to  be  as  stated  by  Mr.  Jeffrey. 

I  conceive  this  is  the  pn^r  time  for  ob« 
jectiog  to  the  designation  of  the  witness.— (t 
IS  not  a  direct  obiection  to  the  designation. 
The  situation  of  me  witness  was  sufficiently 
pointed  out,  to  enable  the  prisoner  to  go  to 
where  he  was,  and  to  apply  to  the  commanders 
in  the  castle  to  see  Campbell.    I  am  clearly 
of  opinion,  that  the  prisoner  was  entitled  t» 
liave  access  to  John  Campbell.    He  was  en* 
titled  to  have  access  to  him,  both  lo  learn  who 
the  individual  was,  and  in  oider  to  make  in- 
quiry as  to  the  nature  of  the  evidence  he  was 
to  give  against  hnn.    Ibis  is  the  law  of  Scot- 
land.   I  do  not  say  it  is  a  matter  of  absolute 
nght;    but,  prima  Jade,  it  is  a  right  which 
every  prisoner  enjoys.    If  it  should  be  stated 
in  the  proper  quarter,  that  there  are  reasone 
against  it  m  any  paxticular  case»  the  Court 
would  refuse  it,  if  itjudged  the  reasons  to  be 
si^dent  for  the  refosal.     But  standing,  as 
this  case  does,  we  must  presume  that  the 
prisoner  was  entitled  to  have  access  to  the 
witness.    This  being  ^  case,  what  does  the 
prisoner's  agent  do  ;  He  naturally  applies  first 
to  the  coomiander  of  the  Castle,  and  he  is 
told  he  must  have  the  authority  of  the  Crown 
agent,  or  of  the  lord  advocate.    He  applies 
to  them,  and  he  is  by  them  told  they  would 
give   no   such  authority  or  consent.    ^Hie 
lord  advocate  deems  it  incumbent  on  him  la 
withhold  his  consent,   at  public  prosecutor, 
from  the  witnesses  in  the  Caatte  having  mtf 
commnnieation  whatever  with  the  agents  <» 
the  pane),  should  any  othef  steps  be  taken  to 

1-    ^^  ^  *  s  -^t^       u  I  obtain  that  obiect."    TWs  is  the  intimation 

apF»hcations  for  aco^  to  the  witnesses   i,y  ^^  j^^  J^,^   ^  if  appUeation  be 
against  Andrew  M'Kmley,  who  are  m    ^^^  ^^  ^^^  Court,  he  will  nit  consent  to 

that  application.  What,  then,  was  the  ste|» 
to  he  taken  by  the  prisoner  ?  He  should  haina 
applied  to  this  Court,  and  then  your  lordrfiips, 
with  or  without  consent  of  the  lord  advocate, 
would  have  granted  access  to  this  witness.  I 
am  not  now  entering  into  the, question  whether 
access  would  have  been  allowed  for  inquiry 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  evidence  to  be  given 
by  the  witnesses  at  the  trial ;  but  to  this  extent, 
at  least,  the  panel  had  clearly  a  right  of 
access — to  learn  who  the  witnesses  were — to 
identi^  the  persons  named  in  the  list  served 
upon  him.  This  application  has  not  been 
made  by  tiie  prisoner,  -ably  assisted  as  he  has 
been.  If  any  bad  consequences  follow,  the 
blame  lies  widk  his  counsel,  as  he  was  not 


w   —  — —   — ^»     —  — ~  ~~~ 

confinement,  having  been  refused,  I  eon- 

tider  it  of  so  mnc£  importance  to  him, 

that  an  opportumtr  of  seeing  then  should 

bealfofded,  thatlcamMH  help  troubling 

yon  with  another  apfriication.    It  is  only 

throoj^  you  that  access  can  be  obtained ; 

atfd  f  think  it  is  not  unlikely  that  you 

may  have    received    other   instructions, 

since  I  formerly  heard  from  yon  on  this 

sunject* 

<«  I  am  >'  Ibc. 


CefQf— liVfnm  from  Mn*  WAuminu ««  Mb. 
EamaT  dated  Uth  Jnly,  1817. 

*^  Sia: — In  answer  to  your^s  of  this 
datCf  I  can  only  refer  you  to  my  former 


5831 


57  GEORGE  III. 


TrM  ofAndmm  M'l&nhy 


C«84 


adviied  ts  make  the  compkint  at  the  proper 
time.  It  k  now  too  late.  And  the  deqisioo 
l^erxed  to  woujd^  in  point  of  principle,  have 
ftpplied  to  the  present  case. . 

.  lioid  PitmUfy.—'MB  queatipn  as  to  the 
admissihiUty  oV  the  witness  embraces  two 
fKiints.  The  first  relates  to  his  designation. 
Xhe  second  i»\ate8  .  to  the  application  foe 
access  to  him,  made  by  the  panel*8  agent 
to  his  majesty's  advocate. 

The  objection  to  the  designation  is,  that 
the  witness  is  designated  **  present  prisoner 
In  the  castle  of  Edinburgh."  That  is  no  good 
objection  to  the  designation,  unless,  as  Mr. 
Drummond  stated,  there  were  others  of  the 
same  name  there.'  There  are  many  instances 
of  such  designatioa%  which  have  been  always 
considered  sufficient,  and  therefore  it  is  not  a 
good  objection. 

The  second  objection  is,  that  access  to  this 
witness  was  denied.  As  to  that  objection, 
I  concur  with  what  has  just  b^en  stated,  that 
this  is  not  the  proper  time  to  bring  forward 
such  an  objection.  I  did  not  think  the  proof 
pn  the  subject  was  relevant ;  but  when  such 
an  assertion  was  made,  it  was  desirable  for 
the  Court  and  Jury  to  ascertain  the  facts.  But 
if  the  lord  advocate,  or  any  other,  refused 
consent  for  access,  and  if  there  was  any  claim 
for  the  prisoner  to  have  access,  application 
should  have  been  made  to  this  Court,  and  no 
time  wo|ild  have  been  improper  for  it  but  the 
present/  If  the  panel's  counsel  had  applied 
yesterday,  with  these  letters,  and  had  stated 
their  desire  to  have  access  to  the  witness;  the 
Court  would  have  considered  the  application. 
If  they  had  done  so  this  morning,  before  the 
jury  was  formed,  the  Court-  would  have  given 
it  consideration.  But  the  only  improper  ^me 
for  making  the  application  is  now,  when  the 
trial  has  commenced.  .  It  would  be  productive 
of  evil  consec[uehces,  if  this  objeption  were  to 
be  supported. 

.  Lord  ReUon, — I  am  entirely  of  the  opinions 
which  I  have  heard  from  your  lordships.  The 
objection  as  to  the  designation  is  not  sufficient. 
Suppose  the  application  had  been  made  to  a 
proper  gaoler,  and  he  had  refused  to  grant 
access,  then  this  Court;  on  being  applied  to, 
would  have  ordered  aceeps  to  be  allowed.  But 
the  lord  advocate  is  not  the  gaoler,  and  his 
refusal  is  no  reason  for  not  applying  to  your 
Iprdships. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk. — I.  am  clear,  now  we 
have  the  facts  before  us,  the  objection  ought 
not  to  be  sustained  by  your  lordships.  No 
such  objection  ever  could  l)e  sustaiped,  except 
when  the  prisoner  would  otherwise  suffer  in*- 
justice.  But  no  injustice  can  be  complained 
of  by  the  prisoner  before  us,  because  the  three 
etters  by  his  own  agent  show,  that  application 
was  not  made  to  the  proper  quarter;  and 
though  put  on  his  guard  that  the  consent  of 
the  prosecutor  would  not  be  given,  althojagh 
pt^er  iteps  should  be  taken  in  order  to  obtain 


access,  yet  the  appUcatioa  nevtr  was  made 
where  it  ought  to  have  been.  For  though  the 
lord  advocate  thought  it  right  to  refuse  ad- 
mission, he  had  not  the  authority  to  control 
Ihe  prisoner,  and  prevent  him  from  applying 
to  us.  If  the  commanding  officer  in  the  castle, 
under  the  circumstances  which  here  occur, 
had  refused  to  comply  with  our  order, 
he  must  have  answered  the  refusal  at  his 
highest  peril.  We  have  equal  charge  and 
command  over  prisoners  committed  by  our 
warrant  to  the  castle,  as  we  have  with  regard 
te  persons  committed  to  any  of  the  common 

Srisoos;  audit  is  impossible  for  anyone  to 
oubt,  that  obedience  must  have  been  given 
to  our  order  for  access  to  the  panel's  agent 
and  counsel.  I  would  have  granted  access 
without  hesitation  uppn  proper  application, 
and  at  any  stage  of  the  pix>ceeding8.  Your 
lordships  would  have  listened  to  it  this  morn- 
ing, if  a  statement  had  been  made,  that  dis- 
advantage had  arisen  from  the  want  of  access^ 
and!  the  trial  would  have  been  delayed.  The 
present  is  the  only  improper  time  when  appli- 
cation could  have  been  made  to  your  lord- 
ships. 

The  Court  pronounced  the  following  inter- 
locutor : 

<*  The  Lord  Justice  Clerk,  and  Lords 
Commissioners  of  Justiciary,  having  con- 
sidered the  said  letters,  they  repel  the  ob- 
jections, and  allow  the  witnesses  to  be 
received. 

(Signed)  "  D.  Boyle,  J..P.  D." 

John  Campbell  was  called,  and  the  oath  admin- 
istered to  him  by  lord  Hermand. 

Lord  FcniMmrf.— Have  you  any  malice  or  ill 
will  at  the  panel  at  the' bar  ?— No  my  lord. 

His  any  body  given  you  a  reward,  orproraise 
of  reward,  for  being  a  witness  ?— i  es,  my 
lord. 

[The  answer  not  being  distinctly  heard, 
lord  Hermand  continued.  ] 

'  Has  any  body  told,  or  instructed  you  what 
to  say  as  a  witness  ? — 

Mr.  Clerk, — We  have  some  questions  to  put 
on  this  matter. 

Mr.  Jeffrey.-^yfiW  your  lordship  be  so  good 
as  questioii  him  again?  L dont  think  the  an*- 
swer  was  distinctly  heard. 

Lord  Hermand. — ^Do*  you  hear,  sir,  what  I 
say,  and  answer  distinctly — lias  anybody 
given  you  a  rewa^d^  or  promise  of  reward,  for 
being  a  witness  ?— Yes,  they  have. 

Lord  JmtkeCierk,—!  think.it  right  to  warn 
the  witness— You  are  now  adduced  as  a  witness 
in  this  prosecution  for  the  Crown.  I  am  bound 
to  tell  you,  that  in  reference  to  the  crime  whkh 
is  charged  by  the  presecutor  against  the  panel, 
you  are  not  in  a6y  panltel  sitnation  with  the 
panel,  and  it  is  not  competent  to  bring  yoa 
for  any  concern  you  had  In  thes^  transactions. 


MS] 


Jot.  AimtitUrmg  uxH^ll^  Oattt: 


A.  D.  .18)7. 


1966 


totally  proMOnliony  «£ieT  your  beiog  adduced 
.  as  a  'witness.  It  U  necessary  for  you  to  tell  the 
whole  ti^th,  ia  as  far  as  yoa  know  it^  jwlative  to 
all  matters  as  to  which  you  may  be  askted  now, 
or  at  any  fiitnre  stage  ci  the  examination.  I 
have  to  admonish  yon,  that^  as  to  the  questions 
now  put,  or  that  may  be  put,  you  are  to  disclose 
the  truth,  and  nothing ^but  the  truth;  and  that 
as  to  your  situation,  you  stand  in  no  risk,  un- 
less you  state  upqn  your  oath  what  is  contrary 
to  the  truth.  If  you  do  so  in  any  part  of  your 
examination,  be  assured  your  being  a  witness 
jrill  not  prevent  your  receiving  punishment. 
It  as  my  duty  to  give  you  this  admonition,  and 
keep  it  in  view. 

Witnetf. — ^I  am  aware  of  the  nature  of  an 
oath.  Where  I  stand,  I  have  called  God  to 
witness  to  the  truth  of  what  I  assert,  as  I  shall 
answer  at  the  day  ofjudgment.  I  am  likewise 
sensible,  that  what  I  have  now  stated  may  be 
construed  as  proceeding  from  my  concern  with 
the  prisoner,  and  that  it  may  be  thought  I  have 
taken  this  method  in  order  to  save  him.  It 
will  probably  be  believed  also,  as  to  the  per- 
sons who  have  given  this  promise,  that  tneir 
word  should  be  taken  before  my  oath.  In  my 
situation,  if  I  can  produce  even  presumptive 
proof,  I  hope  to  convince  the  world  I  do  not 
peijure  myself.  I  shall  state  the  names  of  the 
persons,  and  the  whole  circumstances. 

[The  witness's  statement  was  ordered,  on 
the  motion  of  the  lord  advocate,  to  be 
taken  down  in. writing.] 

'  Mr.  Jeffrey. — I  am  enabled  to  ask  pointed 
questions  of  the  witness.  If  I  ask  improper 
questions,  the  lord  advocate  may  stop  me. 

.  Lord  Juttiee  Clerk, — ^The  correct  way  of  pro- 
ceeding, is  to  desire  the  witness  to  explain  his 
statement,  and  the  prisoner  will  afterwards  be 
allowed  lo  put  questions  to  him. 

yiT.' Jeffrey. — I  am  satisfied. 

Lord  JmUiee  Clerk. — I  ask  you  to  state  dis« 
tinctly  and  accurately  the  grounds  which  have 
made  you  make  this  answer. 

Witnet$, — ^I  will  state  the  circumstances  as 
distinctly  as  possible,  Aid  you  will  make  idlow- 
anee  for  my  want  of  education  preventing  my 
going  through  the  circumstances  so  well  as  a 
person  would  who  has  had  the  advantage  of 
nore  learning.  I  cannot  easily  explain  them 
without  going  baek  to  the  beginning.  It  will 
W  neeeseaiy  that  I  commence  from  my  exami* 
Mttien  at  Glasgow. 

Hie  following  deposition  was  then  taken 
down  by  the  Clerk  of  Court. 

*'  I>eponeB.  That  he  was  i^prehended 
.  alongstwith  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  he 
thinks,  on  the  23nd  of  February  last, 
without  cause  assigned,  and  without  a 
warrant:  That  upon  the  Tuesday  or  Wed- 
nesday following^  he  was  examined  before 
the  sheriff-depute  of  Lanarkshire,  and  was 
7    interrogated,  if  he  knew  what  he  was 


,  brott^theie  lor :  That  he  sUte4,  that  he 
.  did  ttotknow,  and  that  the  sheriflf  insisted 
th%t  he  did,'  and  it.would  be  wisdom  of 
■  him  to  make  his  breast  clean .  Alter  some 
similar  conversation  the  sheriff  went  out, 
leaving  the  witnees  with  Mr.  Sahnond^ 
and  he  is  not  sure  whether  any  other 
person  was  present  or  not :  That  Mr. 
Salmond  came  up  to  the  witnes«^  Mying, 
*  John,  you  perhaps  do  not  know  that  I 
'  know  so  much,  about  this  afiair;*.  sod 
adding,  '  I  know  more  ahont^  it  than  you 
think  I  do.'  Depones,  That  Mr.  Salmond 
added,  <  I  suppose  you  do  not  know  that 
I  have  the  oath  you  toojc  at  Leggat's  on 
the  first  of  January  ?*  He  then  shewed 
him  a  scroll  of  ^n  oath,  saying,  '  You  see 
John,  I  have  get  it ;'  adding,  that  *  you 
and  other  persons  (whom,  he  named)  took 
that  oath  ;in^  Leggat's  ou  the-  first  of 
January.'  The  witness  then  told  him, 
that  he  had  not  taken  that,  oath.*  De- 
uooee,  that  after  several  f  xamioations  be- 
tore  the  sheriff,  and  being  often  closeted 
with  Mr.  Salmond,  on  one  of  which  occa- 
sions, after  using  many  eatceatiel^  to  the 
witness,  and  these  having  lailed,  after 
railing  at  the  prisoners  as  villains,  who  had 
betrayed  him,  the  witness,  and  stating, 
that  it  was  out  of  respect  to  him  .that  £i 
wished  him  to  be  a  witOiesB,  Mr.  Salmond 
said,  <  John,  I  assure  you  that  I  have  six 
men  who  will  swear  that  you  took  that 
oath ;  and  you  will  be  hanged  as  sine  as 
YOU  are  alive.'  Depones,  That  upon  this 
he  told  Mr.  Salmond,  that  if  he  got  six 
men  to  swear  that  he  took  that  oaSi,  they 
would  peijure  themselves.  He  answered, 
'  John,  John  1  it  is  impossible  to  get  six 
men  to  peijure  themselves.'*    Depones, 

*  The  following  part  of  the  witness's  state- 
ment was  not  recorded : — 

''  I  suppose  it  is  needless  to  go  through  any 
further  as  to  that  part  of  the  examination  with 
regard  to  the  ill  humour  shown  me  by  the 
sheriff, — ^threats  held  out  to  get  me  just  to  say 
that  I  would  be  a  witness.  I  suppose  I  may 
come  to  the  engagement  between  us  V* 

**  Lord  Juatkt  CferA.— -Do  you  mean  to  say 
the  sheriff  threatened,  you  F" 

"  He  run  into  arguments  with  me  to  confuse 
me — at  one  time  about  religion  and  other 
matters — at  another  time  putting  the  same 

3uestions  in  different  words  that  were  taken 
own  in  my  declaration  before,  and  said  such 
questions,  were  not  taken  down  before;  and 
said.  Supposing  that  to  be  the  case,  I,  am  not 
satisfied  with  your  answer,  and  I  have  a  light 
to  demand  answers  to  the  questions.  I  said^  I 
was  obliged  to  answer  him,  but  that  UWas 
wrong  in  him  to  put  question^  to  me  in  dif- 
ferent language ;  and  he  told  me  I  was  impu- 
dent." 

*  What  follows  was  not  recorded. 

<<  Loni  Ju^Kc  CMcr-What.  did  Mr.^  JSal- 


M7] 


57  GEORGE  VL 


Trial  ofAndmo  M'KmUy 


l56S 


will  ffan  yoQtMlf  if  71N1  perrfft  in  tins  wajy 
b«C  tffmi  take  Hm  otkor  waj,  yon  will  do 
joviwlf  OMMh  good.*     Da^OMSy  That 
mfter  ■acfa  cowvertatioii,  4iewitM0SMdd 
%e  waa  not  afraid  of  tlia  ont  way,  and 
iia  did  not  aee  mnch  good  ha  ooiild  do 
lumself  by  the  other.    DeponeSy  Tint  Bir. 
SataMmd  taid  the  lofd  adfooate  was  in 
Glasgow,  and  he  wmdd  oome  under  any 
obligation  he  ohoae,  if  he  wovld  be  e  wit- 
neae.    Depones,  That  riiortlv  af^  this  he 
was  taken  befere  the  shetiff,  ^Hien  Mr. 
Dnunmondy  adfoeate-depnte,  came  into 
the  room ;  after  which  he  was  examined ; 
—bet  the  subject  of  the  obligation  was 
not  then  mentioned ;  and  that  in  a  few 
days  afterwaids  tlie  witness  was  remored 
to  Idinbnigh  Caslle.     Depones,  That 
when  in  the  Castle  of  Edinbar|^i  Mr. 
Drammond  case  to  him  and  mentioned 
tihat  M'Kinley  had  been  served  with  an 
indictment)   and  that  his  name  was  in 
tiM  Ust  ef  witnesses :  and  that  now  was 
the  time  for  him  to  determine  whether  he 
would  be  m  witness  or  not.    That  the  de- 
ponent stated,  that  he  did  not  wish  to  be 
n  witness ;  and  that  he,  Mr.  Drummond, 
knew,  thatif  he  was,  he  need  not  go  back 
to  Glasgow,  as  he  conld  not  live  ihere. 
Depones,  lliat  Mr.  Dmmmond  then  said 
that  he  was  quite  sensible  of  that,  but  that 
he  might,  go  and  reside  somewhere  ebe ; 
mmI  that  he  might  change  his  name :   But 
the  witness  said  he  wovud  not  change  his 
name ;  and  that  it  would  be  mudi  the 
same  if  he  lived  in  any  other  menufao- 
taring  place  as  in  Glasgow.     Depones, 
That  Mr.  Drummond  then  said,  he  had 
been  thinking  of  a  plan  of  writing  to  lord 
Sidmooth,  to  get  him  into  the  excise ;  and 
that  if  he,  the  witness,  chose,  he  would 
write  to  lord  Sidmouth,  and  shew  him  his 
answer.    Depones,  That  he  answered  he 
did  not  choose  the  office  of  an  exciseman ; 
and  remarked  at  the  same  time,  it  was 
probably  the  only  office  under  gjoremment 
he  was  capable  for:    That  it  was  an 
office  that  exposed  bim  to  risk  and  ill-wiU 
which  he  did  not  choose  to  eocounter,  as 
he  had  suffiered  enough  from  thepnblic 
while  a'  peace<offlcer.    Depones,  Inat  at 
this  conrersation  no  person  was  present 
but  the  deponent  ana  Mr.  Drummond ; 
and  that  Mr.  Drummond  was  with  him  in 
the  Castle  done  at  other  times.    Depones, 
Ibat  at  the  first  interview,  after  vAat  is 
above-mentioned,  Mr.  Dnnnmond  askc^l 
Inm  what  he  wanted  to  have:  The  witness 
remained  sHent,  and  made  no  answer. 
Depones,  That  Mr.  Drummond  then  said, 
^  that  if  he  would  give  sndi  Information  as 

me^d  siy  as  te  jour  veedving  n  reward  or 
promise  of 

^'Itis 
wbde,  ae  it 


?" 


that  I  should  explain  Ae 
•kmg  in  a  chaiB.'* 


would  plenee  the  lovd  advocate,  he  should 
neither  be  tried  himself  nor  made  a  wis^ 
ness.    Depones,  That  he  said  that  that 
vras  an  uncertain  matter,  as  he  did  not 
•  know  what  ii^nnation  they  wanted,  or 
that  he  could  ^ve  more  than  th^  alresdy 
had ;  and  that  if  his  infoimation  did  not 
please  the  lord  adrocate,  be  woidd  lie 
open  to  every  attadi  that  could  be  made 
against  him.    Depones,  That  Mr.  Dmm- 
mond then  said,  *  1  do  not  know  what  to 
do  with  you,  Campbell.  I  wish  to  do  every 
thing  I  can  to  favour  yooy    I  shallffi  ve  von 
a  dxf  or  two  to  think  of  it.'    Tliat  Mr. 
Drummond  added, '  do  you  wish  I  should 
call  back  again^  Thataftersome  hesitation 
the  witness  said  he  might  do  as  he  pleased, 
and  Mr.  Drummond  went  away.    That  in 
a  few  days  afterwards  Mr,  Drummond 
came  back  again,  and  said,  '  Campbell, 
this  is  the  last  time ;  you  must  be  aeter-r 
mined  now.'    The  witness  asked  if  he 
had  wrote  to  lord  Sidmouth,  and  Mr. 
Drummond  answered  he  had  not,  as  the 
witness  had  rejected  it.    That  Mr.  Drum- 
mond asked  if  he  had  made  up  his  mind 
vet.    Depones,  Tbat  he  answered  that  he 
had  upon  conditions;  and  upon  being 
asked  what  these  were,  the  witness  told  him 
he  wished  ^to  get  a  passport  to  ao  to  the 
continent:' That  Mr.  Drummond  lold  him 
he  supposed  there  wasnobodjr  could  stop 
him;  andhe answered,  that  be»g  a  mechn- 
nic,  he  believed  the  laws  of  the  country  did 
not  allow  him  to  quit  it.    Depones,  That 
Mr.  Drummond  replied  with  a  smile,  'la 
that  all  ?  There  is  no  question  you  will 
get  that,  and  means  to  carry  you  there.' 
Depones,  That  they  were  standing  while 
this  convemtion  took  place;  and  me  de» 
ponent  said,  that  upon  these  conditions 
he  would  be  a  witness,  provided  his  wifo 
was  also  taken  into  consideration.    Do- 
poues.  That  upon  tbis,  Mr.  Drummond 
said,  'Campbell,  let  us  sit  down,  that 
vre  may  understand  eadi  other  properly, 
as  I  wonld  not  wish  that  we  misunder- 
stood one  another  at  the  latter  end.'    De- 
Kines,  That  the  vritness  mentioned  to 
r.  Drummond*  that  his  wife  was  in  % 
verr  delicate  state  of  health,  and  had 
notning  but  what  she  earned  to  suj^ovt 
her;  upon  that  question  being  asked  by 
Mr.  Drummond,  and  that  if  it  was  known 
that  he  was  to  be  a  witness,  she  would 
suffer  from  ill-vrill  by  the  public:   That 
Mr.    Drummond    then    replied,     poor 
woman,  she  must  be  ill  off ;  and  desired 
the  witness  to  write  a  letter|  and  maik  m 
one-pound  note  in  it,  and  give  it  to  Mr. 
Sibbald,  who  would  bring  it  t6  1dm, 
and  be  would  put  a  one-pound   note 
in  it  for  his  wifo :  Ibat  Bfr.  Drummond 
also    desired    the   witness    to  state  to 
his  wifo|  that  be  was  to  be  a  witness, 
and   to    desire  her   to    leave   Glasgow 
and   go  to  the    witaessli   fatfierV    at 


5991 


fw  ^4^iifi^^^gJ''^^^^'^i  Oaihs. 


Symingtpny  m  Aynhira*    Depoiies»  That 
he  said  that  would  be  the  nrat  tiling  to 


discover  that  he.  was  to  be  a  witness, 
bta  wife  oottld  not  read  or  write.  De- 
pooesy  That  after  some  convenation 
about  writing  to  the  tow»«leric  of  Glas- 
gow^  or  some  fiiend  of  the  witness's,  it 
was  agreed  that  the  ¥ritne8s  should  write 
a  letter  to  his  wife,  stating  that  a  friend 
of  hi^  had  sent  her  a  one-pound  note,  to 
pay  her  expences  into  £dinbarp;h  by  the 
coach,  and  that  she  would  receire  ttoncr 
here  to  carry  her  back  ajndn :  That  thre 
letter  was  given  to  Mr.  Sibbald,  in  oonse- 

Jnence  of  the  conversation  with  Mr. 
>rumnond,  but  that  some  days  after- 
wards it  was  brouf^t  back  by  Mr.  Drom- 
mond,  who  told  him,  that  the  lord  advo- 
cate disapproved  of  sending  such  a  letter, 
but  thought  it  more  prober  that  Mr.  Sal- 
mond  should  be  written  to,  to  send  for 
the  witness's  wife,  and  teU  her  that  he 
wanted  her  to  come  to  Edinburgh.  And 
after  this,  Mr.  Drummond  read  to  him  a 
letter  he  had  received  from  Mr.  Salmond, 
stating,  that  a  ticket  had  been  bought; 
Imt  a  postscript  of  the  letter  mentioned 
that  his  wife,  from  her  state  of  health, 
declined  to  come :  That  Mr.  Drummond 
retunied  the  witness's  letter,  which  he 
burnt.  Depones,  That  he  was  informed 
by  Mr.  Drummond  that  the  sheriff  was 
coming  to  examine  him,  and  that  it  was 
agreed  ttpon,  that,  in  answer  to  the  first 
question,  he,  the  witness,  was  to  state, 
and  have  it  taken  down,  that  he  was  to 
receive  a  passport  to  the  contment^  and 
the  means  to  convey  him  there,  it  being 
nnderstood  that  Pitissia  was  to  be  his 
destination ;  That  die  sheriff,  and,  as  he 
betievesy  the  sheriff-substitute,  the  solicit 
tor-general,  the  procurator  fiscal  of  Editk- 
bnigh,  as  he  understood,  and  a  eleift, 
came  into  the  rpom;  and  Mr.  Dram- 
mond  having  asked,  'CampbeQ,  what 
have  you  got  to  say  in  tfiis  business?*  the 
deponent  answered,  that,  supposing*  He 
was  concemei  in  ^at  affidr,  and  was  lo 
tell  the  whole  truth,  that  he  did  not 
conrider  either  himself  or  his  wife  saft ; 
,and  that,  without  his  getting  a  passport 
to  go  to  the  continent,  and  the  means  to 
oany  him  there,  he  could  not  be  a  wit- 
ness ;.  upon  which  Mr.  Drammondi  tnra-i 
ing  to  the  solicitor-general,  said,  'An- 
swer you  that :'  That  the  soIicitor>ge&e- 
lai  then  ordered  the  detk  to  write  these 
wonls,  as  he  thinks.  ^Wbereupon  tiie 
solicitor-general  assures  Um  deehnm^ 
that  every  means  neoeisaii^^  will  be  taken 
to  preserve  him  and  his  wife,  and  that  he 
wiu  gel  a  passport  to  quit  the  country  or 
go  to  the  continent  (he  is  not  sure 
whidi),  and  the  means  to  cany  them 
there :  *'  That  during  this  time,  die  sheriff 
wftt  waBring  np  mi  down  th0  loem, 
wbicb  is  a  pretty  large  onei  ^^4  wben 


A.  n.  mi.         [MO 

the.  above  words  weie  taken  down,  he 
was  desived  tooome  and  sign  this.  De- 
pones^ Thai  Uie  sheriff  came,  and  sat 
down  at  the  table;  and,  after  penning 
4k»  pvjfv  for  sooM  time,  said»  *  1  will 
not  sign  this;'  and  addedf  *that,  as  he 
was  an  ofiioer  of  the  crown,  it  was  his 
dn^  to  see  ^nstioe  done :  and  he  could 
iasttre  the  wataess,  if  he  was  to  sign  that 
naper^  be  wevdd  not  be  answerable  for  it 
for  a  good  deal ;  fof  tbatf  if  the  depo- 
nsntwasbsoaffhttoldsoath,  and  should 
swear  thai;  he  had  received  no  promise  of 
lewaid,  and  this  ptper  signed,  he  would 
peijure  himself:'  That  the  witness  an- 
swered, <  Ne^  if  it  was  considered  as  a 
means  of  his  preservation  ^'  upon  which 
he  was  supported  in  the  same  aigwnent 
by  Mi.  Drammond;  upon  which  the 
sheriff  said,  he  would  sign  no  s«oh  paper : 
That  Mr.  Drummond  then  prepoeedf  that 
it  should  be  put  down  that  he  waa  to  get 
the  means  ot  carrying  him  to  anjy  ef  the 
British  colonies,  in  place  of  going  to  a 
feeeign  kinpdon;  but  tfie  sherm  also 
lelused  that,  and  added,  <  that  he  was 
willing  eveiy  thing  should  be  set  down 
for  the  pfeeervalion  of  him  and  his  wife, 
but  nothing  forthev:'  That  after  the 
sheriff  had  stated  this,  there  was  a  pause 
for  soflM  time;  whmi  Mr.-  Drummond, 
lipoking  at  the  deponent,  said^  *  Caftip- 
bell,  you  know  whether 'you  can  be  a 
witness  on  these  tesms  or  not,'  Thewit- 
•esaremainedaalent;  and  some  time  after, 
Mr.  DnimmeAdsaidv  *  Now,  Campbell, 
do  TOtt  believtiihal  we  eaft-dothai  leir  you 
which.  yo«  .ei|>eei,  wittioiit  ito  beaaf  set 
downin  theyaper?*  and  that  aithia  lime, 
as  he  thitthai  die  Shariff  wm  sinins  «t  the 
tsMe,  the  Sollcitov'geaeral  and  Bir. 
DnuMond  standing  at  the  fiic^  and  the 
other  gentlemen waUong  about  die  room: 
That  we  witoeiS'  anawmd,  he  hnesr^they 
were  able  if  thev  were  willing.;  to  which 
Mr.  DrMMMoa  replied;  ^  Gonld  ha  rely 
upon  them  for  thafiF'  The  witness  an- 
aweiedi  ^MayI^  Mr.  Dmmmend  an- 
swered, *  You  may ;'  and  thai  the  wit- 
ness said  pretty  londly,  *  Well,  theiT,  I 
AaU  nky  upon  you  as  ffenttemen.'  De- 
pones, That  shortly  ^r  thii  he  was 
allowed  to  write^  hb  dedaration  himself, . 
all  eaeepring  one  part  lelaling  to  a.  Mr. 
Kerr:  Theft,  a  fow  dmi  after  this,  the 
Sherifl^  the  Precnrator  Fisoaly'and  aelerk, 
tame  ut>  to  have  his  narrative  signed, 
whioh  wnadoMi;  vapom  which  the.Sheriff 
said'  tc^hiai^  *  CiMapbeUv.  ^fias.jm^  have 
fntekarel  Aifli  TenihadrhtMvfohome 
to  yenc  lotm»  aad  let  theaatinlnthn  nation 
an  they  please:'  That  upon. this  the  de- 
poMBlMidt  that  rather  tfaangobnek  to 
tdsloom  he  wonld  be  served. with  an  in- 
dsetaeal  himself,  even  after-  all  he.*  had 
written:  Thit  the  Sheriff  annmred^ '  he 
had  nothing,  ta  do  wfth  that— it  nmeined 


Slifi]         57  OEOtlGfe  tit 


IViiU  ofAnikem,  M*KiiJU^ 


!• 


betwfeeVk   the  Trithess  and'otbien.*    De- 

Sones,  That  he  was  mited  by  Mr.  Dtuin- 
lobd  after  this,  who  ordered  Cait>tain 
Sibbald  to  get  him  plennr  of  books^  and 
that  be  has  read  near  an  hundred  volnmes 
sinte  that  time :  That,  about  a  Ibrtnight  or 
three  weeks  ago,  he  wrote  iaietter  to  Mr. 
Dnimmobd,  that  be  was  in  need  of 'a  pair 
of  shoes  and  a  pair  of  trowsers,  and  that 
his  wife  was  in  need  of  niion%T.  Depones, 
That  he  did  receire  a  pair  or  shoes  from 
Captain  Sibbald,  by  uie  orders  of  Mr. 
Dnimmond,  as  Captain  Sibbald  saidi  but 
that  he  could  not  then  get  any  money,  but 
that,  as  soon  as  the  first  trial  was  over,  he 
would  get  money :  That  he  wrote  another 
letter  to  Mr.  Drummond,  stating  part  of 
what  was  in  bis  declaration,  as  a  gentle 
dematid  for  money,  and  received  the  same 
answer,  that  he  could  get  no  money  at 
present,  but  that  he  would  get  some  pifter 
the  first  trial  was  over ;  and  that  he,  Sib- 
baldi  told  him  he  had  got  this  answer 
from  Mr.  Drummond.  Depones,  That 
although  their  engagement  is  not  in  writ- 
ing, in  consequence  of  the  interference  of 
the  Sheriff,  and  which  writing  was  imme- 
diately burned  in  the  Sheriff's  presence, 
he  considers  it  still  a  subsisting  private 
engagement,  upon  the  performance  of 
wlich  he  thinks  himself  entitled  to  rely ; 
and  that  the  declaration,  whidi  he  signed 
and  gave  to  the  Sheriff,  was  made  upon  a 
reliance  on  that  engagement.  Depones, 
That  at  the  conversation  with  Mr.  Drum- 
mond', when  he  got  an  order  to  get  the 
books,  he  was  then  cited  as  a  witness  on 
Ibe  trial  of  Andrew  M^Kinley,  and  the 
first  book  that  the'  deponent  received  from 
the  library,  in  consequence  of  that  order, 
was  lipon  the  23nd  day  of'  April  last. 
Depones,  That  he  was  not  cited  as  a  wit- 
ness at  the  time  he  sisned  and  delivered 
bis  declaration  to  the  Sheriff,  and  that  the 
conversation  about  the  books  took  place 
in  the  week  that  Mr.  Drummond  went  to 
the  Circuit  at  Glasgow.  Depones,  Iliat 
The  first  idea  of  apprehensioh  of  his  being 
in  danger  was  suggested  to  the  deponent 
by  the  Sheriff  and  Fiscal  at  Glasgow,  who 
asked  him,  if  the  reason  why  he  would 
not  be  a  witness  was,  that  he  con- 
aidered  bis  life  to  be  in  danger?  Thai 
be  cannot  say  that  he  considered  his 
life  to  be  in  danger,  but  that  be  did 
not  choose  to  go  back  to  Glasgow  after 
being  a  witness.  Depones,  That  he  did 
not  t^  Mr.'Drunmond  that  his  life  was 
in  danger,  as  Mr.  Drummond  seamed  to 
be  iuipieased  with  that  idea,  and  the  de- 
ponent-oonlimM  to  cany  it  on.-  De- 
pones, That  -in  the  conversations  above>- 
mentioDed  widi  Mr.  Drummond,  or'  any 
of  iba  other  gentlemen, '  there  wasno  at« 
tempt  whatever  made  to  instruct  hhn  in 
any  w«yas  to  what  he  should  say  in 
fiviDg  evidenoe  as  a  witoesi.    All  whieb 


is  truth,  as  the  deponent  shall  ainswer  to 
God.» 
(Signed)         ''Jobv  CAinniELL.* 
«  D.  BoYw,  J.  P.  D." 

*  Copt — ^Letter  addressed  *^  Hume  Drum- 
mond, Esq.  Advocate,  Edinburgh.'' 

'EMburgk  Cattle,  ZUt  March,  1817. 
Sir; — rAfter  consideration  I  can  see  no  way 
that  wife  can  be  informed  how  she  is  to  act 
but  by  your  writing  Mr.  Salmon  giving  him 
instructions  and  by  me  writing  at  sametime  to 
her  to  call  upon  him  and  attend  to  what  he 
tells  her  to  do  you  must  cause  Mr.  Salmon  to 
state  to  her  that  I  was  under  the  necessity  c€ 
acting  in  the  manner  that  I  have  done  and  to 
shew  her  the  danger  that  she  is  in  to  stop 
about  Glasgow  and  that  I  request  her  to  go  out 
by  the  maU  to  Kilmarnock  and  then  walk  to 
Symington  to  my  fathers  and  after  stoning 
there  a  few  days  to  go  down  to  Irvin 
and  stop  there  in  my  Sisters  a  night  and  next 
day  walK  ^o  Saltcoats  where  she  roust  take  a 
room  for  herself  and  live  there  till  that  I  send 
for  her  as  also  in  Saltcoats  she  will  be  more 
Comfortable  beside  htr  mother  Brothers  andr 
Sister  than  in  any  other  place  and  that  she  is 
to  write  to  me  as  soon  as  she  reaches  my 
fiithers  but  Sir  I  must  also  state  tliat  it  is 
needles  to  send  her  away  without  the  means 
of  support  as  my  fiather  is  an  old  roan  and  has 
no  income  but  his  Pention  as  well  her  moilier 
is  a  widow  and  is  sustained  by  a  son  who  lives 
in  the  house  and  he  being  a  weaver  they  pan- 
not  but  be  poor  and  she  has  not  the  same  op- 
portunity or  earning  a  shilling  in  Saltcoats  a» 
in  Glasgow  and  weakly  constitution,  and  in 
the  situation  in  which  she  is  at  present. wilt 
not  admit  of  labourious  work  as  also  she  cannot 
remove  any  of  the  furniture  without  paying;  the 
house  rent  that  sum  being  only  1l.  3s.  which  I 
owe  to  the  Laird  of  house  rent  having  paid 
him  the  last  half  year's  rent  and  is.  more — ^I 
owe  him  1/.  lOt.  of  loom  rent  at  Witsunday 
that  is  a  thing  that  has  no  concern  with  the 
House  as  it  was  taken  seperatly  and  if  the 
house  rent  be  managed  tell  Mr.  Salmon  to  be 
sure  and  order  her  to  give  it  in  nam  of  house 
rent  or  do  not  give  it  at  all  and  that  she  must 
have  all  the  things  upon  the  Saltcoats  carriers 
cart  upon  friday  at  farthest  and  be  off  herself 
upon  Saturday  Mr.  Salmon  at  same  time 
writing'  a  letter  by  post  the  night  before  the 
things  goes  away  to  William  Archibald  weaver 
in  Salt^ts  stating  that  the  furniture  is  coming 
witb  the  carriers  and.  that  Martha  his  Sister  is- 
gone  to  my  fethers  but  that  she  will  be  there 
in  a  few  days  (An  expression  is  here  omitted 
as  relating  to  third  parties.) 

I  remain  Dear  Sir  yours 
most  respectfully 
(Signed)  John  Caicpbeil. 

(P.  S.  to  the  foregoing  leher.)  * 

I  wrote  the  report  of  that  meetiag  on  nb(r 
Slsl  and  32nd  pag»  of  my  declantwa  nk9m 


< 


M»l 


Jot  Admnitleying  taJa^ful  ^tit. 


A.  D.  18ir. 


mi 


Mr.  Jffiey. — f f  (  uridenttand^  on  the  ptcri  of 
the  prosecutor,  that  the  facts  now  disclosed, 
are  disputed,  I  am  prepared  to  corroborate 

Sir  if  you  positively  do  not  see  a  way 
for  me  to  escape  out  of  their  hahd«  I 
would  reqiMBt  it  of  yoa  as  a  particular 
faMmr  that  you  would  serre  toe  with  an 
IpdictODent  even  although  that  I  have  crimi- 
nated myself  as  I  would  rather  die  by  the 
lUnds  of  the  executioner  than  by  the  hand  of 
as  assassin  as  it  would  "not  be  a  ball  through 
the  head  or  body  that  would  satisfy  but  wodd 
•nploy  eirery  kind  of  torture  that  conveniency 
wo^  allow  or  that  malice  eoald  invent. 
Youn  <co. 

(Signed)  Joaif  Cakpbel£. 

The  foregoing  letter  was  inclosed  and  trans* 
•  tnitted    in    the   following   letter    from    Mr. 
Drummond  to  the  Procurator  Fiscal  at  Glas- 
gow: 

Itftnr.  idprtf  1, 1817/ 
Siai-^The  fadoenres  "will  eiplain  them- 
ailv9.f  We  aro  certainly  bonnd  to  insure 
tha  woman's  personal  security,  and  ia  order 
to  effect  that,  you  may  cause  her  to  be  sent  off 
to  Ayrshire  by  such  mode  of  conveyance  as 
tha  sitaatioii'  oif  her  health  fenders  necessary, 
anplying  her  with  the  means  of  travelling  and 
aaoaiaieace  of  which  she  seems  totally  dasti* 
tata.  As  to  liie  house  reat  and  fumitaia  it  is 
knpossibla  to  say  any  thing.  Campbell  has 
bae»piomised  stieh  meesbtes  as  are  necessary 
to  seeore  bis  peisonal  safety,  and  that  of  his 
wifis,  without  vHiich  it  is  impossible  to  expect 
shat  ha  should  glva  mi  unbiassed  evidenoa»  or 
iadead  any  etidaaco  at  all. — ^Farther  he  must 
^  left  ia  the  silaation  of  every  other  witness. 
I  remain, 
Sir, 

Your  most  obedient  servant, 
(Signed)        U.  Hoke  Drchmoiii). 
lif,  George  Sahnond, 
Piaaarater  Fiscal  Glasgow. 


P.  S.  I  have  beard  nothing  of  Campbell^ 
wife  Tia%ing  arrived  here.  Is  it  not  a  little 
awkward  for  you  to  be  seen  about  her  house  t 
i  mean  oa '  her  account.  But  you  know 
best. 

€a9y^fipte  addressed  **  To  the  Sheriff  of 
Edialwrgb,*'  acebmpaoying  some  addi- 
tions to  J<^a  CahipbeH's  Declaration, 

Silt 
Having  neglected  what  I  have  here  wrote 
at  the  time  of  writing  my  narrative  I  consi- 
dered it  prudent  to  write  this  as  an  addition  to 
my  forager  narrative  on  account  that  I  would  feel 
nys^fvary  embarassed  if  that  these  omissions 
were  aot  made  knowti  to  the  Crown  Counsel 
till  I  made  them  known  when  upon  oath  be- 
^Ke  the  Court — and  for  this  reason  I  'hope 
y.oii>  win  have  tha  goodness  to  forward  it  to  tne 

*  The  other  inclosure  mia  a  letter  (nm  J. 
Camobell  to  his  wife. 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


Ihein,   by   the   examination  of  the   persons 

gointed  out  ia  the  deposition  which  has  just 
leen  giveti.    And,  in  particular,  in  that  event. 

Crown  Counsel  by  so  doing  you  will  much 
oblige  y'  m*  oV  ser* 

(Signed)  Jouir  Campbell.  . 

Cepv — ^Letter  addressed  <*  H.  H.  Drummond; 
Esq.  Advocate,  Edinburgh.'' 


Snt 


Edinburgh  CastU  27th  June  1817 


Necessfily  irapells  me  to  make  yon  acquaint- 
ed with  my  present  wants  ;ind  at  same  time 
to  crave  your  assistance  in  getting  ray  dis- 
tress in  some  measure  lessened  they  are  in 
number  three  two  of  them  are  entirely  per- 
sonal and  the  third  concerns  both  my  wife  and 
me  the  last  of  which  causes  me  a  great  deal  of 
uneasiness,  and  shall  therefore  take  the  free- 
dom to  ktate  them  seperatly  which  is  as  fol- 
lows 

My  shoes  are  in  sach  a  sitnatioa  that  they 
do  not  serve  to  keep  my  feet  of  the  ground  so 
that  my  stockings  are  in  a  gpreat  measure  de- 
stroyed and  in  a  few  days  the  want  of  shoes 
will  leave  me  without  stockings 

my  tronsers  are  also  in  that  situation  that 
for  these  some  weeks  I  could  not  put  them  on 
as  they  were  become  unfit  to  serve  there  da^ 
sign  in  at^  sense  which  caused  me  to  wear  a 
pair  of  Breeches  the  cloth  of  which  cost  me 
32j.  pr.  yd.  a  very  unfit  article  for  every  days 
wear  they  are  fast  changing  appearance  which 
will  render  me  soon  destitute  of  elothing. 

I  now  come  to  the  last  of  the  three  and  the 
one  that  concerns  me  most  I  informed  you  be- 
fore of  my  wife  being  Pregnant  and  of  having 
been  in  a  bad  state  of  health  these  some  years 
by  past  I  have  now  to  add  that  I  believe  she 
is  arrived  at  that  period  when  that  a  wife  has  a 
right  to  look  for  the  roost  tender  care — ^but  what 
must  her  situation  be  her  husband  a  prisoner 
her  friends  poor  who  has  the  heart  to  assist  a 
person  in  distress  and  thus  render*d  unable  to 
give  her  attendance  when  needed  the  credit  of 
every  poor  man  destroyed  by  the  badness  of 
the  times  add  to  this  the  recolection  of  having 
been  six  days  badly  with  her  first  child — and 
to  this  a  Doctor  without  the  view  of  pay  for 
his  labour  is  seldom  known  to  give  his  assist- 
ance with  these  pronpects  I  think  her  misery 
nearly  compleat  and  my  reflections  cannot  ba 
diottght  to  b^  very  pleasant. 

1  hope  Sir  you  will  excuse  my  freedom  it  is 
very  disagreeable  to  my  feellings  to  be  forced 
to  this  alternative  at  tliis  time. 

Yofir  consideration  of  the  above  will  greatly 
Oblige  your  most  OV.  St. 
(Signed) 

John  Campbell. 

It  IS  believed  that  the  Jailor  famished  John 
CunpheH  with  one  or  tiro  articles  of  dress  as  is 
usual  with  prisoners  nnder  Mmilar  drcumstanees, 
and  which  he  informed  Campbell,  before  deliver- 
ing the  letter,  oould  he  done  without  writing  to 

2  Q 


596]      57  &e;prge  hi. 

1  should  wbli-  DOW  to  call  for  the  exatninalicq 
of  the  Sherifi;  sir  William  Rae/  thai  the  ac- 
curacy and  veracity  of  this  witness  should  be 
established. 

lard  Juttice  Clerk, — In  the  view  in  which 
this  examination  presents  itself  to  my  mind,  it 
does  not  appear  to  me  necessary  to  proceed  in 
this  inYCStigfation. 

Lord  Advocate, — I  should  think,  aAerwhat 
has  been  sworn  to  by  this  witne^,  the  state- 
ment of  Sir  William  Rae  should  be  given  to 
the  Court,  and  the  Court  will  then  determine 
what  line  of  proceeding  should  be  followed. 
It  will  then  be  for  me  to  consider  what  line 
I  am  to  adopt ;  but  till  this  inquiry  belfinished 
r  am  not  calbd  upon  to  say  what  I  am  to  do. 

Lord  Jmtice  Clerk. — ^Your  lordships  will  say 
if  this  enquiry  is  to  be  gone  into. 

Lord  Hermmd.^lBAther  this  man^s  state- 
ment is  true  or  not.  If  not  true,  what  sort  of 
witness  have  we  here?  If  k  be  true,  which  I 
disbelieve,  for  the  promise  of  an  office  in  the 
excise,  and  the  promise  of  writing  to  the 
Secretary  of  state,  I  don*t  believe;  but,  if 
true,  the  objection  to  his  evidence  being  re- 
ceived, must  be  sustained.  We  are  in  an 
equal  dilemma  against  receiving  him  as  a  wit- 
ness, whether  his  story  be  true  or  false. 

Lord  Gillkt. — I  concur  fn  the  opinion 
which  lord  Herroand  has  given.  I  should 
wish  very  much  to  have  Sir  W.  Rae  examined ; 
but  the  Court  is  sitting  to  try  the  case'  of  M' 
Kinley,  and  it  is  our  duty  to  proceed  in  this 
trial,  and  examine  no  witnesses  whose  evidence 
cannot  affect  the  result  of  the  trial.  If  five 
hundred  were  examined,  say  what  they  like, 
this  man  is  disqualified  from  giving  evidence. 
'  He  is  disqualified  in  every  way,  whether  what 
he  has  said  i^  true  or  not.  Besides,  he  has 
sworn  that  he  considers  himself  under  an  en- 
gagement, having  influence  on  him,  and  con- 
nected with  this  trial.  Under  these  circum-' 
stances,  I  cannot  go  farther  into  the  inquiry. 
It  may  be  a  subject  for  consideration  after- 
wards, whether  any  proceeding  should  be  had 
in  regard  to  tlie  witness ;  but,  at  present,  it 
could  not  lead  to  any  thing  towards  forwarding 
the  trial. 

Lord  PitmUly, — ^We  must  attend  to  the  pre- 
cise point  which  is  before  us.  All  this  has 
come  out  in  the  questions  put  by  the  Court, 
tfi  inUialibuSf  to  this  witness,  and  we  are'now 
in  an  inquiry  whether  the  evidence  of  Sir 
William  Rae  is  to  be  received.  I,  for  one, 
am  of  opinion,  that  it  is  not  hujus  loci  to  enter 

any  person.    No  answer  whatever  tras  sent  to  the 
letter,  either  in  writing  or  otherwise. 

[See  some  farther  particulars  respecting  this 
witness  Campbell,  in  the  Deoate  in  the 
House  of  Commons,  Feb.'10|  1818;  37 
Hans.  Pari.  Deb.  268.] 

*  Afterwards  Lord  Advocate. 


Trial  ofAndrtn  M'Kinley 


[506 


upon  this  enquiry,  and  that  it  is  not  -  compe^ 
tent  to  examine  Sir  William  Rae  at  present. 

Lord  Btiton, — I  concur  in  thinking  that 
Sir  William  Rae  cannot  competently  be  ev 
amined. 

Lord  Juttiet  Clerk, — The  opinions  now  de^ 
livered  are  to  the  same  purport  with  what  I 
was  going  to  state.  However  anxious  ^roar 
lordships  may  be  with  regard  to  them,  this  is 
not  the  stage  to  proceed  in  an  examination  of 
the  statements  made  by  the  witness ;  for  I  am 
clear,  that,  even  supposing^  you  were  to  have 
the  most  satisfactory  evidence,  that  he  has  not 
correctly  stated  any  one  of  the  coDTersatioDe 
which  he  has  detailed,  he  cannot  be  recetred 
as  a  witness,  for  he  has  sworn  he  is  acting 
under  an  engagement  which  he  holds  to  be 
binding.  Therefore^  there  can  be  no  farther 
examination  of  him  in  this  trial. 

Lord  AdvocaU.^Yom  lordships  will  io- 
duljge  me  with  saying,,  that  this  mode  of  pro- 
ceeding abridges  the  discretSoaary  power  eom- 
petent  lo  me  with  relation  to  pressioi^  the 
examination  of  this  witness.  I  have  expressed 
my  anxiety  that  Sir  William  Rae  should  be 
examined;  and  after  his  examination  wa» 
closed,  it  would  hare  been  for  me  to  have  said 
whether  I  wished  or  not  that  the  witness 
should  be  examined  or  withdrawn.  It  woold 
have  been  within  my  competency  then  to  have 
stated,  that  I  did  not  desire  a  judgmeat  of 
your  lordships  upon  the  admisstbiUty  of  the 
witness  Ounpbell.  As  it  is,  it  only  remaina 
for  me  to  say,  that  I  am  satisfied  that  whatever 
might  have  been  the  evidence  of  Sir  William 
Rae,  after  what  has  been  said  by  the  witness^ 
besides  what  I  have  now  heard  mm  the  Cour^ 
I  should  not  hare  considered  it  as  my  duly, 
as  public  prosecutor,  to  have  pressed  the  evi* 
dence  of  this  witness  apon  your  lordships ;  and 
my  wish  for  examining  Sir  William  Rae  arose 
from  my  feeling  of  what  was  due  in  justice 
to  persons  whose  names  hare  been  mentioned. 

One  thing,  as  I  am  up,  you  will  aUow  me 
to  say,  that  I  myself  have  not  been  in  the  dty 
of  Glasgow  for  two  years. 

Mr.  Je/^rey.— I  wish  a  statement  on  the  sub- 
ject to  be  made  on  the  record. 

The  following  minutes  were  then  given  in : 
*' Jeffrey  for  the  panel,  represented, 
that  if  tKe  truth  or  accuracy  of  the  stale- 
ment  now  given  in  the  initial  depositioa 
of  this  witness,  was  not  admitted  by  the 
prosecutor,  he  was  ready  and  desirous  of 
corroborating  the  statement  by  other  wit- 
nesses, and  accordingly  begged  leave  in 
the  first  place,  to  calf  for  the  evidence  of 
Sir  William  Rae,  upon  the  points  alluded 
to  in  the  preceding  deposition.'' 

'^  Advocatus  answered,  that  he  was  no 
less  anxious  than  the  Counsel  for  the 
panel,  that  the  evidence  of  Sir  William 
Rae  should  be  taken.  Without  t^tam 
eridence  the  true  state  of  the  &cts,  and 


«?] 


Jw  Admmkhring  unUmfitl  Oaiiu, 


A.  J>.  1817. 


[509 


of  the  cottverMtioDi  alluded  to  in  the 
foregoing  depoeitioD,  could  not  be  pre- 
^ely  ascertained.  That  the  precise  im- 
jportof  thpse  alleged  convenations  must 
oe  ascertained  before  the  nature  and  effect 
of  the  legal  objection  could  be  distinctly 
estimated :  That  he  had .  no  intention  to 
.press  the  examination  tn  cau$d  of  this 
witness  upon  the  Court ;  and  even  after 
the  testimony  of  Sir  William  Rae  should 
-be  taken,  it  was  his  intention  to  withdraw 
the  witness." 

The  Coutit  -declined  going  into  anj  investi- 
gation in  this  matter. 
The  wituess  was  then  withdrawn. 


JioAn  M'LoMme  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Drummond, 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  ?— Yes. 

^o  you  know  a  person  of  the  name  of  Hugh 
Dickson } — ^Yes. 

Do  yoo  remember  meeting  the  panel  at  the 
bar  at  the  house  of  Hugh  Dickson,  in  the 
Gallon  of  Glasgow,  in  the  month  of  December 
last  T-^I  could  not  say  whether  November  or 
December. 

You  remember  a^meetiog  at  his  housed — Yes, 
but  not  the  time. 

Id  Che  month  of  December}^!  rather  sus- 
pect "November. 

Before  the  New  Year  ? — Yes,  a  considerable 
time  ;  I  think  November. 

Who  were  present  there? — I  could  not  say 
altogether. 

Could  you  mention  some  of  them? — One 
John  Campbell  and  Hugh  Dickson. 

Who  else  ?<*One  Gil^n,  Peter  Gibson.*  I 
eoold  not  say  I  can  recollect  their  names;  but 
I  thmk  they  were  all  present. 

Was  the  meeting  in  the  evening  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  the  purpose  of  it  ? — To  consider 
whether  it  was  pnident  to  commence  Reform 
SocieCies,  as  they  are  called. 

Describe  what  was  done  at  that  meeting  ? — 
What  I  recollect.  After  some  alt^'cation 
taking  place,  some  one  was  introduced  by 
Peter  Gibson,  who  told  us  there  were  some 
societies  aSout  town,  who  would  wish  others 
were  formed,  and  that  if  he  would  agree  to 
ferm  societies,  they  would  correspond  with 
them. 

Others  of  the  same  kind? — He  said  he  un- 
derstood so.  And  the  question  being  put— * 

Go  on?— It  being  allowed  by  tne  same  in* 
dividml,  that  it  was  necessary  they  shonld 
piomise  secrecy,  there  was  some  altercation 
vpon  that  subject.  The  ground  stated  then 
Mr  feerecy  was ;  that  as  it  was  hinted,  for  some 
time  previoOs,  in  the  London  newspaper,  the 
XiODdon  Courier,  that  the  Habeas  Coipus  might 
be  suspended  soon  after  the  meeting  of  parlia* 
nent  tor  dispatch  of  business ;  and  as  it  vras 
ftnarally  understood  that  a  very  small  crime 
asgfat  be  the  cause  of  throwing  a  roan  into 
poton;  at  tast  if  any  unguaided  ezpreasioos 


were  used,  no  one  therefore  should  hurt  his 
neighbour  for  such  unguarded  expressions. 
An V  member  might  use  unguarded  expressions  ^ 
and  his  neighbour  should  promise  not  to  hurt 
him  for  such  unguarded  expressions. 

What  vras  done  in  consequence  of  this  t^k 
of  secrecy  T~- 1  was  going  to  proceed,  if  you 
please.  Then  it  wasproposed  an  obligation 
should  take  place.  This  was  objected  to  by 
some,  as  we  did  not  know  how  other  societies 
did,  or  what  they  were  about.  All  we  could  do 
was  to  promise  not  to  hurt  them,  till  we  should 
know  what  they  were  about,  and  see  what 
weve  the  grounds  or  meanine  of  the  other 
•ocieties,  or  what  rules  they  had. 

Well,  sir  P — I  recollect  the  preses  (I  do  not 
remember  his  name)  put  it  to  the  vote,  and 
that  those  for  secrecy  should  hold  up  their 
right  hand. 

How  was  it  decided  ? — It  was  agreed,  with 
the  exception <»f  one  man,  for  secrecy.' 

Who  was  he P-^Mitchell,  I  think;  but  I 
could  not  be  positive. 

What  was  done  next? — Each  individual 
shook  hands.  There  was  a  shake  of  hands  in 
confidence,  that  nothing  was  to  be  revealed 
of  any  information  given  them  by  other  socie- 
ties ;  and  that  no  one  was  to  hurt  any  indivi« 
dual.  Then  there  was  an  appointment  of  two 
individuals. 

Do  you  remember  who  they  were? — I  was 
one.  1  do  not  remember  the  name  of  the 
other. 

What  were  they  to  do  ?— To  wait  upon  the 
Glasgow  Reform  Committee,  to  see  wnat  in<* 
formation  they  could  give  them. 

Was  that  all  that  was  done  that  night? — 
That  is  all  that  I  recollect  was  done  that 
evening. 

When  WM  the  next  meeting? — Before  I  go 
forward,  I  suspect,  I  should  give  what  took 
place  afterwards  before  any  other  meeting. 

Cour^-^It  is  what  you  know  that  you  are  to 
tell  us.-^What  I  know  took  place  as  to  myself. 
Before  I  got  time  to  call  upon  the  Glasgow 
Committee,  there  was  one  of  the  memben 
called  upon  me. 

Mr.  Druiftifioml.^What  was  his  name?— 
Alexander  Richmond.  He  called  upon  me, 
and  asked,  what  was  our  Reform  Committee 
about  now?  I  told  him,  I  was  not  an  active 
member,  or  member  of  the  committee.  He 
said,  they  would  be  as  lax,  he  supposed,  as 
the  Glasgow  Committee. .  I  told  him,  I  was 
glad  to  see  one  of  the  committee,  as  I  had  been 
appointed  to  wait  on  them ;  and  I  asked  what 
were  they  to  do  ?  Did  they  mean  to  petition  T 
or  what  were  they  to  do  ? 

Go  on  to  the  next  meeting?-— It  took  place 
in  M^Kinley's  house.  Those  I  was  connected 
wiUi 

Mr.  Je^rey.-^There  is  no  meeting  in  M'Kin- 
ley's  libelled, 

Mr.  Drummond, — Do  you  remember  a  meet- 
ing upon  the  first  of  January  ?— Yes. 


990]       57  GEOliGE  lU. 


Tri0i  ofAwirm  M'KUky 


1400 


Where  was  that  beM  ?— lo  9n«  LeMai'f . 

Where  does  Leggat  live?— loTradettovD. 

Was  that  meeting. in  the  evening  too? — ^Yes, 

Can  you  tell  us  who  were  present? — 
CampbelU  Dickson,  M'Kinley. 

This  roan  P  [pointing  to  the  panelj. — I  re- 
nember  seeing  him  there. 

Do  you  remember  any  more  of  tbem  I — ^Yes, 
one  of  the  name  of  Somenrille* 

Court, — How  many  of  them  altogether  ?-^A 
dozen,  or  perhaps  more. 

Mr.  Drvamond. — Who  was  preaes  of  that 
meeting?— I  think  a  man  of  the  name  of  Pate. 
But  as  I  was  a  little  intoxicated  that  evening^ 
I  could  not  be  positive  upon  that  point' or  any 
other.    I  was  the  worse  of  drink. 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  about  an  oadi 
at  that  meeting? — ^To  the  best  of  my  recollec- 
tion, there  was  a  paper  wrote  that  night,  called 
a  Bond  of  Union.  I  never  heard  it  called  an 
oath  till  after  I  was  made  a  prisoner. 

What  was  the  nature  of  it  ?— I  could  nol 
repeat  it  at  present.  It  was  about  persevering 
in  demanding  a  reform  in  parliament,  or  at 
least  in  petitioning  for  it. 

Who  read  it  ? — I  could  not  be  positive,  i 
believe  it  was  read  by  one  or  two. 

Do  yon  remember  any  of  the  woids. — ^If  I 
heard  them  read  perhaps  I  could. 

You  said  it  contained  something  about  pe- 
titioning for  a  reform  in  parliament? — Yes. 
Please  to  read  it,  and  I  will  say  what  I  re- 
member. 

Was  any  particular  species  of  reiorm  wanted  ? 
— ^To  obtain  the  elective  franehise  at  the  age 
of  twenty-one. 

Who  were  to  get  it  P^-Thoae^  I  suppose, 
who  were  to  be  considered  worthy  of  it. 

Was  it  for  any  particular  description  of 
persons,  or  was  it  a  general  thing  ? — I  recollect 
nothing  more  than  the  elective  franchise  at  the 
age  of  twenty-one. 

Court, — Was  it  to  every  bodyP — Insanity 
was  one  thing,  crime  was  one  thing,  that  was 
to  disqualify  a  man,  I  understood.  If  he  was 
disqualified  by  crime  he  was  to  have  no  right. 

Mr.  Drvmmand, — Was  insanity  to  disqualify 
him  ?•— I  could  not  be  positive ;  but  I  l>elieve 
it  would  do  it.  But  I  do  not  remember  whe- 
Ihere  it  was  in  the  paper  or  not. 

Do  voo  remember  any  thing  else  of  the  na- 
tare  of  this  bond  of  union  ? — ^Yes,  there  was 
one  thiitg.  There  were  none  that  were  to 
oome  into  this  society  that  were  to  hurt  any  of 
their  brethren  in  the  same  society. 

Lord  Bermand. — ^What  do  you  mean  by 
hurting  ?— By  giving  information. 

Mr,  Drimmond. — Do  yon  remember  tny 
thing  more  of  the  nature  of  the  promise  ?— ?1 
could  not  say  at  present. 

Was  it  said  what  was  to  happen  if  they 
broke  their  promise  ?— They  were  to  be  con- 
sidered at  traitors^  or  someUdDg  to  that  pur- 
pose. 


Coir^.«*-if  ftey  should  give  iofiNWittipii  f— 


Mr.  DnanmoHd. — ^Was  it  said  what  was  to 
be  done  to  them? — ^Not  that  I  remenrber  in 
that  paper. 

In  any  other  ? — ^I  saw  one  in  court. 

But  at  that  meeting  f'— I  recollect  none. 
Tliev  were  to  be  accounted  traitors,  and  to  be 
jusea  as  such. 

Court.T-To  be  used  ^s  sacb  ?^I  understood 
so. 

You  remember  itP — ^Yes;  that  is,  to  the 
best  of  my  recollection.  It  is  from  a  copy  I 
saw  of  it  next  day  that  I  speak. 

Mr.  Groii^. — He  was  not  sober  at  the  meeir 
ing,  and  does  not  speak  from  his  recollertion 
of  what  took  place  then,  but  from  ^  recol- 
lection of  a  paper  which  he  saw  afterwards. 

Court, — ^Are  you  s^ng  to  us  your  reeoUec* 
tion  of  what  passed  P-^Tiie  last  part,  I  ob- 
served to  vou,  as  to  traitors,  I  do  not  remember 
at  Leggat^s,  but  firom  a  papjsr  I  saw  MSt  day. 
There  were  other  papers  read,  as  a  speech 
prepared  for  some  reform-aueeting.  Tb^ 
were  strangers  to  me,  except  a  few  UmI  I  jesi 
now  named. 

lord  Bermond, — ^Was  any  thing  said  at  that 
meeting  as  to  the  means  to  be  employed  f — I 
never  understood  any  of  their  means,  bnt  by 
that  of  persevering  in  petitioning. 

Lord  Juttke  C/!erfc.*-You  irill  vsMlerstaad 
we  should  hava  warned  you,  that,  bgr  Mng' 
brought  here  as  a  witness,  you  tamwt  be 
brought  to  any  trial  for  those  transaetions,  and 
that  you  are  now  in  no  hazard  if  you  speak  thd 
truth.  Having  been  brought  here  as  a  witness, 
you  are  bound  to  apeak  out  the  whole  tralb, 
without  regard  to  any  obligation  that  may  hatve 
been  taken  from  you  at  any  fbmer  iimtf  or 
for  any  thing  Ulat  was  ever  said  to  yos. 

Mr.  thvmmond, — You  sdd  you  were  a  little 
the  worse  of  liquor  f — I  was,  before  going  to 
the  meeting ;  and  I  became  a  little  sick  after 
I  was  there. 

You  were  not  so  drunk  you  could  not  re- 
collect what  passed? — I  was  not  insensible 
altogether,  but  it  hurt  my  recollection. 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  further  than 
what  you  told  us  passed  at  that  meeting  1 — I 
recollect  of  the  words,  moral  and  phyitt^al 
fbrce  or  strength,  or  something;  moral  or 
physical  strength,  I  think. 

Lord  IfiTwoML— Was  that  in  the  beodP— 
I  understood  so<  It  is  from  the  P^P^  I«n 
speaking. 

Was  it  in  the  bond  ?-*-To  the  beet  el  my  r^- 
coUeetion. 

tord  Justice  Cftrft.—You  heard  it  at  Leg- 
gat's  ?— Yes. 

Mr.  Dnmunetuk — How  wa»  this  eKpressima 
used  in  that  bond?  .iiow  was  tiie  metal 
streDfth  tc  b*  applied  ?-^ADy*  mt^m^tm.  I 


•on 


for  AimhikLenng  unlawfid  Oaihs, 


A,  D.  1BI7. 


[«M 


9tB  give  if,  I  nnSenMod  it  mertfly  i»  mmi, 
they  were  to  use  great  effortt,  bj  roasdoing 
and  all  the  means  in  their  power,  to  effect  a 
refonti  in  parliament. 

Court.— Repeat  your  words,  sir?— Tocon- 
Tinoe  of  the  necessity  of  a  reform  in  the 
Commons  house  of  parliament. . 

Mr.  Dnomnond.^'llow  was  .the  physical 
strength  to  be  applied? — By  the  expression 
pliysical  strength,  I  understood  from  the  rea« 
soning  that  took  place,  that  I  was  bound  to 
assist  personally  in  preparing  and  forwarding 
petitions  for  the  like  object;  or  subscribing 
sums,  as  the  case  might  require,  subscribing 
s(s  much  money  as  possible,  to  defray  the 
expenses  of  forwarding  and  preparing  the  pe- 
iiitons. 

Lord  AdvocaU. — ^You  said  you  are  not  quite 
sure  whether  the  Hqid*  are  pbysieal  force,  or 
strength? — ^To  the  best  of  my  recollection, 
strength. 

Do  you  employ  them  as  meaning  the  same 
thing  ? — I  do  not  ptesttme  to  be  a  judge  in  the 
language. 

If  it  had  beca  physical  Ibreet  would  yo« 
hare— - 

[I^Qid  Advocate  interrupted  in  putting  the 
qae8tioi),by  the- Opposite  counsel  objecting.] 

Jjord  Advocate. — I  am  entitled  to  ask——* 

• 

.  1fitett.f^Tbey  mcy  be  synonymous ;  Vut  I 
am  not  a  judge  of  language. 

Did  you  understand  subscribing  money  to 
be  exerting  physical  strength  ? — I  understood, 
that  if  my  physical  stiengSi  was  not  t6  be  efen- 
ployed  the  other  way,  I  was  to  subscribe; 
that,  if  I  weie  not  ealled  upon  to  act  person* 
ally,  I  was  to  pay  those  who  were  to  act  ptr^ 
sttndlfty. 

Did  yott  see  any  papei*  takea  that  night  out 
of  any  person's  pocket?  by  the  prisoner  out  of 
faispocket  ? — I  could  not  say  so. 

Did  yon  see  him  produce  a  paper ^ — Yes; 
I  saw  him  have  a  paper  in  his  hand. 
*  Was  that  papeir  read  ? — ^I  understood  it  was 
fead. 

Did  yeu  bear  it  kead  f-^-To  the  best  bf  iliy 
recollection. 

What  Was  it-  about  h--Oft  the  same  sid>jbet, 
reform  in  parliaiaent. 

What  did  it  say  ?— I  could  not  be  positive. 

Do  yon  remember  nothing  about  it? — It 
was  like  the  lest  of  them,  abonl  a  refotn  in 
periiasenl. 

Siniltr  to  the  bond  of  nnien  ? — No ;  I  do 
npt  tlimk  it  we»  siasilaf  to  it.  I  think  it  was 
longer  than  it,  fi>r  one  thing. 

what  wee  it  abo«t?^About  a  lelbrte  in 
padiiunent ;  but  I  am  not  able  to  recolleet. 

Did  it  contain  any  of  IhS'  werdil  yoia  heve 
speften  oif-^l  do  not  renMsber. 
.  Any  thing  like  theni?-^!  eoeld  not  ley* 
Tkmim  was  a  p^^et  reed  by  tbem  befvre  it, 
wtfiifih  was  laid-esidei  aaii enew  paper  ordered ' 
.«tr  Ii0  sped  fee  the  conmtlWNilBiit.    Mer 


these  twe  were  read  and  Wd  aside,  tktm  fras 
a  long  speech,  five  or  six  sh^ets^  whi^  had 
been  prepared  to  be  read,  or  which  4ud 
actually  been  read,  at  some  refbfm  meeting. 

Was  the  bond  of  union,  which  vou  tok)  us 
of,  approved  of  1 — l^o ;  I  do  not  think  it  was« 
-  Any  written  that  night  7 — ^I  understood  it 
was  written. 

Did  you  see  it? — I  do^not  recollect  that  I 
saw  it ;  but  I  understood  afterwards. 

Was  there  any  body  present  ? — One 
M'Dowall  Pate,  I  tnink,  to  the  best  of  my  re- 
colUction. 

Did  McDowell  Pate  read  aloud  in  your  bear- 
ing any  paper?— He  did  read  the  bond  of 
union,  of  Which  I  have  spoken. 

And,  what  did  the  oihecs  do  when  it  was 
read  ? — ^To  the  best  of  my  recollection,  there 
was  some  amendment  proposed,  whi<^,  I 
understood,  was  added  afterwards )  but,  to  the 
best  of  my  recolIection»  I  was  out  at  the  time. 

Covf/.— Was  it  proposed  in  your  hearing  ? 
— Yes. 
In  yonr  presence  read  by  Fate  ? — Yes. 

Lord  Aduoeaie. — Did  they  sit  stall  or  rise 
after  the  reading  ?— They  sat  st^^  I  believe. 

You  did  not  hear,  it  read  when  they  stood 
up  l^-Yesy  but  not  at  that  time. 

Yen  came  btxk  again  ? — Yes. 

You  heard  the  paper  read  over  as  agreed 
to  ? — Not  by  tbe  same  individual,  but  another 
at  tbe  other  end  of  the  table;  his  name  I  do 
not  know. 

What  then  ? — Tbe  preses  ordered  every  one 
who  approved  of  the  paper  to  signify  so,  by 
holdirfg  up  their  right  nand. 
.  Do  yon  know  a  person  of  the  name  of* 
Edger  r — I  hate  seen  him  onee  since  I  was 
made,  a  prisoner. 

Did  you  hear  him  read  ? — He  retfd  it  once^ 
and  so  did  the  preset  Both  read  rt^  and 
amendmeafts  were  proposed.  He  who  read  it 
the  third  time  sat  oes^e  £dgar^  or  where  he 
sat  before  I  went  out. 

You  Said  tltey  stood  up;  mMl  each  was  to 
signify  his  spptovai  of  the'  bond  of  enion  by 
holding  u^  his  right  hand?— I  did  so^  sad  I 
understood  each  did  so. 
.  Wtiat  did  you  do  1 — ^I  geve  my  approval  to 
it,  by  holding  up  my  right  hand. 

What  do  you  nkeen,  by  giving  your  ap- 
proval?— I  became  a  member  of  that  society^ 
bound  as  I  have  eitplained,  I  understood  it« 

How  did  the  paper  begin  ?  To  the  best  ei 
ny  reoeUectien^  it  began  with  <'  In  the  pre« 
sence  of  Almighty  God.'' 

Did  it  end  wttb  the  vrordtf  *^  Almighty 
Ged?** — ^I  do  not  positively  reflsember;  but, 
I  beUeve  it  ended  with  "  he^  tae  God,"  et 
sefnsthing  te  thaiL)purt»eae»     . 

Was  there  anything  in  it  about  brothesbeed  ? 
— *I  dd  not  lemdmber. 

Try  to  recollect  whether  there-  wss  lajr  sddb 
wdrd  in  it  ?-<-^Yes;  i  daae  segr  theie  wes. 

Brotheriiood  of  affeetien  l^^-Aondthii^K 

%SB^S^w 


eOBi       St  GBOSGB  lit 


fTbelptd  »d?ooa!tew«s 
Cleik.] 

Lord  Adnofaki, — ^I  must  not  be  intempted. 

Mr.  CMl — ^Yo«  tnust  be  intemipted  ivhen 
joQ  pat  incompeteot  questknui. 

Lord  Jtatice  Ckrk, — ^The  Couit  will  prevent 
questions  from  being  put  that  are  iBoompetent, 
but  none  such  have  been  put.  The  question. 
Was  there  anything  in  the  oond  of  union  about 
brotherhood  ?  is  not  incompetent. 

XoftJ^dvooite.— Did  the  wIGness  add  bro- 
theilMMM  of  afieolioii  t — ^I  think  there  was  some- 
thing of  thai  kind. 

Was  there  anything  about  con6dence  in  it  ? 
— ^I  could  not  say  I  recollect  of  that  word. 

Was  there  anything  like  it,  or  of  ^the  same 
meaning  ? — I  could  not  say  tlwtl  remember. 

Was  there  anything  about  the  punishment  of 
death  in  it  ^— Not  that  I  recollect  of.  There 
was,  in  one  I  saw  after  I  was  a  prisoner. 

Speak  to  what  you  heard  that  night,  and  the 
bond  to  which  you  became  a  member.  Was 
there  anything  about  equal  representation  in 
it  7 — ^Yes,  I  thmk  there  was ;  that  was  in  it. 

Anything  about  annual  parliaments  in  it? — 
zes. 

You  have  said,  persons  were  to  be  con- 
sidered as  traitors,  in  certain  circumstances. 
Did  this  bond  of  union,  or  whatever  il  is, 
bear  that  any  punishment  should  be  inflicted 
on  them  ?— Not  that  I  remember.  It  held  up 
as  traitors,  or  detestable  characters,  those  who 
should  give  information,  upon  what  I  have 
said. 

You  hare  said,  that  there  was  in  this  bond, 
or  whatever  it  was,  the  words  Almighty  God, 
that  it  began  with  the  name  of  God ;  What 
were  th^  words  before  ? — ^In  presence  of  Al- 
mighty God. 

Was  there  anything  about  hopes  or  fears,  or 
rewards  or  punishments  f — ^Yes ;  I  think  these 
were  in  it,  hopes,  fears,  rewards,  or  punish- 
ments. 

How  applied  P — That  no  man  should  become 
a  traitor  for  the  sake  of  reward ;  that  no  man 
should  become  a  traitor  to  his  brethren  who 
composed  the  society. 

Was  the  word  stedfast  in  it  ?— Not  that  I  re- 
member* 

You  hare  stated,  the  words  equal  represen- 
tation and  annual  parliaments,  were  in  it,  and 
aUo  that  the  terms  moral  and  ph^cal  strength 
were  in  it ;  was  there  not  sometmng  also  about 
endejivours  ? — ^Yes  ;  endeavours  to  obtain  all  in 
our  power. 

liow  were  the  words  I  have  now  mentioned 
and  annual  parliaments,  and  unirersal  suffrage, 
connected  ? — ^I  4o  not  remember  at  present  Uie 
way  they  were  connected.  They  were  all  in 
the  same  paper. 

In  the  same  paper,  which  began  with  Al- 
mMty  God  P— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  the  word  awful  P— I  do 
not  remember  of  the  word  awful. ' 
When  you  held  up  your  hand  in  order  to 


Triti  rfAwirm  M*KMqf 


riMM 


itenvpled  by  Mr.    testify  your  beeoming  boond  to  that  tocietyy 

'  Mr  ft  mMnhgy 


Mr.  Clerk, — ^You  canoot  be  albwed  to  as- 
sume so  from  what  the  witness  said. 

Lord  Adoocate. — The  assuming  is  not  upon 
my  part. 

fWitness  removed.] 

Mr.  Clerk, — ^As  I  understood  the  witness, 
the  substance  of  what  he  said  was,  that  they 
did  stand  up,  and  some  held  up  their 
hands,  and  some  held  them  down.  Examine 
the  witness  again;  for  he  has  not  yet  said, 
that  by  bedding  up  his  hand  he  approved  the 
oath. 


Lord  JuUiee  C/erfc.— The  words  I  took  down 


«re, 

[Here  his  lordship  read  from  his  notes.] 

Mr.  Jejfity, — There  was  only  one  putting  up 
of  hands. 

Lord  GUlie$* — ^My  recollection  concurs  with 
your  lordship*s  notes.  And  I  suggest  the 
propriety  of  learning  from,  this  witness,  as  I  am 
not  sure  of  it,  whether  he  was  speaking  from 
what  he  remembers  passed  at  Leggat*s  or 
from  his  recollection  of  what  he  saw  the  day 
following.  * 

Lord  Jdvocaie, — I  begleare  to  state,  that 
I  wish  to  know  nothing  but  what  he  does  re- 
member of  that  meeting. 

[Witness  returned  .J 

Lord  Jmike  Cferfc.— I  wiah  to  state,  that  the 
Court  expects  you  to  say  distinctly,  whether 
you  are  speaking  as  to  the  terms  of  the  bond 
solely  from  your  recollection  of  the  meeting  at 
Leggat*s,  and  not  from  any  recollection  upon 
seeing  any  other  paper? 

WUneu, — I  think  I  have  made  the  difference 
always  to  your  lordships,  by  stating  when  it 
was  nom  something  else.  All  the  answers  have 
been  as  to  Leggat's  where  I  did  not  mention 
any  other  place. 

Lord  Jdooeete, — At  the  time  tou  stood  up 
and  repeated  these  words,  and  held  up  your 
hand,  and  approved  of  the  bond,  and  became 
bound  as  a  member  of  the  society,  was 
M'Kioley  present } — I  believe  he  was,  but  I 
could  not  declare  it  upon  oath. 

Have  you  any  douot  he  was  present,  from 
your  recollection  P — ^He  might  be  out  at  the 
time,  but  I  have  no  doubt  he  was  in.  He  was 
out,  but  I  believe  he  was  in  at  that  time.  I 
think  so,  but  could  not  be  positive. 

Did  you  hear  M'Kinley,  or  any  body  at 
that  meeting,  say  from  what  the  copy  of  that  - 
paper  was  taken  ?•— I  heard  some  of  the  meeting 
say,  at  one  of  the  meetings,  that  it  was  similar 
to  what  was  used  in  Iruand ;  and  there  was 
soine  alteration  made  on  that  aooount,  as  their 
object  was  only  to  employ  legal  means,  and 
the  Other  had  different  means  in  iriew.    That  •« 


f»T  Adii^kuteniig  tmltmfiiKhtht. 


dosJ 

was  the  cauM  of  the  alteration^  as  I  under- 
stood. 

Do  YOU  remember  whether  the  words,  moral 
and  physical  strength,  were  in  the  first  time 
the  bond  was  read  ? — I  do  not  remember  but 
I  understood  they  were  in  the  last  time. 

Mr.  Dnamumd. — Do  you  know  Leggat  him- 
self ? — I  could  not  say  I  am  acquainted  with 
the  man.  | 

Was  there  any  liquor  at  the  meeting  that 
night  ? — ^Yes. 

Who  brought  it  in  T-^The  man  of  the  house, 
I  undentood. 

Could  you  know  him,  i£you  saw  him  ? — ^I  do 
not  know  but  I  should. 

Do  you  see  him  in  the  Court  ? — Not  at  pre- 
sent. 

[Three  men  were  produced,  one  of  whom 
was  Leggat,  trbom  he  recognised.] 

Were  you  at  a  meeting  on  the  4th  of  January  ? 
—Yes. 
,  Where  was  it  held  ?— In  Keill  Munn*s. 

Where  is  that  ?— In  the  new  town  of  Glas- 
gow.   I  could  not  name  the  street. 

Who  were  present  at  that  meeting  ?— There 
were  these  inaividuals,  Gibson,  Dickson,  and 
M'Kinley. 

What  time  did  you  go  there? — ^Half-past 
nine  o'clock,  as  near  as  I  recollect.  It  might 
be  twenty  minutes  from  ten;  but  near  that 
time.    I  think  the  4th  of  January. 

Who  was  preses  at  that  meeting  ? — I  think  he 
who  was  preses  the  nieht  before. 

Pate,  you  mean  ? — ^Yes. 

How  long  were  you  at  that  meeting? — 
About  half  an  hour,  I  think. 

What  was  done?— Some  delegation  was 
tpoken  of.  M'Dowal  Fate  Tolunteered,  I 
think,  to  go  out  to  a  place  called  Carmunnock, 
to  see  if  tome  friends  and  acquaintances  of  his 
there  would  agree  to  form  a  society,  similar  to 
that  then  met,  which  commenced,  I  understood, 
the  1st  of  January. 

Were  any  others  present,  than  those  who 
were  present  at  the  former  meeting? — ^Yes, 
many  who*  were  strangers  to  me.  I  saw 
none  initiated.  That  was  the  term  generally 
used. 

What  do  YOU  mean  by  initiating  ? — Becoming 
members  of  the  society,  signifying  their  appro- 
bation Qf  the  bond. 

CoMTf . — What  is  your  explanation  of  initiate  ? 
— ^Doing  the  same  as  I  had  kcted  myself  upon 
the  1st  of  January,  by  holding  up  the  right 
hand  to  that  bond.  That  is  what  I  qnderstood 
by  initiating. 

You  said,  many  of  those  others  you  did  not 
know  ? — ^Yes.  The  room  was  pretty  full^  tfrhen 
I  went  in,  not  having  room  to  sit. 

Lord  Hernumd, — ^Not  room  to  sit  ? 

Mr.  Drammofiii^-Initiate  was  the  common 
word  for  the  parpoie  yoa  explained  ? — I  heard 
it  naed. 


A.D.  t8l7. 


tCk)6 


GEwrf .-^Did  yon  bear  that  word  used  at  that 
meeting  ? — No. 

Mr.  Drummond. — ^Did  this  man,  Pate,  sit  al 
the  head  of  tiie  table  ?  or  where  did  he  sit? — 
He  was  standing,  when  I  went  in. 

Had  he  any  particular  place  as  preses  T — I 
could  not  say  whether  the  side  or  head  of  the 
table  was  to  him.  ' 

How  do  you  know  he  was  preses?-- He  was 
addressed  as  such. 

Was  there  any  vice-president,  or  secretary  ? 
— None  that  I  recollect  of. 

No  other  officer,  with  any  duty  to  perform  f 
— None  that  evening:,  except  the  panel,  who  as 
collector  received  e^;hteen  pence,  which  was 
over  the  reckoning. 

Collector  of  what  ?— Collector  to  collect 
the  reckoning,  or  for  any  thiag  that -might 
occur. 

What  was  to  be  done  with  the  money  ? — >^ 
I  could  not  say.  It  was  for  the  reckoning ; 
and  the  meeting  allowed  him  to  keep  what  was 
over. 

Ctwri.— Was  he  called  collector  ?•— Yes. 
The  1st  of  January  he  was'  appointed.  He, 
or  the  person  who  had  the  office,  was  to  keep 
what  was  over,  as  some  individual  might  he 
out  of  a  sixpence,  when  he  was  called  to  pay 
the  reckoning. 

Lord  flmnanJ.— How  much  had  you  to  pay 
yourself? — I  think  sixteenpence. 

Upon  the  4th  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  know  whether  any  were  present  at 
that  meeting  who  were  not  initiated  ?-— I  do  not 
know.    I  heard  no  remarks  made. 

Lord  Juitke  Clerk, — He  said  none  were 
initiated  at  this  meeting;  but  persons  were 
present  who  were  not  at  the  meeting  of  the  Isl 
of  Januaiy. 

Mr.  Dntmmtmd. — Were  you  at  any  other 
meeting  after  that  ?— I  believe  I  was  at  some 
other  meeting.  I  do  not  remember  particu- 
larly. 

Were  you  at  a  meeting  at  Robertson's  ?— At 
Robertson*s,  I  think,  in  tibe  Gallowgate. 

How  long  was  Robertson's  meeting  after  the 
other  ? — I  could  not  positively  say. 

A  week  ?— -A  week  or  two;  out  I  do  not 
positively  recollect. 

Was  M'Kinley  there  f — I  do  not  remember ; 
but  I  think  he  was. 

"What  was  done  ? — ^I  do  not  remember  any 
thins  particular  that  was  done. 

Did  M'Kinley  keep  a  copy  of  the  bond  of 
union  ? — I  could  not  be  so  particular.  I  never 
saw  him  have  it. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  he  had  it  ?— I 
never  heard  him  say  so. 

Who  were  in  Robertson's  ? — A  number  of 
persons;  John  Campbell  was  there;  and 
Didcson  and  James  Hood  were  there ;  and  a 
number  of  others,  whose  ^  names  I  do  not  re* 
member. 

Was  Simpson  there  ?— Never  that  I  saw. 

Was  Fiidayson  there  ?-*-No. 


007]        ^  GEOBGE  III. 


Tnkt  of  A^idr^w  M^£mls^ 


C«<M 


Wore  jTOii  At  tbe  nweCiag  U  Hiiniet^s  ?^  Ye», 
upon  the  23nd  of  February,  when  I  was  taJctn 
up ;.  never  before. 

Before  I  have  done  with  you,  J  wiah  to  ask 
yo«L  to  try  to  repeat,  as  iar  as  your  memory 
aenres  you,  the  way  the  bond  was  expressed. 
Begin.— In  connection,  I  could  not  repeat  it. 
There  were  annual  parliaments,  eauai  repre- 
sentation. There  were  these  woras — ^hopes, 
fears,  rewards,  and  punishments,  were  in  it ; 
and  there  was  something  about  brotherhood  of 
affection.  I  could  not  take  it  in  connection. 
These  words  were  itf  it. 

Loid  ficrMMMJ. — ^Wcfe  aay  false  names  as- 
nmed  by  ajiy  on$  t — ^Yas ;  one  by  Gibson,  and 
one  by  M'Kinley. 

What  did  bacall  fainself  r^Brotheistone,  or 
tome  sucbname.  Qibsaa  did  so  too ;  he  called 
himself  M%nley. 

John  MlfOehiane  cross-examined  )>y 
Mr.  Jeffrey. 

How  many  were  at  Munu's  ?— I  could  not 
aagr.  « 

A  handred  ?^No. 

Tyventy  or  thirty  ? — ^I  could  aoi  say. 

Was  il  a  laige  room  tba  ascetiiig  oacapiad  f 
—No. 

Mr.  J^Jrof. — I  hare  no  more  questions. 

Lord  Advocate, — Were  the  wordsy  declare 
and  swear,  in  the  bond? — ^The  word  deckare 
was  in  it.    It  vf  as  at  the  beginaing> 

There  were  the  words  Almighty  God,  and 
then  the  word  declare  after  tUem  ;  hoiw  did  the 
words  run  ? — I  know  declare,  was  immediately 
after  Almighty  God ;  but  how  the  words  were 
used,!  do  not  know. 

Did  TOO  ooderaCand  you  ased   the  word 

dare  r — Yes ;  that  it  was  ii 


declare 


in  the  bond". 


Ceurt. — ]>o  yoa  fecoltect  any  thing  of  the 
'  swear  in  it  ? — ^Not  that  I  recollect  of; 
but,  the  word  declare,  I  recollect. 

Explain  m  what  way  the  preses  directed  the 
holding  up  the  hands  ?— The  word  were :  All 
who  approve  of  the  bond,  ae  it  now  stands, 
will  signify  the  same  by  holding  up  their  right 
hand. 

This  was  after  it  wa»  read  ? — Yes,  after  it 
was  read  the  third  time. 

Attend  to  this  question.  Am  I  to  under- 
stand, that  by  your  complying  with  this  ques- 
tion, that  was  put  bf  the  preses,  by  holding 
up  your  hand,  you  mean  to  conrey  to  as,  that 
that  was  being*  initiated  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  reooUect  any  thing  more  being  said 
by  the  preses,  either  before  or  after  he  put  that 
questioB  about  approval  by  the  holding  up  of 
hands  ?— No,  except  his  part  in  general  con- 
verMrtion. 

Am  I  to  understand  from  you»  tJhat  this  pro.* 
aetding,  which  iwAi  place  at  Lemf  s  was  the 
only  oceasion  when  you  saw  this  bond  ap>- 
proTed  of,  in  the  way  you  mention ;  or  did  you 
see  it^kma  at  any  other  meetirfe  f — At  none  of 
those  meetings  I  was  talking  or. 


Lavd  He^mtmd, — Did  you  ete¥  see  it  done  at 
any  priyate  meeting  ? 

Comaelfor  tie  Fanel. — ^That  is  not  in  the 
libel. 

Mr.  Draiawioarf.*— The  gentlemen  opposite 
have  not  attended  to  the  indictment,  in  object- 
ing to  this  question. 

Lord  Advocate, — ^Did  you  ever  at  any  time 
see  the  question  of  approval  put  in  the  same 
way  as  at  Leggat's? 

[Objected  to  by  Mr.  Gerk,] 

I  never  recollect  it  being  put  when  the  panel 
was  present. 

Lord  Advocate. — I  wish  to  ask  the  witaess, 
whether  he,  at  this  moment,  considers  himself 
under  the  obligation  of  this  bond  of  union?— 
By  no  meaas. 

TeterOAun  called. 

Mr.  Je^ey. — This  man  proposed  to  be 
adduced  la  evidence,  is  liable  to  ooavulsions 
and  epileptic  fits,  which  have  so  iur  weakened 
bis  memoiy,  as  to  render  htm  aa  tmiK  witness 
in  such  a  case  as  the  pnssent.  We  can  prove, 
by  those  who  have  known  him  from  hie  infancy, 
that  his  evidence  is  not  be  relied  upon. 

Lord  Advocate. — The  otjeotion  relatas  le 
epilepsy.  It  is  quite  common  to  men  of  the 
greatest  f;alents.  Julius  Cesar  was  liable  to  it. 
Buonaparte  has  been  said  to  be  liable  to  it,  aa 
well  as  another  great  military  commander  the 
Arohduke -Charles.  Do  our  learned  friends 
mean  to  say,  that  none  of  tliese  personages  eoald 
have  given  testimony  in  a  court  of  justice }  I 
appri^end  this  to  be  impossible.  If  so,  yoar 
lordships  caaaot  admit  a  proof  of  this  aUeg»> 
tion  ia  the  terass  in  which  it  is  made. 

Mr.  Jeffrey. — It  is  in  the  knowledge  of  alV 
mankind,  that  this  disease  impairs  the  faculties 
of  the  mind. 

Lsxrd  Advocate. — Is  it  meant  lo  aver  thai 
Gibson  is  turn  aompu  mentis 

Mr.  C/^^.— We  do  not  say  he  is  an  idiot ; 
but  we  make  an  averment  that  bets  subject  to 
a  weH  known  disease,  which  weakens  thf  in- 
tellects to  an  extraordinary  degree.  And  sup- 
pose we  should  not  be  able  to  establish  this  fkct 
to  such  an  extent  as  to  induce  you  not  to  receive 
his  evidence  at  all,  we  may  do  it  to  such  an 
extent  as  to  satisfy  your  lordships  and  the  jury, 
that  the  witness,  if  examinable,  is  yet  entitled 
to  very  Kttle  credit  or  belief  with  a  jury.  Having 
said  these  few  words,  I  need  not  trouble  you 
with  a  long  harangue,  as  I  never  heard  suc)k  an 
o!]gection  opposed  ta  iifnine. 

Lord  Advocate. — I  merely  wish  to  kuow  what 
is  asked  io  be  proved,  aixl  I  desire  to  see  the 
allegation  in  wn ting  upon  t^a  record. 

Jokn  derk  was  called  as  a  witness  Ibr  the 

panel. 


66dl 


9  \  ' 

far  AditAniUenng  unlaXB/id  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


feio 


Lord  Advocate. — Till  this  moment  I  vras  not 
aware  of  this  eridencp.  The  witness  is  not  in 
the  list  of  witnesses  furnished  by  the  prisoner. 
I  do  not  object  on  this  account  to  his  e^dence, 
though  I  might  do  so ;  but  he  is  uot  in  the  list 
sent  me  eTen  last  night. 

[Witness  sworn.] 

Mr.  CoMum» — What  are  you  7— A  cotton- 
spinner,  in  the  summons  I  received. 

What  are  you  ? — Sometimes  I  am  designated 
by  that  name,  and  sometimes  by  the  name  of 
merchant. 

Do  you  know  Peter  Gibson  ?«— Yes,  I  do. 

Was  he  ever  in  your  employment  f^-Yes. 

Mr.  Jeffrey, — You  know  Peter  Gibson  ?— 
rdo. 

Do  yon  know  whether  he  is  in  a  sound  or  an 
inBrm  state  of  health? — He  was  for  several 
years  in  my  employment  previous  to  the  month 
of  March.  I  was  told  he  is  subject  to  a  falling 
sickness.    I  never  saw  him  in  it. 

Have  you  occasion  to  know  whether  he  is  a 
person  oS  entire  understanding,  or  weak  in  his 
intellects  ? — ^I  had  occasion  to  give  him  orders 
in  various  things  ^  and  in  any  intercourse  I 
had  witb  him,  we  understood  one  another. 
He  knew  what  was  to  be  done  or  not. 

Did  you  observe  any  defect  in  his  under- 
standing ?  What  kind  of  matters  had  y<m  to 
speak  of  to  him  F^—In  cotton  mills  there  are 
many  things  of  a  mechanical  nature  to  speak 
about. 

Did  he  appear  to  you  to  have  the  ordinanr 
memory  and  understanding  of  other  men  ?-<-i 
always  received  the  same  kind  of  answers  from 
him  as  from  any  of  the  pther  servants. . 

Peter  GftftioMr  sworn  .-^Eztfmined  by 
Mr.  Drununondm 

Court, — ^Being  adduced  here  as  a  witness, 
you  can  now  suffer  in  no  respect  on  account  of 
any  share  you  may  have  had  in  the  proceedings 
in  question,  and  yon  will  tell  all  that  you  re- 
meoiber  of  diem. 

Wifytsuj^-l  shall  not  tell  what  I  do  not  re* 


Mr.  DruffmtonJ.— Do  you  know  this  man  ? 
—I  do. 

MThat  is  his  name  ?— Andrew  M'Kinlev. 

Do  you  remember  seeing  him  in  Hugh 
J)kikaon%  in  December,  last  ?r~Yes. 

Do  you  remember  what  other  persons  were 
at  that  meeting? — ^There  were  so  many  of 
them,  and  some  I  did  not  know. 

Mention  any  of  the  names  f — Hugh  Dick- 
son, John  Campbell,  John  M'Lachlane,  and  I. 

About  how  many  might  there  be  altogether 
at  the  meeting  ? — I  thi^. there  might  be  about 
ten. 

Was  there  any  thing  of  the  nature  of  an 
dathy  obligation,  or  promise,  at  that  meeting  ? 
— ^A  proniise  of  secrecy  by  shake  of  the  hand. 
Do  not  be  too  fast  wiUi  me.  I  should  wish  so. 

Can  jOQ  describe  to  us  how  that  promise  of 
ifecreey  by  shake  of  hand  was  done  F— I  can* 

VOL.  ?cxxni. 


not  describe  the  very  way.  I  remember  we 
all  shaked  hands. 

Did  you  stand  up? — ^Upon  our  feet.  We 
had  been  sitting ;  and  we  shook  hands,  that 
what  we  should  get  we  should  keep  to  our- 
selves. 

All  information  ? — ^All  information  whatso« 
ever. 

Do  you  remember  a  meeting  some  time 
after  this  at  William  Leggat's?— In  Trades* 
town  ? 

Yes  ? — I  remember  a  meeting  there. 

At  what  time? — I  think  on  the  1st  qf 
January. 

Was  M<KinIey  at  that  meeting  ?~I  think 
he  was. 

Cotart. — Are  you  positive  he  was?— -I  am 
pretty  sure  he  was  there. 

Mr..  Drummond. — Can  you  mention  any 
other  names? — I  cannot  recollect  any  more  than 
I  mentioned  before. 

CsMf^.— Were  there  others  ?— Yes^  strangers 
to  me. 

Mr.  Drvmmmd, — ^Was  there  any  thing  in 
the  shape  of  oath,  promise,  or  obligation,  at 
that  meeting? — As  I  had  got  spirits  befbre 
going  there,  and  while  Uiere,  I  do  not  recol- 
lect what  was  said  or  done,  at  the  meeting  of 
the  first  of  January.  I  dare  not  say  any  tUng 
concerning  it.    I  am  not  very  sure. 

Do  you  mean  to  say  you  were  so  drunk  that 
you  could  not  remember  ? — I  do  not  mean  to 
say  that  I  was  drunk.  Tliere  are  different 
degrees  in  which  persons  may  be  the  worse 
of  liquor.  I  have  seen  some  persons  -Mio 
cannot  go,  others  who  cannot  speak,  and  some 
who  can  do^  both  but  do  not  afterwards  re- 
collect what  happened  in  their  presence.  ' 

Do  you  know  what  M'Kinley  and  the  others 
did  ? — I  remember  coming  home  with  them. 
We  went  into  a  public  house  at  the  Catton,' 
wheK  I  fell  asleep  and  continued  so,  I  was 
told,  for  two  hours. 

Do  you  remembev  the  approval  of  a  bond 
or  oath  of  union  ? — I  do  not  remember. 

Do  you  swear  you  do  not  remember? — ^I 
swear. 

Do  you  say  or  swear  you  do  not  recollect  any 
thing  of  an  oath  at  that  meeting  ? — ^I  do  not 
recollect  any  thing  about  it. 

Do  you  recollect  any  thing  about  a  bond  of 
union  at  that  meeting  ?— I  saw  one  about  the 
2nd  or  3rd  of  January. 

Where  ?-^In  a  man's  hand  in  the  Calton. 

Was  there  any  thing  of  that  kind  at  the 
meeting  ?-^I  don't  recollect  of  it. 

Was  there  a  person  of  the  name  of  Mn[)oi!^ 
all  Pate  at  that  meeting  ? — I  was  told  he  was. 

Lord  Advocate, — After  you  did  know  him, 
did  you  recollect  having  seen  him  there  ?— I  do 
not  remember. 

Wete  you  at  a  meeting  at  Keill  Munn's 
upon  the-4th  of  January  ?— Yes. 

Were  those  persons  present  who  had  been 
at  the  former  meetings  ?— Was  M'Kinley  there  ? 

2  R 


611] 


£7  GEORGE  IIL 


Trial  qfAmken  M'Kmiqf 


[612 


— I  do  not  remember  of  s^ng  M'Rinley  there. 
I  was  out  some  time.  I  do  not  recollect 
him. 

Was  he  there?-— I  say  he  was  not  there. 

Was  Soroerrille  there  ? — I  do  not  recollect. 

Was  Hood  there  ? — ^Yes. 

lard  JuUiee  CMt.~He  has  said  M'Kinley 
was  not  there,  at  least  as  &r  as  he  recollects. 

Lard  Advocate. — ^We  must  ascertain  how  far 
his  memory  serves  him,  and  whether  he  be 
consistent  in  his  statements. — ^Was  Somenrille 
there? — I  wish  to  say  nothing  but  what  I 
recollect.  I  am  not  certain  whether  he  was. 
I  have  a  judge  to  answer  at  another  day. 

'  Was  Hood  there  T—Yes,  I  say  he  was.  I 
have  not  at  all  a  good  memory. 

Hugh  Dicksen's  house  is  off  and  on  with 
your's  f — ^A  but  and  a  ben ;  I  am  on  the  north 
end,  and  he  is. to  the  south  of  that  in  the 
middle. 

'  You  have  sud  you  were  at  a  meeting  in 
Hugh  Dickson's  part  of  the  house,  in  which 
John  Campbell  and  M'Kinley  were  present  f— 
I  juiid  8o»  and  I  say  it  yet. 

I  believe  your  statement  is  perfectly  true, 
and  you  said  there  was  a  promise  of  secrecy. 
Was  any  paper  produced  and  laid  before  the 
meeting?— It  might  be  the  case,  but  I  do  not 
recollect. 

Do  vou  recollect  of  any  paper  being  read 
in  the  n>rm  of  an  obligation  of  any  sort? — No. 

Any  thing  of  the  nature  of  a  bond  f — I  never 
heard  tell  of  a  bond  or  any  such  thing. 

An  oath  ? — ^No. 

A  declaration  ? — ^No. 

Did  you  hear  any  words  repeated,  in  which 
the  name  of  the  Almighty  was  employed  ? — ^No. 

Do  you  know  Robertson's? — ^I  know  the 
place. 

Were  you  there  on  the  15th  of  February  P 
—You  are  leaving  a  long  way  now.  I  was 
there. 

Was  a  person  of  the  name  of  Finlayson 
there? — ^Tes,  I  think  so. 

Was  M'Kinley  therel-Yes. 

I  ask  you  upon  your  oath,  whether  an  oath 
or  obligation  was  administered  to  him  there 
in  presence  of  the  panel  at  the  barf — I  could 
say,  and  hold  up  my  hand  again»  that  there 
was  no  such  thing,  or  I  am  very  far  mistaken, 
upon  the  15th  of  February,  in  Roberston's. 

Was  there  so  any  other  day  f — I  never  saw 
that  man  administer  an  oath  to  Finlayson. 

Ijfrd  Advocate. — ^I  wish  the  witness*^  de» 
position  to  be  taken  down  in  writing. 

The  following  was  taken  down  in  writing 
by  the  Clerk  of  Uourt. 

^  And  uDon  the  motion  of  the  lord 
advocate^  tne  said  Peter  Gibson  being 
interrogated^  if  at  the  meeting  at  Rob^ert- 
son's,  on  the  15th  day  of  February  las^ 
at  which  he  admits  he  was  present^  and 
where  he  depones  the  panel  and  one 
Finlayson  also  were^  any  oath  was  admiii^ 
stered  by  the  panel  to  the  said  Finlayson 


in  his  presence,  depones,  That  there  mm 
none.  Interrogated,  if,  upon  the  above 
occasion,  any  oath  was  administered  to 
Finlayson  by  an  other  person  in  the  pre- 
sence of  M'kinley,  the  panel?  Deponea^"^ 
That  there  was  no  oath  administered  to . 
Finlayson,  or  any  person  else  at  Robert- 
son's on  ^e  I5ui  of  February  last.  In- 
terrogated, if  any  oath  was  administered 
by  M'Kinley,  or  any  body  else  in  M*&ui- 
ley's  presence,  either  to  Finlayson  or  any 
body  elA,  or  ariy  other  day  in  the  month 
of  February  last,  at  Robertson's?  Da* 
pones,  Tliat  he  was  present  at  a  meeting 
at  Robertson's  on  the  18th  of  Februaiy 
last,  along  witli  the  panel  M'Kinley  and 
Finlayson,  when  he  thinks  there  was  an 
obligation  taken;  but  whether  it  was 
more  than  a  promise,  or  amounting  to  an 
oath,  he  does  not  recollect.  Depones, 
That  at  the  meeting  at  Leggat's  on  the  1st 
of  January  last,  which  was  the  only  one 
he  ever  was  present  at  in  that  house,  he 
was  in  liquor,  and  if  he  took  any  obUga- 
tion  or  oath  there,  he  does  not  Know  of 
it,  nor  does  he  know  of  any  other  body 
having  taking  any  there.  Depones,  Hutt 
he  never  read  any  oath  from  a  paper,, 
because  he  cannot  read  writing  ;  and  all 
which  he  depones  to  be  truth,  as  he  shall 
answer  to  God.'* 

(Signed)         Pbtee  Qibsox. 

Who  took  the  promise  on  the  18th  of  Fe- 
bruary ? — ^All  present. 

Was  there  any  writing? — ^No. 

Was  it  read  ?— No. 

Was  it  repeated  ?<~I  am  not  very  certain. 

What  do  you  think  ? — ^I  did  not  see  those 
present  take  this  obligation,  and  do  not  know 
whether  it  was  any  more  than  a  promise. 

How '  was  it  taken  ?~I  thinK  it  vras  re- 
peated.   I  do  not  recollect  who  repeated  it<. 

Was  it  M'Rinley?— I  do  not  recoiled 
whether  he  or  not. 

You  have  said  there  was  something  of  the 
nature  of  a  premise.  What  did  they  promise 
to  do  ?-«-There  was  a  secret  committee  choseit 
to  do  nothing  unknown  to  the  central  meeting. 
They  bound  themselves  to  do  nothing  bat 
what  was  to  be  made  known  to  the  central 
meedngK 

Lord  JBermdnd.— Is  that  all  you  recollect?—- 
That  is  aU  I  reeoftect 

Lord  Advocate. — ^Did  you  at  any  time,  at 
any  meeting  at  Robertson's,  at  Hugh  Dick- 
son's, at  Leggat's,  in  the  months  of  January 
or  February,  see  any  other  oath  taken  than 
that  you  have  now  mentioned,  in  presence  qC 
the  panel  ?— In  Hugh  Dickson's,  tnere  was  a 

Jromise  by  shake  of  hand.  0>n  the  first  of 
anuary  I  do  not  remember  what  was  said« 
And  in  Robertson's,  on  the  15tb,  there  was  no 
obligation  at  all. 

I  ask  whether  at  any  time  of  these  two 
months,  you  heard  any  obligation  taken  f — ^I 


6131 


■  • 

Jot  AdminisieringunUnt^l  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C614 


do  not  remember  seeing  more  thtn  what  I 
have  told  you  of. 

I>id  you  take  any  yourself  when  M'Kinley 
was  present? — ^No.  Mind,  I  said  I  do  not 
remember  what  passed  on  the  Ist  of  January. 

When  sol^r,  at  any  time,  did  you  take  an 
oathy  or  any  obligation,  when  the  prisoner  was 
present  ? — No.  ' 

In  the  month  of  December,  was  there  any 
other  promise? — No. 

In  the  house  of  Leggat,  in  December,  was 
any  other  taken? — I  never  was  there  any  other 
time.    I  can  say  no  more. 

•  Mr.  Drwmnond. — ^Had  you  anv  other  ^ymp- 
torn  of  intoxication,  than  want  of  recollection  ? 

Lord  Adooeate, — I  want  to  know,  whether 
you  administered  an  oath,  or  read  any  thing  in 
tb€ .  nature  of  an  obligation,  at  any  of  the 
bouses  or  times  mentioned,  or  tried  to  read 
any  ? — I  never  read  one  in  my  life,  nor  tried, 
fat  I  cannoti  which  is  a  very  gfood  reason. 

Yon  limit  your  answer  by  saying,  you  did 
not  see  an  oath  administered,  or  did  not  read 
an  oath  ?  Did  any  person  read  it  to  you  ? — ^No 
person* 

Was  any  oath  repeated  then?— There  was 
never  an  oath  repeated  than  what  I  have  told 
yon,  Qp  in  Dickson^  on  the  18th  of  February. 

[The  Counsel  for  the  panel  put  no  questions 
to. this  witness.] 

Jtay, — In  consequence  of  what  took  place 
on  the  18th,  or  at  any  other  time,  do^'you  con- 
ceive yourself  under  an  obligation  to  conceal 
Che  truUa?  In  consequence  of  that  promise,  or 
oath,  whether  more  solemn  or  not  than  you 
describe  it,  do  you  hold  yourself  at  all  in- 
fluenced?— Not  in  the  least.  I  gave  up  idl 
that  this  present  month. 

Joawt  Fmltnfton  swotu-— Examined  by 
Mr.  Dnanmond, 

Do  you  remember  being  at  a  meeting,  in 
February,  at  Robertson's,  in  the  Gallowgate  ? 
—Yes. 

Were  you  at  more  than  one?— I  do  not 
remember  the  dates.  I  was  at  two,  at  that 
man  Robertson's. 

At  what  date  was  the  first  ? — ^IJpon  a  Satur- 
day. 

What  time  of  the  year?  The  month  of  Fe- 
bruary ?^-I  think  it  was  February;  a  week 
before  I  was  taken  up. 

How  many  were  present  at  that  meeting  ?*' 
At  the  first  P 

Yet. — ^About  twenty. 

Can  yon  name  any  of  them? — ^Yes,  the  pri- 
scmer  was  there. 

Do  you  remember  tiie  names  of  any  of  the 
reet } — ^Yes,  Peter  Gibson  waa  there. 

DojoQ  know  him? — ^Yes.  That  vras  the 
first  time  I  ever  saw  Gibson. 

Do  yon  remember  any  others  ?— John  Camp- 
bell was  diere. 

Was  Hood  there  ?~Yes. 

Was  James  Robertson  Uiere  ?— Yes,  James, 
is  his  name. 


Was  Somerville  there  ?*-i— Yes. 

What  is  his  first  name  ?—  Andrew. 

Was  Buchanan  there  ? — ^Yes. 

What  is  his  first  name  ?— Fthink,  John. 

Was  there  any  preses  of  the  meeting? — 
Robertson. 

What  was  done  at  thb  meeting? — ^They 
chose  a  select  committee; 

What  was  that  for  ? — I  do  not  know  what 
it  was  for.  Positively  I  do  not  know  what  it 
was  for. 

Were  you  one  of  the  committee  chosen  ?-^ 
Yes. 

Lord  Adoodate. — ^Do  you  remember  whether 
there  were  any  oaths  administered  ?«— Yes,  I 
do. 

Recite  them,  and  let  us  hear  them  if  you  can  ? 
— ^I  have  heard  two.  There  was  none  at  the 
first  meeting. 

Mr.  Drmmond. — ^Was  anything  more  done, 
that  you  remember? — ^I  never  heard  what  the 
select  committee  was  to  do. 

Was  any  thing  more  done  at  that  meeting, 
by  way  of  oaths  ? — ^Members  brought  money. 

What  vras  done  with  the  money  ? — ^It  was 
given  to  the  treasurer. 

Who  twas  treasurer  f — Hugh  Cochrane.  He 
vras  there. 

Those  present  brought  money?— Some  of 
them.    I  did  not  see  afi  of  them. 

Do  you  remember  anything  more  ? — Tliere 
was  a  good  deal  said,  but  I  do  not  remember  it 
all.  The  most  of  the  time  was  taken  up  in 
electing  that  committee. 

Was  the  prisoner  at  the  next  meeting,  on  a 
Tuesday  ? — Yes. 

Was  an^  oath  administered  or  taken  at  the 
next  meetmg? — ^Yes. 

What  took  place  at  that  meeting? — ^An  oath 
was  dictated  to  me>  and  I  wrote  it. 

What  was  the  nature  of  this  oath  ? — ^I  cannot 
repeat  it ;  the  whole  matter  of  it :  we  were  not 
to  tell  anybody  what,  was  to  be  done ;  either 
the  names  of  the  select  committee,  or  anything 
they  should  do,  for  that  select  committee  was 
not  elected  openly,  but  bv  ballot. 

Was  Gibson  present  when  that  oath  was  ad- 
ministered or  taken  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  done  with  the  oath  ? — I  read  it 
out. 

All  of  the  rest  repeated  it  after  you  ?— They 
all  stood  round  the  table,  and  I  beard  their 
voices  repeating  it  after  me. 

You  aoministered  it  to  the  rest? — I  could  not 
tell  whether  all  did  repeat  after  me. 

Did  Gibson  ? — I  do  not  know ;  one  or  two 
may  not  have  followed  me,  and  I  may  not  have 
noticed  it. 

Was  Gibson  present  at  the  time  ?— Yes. 

Was  he  one  of  those  standing  round  the 
table  ?— Yes. 

Lord  Adtfocaie, — Do  you  know  if  any  other 
oath  vras  taken  there  then,  or  in  any  other 
houses,  in  the  month  of  January  P — Not  in  that 
house. 

No  Qther  in  (hat  boase  ^*No. 


6151       SI  GEORGE  IIL 


Triai  qfAndrm  M'Kinley 


[616 


•  £Th6  Counsel  for  the  panel  objected  to 
the  questions  now  put,  {ind  the  witness 
was  withdrawn.] 

lord  JrfiMicatt.— The  indictment  charges  the 
oath  to  have  been  administered  at  a  secret 
meeting  held  at  the  house  of  W.  Robertson, 
innkeeper  and  sUbler  in  Gallowgate  of  Glasgow, 
or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate 
▼toinity  thereof.  The  question  I  wish  to  put, 
is,  whether  or  no,  at  any  other  place  in  Glas- 
gow, within  the  three  months,  the  witness  heard 
any  oath  administeied,  at  which  the  panel  was 
present? 

Mr.  Je^^^. — ^Wemust  object  to  that  ques- 
tion. Itthere  be  any  use  at  all  in  the  specifi* 
cation,  without  which  the  relevancy  of  the  libel 
could  not  be  sustained,  it  must  be  incompetent 
for  the  prosecutor,  after  the  opportunity  he  has 
had  for  deliberation  upon  this  indictment,  to 
put  such  general  questions  to  the  witness.  In 
this  case,  particularly,  where  there  is  a  specifi- 
cation of  only  one  meeting,  at  which  this  wit- 
ness is  stated  to  have  been  present  (for  he  is 
not  mentioned  to  have  b^en  present  at  Hunter's 
or  Leg«^at*s,  or  at  any  odier  meeting),  such  a 
general  question  cannot  be  allowed.  You 
have  that  meeting  specified  in  the  indictment : 
and  I  submit,  that,  especially  after  the  prose- 
cutor has  brought  qut  that  an  oath  was  adminis- 
tered (but  which  is  not  very  available  to  him), 
lie  cannot  take  an  opportunity  of  putting  a 
general  question  to  the  witness,  whether  an 
oath  was  administered  in  Glasgow,  or  the 
vicinity,  at  anv  time  within  the  limiution  of 
these  months  (for,  as  to  Robertson's,  the  pro- 
secutor has  not  confined  himself  there). 

This  indictment  is  divided  into  five  heads, 
charging,  as  so  many  acts,  the  administration 
of  the  oath,  at  fixed  dates  and  places,  to  a 
number  of  persons  mentioned ;  and  the  advan- 
tage of  specification  would  be  lost,  if  a  prac- 
tice were  to  be  introduced,  that  after  naming 
a  day  an<]t  place  in  his  charge,  the  prosecutor 
might,  in  his  examination,  go  through  many 
months  and  different  places.    The  general  ex- 
pressions added  in  an  indictment  are  intended 
for  any  casual  slip  or  inaccuracy  in  what  roust 
be  articulately  stated,  and  not  to  give  the  pro- 
secutor such  a  range  of  inquiry  as  he  now 
wishes.    To  what  is  particularly  charged  and 
specified  alone  he  must  confine  himselh   Were 
it  to  be  otherwise,  we  might  be  mocked  with 
the  appearance  of  a  form  of  specification  in  an 
indictment,  but  we  should  be  deprived  of  any 
benefit  from  it ;  and  we  might  be  condemned, 
in  other  hands,  to  suffer  the  perversion  of  all 
the  forms    considered    indispensable    to  the 
safety  of  the  subject.    If  this  were  to  be  per- 
mitted, any  suspected  places  might  be  men- 
tioned; and  different  places  might  be  inten- 
tionally put  in  to  oppress  prisoners,  by  the 
most  intolerable  latitude  of  investigation.    I 
submit,  therefore,  that  the  question  pn^MMed 
by.  the  lord  advocate  cannot  be  put  to  the 
witness. 

Mr.  GranU-^ln  a  case  in  which  T  attended 


before  you  last  year,  where  a  carrier  was  tried 
for  theft,  the  description  of  some  of  the  stolen 
goods  was  in  general  words,  ''  cotton  twist,  and 
other  goods;*'  and  you  were  all  clearly  oC 
opinion,  that  the  description  was  not  sufficiently 
particular  and  specific. 

Lord  Advocate, — My  learned  friends  are  mis- 
taken in  supposing  that  the  general  description 
given  in  the  indictment  applies  merely  to  the 
persons  to  whom  the  oath  was  administered* 
It  applies  also  to  the  placed;  and  your  lord- 
ships nave  found  it,  by  your  interlocutor  of  re- 
levancy, to  be  sufficientlv  specific.  The  ques* 
tion  is,  therefore,  whether  or  not,  your  lord- 
ships having  found  this  part  of  the  indictment 
relevant,  the  prosecutor  is  to  be  narrowed,  in 
the  course  of  bis  investigation  of  the  Cuts  so 
found  to  be  relevantly  set  forth,  by  the  objec- 
tion in  question. 

The  dates  when  the  oath  is  alleged  to  have 
been  administered  are  given  specifically  in  the 
indictment,  as  well  as  generally,  within  two 
months.  Your  lordships  have  already  allowed 
questions  to  be  put  as  to  meetings  any  day  in 
the  months  of  January  or  Februaxy,  without 
adhering  merely  to  the  precise  days  in  the 
minute  and  specific  statement  of  the  previous 
clause  of  the  indictment.  Yet  it  is  obviova, 
that  the  same  objection  now  stated  to  putting 
a  question  as  to  meetings  in  other  places  than 
those  specially  mentioned,  but  referring  to 
meetings  at  Glasgow  or  the  vicinity  thereof, 
as  stated  in  the  indictment  might  bave 
been  urged  vrith  the  same  propriety  to 
a  question  general  as  to  the  time,  and  not 
referring  generally  to  tlie  dates  condescended 
on.  Now,  what  I  now  wish  to  prove,  relates 
to  a  meetinff  at  some  place  in  Glasgow  or  its 
vicinity.  Your  lordships  have  found,  that  the 
charge  in  the  indictment  laid  in  those  terms, 
and  thus  generally,  is  relevant ;  and  you  have 
actnallv  allowed  me  to  put  questions  equally 
general  as  the  present,  with  respect  to  time. 
The  same  prinaple,  I  submit,  ought  to  prevent 
my  being  narrowed  in  my  inquiries  as  to  place. 
This,  as  I  understand  it,  is  the  simple  state- 
ment of  the  case,  and,  I  submit,  your  lordships 
would  not  have  remitted  the  indictment  to  an 
assize  without  erasing  that  general  statement 
from  the  indictment,  if  Mr.  Jeffrey's  present 
objection  appeared  to  you  to  have  been  well« 
founded. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk, — ^We  certainly  could  not 
repel  this  objection  without  the  most  deliberate 
consideration.  I  took  it  for  granted,  thert 
were  four  several  occasions  upon  which,  it  ia 
alleged,  the  oath  was  administered;  and, 
although  the  general  words  in  the  indictment^ 
fonndmi  upon  by  the  lo)rd  advocate,  did  not, 
among  the  multiplicity  of  points  for  considen^ 
tioB,  strike  me  before,  now  that  the  objeetion 
to  thegi  is  pointed,  out,  I  htve  to  itaite,  thai  I 
think  it  is  my  duty  to  confine  this  eaaminaCion 
to  the  specific  charges  in  the  indictment. 

Lord  Hermand, — t  was  a  little  misled  at 
first,  jiarticularly  as  to  the  first  charge.    It  says. 


I 


617] 


far  AdmMitering  unlav^  Oaths- 


^.  D.  1S17. 


i^U 


*'  At  a  lecret  meeting,  beld  at  the  bouse  of 
Hugh  Dick^on^  then  weaver  in  Abercromby- 
street,  in  Calton  of  Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at 
Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate  yicioity  therep^ 
yon,  the  said  Andrew  M'Kinley,  did,^  &c. 
But,  upon  looking  at  it  again,  and  comparing 
it  with  the  statement  of  the  next  charge,  it 
appears  only  a  broad  description  of  the  habi- 
tation of  the  man.  The  words  apply  to  a  de- 
scription of  the  residence  of  Dickson,  as  the 
next  to  a  description  of  that  of  Leggat.  The 
lord  advocate  questioned  as  to  what  happened 
at  Kobertson's.  Under  this  indictment,  he  is 
entitled  thus  generally  to  establish  the  facts 
which  have  been  found  relevant. 

Lords  QUUuy  Pitmlfy,  and  i2es/(m,'4ntimated 
their  agreement  in  opiraon  with  the  lord  jastice 
c^erk. 

[The  witness  was  recalled.] 

Lord  Adcoeate, — Do  you  know  Hugh  Dick- 
son ? — Yes,  I  thiiik  so. 

Do  you  know  he  has  a  house  in  Glasgow  ? 
— ^No ;  I  do  not  know  that. 

You  never  were  hi  his  house  ?— No. 

In  the  house  of  William  Leggat  ? — ^Not  to 
my  knowledge. 

Do  yoQ  know  Neill  Munn  ? — I  have  seea  his 
sign,  hut  was  never  in  his  house. 

And,  in  none  of  Uie  three  months  mention- 
ed, you  ever  heard,  in  Rofoertsoh's  bouse,  any 
other  oath  ? — ^There  was  never  any  other  oath 
ra  that  house,  either  on  the  Saturday  or  Tues- 
day. 

CourC.— In  that  house,  upon  any  other  day 
in  that  month,  were  you  present  when  an  oath 
was  administered? — Yes;  but  I  do  not  re- 
member the  day. 

In  that  month  of  February  ? — I  think  it  was. 

Mr.  Jeffmf, — ^This  does  not  seem  applicable 
to  the  partioidar  charge  against  the  panel. 

Ijord  Advocate. — ^There  is  no  necessity  for 
proving  that  M'Kinley  was  present,  in  order 
to  bring  the  diarge  home  to  him.  He  might 
l>e  an  accessary,  though  he  was  absent;  sind 
this  is  charged  against  him  in  the  indictment. 
Tlie  witness  says,  there  was  an  oath  adminis- 
tered in  Robertson's  at  a  particular  period; 
and  I  presume  we  are  entitled  to  have  this 
fact  investigated,  as  we  may  be  able  to  prove 
the  panel's  connection  with  the  administration 
of  this  oath,  and  to  establish  against  him  the 
charge  in  the  indictment.  Perhaps  I  may  not 
have  fully  comprehended  the  force  or  extent 
of  my  friend  Mr.  Jeffrey's  objection ;  and  be- 
fore my  friend  the  solicitor-general  or  myself 
submit  any  observations  upon  it,  I  hope  he 
will  state  it  more  fully.  I  have  given  what  ap- 
pears to  me  a  sufficient  answer  to  the  objec- 
tion, as  already  brought  forward. 

[The  witness  was  withdrawn.] 

Mn  Jeffrey, — ^My  objection  is  two-fold.  In 
the.  case  of  accession  to  crimes  committed,  the 
first  thing  to  be  proved  is  the  crime.    This  ii 


a  different  case.    The  charge  is,  that  t^e  panel 

at  the  bar  was  guilty  of  administering  the  oath 
specified  in  the  indictment.  It  is  true,  by  the 
other  clause  of  the  act  of  parliament,  it  is  s^d, 
''  That  persons  aiding  and  assisting  at  ^e  adr 
ministerin|f  of  any  such'  oath  or  engagements 
as  aforesaid,  and  persons  causing  any  9ucii 
oath  or  engagement  to  be  administered,  though 
not  present  at  the  administering  thereof,  shaU 
be  deemed  principal  ofliendeis,  and  tried  ^ 
such ;  and,  on  conviction  thereof  by  due  course 
of  law,  shall  be  adjudged  guilty  of  felony,  and 
shall  suffer  death  as  felons,  without  benefit  of 
clergy,  although  the  person  or  persons  who  ac- 
tually administered  such  oath  or  engagement 
shall  not  have  been  tfied  or  convict^/'  Bui 
it  Is  necessary,  that  the  fact  to  which  this 
clause  may  apply  iftiould  be  speciftcany  stated 
in  the  indictment,  to  give  to  the  lord  advocate 
the  benefit  of  that  special  clause.  Now,  ther^ 
is  no  specific  allegation  in  any  one  of  Chese 
charges,  that  the  pranel  had  caitted  the  oath 
alleged  to  be  administered. 

Mr.  Drwtmand. — ^Ihat  is  clearly  ch^iged. 

Mr.  Ckrk, — It  is  charged :  you  did  so  and 
so,  or  did  so  and  so.  If  there  is  an  allegatioi^ 
that  he  did  cause  the  oath'  to  be  administered, 
what  is  it  alleged  that  he  particulaily  did  at 
that  house,  and  upon  that  occasiob  } 

lord  Hermand. — ^That  he  administered,  th^ 
oath,  or  caused  it  to  be  administered,  19 
libelled.  But  the  whole  act  of  parliament  is 
libelled  on ;  and*  the  fourth  clause  is,  [Here 
his  lordship  read  the  clause  ^bove  quoted  by 
Mr.  Jeffrey.] 

Lord  Juttke  Clerk. — ^Tbere  is  no  doubt  of  it 
•^ook  to  the  vrords  of  the  act  of  parliament*. 
The  very  words  are  repeated  in  this  charge  as 
to  Robertson's. 

Mr.  Clerk, — But  then  it  is  not  said  in  that 
charge,  that  when  he  caused  the  oath  to  be  ad- 
ministered he  was  at  any  other  place.  Now, 
please  attend.  It  may  be  true,  that  it  is  very 
well  to  allege  the  panel  caused  the  oath  to  be  ad- 
ministered ;  but  then  it  is  necessary  to  allege 
where.  And  the  allegation  in  the  libel  is, 
that  at  that  place  he  caused  the  oath  charged 
to  be  administered,  else  no  place  whatever  is 
assigned. 

Lord  Kermawf.— The  allegation  is,  that  the 
oath  was  administered  in  thathouse.  *'  Further, 
you  the  said  Andrew  M'Kinley  did,  upon  the 
5th  day  of  February,  1817,  or  on  one  or  other 
of  the  days  of  that  month,  or  of  January  im« 
mediately  preceding,  at  a  secret  meeUng  held 
at  the  house  of  John  Eobertson,  then  inn- 
keeper and  stabler  in  Gallowgate  of  Glasgow, 
or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or  in  the  immediate 
vicinity  thereof,  wickedly,  maliciously^  and 
feloniously  administer^  or  cause  to  be  admi« 
niste;^ ed^  or  did  aid  and  assist  at  the  adminis- 
tering  an  oath  or  enga^ment.*'  He  ma^  have 
caused  the  administering  of  the  oath  in  that 
house,  though  he  never  entered  i|  in  his  life. 


oiO] 


57  GEORGE  IIL 


trud  ofAndrem  B9*Kinley 


[630 


•  Mr.  Ckrk, — I  have  one  remaik  to  make*  oq 
the  clause  in  the  act  of  pariiament.  ''  And 
persons  causing  any  such  oath  or  engagement 
to  be  administered,  though  not  present  at  ^e 
administering  thereof,  sluill  be  deemed  prin- 
cipal offenders,  and  shall  be  tried  as  such.'' 
It  is  not  libelled  that  the  panel  caused  the  oath 
to  be  administered,  though  he  was  not  present. 
On  the  contrary,  it  is  alleged  he  was  present, 
and  so  caused  the  administerinff  of  the  oath  in 
that  placjB.  Neither  time  nor  place  is  assigned 
for  the  commission  of  the  crime,  unless  this 
time  and  this  place  are  assigned. 

Mr.  *SoikUor  General,'^!  am  little  disposed 
to  trouble  you,  by  prolonging  this  debate; 
but,  with  your  lordships'  permission,  I  beg  to 
address  a  few  words  to  you.  It  is  necessary 
that  the  precise  nature  of  the  olnection  now 
made,  should  be  recalled  to  mina,  before  the 
answer  to  it  can  be  understood.  The  proper 
form  of  the  objection  seems  to  be  this :  is  the 
public  prosecutor  entitled  to  prove  the  import 
of  the  oathy  before  proving  the  presence  or  the 
panel  at  the  administration  of  it  P  The  lord 
advocate  asks  of  the  witness  what  is  the  import 
of  the  oath  which  was  taken  or  administered 
by  the  witness,  or  in  the  presence  of  the 
witness,  and  the  objection  is,  ne  is  not  entitled 
to  put  this  question,  till  the  presence  of  the 
panel  on  that  occasion  be  proved.  I  submit, 
that  this  is  no  objection  at  all,  because  it  is 
competent  for  the  public  prosecutor  to  prove, 
by  one  set  of  witnesses,  tnat  the  oath  wa^  ad- 
ministered at  the  time  kpoken  to ;  and  it  is 
competent  for  him  to  prove,  by  other  witnesses, 
that  the  panel  was  present.  I  know  of  no 
tule,  in  the  law  of  evidence,  which  requires 
that  the  nature  of  the  odth,  and  the  presence 
of  the  panel,  should  be  established  at  the  same 
moment,  or  by  the  same  witnesses.  Much 
light  has  already  been  lost  by  the  real  or  pre- 
tended failure  of  memorv  in  witnesses.  If  the 
rule  which  the  other  side  of  the  bar  contend 
for  were  adopted,  it  would  produce  much  in- 
convenience, and  a  total  impossibility  of  prov- 
ing a  crime  in  any  instance.  In  every  criminal 
charge,  the  public  prosocutbr  may  prove  the 
corpus  delicti,  before  proving  the  connection  of 
the  panel  with  it ;  and  he  neither  can  be,  nor 
ougnt  to  be  controlled  in  the  course  and  order 
of  adducing  the  proof  and  conducting  the  case. 
In  this  part  of  his  duty,  he  acts  upon  informa- 
^on,  ot  which  the  Court  and  the  prisoner 
neither  can  nor  ought  to  be  in  possession. 
The  objection  by  the  panel  rests  on  a  principle 
leading  directly  to  absurdity,  and  creating  im- 
practicability in  business. 

Mr.  Jeffrey.'^l  submit  that  this  position  is 
untenable.  Tlie  solicitor-ffeneral  says,  it  is 
competent  to  prove  the  administration  of  the 
oath  and  its  tenor,  by  one  set  of  witnesses,  and 
then  by  another  set,  to  prove  that  the  panel 
was  present  at  or  connected  with  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  oath.  I^  he  has  witnesses  to 
prove  that  the  panel  was  present,  should  not 
he  first  prove  that?    Upon  what  principle  can 


he  be  allowed  to  prove  any  thing  about  an 
oath,  without  proving  the  panePs  connection 
with  that  oath  ?  If  the  fact,  as  to  an  oath 
having  been  administered,  be  proved,  without 
the  prisoner's  connection  with  it,  would  any 
thing  be  established  against  tHfe  prisoner?  To 
prove  the  administration  of  an  oath,  or  the 
terms  of  any  oath,  can  here  be  of  no  avail, 
unless  my  client's  connection  with  it  be  esta- 
blished. Without  this,  there  is  no  evidence 
against  the  prisoner.  A  case  might  happen, 
that  ffoods  were  carried  off  by  one  man,  and 
found  in  the  custodv  of  another,  and  to  such  a 
case  the  principle  of  the  solicitor-general  might 
apply,  ^t  such  a  case  is  of  a  different  kind 
from  the  present;— and  if  it  is  hinted  that, 
perhaps,  you  will  get  nothing  from  Mr.  Fin- 
layson  but  the  statement  of  an  oath,  and  no- 
thing about  the  pri5oner,-rhow  could  you 
afterwards  get  any  thing  to  connect  the  pri- 
soner and  tne  oath  ?  At  any  rate,  what  dis- 
advantage does  the  public  prosecutor  suffer, 
by  being  called  upon  first  to  prove  the  pre- 
sence of  the  panel  ?  while  I  have  a  material 
interest  that  the  minds  of  the  jury  should  not 
be  prejudiced  by  any  proof  as  to  an  oath  ex- 
traneous to  the  case  of  the  prisoner.  Are  they 
entitled  to  proceed  so  as  to  induce  an  impres- 
sion against  the  prisoner  of  the  most  unfavour- 
able nature,  when,  if  they  had  begun  at  the 
end,  to  which  they  must  go,  and  inquired  as 
to  the  relation  of  the  furisoner  with  the  hcU, 
they  could  have  found  no  proof  of  any  guilt 
attachable  to  him  ? 

Lord.  GUUcM* — This  is  a,que8tion  of  import* 
ance  and  difficuUjr.  One  objection  has  neen 
stated,  and  two  different  answers  have  been 
made,  and  have  nven  rise  to  two  questions. 
The  answer  made  by  the  lord  advocate  is,  that 
the  act  of  parliament  entitles  him,  although 
M'Kinley  may  not  have  been  present  when  the 
oath  was  administered,  to  prove  that  he  caused 
its  being  administered.  The  solicitor-general 
again  sa3rs,  I  may  prove  by  another  witness 
that  the  oath  was  administered  by  the  agency 
of  the  panel.  We  are  bound  to  consider  both 
questions. 

The  lord  advocate  says,  he  is  entitled  to 
prove  that  the  panel  caused  the  oath  to  be  ad- 
ministered, altnough  he  was  not  present  when 
it  was  administered.  That  is  the  first  and 
most  important  question.  I  think  the  lord 
advocate  is  not  entitled  to  prove  under  this 
indictment  that  the  panel  was  not  present  at 
the  administering,  but  caused  the  administer- 
ing of  the  oath  here  charged.  You  must  have 
the  time  when — the  place  where— (though 
there  may  be  some  latitude  as  to  both)— You 
must  have  the  tpeda  factiy  the  quo  modo  set 
forth.  The  fact  of  causing,  when  absent*  is 
different  from  causing  when  present.  Tbe 
fact  that  the  panel  caused  the  oath  to  be  ad- 
ministered in  nis  absence,  is  not  set  forth  in 
the  indictment ;  and  I  must  appeal  to  my  own 
recollection,  and  to  that  of  every  one  who 
hears  me,  whether  it  entered  into  ypur  con- 
templation that  the  lord  advocate  meant  to 


esil 


/or 


wdamfidOtahs. 


A.  D.  1817. 


[0S3. 


charge  the  causing  without  the  paneVs  being  i     I  have  iomei  difBcultyy  from  what  the  so- 
present  at  the  administering.  I  licitor  general  stated ;  for,  it  is  possible  this 


I  am  not  talking  of  the  major  proposition — 
but,  what  I  find  defective  is,  that  this  apepes 
Jacti,  now  stated  by  the  prosecutor,  is  set 
forth  in  no  part  of  the  minor  proposition,  and 
I  was  led  to  conclude,  that  ail  that  the  lord 
advocate  meant  to  prove  was,  the  administering 
of  the  oath,  the  panel  being  present  at  the 
time.  ^  he  meant  to  prove  a  specki  facti  of  a 
different  kind,  that  the  panel,  though  not  pre- 
sent, caused  the  administering,  that  ^pectei 
Jadi  should  have  been  stated.  And  surely, 
according  to  Mr.  Hume*s  doctrine  of  specin- 
cation,  the  fact  whether  the  panel  was  present 
<nr  not  at  the  administering  of  the  oath  should 
bare  been  stated.  Then,  is  the  lord  advocate 
entitled  to  bring  an  indictment  without  saving 
whether  the  panel  was  present  at  the  aami- 
nistering,  or  a  hundred  miles  off?  His  lord- 
sbip^s  plea  is  competent,  under  the  mmor,  but 
not  under  the  minor  proposition*  If  you 
adopted  this  view  of  the  lord  advocate*s,  you 
would  proceed  on  a  tpedes  faeti^  taking  for 
granted  it  is  not  necesssury  to  state  the  quomodo 
of  the  tpeda  facti  alleged  to  be  committed. 

As  to  the  question  raised  by  the  solicitor- 
general's  answer,  it  is  of  a  dinerent  nature ; 
and  I  do  not  know  by  what  principle  of  law 
Ihe  public  prosecutor  can  be  hindered  from 
proving  the  fact,  and  then  the  presence  of  the 
panel.  But,  I  submit  to  the  public  prosecutor, 
Ihat  it  is  an  inconvenient  moae  of  proof.  I  do 
not  mean  to  sustain  the  objection  upon  this 
ground;  but,  it  can  answer  no  purpose  to 
prore,  diat  any  obli^tion  was  then  adminis- 
tered or  taken ;  for  it  cannot,  and  ought  not 
to  affect  the  prisoner  if  he  was  not  present. 
And  the  oidy  effect  would  be,  to  create  a  pre- 
judice in  the  minds  of  the  jury. 

Lord  PUmUly. — Mv  difiBculty  arises  from 
vhat  has  been  stated  by  the  solicitor-general. 
The  crime  charged  is,  that  the  panel  admi- 
nistered the  oath,  or  caused  it  to  oe  adminis- 
tered. It  will  be  sufficient  to  prove  that  he 
administered  the  oath,  or  caused  it  to  be  ad- 
ministered-^ut  then  we  must  attend  to  the 
manner  in  which,  the  time  when,  the  place 
wb»e,  he  had  done  m,  and  I  agree  as  to  what 
has  oeen  said  by  lord  Gillies  and  Mr.  Clerk, 
that  such  particulars  x^uire  to  be  specified. 
It  is  a^d  in  the  indictment,  that  the  panel  did, 
**  upoi^the  5th  day  of  rebruary,  1817,  or  on 
one  or  other  of  the  days  of  that  month,  or  of 
January  immediately  preceding,  at  a  secret 
meeting  held  at  the  bouse  of  John  Robertson,'' 
&c.  whether  he  administered  the  oath,  or 
caused  it  to  be  administered,  it  must  be  upon 
the  5th  of  February,  or  some  day  of  that 
month,  and  at  that  secret  meeting..  It  will 
not  do,  that  he  did  it  out  of  that  meeting.  I 
think  we  are  bound  strictly  to  festen  the  pro- 
secutor down,  both  to  the  time  and  place 
charged  in  the  indictment.  The  proof  must 
be  as  to  February  or  January,  and  the  panel 
must  have  been  present. 


man  may  have  caused  that  oath  to  be  adminis- 
tered, and  perhaps  in  a  room  among  a  crowds 
and  a  particular  witness  may  not  have  known 
the  panel  had  been  the  cause  of  the  administer- 
ing. I  think  it  is  not  incompetent  to  the  public 
prosecutor  to  prove  as  he  was  doing.  If  he* 
fail,  it  will  not  go  against  the  prisoner. 

Lord  Betton  concurred. 

Lord  JuMtke  Cferfc.— I  agree,  that  though  it 
is  com]>etent  to  charge  the  causing  the  oath  to 
be  administered,  as  well  as  the  aSministerine 
of  the  oath,  yet  the  same  precision  is  required 
as  to  the  nedet  facti  charged,  and  that  time, 
place,  ana  manner,  should  be  particulariy 
specified.  But  I  own  I  am  equally  clear,  that 
there  is  nothing  that  can  prevent  the  public 
prosecutor  from  proving  the  nature  of  the  oatli, 
and  the  place  and  time  when  it  was  adminis- 
tered, and  afterwards  the  panel's  presence. 
I  am,  therefore,  for  allowing  the  question  to  be 
put. 

(The  witness  was  brought  back.] 

Lord  Advocate, — ^What  were  the  terms  of  the 
oath  put  that  other  night  at  Robertson's,  not  the 
oath  of  secrecy  f — ^It  was  the  prisoner  who  ad- 
ministered that  oath. 

What  were  the  words  P^It  was  the  usual 
one.  I  cannot  repeat  it.  It  was  about 
reform. 

Do  you  remember  how  it  began  ?— *'  In  tlie 
awfiil  presence  of  God.*' 

Was  there  any  thing  about  swearing  r<«» 
res. 

What  were  the  words  ?— I  saw  an  oath,  after 
I  was  put  in  prison^  in  a  speech  in  parliament,  * 
which  was  the  same  as  that  then  administered.' 

You  said  the  oath  began,  <'In  the  awfol 
presence  of  Ood.''  Was  there  any  thing  about 
the  word  '' swear  T—Ifl  had  not  seen  &e  oath 
in  a  newspaper,  I  could  not  have  remembered 
a  word  of  it. 

Mr.  Clerk  made  some  inaudible  observa» 
tion. 

Lord  Jdooeate.^1  cannot  lose  the  benefit 
of  this  witness's  testimony,  and  I  have  no  wish 
to  *put  any  questions  but  with  a  view  to  get 
the  truth  from  him  of  what  he  may  know 
actually  to  have  taken  place.  I  shoidd  be 
happy  to  prevent  those  interruptions  from 
the  other  side  of  the  bar  if  your  lordships  would 
take  the  examination  of  tba  witness  into  your 
own  hands. 

Mr.  Grant, — We  can  have  no  further  ques- 
tions to  put  after  his  last  answer. 

LordJmtice  Cferfc.— Till  you  saw  the  oath 
in  a  newspaper,  you  could  not  have  repeated 
any  part  of  it?— Nothing  but  the  beginning. 
Before  I  went  out,  you  nSked  me  whether  there, 
was  an  administration  of  any  other  oath  iu: 

•  Fife  35  Hans.  Pari.  Deb.  729. 


dg^]         57  GEORGE  til. 

these  fioasesi  I  recollect,  after  I  read  out 
the  oath  in  Robertson's,  John  Buchanan  came 
in  and  I  read  it  to  him — the  secret  committee 
oath. 

Lord  Harmand, — Could  you^,  ivithout  the 
newspap€9'y  ha?e  recollected  tlie  latter  part  of 
the  o^th  ?— -No. 

[Witness  withdrawn.*] 

Lord  Advocate. — Although  the  witness  read 
the  oath  in  a  newspaper,  he  did  not  Bwear  the 
reading  in  the  newspaper  gave  him  any  new 
hnpres((iops  .of  it,  The  circumstance  merely 
brought  it  to  his  recollection.  He  has  expressly . 
Kiid  the  oath  he.  then  read  was  the  same  he 
lieard  administered  in  the  meeting.  Now,  I 
beg  leave  to  ask,  what  .is  there  to  prerent  my 
laying  a  copy  of  the  oath  even  now  before  him, 
and  asking  jtbe  witness  whether  that  was  the 
oath  whiqh  was  administered  or  no  ?  I  am  not 
aware  of  any  rule  of  law  whidi  should  prevent 
my  doing  so,  and  it  would  in  .many  cas^  be 
attended  wiUi  the  total  loss  of  evidence  if  such 
a  form  pf ,  proceeding  was  held  to  be  illegal. 
Few  person^  have  the  power  of  repeating  from 
memory  verhaimvrhat  they  have  read,  al&ough 
t)iey  can  recollect  it  when  laid  before  thern^  or 
n^Ml  over  to.  them ;  and  it  would  be  to  render 
the  statute  under  which  this  indictment  is  laid 
utteriy  inopeiativie,  if  it  were  held,  that  it  is  in- 
qpmp9tent  lo  do  more  than,  ask  the, witnesses 
to  repeat  the  ^muima  verba  of  the  illesal  oath 
ch^md  to  haye  b^en  aduinistered*  Nothing, 
in  effect,  more  happened  in  this  case*  Indeed, 
Iqiprehend  not.ao  much  has  beendone^  when 
the  fact  is  merely  that  the  witness  saw  acci-. 
dentally  in  a  n«W9pii|>er  the  oath  which  4ei  had 
heard  before,  and  which  brought,  ho  depones, 
its  terms  to  his  recollection.  In  feet,  the  qnes« 
tion  is  not  how  he  came  to  rem^ttber  ttie  oath, 
W  does  he  now  recollect  it;  tthd,  I  tfubmit^  it  is 
of  no  consequence  how  that  leoolleciton  was 
dhtained  (excepting  always  any  undue  pio« 
ceedin^on  the  part  of  the  pub&c  .proseentor,. 
which  IS  not  here  alleged  to  nave  taken  place), 
ifit  is  clear  and  distinct^ 

This  is  a  question  of  great  importance  in-' 
Med ;  and'if  yottr  lordships  sustain  this  objec- 
tion, founded  upon ,  the  witness  having  read 
the  oath  in  a  newspaper,  it  will  go  du  to  im- 
pede the  course  of  justice.  The  same  must  in 
every  case  be  sustained*  where  the  witness  has 
read  the  narrative  of  the  previous  pioceediogs, 
before  a  magistrate,  in  the  public  prints,  and 
an  epd  would  therefore  be  put  to  convictions 
in  the  most  atrocious  cases,  which  are  genesrally 
those  on  which  the  most  public  investigations 
take  place. 

Mr.  Jeffrof. — Nothing  can  be  moie  fair  or 
candid  than  the  statement  of  the  lord  advocate, 
and  1  agree  with  him  in  an  observation  which 
he  ^made,  but  it  leads  to^  a  decision  in  my 
favour.  If  the  lord  advocate  had  been  correct 
in  stating,  that,  in  consequence  of  an  innocent 
accident,  the  Crown  was  to  be  deprived  of  any 
thing  they  would  otherwise  bave  had  the  benefit 


Trud  ofAnitem  M^Kinhy 


[624 


of,  that  certainly  would  be  an  evil.  But  ob* 
serve  how  the  fact  stands.  The  witness  ad-* 
mits,  that,  in  point  of  fact,  if  the  trial  had  pro- 
ceeded before  he  read  the  newspaper,  or  if  he 
had  never  seen  it,  his  memory  would  have  been 
an  entire  blank  as  to  the  terms  of  the  oath ;  and 
the  question  is.  Can  evidence  from  such  a 
source  be  received  in  a  court  of  justice  ? 

What  is  it  that  a  witness  must  speak  to  ? 
Tbe  facts  to  which  he  was  present;  and  if  he 
states,  that,  as  to  these  facts,  he  has  no  recoU 
lection  of  himself,  and  that  the  source  firom 
which  he  has  derived  any  recollection  of  the 
circumstances,  is  a  newspaper,  this  is  no  evi- 
dence at  all. 

I  distinguish  this  case  from  one  where  a 
person  may  say,  I  had  forgotten  every  thing 
but  for  a  paper  that  I  wrote  myself,  and,  im- 
mediately upon  reading  it,  my  memoiy  was 
refreshed,  and  I  could  now  positively  swear  to 
the  circumstances.    But  only  see  the  difference 
here,  and  see  the  infinite  incalculable  danger 
to  which  a  person  might  be  exposed,  par- 
ticularly in  a  question  with  the  Crown,  as  in 
the  case  of  this  panel,  on  a  trial  upon  charges 
of  a  crime  against  the  government  if  a  witness 
were  to  be  examined  whose  memory  is  gone, 
and  who  is  totally  unable  to  give  testimony  on 
the  subject  but  from  the  accident  of  seeing  an 
unauthentic  account  in  a  newspaper.    Such 
witnesses  will  be  subject  to  the  delusions  to 
which  the  human  mind  is  liable,  from  anything 
bearing' a  resemblance  to  former  objects  of  its 
knowledge,  and  will  think  that  they  have  seen 
before  what  only  bears  a  resemblance  to  what 
they  had  formerly  known.    Every  one  familiar 
with  dreams  must  know,  that  in  them  the  vivid- 
ness of  conception  sometimes  leaves  an  im- 
pression' almost  of  reality  on  the  mind;    A 
witness,  who  has  altogether  forgotten  the  terms 
of  an  oath  which  he  nad  once  read,  and  after- 
wards reads  in  a  newspaper  an  oath  which  ap- 
l)ears  of  the  same  general  description,  will  be- 
lieve it  to  be  the  same  oath ;  but  if  he  be  exa- 
mined^on  the  subject,  all  he  can  swear  to  will 
be  the  tenor  and  recollection  of  what  he  read 
in  the.  newspaper.    Even  at  this  moment  the 
witness  swears  he  could  not  have  recollected 
anything  of  the  nature  or  terms  of  the  oath  but 
for  the  newspaper.    A  witness  whose  memory 
is  revived  by  accident,  may  say,  I  now  re-> 
member.    But  this  vritness  says  he  could  not 
have  recollected  but  for  the  newspaper.    Hq 
recals  the  oath  to  his  imagination  rather  than 
his  memory.    If  he  says  he  has  no  recollection 
butyrom  the  newspaper,  he  has  no  recollection 
but  of  the  newspaper,  a  source  of  information 
which  must  exclude  his  evidence  from  being 
received.    I  submit,  that,  in  a  court  of  civil 
jurisdiction,  evidence  of  this  kind  could  not  be 
received ;  and  to  allow  evidence  of  this  ques- 
tionable sort  to  be  taken  in  this  couYt,  and  in 
such  a  case  as  the  present,  would  be  an  example 
of  the  most  dangerous  nature. 

lard  Adbocate, — If  the  recollection  of  the 
witness  depends  altogether  upon  what  he  read 


635] 


Jivr  Administering  unlawful  Oaths. 


A.  D.  1817. 


1620 


in  -the  newspaper,  I  am  not  entitled  to  ask  as 
to  that  recollection;  but  my  question  if, 
"Whether  he  can  recollect  the  substance,  not  the 
terms  of  it,  without  the  newspaper  ?  I  wish 
that  to  be  further  cleared  up. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk.— I  think  it  right  to  state 
what  I  have  taken  down  from  the  witness.— 
**  That  if  he  had  not  seen  it  in  the  newspapers 
be  would  not  have  remembered  another  word 
<d  it ;  and  that,  with  the  exception  of  the  words 
in  the  beginning  he  has  stated,  he  could  not 
-have  repeated  on  his  oath  any  part  of  it,  had 
he  not  so  seen  it  in  the  newspapers."  Under 
these  circumstances,  we  are  clear  it  would  not 
be  consistent  with  any  'rules  of  justice  to  have 
the  witness  examined  further  as  to  the  tenns  of 
that  oath,  for  he  could  only  give  his  recollection 
from  the  newspaper.  * 

Lord  Hermand. — In  answer  to  my  question, 
he  said '  be  could  not  without  the  newspaper 
have  recollected  the  last  part  of  the  oath ;  so 
he  cannot  be  examined  further  on  the  terms  of 
the  oath. 

[Witness- brought  back.] 

By  whom  was  this  oath  administered  at 
Robertson's  ? — By  the  prisoner. 

Mr.  Jeffrey ' — '^o  whom  was  it  administered? 
--—To  a  man  whom  we  met  upon  the  road. 

What  other  persons  were  present? — We 
went  in  with  John  Buchanan  and  this  man, 
and  John  Buchanan  went  out  to  see  another 
«Ban,  and  then  eame  in ;  and  I  am  not  sure 
whether  the  administering  was  done  when  he 
jretumed* 

Vo  other  person  ?— 'No. 

You  do  not  know  his  natne  ? — No. 

Hugh  Dickson  sworn. — Examined  by  the 
Lord  Advocate. 

'     Do  you  know  the  house  of  William  Leggat? 
••—•Yes,  I  have  been  in  the  house. 
.  Who  were  all  there  ? — A  number  of  men. 

Was  the  prisoner  there  ? — Yes. 

Was  Peter  Gibson  there  ? — Yes. 

Was  M'Lachlane  there  ?~ Yes 

Was  John  Campbell  there  ? — Yes. 

Was  any  oath  taken  or  administered  at  that 
meeting  ? — ^There  was  what  we  cabled  a  bond 
of  union  agreed  among  us  at  that  meeting. 
•    Can  you  repeat  it  ? — No. 

.Can  you  tell  the  import  of  it? — Hearing  it 
read,  I  could  give  an  idea  if  it  was  like  it.  I 
never  read  the  original. 

Did  you  hear  it  read  that  night  ?— Yes. 

Who  read  it  ? — I  could  not  be  certain  of  his 
name  who  read  it. 

Was  it  the  prisoner? — No. 

Was  he  present  when  it  was  read?— I  think 
be  was. 

Did  you  take  it?  Was  it  given  to  you.^ 
Was  it  administered  to  you?*- After  it  was 
agreed  upon,  it  was  taken  by  a  vote.     From 


•  Fkfe  1  Phill.  Ev.  288,  5th,  ed. 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


circumstances  that  occurred  through  that  day, 
I  could  not  say  it  was  taken  as  an  oath.  It 
might  be  the  case. 

In  what  form  was  it  taken  ? — They  stood  up 
and  held  up  their  hands.    I  do  not  remember 
any  words  used  at  the  time. 
'  Part  of  the  time  it  was  read,  they  held  up 
their  hands  ? — ^Yes. 

What  were  the  circumstances  that  happened 
through  the  day  ? — Being  the  first  of  January, 
I  had  got  some  liquor  through  the  day. 

Did  it  affect  your  memory  ?  —  I  could  not 
take  upon  me  to  speak  with,  certainty  as  to 
that  night. 

Were  you  at  Munn's? — On  the  4th  of  Ja- 
nuary. 

Was  the  prisoner  there  ? — Yes. 

Was  the  bond  or  oath  read  or  administered 
there? — One  man  read  it  and  held  up  his  hand. 

Who  was  he  ?'--I  never  saw  him  before  or 
since. 

Was  the  prisoner  present  ? — I  do  not  know. 

Who  reaa  it?— The  man  himself. 

And  held  his  hand  up  ?— 'Yes.  * 

Was  the  prisoner  present  ? — I  conld  not'  say. 
The  room  was  too  small,  and  some  withdrew. 
He  had  been  at  the  meeting,  but  I  cannot  tell 
whether  he  was  present  at  the  administering. 

• 

Lord  Advocate. -^Vfiihdnyf  t^e  witness. 
Having  now  concluded  the  most  material  part 
of  the  evidence  upon  which  I  had  expected  to 
establish  the  charges  laid  in  the  indictment, 
and  finding  that  the  witnesses  have  not  given 
testimony  corresponding  to  their  previous  ex- 
aminations, and  on  which  I  was  most  thoroughly 
•persuaded  I  should  have  convicted  the  panel, 
1  deem  it  incumbent  on  me,  in  justice  to  your 
lordships,  whose  time  is  too  precious  to  be 
needlessly  wasted,  not  to  take  up  a  moment 
longer  than  necessary,  by  going  into  further 
evidence,  which  I  believe  (o  be  stili  less  con- 
clusive, and  without  proceeding  further  in 
which,  I  am  now  satisfied  the  panel  is  entitled 
to  a  verdict  of  acquittal.  However  much, 
therefore,  I  must  regret  a  result  so  different 
from  what  the  truth  of  the  case  and  public 
justice  demanded,  my  consolation  will  be,  that 
I  have  discharged  my  own  duty  in  submitting 
the  investigation  to  the  judgment  of  a  jury, 

Mr.Jeffery, — After  what  has  been  stated, 
with  so  much  candour  and  propriety,  by  bis 
majesty's  advocate,!  should  be  to  blame,  if  I 
were  to  dwell  on  the  course  of  evidence  which 
has  been  led.  I  should  be  infinitely  to  blame, 
if  even  any  feeling  of  joy  or  triumph,  excusa- 
ble on  such  an  occasion,  should  lead  me  to 
make  any  further  observations.  I  shall  be 
satisfied  with  that  verdict  which  the  good 
sense  and  right  feeling  of  the  jury  shall  deter- 
mine upon;  and,  in  whatever  terras  that  ver- 
dict shall  be  contained,  I  am  sure  it  will  do 
ample  justice  to  the  whole  case. 

Lord  Justice  Clerk, — Gentlemen  of  the  jury, 
I  am  happy  to  liiink,  that,  after  what  ha^  taken 
place,  the  panel  can  expect  nothing  but  an  ac- 

2  S 


0271 


57  GEORGE  ill. 


Trial  qfAndrn  M'Kinkif. 


CMfi 


qaittaii.  Yottf  duly  is  now  mi  exUwmly  light 
«iid  pleasant  qac^  and  Tecydiff«reQt  fromtbat 
^hich  must  have  been  eipect«d  when  we  oojsr 
aeneed  this  trial.  It  ki  your  duty  to  return 
•ttch  a  vefdict  as  you  may  think  due  lo  the 
case,  taking  all  the  drouraataBces  into  oon- 
sideration»  and  to  find  the  panel  either  Not 
Guilty,  or  the  libel  Not  Proven. 

I  leave  the  case  in  your  hands,  you  being 
poMfMed  of  all  the  facta  as  hitherto  disclosed, 
and  quite  able  to  discriminate  the  circuni' 
stances  of  the  evidence.  And  as  to  the  ver- 
dict yeu  return,  it  m^  be  vM  voce^  if  you  are 
unanimous ;  but,  if  not,  we  will  sit  with  great 
pleasare  to  receive  your  v«rdi<:t  in  writing, 
if.  you  think  it  necessary  to  retire  for  thi^t 
purpose. 

The  Jvrv,  without  retiring,  unanimously 
*  found  the  libel  Not  Paoven. 

lard  JuUke  C/«r/c.~Gentlemen  of  the  Jury, 
you  are  now  discharged  from  your  fatiguing 
duty;  and  I  have  to  express  my  entire  con- 
currence in  the  terms  in  which  you  have  ex- 
preised  your  verdict. 

Andrew  M'Kioley«— in  consequence  of  what 
has  passed  this  day,  relative  to  the  charge 
exhibited  against  you,  the  jury  have  returned  a 
Terdict,  all  in  one  voice,  finding  the  libel  Not 
Proven.  It  is,  therefore,  the  duty  of  the  Court 
to  assoilzie  you  timplieiirr,  and  to  dismiss  yeu 
from  that  bar.  But,  Sir,  I  cannot  help  notic- 
ing, upon  this  occasion,  that  the  verdict  of 
your  countrjrmen  has  not  pronounced  yoa  to 
be  Not  Guilty  of  the  charge  that  was  exhibited 
against  you;  and  I  have  already  stated  in 
your  presence,  that,  in  reference  to  the  evi» 
dence,  unsatisfectory  and  iDeondusire  as  it 
was  with  respect  to  the  full  measure  of  yeor 
guilt,  and  looking*  above  all,  to  those  declarah 
tions  of  yours,  which  were  proved  and  made 
part  of  the  evidence  by  a  regular  minnte  of 
admissien  by  your  counsel,  I  am  decidedly  of 
•pinion  the  jury  were  bound  to  return  the  ver- 
4M!t  now  npen  record — a  terdict  which  leaves 
n  mark  upen  yent  character,  that  noshing  but 
a  tife  of  future  rectitude  in  evevy  respect  can 
^  wipe  off.  Yon  ape  now  to  be  delivered  from 
nH  risk  of  puniehaoent  for  ai^  degree  of  guilt 
yon  may  have  ificotred  relative  to  the  traoa- 
netions  mentioned  in  the  indictment ;  and  I 
do  hope  and  trust,  that,  after  the  full,  fair,  and 
impaitial  trial  you  have  undergone,  in  which, 
while  an  attempt  vras  made  to  estabhsh  the 
charge  against  you,  you  had  the  protection  of 
the  laws  of  your  country,  and  the  nlessed  safe- 


guard of  a  jury  of  your  eottntiymen.to  watch 
over  your  interests,  you  have  now  an  entire 
and  i>erfect  conviction  of  the  happiness  and 
security  under  which  the  people  of  this  couuii 
try  at  present  live,  that  yon  are  now  fully  con- 
vinced the  constitution  of  your  country  affords 
a  oempleto  safegnard  to  its  subjects ;  and  that 
there  can  be  no  risk  of  their  lives  or  liberties 
being  invaded,  while  the  sanction  of  the  law 
at  aH  timet  extends  its  proteetion  to  them.  I 
hope,  therefore,  when  you  retnm  to  the  society 
in  which  you  formeriy  lived,  that,  in  whatever 
proceedings  you  may  have  formerly  been  en- 
gaged—  whatever  secret  meetings  yon  may 
have  attended  —  whatever  description  of  pei^ 
sons  you  may  have  been  linked  with  by  boiMU 
of  union,  oaths,  or  engagements,  you  will  from 
this  time  resolve  to  attain  from  all  such  pro-  ^ 
ceedings,  and  never  render  it  even  possibit 
that  any  such  charge  should  again  be  exhibited 
against  you;  that,  on  the  contrary,  you  will 
use  your  utmost  endeavours,  by  holding  onl 
the  example  of  the  protection  of  Uie  law,  which 
you  have  experienced,  to  convince  theni  that 
they  ought  to  unite  with  you  in  preserving  un- 
impaired thai  happy  constitution  and  govern- 
ment, under  which  the  subjects  of  this  country 
live ; — that,  in  short,  yon  will  act  the  part  of  a 
good  subject,  justify  the  verdict  in  your  &voar, 
and  prove,  that,  though  you  mav  have  been 
misled  by  the  designs  perhaps  of  other  men, 
yen  are  not  wicked  in  heart,  and  will  live 
peaceably  in  time  to  oome.  I  trust  what  I 
have  now  said  will  have  a  due  effect,  and  I 
congratulate  yon  upon  the  verdict  yon  have 
received. 

'<  The  Lord  Justice  Clerk  and  Lw^ 
Commissioners  ^Justtciarjr,  in  respect  of 
the  foregoing  verdict,  assoibie  the  pen^ 
mgUkUer^  and  dismiss  him  from  thn  bar. 
(Signed)       «  D.  Botle,  J.  P.  Dr 

jUubKw  M^SmiQf. — I  am  not  able  to  stand, 
from  a  weak  state  of  body,  to  return  mj  thanka 
in  a  long  speech.  Bet  I  wish  to  retnm  my 
sincere  thanks  to  your  lordships  for  sbowing 
me  such  kindness;— to  the  gentlemen  oC  the 
jury  for  their  attention,  and  the  verdict  they 
have  returned : — and  to.  the  Loi4  Advocam  for 
his  kind  attention  during  my  impiiaonmen!^; — 
and  I  wish  publicly  to  deciare,  that  I  had -nil 
the  liberty  and  indulgence  that  man  coiUd 
possibly  have  in  snch  circumstanfes.  My 
feelings  of  gratitude  to  my  co«dhI  ^W  stw^gni 
thanlcanexpieas« 


^roeMittgi 


t«3» 


Proceedings  agaimst  Jku^s  M'Ewan^  and  others^  at  Gla^ow. 


^T&ACT  from  the  Record,  containing  Pro- 
oeedings  in  the  Circnit  Court  of  Justiciary 
at  Glasgow,  against  James  M'EwaN, 
M'DowAi.  pATEy  or  Peat,  and  John 
Conn  ELTON,  23rid  April,  1817,  before 
Lords  Hermand  and  Gillies. 

The  -diet  was  iheii  called  of  the  criminal 
pMwcntion  at  tbe  instance  of  bis  m^esty's  ad- 
iKooate,  ibriiis  im^siy'i  interest  against  James 
M^fiwan,  now  or  Utefycardiog-masterat  Hum- 
phne*s  Mill,  Gortels  of  Glasgow ;  M<Dowal 
rate,  or  Peat,  tiow  orlatefy  weaver  in  Pieoadilly- 
at]%et,  Anderston,  in  the  vicinity  of  Glasgow ; 
and  Jditi  Connelton,  now  or  lately  cotton* 
apivmer,  in  Calton  of  Giaegow,*  far  the  erime 
<n  admiiR0te|U]g  unlawfiil  oaths,  as  patticuiariy 
nentioBed  in  die  indictment  raised  and  piir- 
•«ed  agamst  them  thereanent  bearing  :<^ 

James  M^Ewwiyiiow  or  lately  cardnig-maiter 
m  Htmiphrie's  Mill,  GorlN&  of  cSasgow; 
M^owal  Pata,  or  Peat,  now  or  lately  weaver 
aft  Picoadilly-street,  Anderstoa,  4n  the  viciaity 
of  Glasgow;  and  John  Connelton,  •now  os 
lately  ootlon-«pinaer  in  Calton  of  Gtasgow : 
Yon  are  indicted  and  accused  at  the  instance 
oT  Alexander  Maoonochie  of  Meadowbank,  bis 
maiestv's  advocate,  for  bis  majesty's  interest : 
That  albeit  by  an  act  passed  in  the  (ifty^econd 
year  of  his  present  majesty's  reign,intituled,  *'  An 
act  to  render  more  effectual  an  act  passed  in  the 
thif^"sevonth  year  of  his  present  miyesty,  for 
Mcventing  tiie  adoainisteFing  or  taking  unlaw- 
ral  oaths,  ft  is  itUer  aiia  enacted,  *'  Tfattt  every 
person  who  sbaU,  in  any  maofner  or  form  what* 
aoevcf ,  administer,  or  cause  to  %e  admimstev- 
«d,  or  be  aiding  or  assisting  at  tike  adaainister- 
ftng  <rf  any  oaih  or  engageownt,  porpevting  m 
intending  to  bind  tbe  penon  taking  tbe  same 
to  commit  -any  treason,  or  murder,  or  any 
Mf«iy,'paiiiiliable  by  hm  with  dealh,  skaU,  on 
<MnivicMi  IhereoC  by  4tfe  oourw  of  low,  be 
l<§jttdgedgaitfy  of  felony,  and  sdihr  death  as 
*  felewy  wttho«t  bancdit  of  alesgy.^'  And ; 
fbrtfaer  by  section  fourth  of  «Mil«et,  it  is  eti- 1 
aoied^  ^  not  pernons  aiding  and  anistiag  at 
the  administerin|^  of  any  such  oath  or  engage- 
ment as  aforesaid,  and  persons  causing  any 
such  oath  or  engagement  to  be  administered, 
tbough  not  present  at  the  administering  thereof, 
shall  be  deemed  principal  offenders,  and  shall 
be  tried  as  such,  and  on  conviction  thereof  by 
due  course  of  law  shall  be  adjudged  guilty  of 
felony,  and  shall  suffer  death  as  felons  without 
benefit  of  clergy,  although  the  person  or  per- 
sons who  actually  administered  such  oath  or 
eogasement,  if  any  snch  there  shall  be,  shall 
not  have  been  tried  or  convicted."  And 
forther,  by  section  sixth  of  the  said  act,  it  is 
enacted,  ''That  any  engagement  or  obliga- 
tion whatsoever,  in  the  nature  of  an  oath, 
puiporting  or  intending  to  bind  the  person 
taking  tbe  tame  to  oommit  any  treason,  or 


murder,  or  any  felony  punishable  by  law  with 
death,  shall  be  deemed  an  oath  within  the  in- 
tent and  meaning  of  this  act ;  and  in  whatever 
form  or  manner  the  same  shall  be  administered 
or  taken,  and  whether  the  same  shall  be  ac- 
tually administered  by  any  person  or  persons 
to  any  other  person  or  persons,  or  taken  by 
any  other  person  or  persons  without  any  admi« 
nistration  thereof  by  any  other  pemon  or  pai^ 
sons."    Yet  true  it  is  and  of  verity,  that  you, 
the  said  James  M'Ewan,  M'Dowal  Pate,  ar 
Peat,  and  John  Connelton,  are  aU  and  eidk^ 
or  one  or  other  of  you,^£nilty  of* tbe  said 
crimes,  or  of  one  or  more  of  them,  aolors  or 
actor,  or  art  and  part ;  in  so  far  as  you  the 
said  James  M'Ewan,  H'Dowal  Pate,  or  Peat, 
and  J<^n  Connelton,  having  atOlasgow,  and 
in  the  vicinity,  thereof,  in  tbe  course  of  the 
months   of  November   and  December,  one 
thonsand  eisfat  hundred  and  aixteea,  and  of 
January  and   February  one  ihoosaiid  eight 
hundred  and  sei^enteen,  wickedly,  nalicionsly, 
and  traitoitmsly  ooofpired  and  agreed,  with 
other  evtl-diaposed  .pemens,  to  break  and  dis- 
turb Ihe  |>ubhc  peace,  <to  change,  subvert,  and 
overthrow  tbe  govemmeot,  and  to   exoiie,^ 
move,  and  raise  insurrection  and  rebelliott;  and* 
especially  to  hold  and  attend  secret  mfsetings 
for  the  >pnipose  of  obtaining  annual  parlia- 
ments and  universal  snifrage  by  unlawful  and 
violent  means,  did  then  and  there,  aU  and 
each,  wr  one  <or  other  of  yon,  wiokedly, 
maliciously,  and   trahoiouely  administeK,  or 
caase  to  be  administered,  or  did  aid  or  assist 
at  the  nflflnnisteving,  to  a  great  nnmbtr  of 
peieoos  «n   osah   or    tmgage^ent,    or    an 
obligation  "in  <the  nature  of  an  oath,  in  the 
fbUowing  terns,  or  to  the  following  perpovt : 
— '^  la  asifttl  fPesenoe  of  God,  I,  A.  B.  dio  vo» 
lanlarily  vwear  that  I  will  pcnsevere  in  my  en*- 
deavoaiing  to  form  a  brolhevheod  of  nflfection 
amongst  Britons  «f  every  descfrtptioa,  who  are 
oonsidBred  worthy  of  confidence,  and  that  I 
will  pamenen  ia  my  endeavours  to  obtain  for 
all  the  people  in  Great  Britain  end  Ireland, 
net  idisquahfied  by  crimeB  or  insam^^   the 
elective  franchise  at  the  age  of  21,  with  free 
and  equal  representation,  and  annual  pariia- 
ments ;   and  that  I  will  support  the  same  to 
the  utmost  of  my  power,  either  by  moral  or 
physical   strength,   as  the  case  may  require. 
And  I  do  further  swear,  that  neither  hopes, 
fears,  rewards,  or   punishments  shall  induce 
roe  to  inform  on,  or  give  evidence  against 
any  member  or  members,  collectively  or  in- 
dividually,  for   any  act   or  expression  done 
or  made,  in  or  out,  in  this  or  similar  societies, 
under  the  punishment  of  death,  to  be  inflicted 
on  me  by  any  member  or  members  of  such 
societies.    So  help  me  God,  and  keep  me  sted* 
fitft."    Which  oam  or  obligation  did  thus  pur- 
port or  intend  to  bind  the  persons  taking  the  same 
to  oommit  treason,  by  effecting  by  physical  force 


^1]         57  GEORGE  ill.  Proceedings  agauut  JaAu  M^Eman  and  others.  \QSSt 


the  subversion  of  the  established  government, 
laws,  and  constitution  of  this  kingdom.  And 
more  particularly  you,  the  said  James  M'Ewan, 
M'Dowal  Pate,  or  Feat,  and  John  Connelton, 
did,  upon  the  first  day  of  January  one  thousand 
eight  hundred  and  seventeen,  or  on  one  or 
Dther  of  the  days  of  that  month,  or  of  Decem- 
ber immediately  preceding,  or  of  February 
immediately  following,  at  a  secret  meeting, 
held  for  that  and  other  unlawful  purposes,  in 
the  house  of  William  Leggat,  change-keeper  in 
king-street,  Tradestown,  in  the  vicinity  of 
Glasgow,  or  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or  in  the 
immediate  ricinity  thereof,  all  and  each,  or 
one  or  other  of  you,  wickedly,  maliciously, 
and  traitorously  administer,  or  cause  to  be 
a4ininistered,  or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the 
administering  of  an  oath  or  obligation  in  the 
terms  above  set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport, 
to  Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lachlane,  John 
Campbell,  and  Hugh  Dickson,  all  present 
prisoners  in  the  Castle  of  Edinburgh,  ot  to 
one  or  other  of  them,  and  toother  persons, 
ivhose  names  are  to  the  prosecutor  unknovrai ; 
the  said  oath  or  obligation  thus  binding  or 
purporting  to  bind  tlie  persons  taking  the  same 
to  commit  treason  as  said  is.  And  further, 
(2.)  you,  the  said  James  M'Ewan,  M*Dowal 
Pate,  or  Peat,  and  John  Connelton,  did,  upon 
the  fourth  day  of  January  one  thousand  eight 
hundred  and  seventeen,  or  on  one  or  other  of 
the  days  of  that  month,  or  of  De<tember  imme- 
diately preceding,  or  of  February  imme- 
diately following,  at  the  house  of  Niel  Munu, 
innkeeper  and  stabler  in  Ingram-«treet  of 
Glasgow,  or.  elsewhere  at  Glasgow,  or  in  the 
immediate  vicinity  thereof,  air  and  each,  or 
one  or  other  of  you,  wickedly,  maliciously,  and 
traitorously  administer,  or  cause  to  be  admi- 
nistered, or  did  aid  or  assist  at  the  administer- 
ing an  oath  or  obligation  in  the  terms  above 
set  forth,  or  to  the  same  purport,  to  the  said 
Peter  Gibson,  John  M'Lachlane,  John  Camp- 
bell, and  Hugh  Dickson ;  also  to  James  Hood, 
Andrew  Somerville,  John  Buchanan,  and 
James  Robertson,  all  present  prisoners  in  the 
Tolbooth  of  Glasgow,  or  to  one  or  other  of 
them,  and  to  other  persons,  whose  names  are 
to  the  prosecutor  unknown ;  the  said  oath  or 
obligation,  thus  bindingy  or  purporting  to  bind, 


the  persons  taking  the  same  to  commit  treason, 
as  said  is :  And  you,  the  said  James  M'Ewan, 
M'Dowal  Pate,  or  Peat,  and  John  Connelton, 
conscious  of  your  guilt  in  the  premises,  have 
absconded  and  fled  from  justice.  At  leaa|( 
times  and  places  foresaid,  •  the  said  oath  or  en^ 
gagement,  or  an  oath  or  engagement  to  the 
same  purj^rt,  was  wickedly,  and  maliciously, 
and  traitorously  administeiifd,  or  caused  to  oe 
administered ;  and  some  persons  did  aid  or 
assist  at  the  administering  thereof;  And  you, 
the  said  James  M*Ewan,  M'Dowal  Pate  or 
Peat,  and  John  Connelton,  are  all  and  eaob» 
oir  one  or  other  of  you,  guilty  |hereo(^  actora^ 
or  actor,  or  art  and  part.  All  which,  or  part 
thereof,  being  found  proven  by  the  verdict  of 
an  assize  before  the  Lord  Justice  General,  the 
Lord  Justice  Clerk,  and  Lords  Commissioners 
of  Justiciary,  in  a  Circuit  Court  of  Justiciary, 
to  be  holden  by  them,  or  any  one  or  more  of 
their  number,  within  the  burgh  of  Glasgow,  ia 
the  month  of  April,  in  this  present  year  one 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  seventeen,  you  the 
said  James  M'Ewan,  M'Dowal  Pate,  or  Peat, 
and  John  Connelton,  ought  to  be  punished 
with  the  pains  of  law^  to  deter  others  from 
committing  the  like  ciimes  in  all  time 
coming. 
(Signed)       H.  Home  Drummoko,  A.  D. 

And  the  said  James  M'Ewan,  M'Dowal 
Pate  or  Peat,  and  John  Connelton,  having 
been  all  and  each  of  them  oftentimes  called  ia 
open  Court,  and  three  times  at  the  (foor  of  the 
Court-house,  yet  failed  to  appear, 

The  Lords  Hbrmand  and  Gillies  decern 
and  adjudge  the  said  James  M'Ewan,  M*Dowal 
Pate,  or  Peat,  and  John  Connelton,  all  and 
each  of  them,  to  be  outlaws  and  fugitives  fron& 
his  majesty's  laws ;  and  ordain  them  to  be  put 
to  the  horn,  and  their  whole  moveable  goods 
and  gear  to  be  escheat  and  inbrought  to  his 
majesty's  use,  for  not  appearing  this  day  and 
place,  to  underlie  the  law  for  the  said  crime 
of  administering  of  unlawful  oatlis,  as  they 
who  were  lawfully  summoned  for  that  effect, 
several  times  called  in  open  court,  and  thrice 
at  the  door  of  the  Court-nouse,  yet  failed  t<^ 
appear,  as  said  is. 

(Signed)  Ao.  Gillies.  P« 


«3»3 


Trial  of  NeU  Dwglasfir  SedUion. 


A.  P.  1817. 


imM 


701.  Proceedings  in  the  High  Court  of  Justiciary  at  Edinburgh, 
against  Neil  Dougdas,*  Universalist  Preacher,  for  Sedi- 
tion, May  26  :   57  Geo.  III.  a.  d.  1817. 


HIGH  COURT  OF  JUSTICIARY. 

May  26,  181T. 

Fre$ent. 

Rt.  Hon.  Bamd  Boykf  Lord  Justice  Clerk. 
Lord  Ucmoad, 
Lord  GilHeg. 
Lord  PUtmlly. 
Lord  Raton, 

Cowmlfcr  the  Ovwn. 

James  Wedderhuniy  Esq.  Solicitor-Genend.- 
H.  Hcmt  DrttfiMROfM?,  Esq. 
Jcmei  Maconochie,  Esq. 

If.  Warrender,  W.  S.  Agent. 

Coumelfor  Niel  Dtntglag, 

Fra$ids  Jeffrey,  Esq. 
J.  P.  Grant,  Esq. 
Henry  Coddrum,  Esq. 
J,  A,  Murrey,  Esq. 
David  Bamay  W.  S.  Agent. 

lard  JuUke  Clerk. — Neil  Douglas, — 
„      iAttend  to  the  indictment   ftgaiost  you, 
which  is  now  to  be  read. 

^'  Neil  Douglas,  Unirersalist  preacher, 
leskting  in  Stockwell  street  of  the  city  of 
Glasgow,  you  are  indicted  and  accused,  at 
the  instance  of  Alexander  Maconochie  of 
Meadowbaok,  his  Majesty's  advocate  for 
his  Muesty's  interest :  That  albeit,  by  the 
law^of  this  and  of  every  other  well  go- 
verned realm,  sedition,  more  especidly 
when  committed  by  a  minister,  or  by  a 
person  exercising  the  functions  of  a  mini- 
ster, in  the  perfohnance  of  divine  worship, 
is  a  'crime  of  a  heinous  nature,  and  se- 
verely punishable :  Yet  true  it  is  and  of 
verity,  that  you  the  said  Niel  Douglas  are 
guilty  of  the  said  crime,  aggravated  as 
*  aforesaid,  actor,  or  art  and  port ;  In  so 
£ir  as,  on  the  9th  day  of  March  1817,  or  on 
one  or  other  of  the  days  of  that  month, 
or  of  the  months  of  February  or  January 
inmiediately  preceding,  in  a  house,  hall 
or  room,  called  the  Andersonian  Institu- 
tion Class-room,  situated  in  John  street 
of  the  said  city  of  Glasgow,  jrou  the  said, 
Niel  Douglas,  being  a  minister,  or  exer- 
cising the  functions  of  a  minister,  did,  in 

*  This  panel  was  a  member  of  the  celebrated 
British  convention  in  1793,  in  the  proceedings 
of  which  assembly  he  appears  to  have  taken  a 
very  active  part:  See  the  minutes  on^^Vol. 
^.  p.  392,  e4  fcy. 


the  course  of  divine  worship,  wickedly, 
slanderously,  falsely  and  seditiously  otter, 
before  crowded  congregations,  chiefly  of 
the  lower  orders  of  the  people,  prayers,  ser- 
mons,  or  declamations,  containing  wicked, 
slanderous,  false  and  seditious  assertions 
and  remarks,  to  the  disdain,  reproach,  and 
contempt  of  his  Majesty,  and  of  his  Royal 
Highness  the    Prince    Regent,  in  their 
persons  as  well  as  in  their  offices;  and 
also  to  the  disdain,  reproach  and  con- 
tempt of  the  House  of  Commons,  and  of 
the  administration  of  justice  within  the 
kingdom ;   all  which  wicked,  slanderous, 
false  and  seditious  assertions  and  remarks 
were  calculated  and  intended  to  the  hurt, 
prejudice  and  dishonour  of  his  Majesty, 
and  of  his  Royal  Highness  the  Prince  Re- 
gent, both  in  their  persons  and  offices ;  to 
withdraw  from  theUovemmentand  legisli^ 
ture  the  confidence  and  affections  of  the 
people;  and  by  engendering  discord  be- 
tween the  king  and  the  people,  to  inflame 
the  people  with  jealousy  and  hatred  against 
the  Government,  and  to  fill  the  realm  with 
trouble  and  dissension.    More  particu- 
larly, time  and  place  aforesaid,  you  the 
said  Niel  Douglas  did  wickedly,  slander* 
ouslv,  fiadse^  and  seditiously,  in  the  course 
of  the  prayers,  sermons  or  declamations 
uttered  b^  you,  assert  and  draw  a  parallel 
between  his  Majesty  and  Nebuchadnessar 
king  of  Babylon,  remarking  and  insinuat- 
ing that,  like  the  said  king  of  Babylon,  his 
Majesty  was  driven  from  me  society  of  men 
for  infidelity  and  corruption :  And  you,  thei^ 
and  there,  did  further  wickedly,  slander* 
ously,  falsely  and  seditiously  assert,  that  hif 
Royal  Highness  the  Prince  Reg^ent  was  « 
poor  infatuated  wretch,  or  a  poor  infatuated 
devotee  of  Bacchus,  or  use  expressions  of 
similar  import :  And  you,  then  and  there,* 
did  wickealy,  slanderously,  falsely  and  se* 
ditiouslv  assert  and  draw  a  parallel  be* 
tween  his  Royal   Highness   the  Prince 
Regent  and  Belshazzar  king  of  BaMon  ; 
remarking  and  insinuating  that  his  Rofral 
Highness  the  Prince  R^^t,   like    the 
said  king  of  Babylon,  had  not  taken  warn- 
ing froqft  the  example  of  his  father ;  and 
that  a  (ate  similar  to  that  of  thd  said 
king  of  Babylon  awaited  his  Royal  High^ 
ness  the  Prince  Regent,  if  he  did  not 
amend  his  ways,  and  listen  to  the  voice  of 
his  people:  And  further,  time  and-  plaea 
forc»aia,  you  did  wickedly,  slanderously, 
falsely  and   seditiously  assert   that   the 
House  of  <JommonB.waB  corntpt,  aaf 


iiil        57  C80RGE  ttl. 

that  tlM  memben  tharaof  w^e  tbievesmd 
robben;  that  seats  in  the  sud  House  of 
FarUanient  were  sold  Uke  hulk>cks  in  a 
fnaikety  or  use  expresshms  of  similar  im- 
p<»rt4  .And  fvfetbery  lime  and  place  foie-  * 
saTdy  you  did  wickedly,  slanderously, 
h}a%\y  and  seditiously  asaett,  that  .the ! 
laws  were  not  justly  administered  within 
this  kingdom ;  and  that  the  subjects  of 
his  Majesty  were  condemned  without 
trial,  amd  trididnt  endenoe,  dt  use  ex- 
pressions of  similat  impoit.  And  you 
the  said  Neil  Douglas  having  been  ap- 
jnthended  and  isken  before  Robert  Ha- 
«ki)tcm,£squire,'Shetiff-depatfe  of  the  county 
of  LttUaHc,  did,  in  his  presence,  at  Glas- 

tdw,  emit  three  sereral  declarations, 
ated  the  15th^7th  and  18A  days  of 
Msrch  18t7:  Which  dedarsctions  being 
to  be  used  in  evidence  ^;ainst  ybu,  will 
1)e  lodged  in  due  time  in  the  hands  of 
Ae  derk  of  the  Hi^  Court  df  Justidaiy, 
l>efore  whidi  you  ai«  to  be  toed,  that  you 
may  have  an  opportunity  of  aeein^  the 
tame.  At  least,  time  mad  place 'foresaid,  in 
the  <xmne  of  divine  worship,  prayers, 
sermons  tur  dedamalions  were  wickedly, 
ftanderCTQ^y,  -ftOsdly  and  aeditieiusly  ut- 
lered  containing  %e  foresaid  wicked, 
ttandefrcms,  fiUse  and  seditious  assertions, 
vemaiks  and  insintitftions,  by  a  person 
^wfao  was  aministei^  or  wbo  jexercned  the 
fnctlous  of  a  minifter ;  and  you  the  said 
Hiel  Dooghtt  are  gitiHy  "ftiereof,  actor,  or 
«n  «md  pmt.  AQ  Whidi.  or  part  thereof, 
JNtogTOund  proven  bfihe  Terdhftdf  an 
lUHhey  MGsre  the  loM  Sfntftce-^Gviieral, 
fte  tod  Justice  €le<t,  «!&  teids  torn- 
nrtsiiuueif  of  Jmtticiavy,  yoou  the  'said 
WW  I>ou|(tas  ott^to  Ik  punlMmd  with 
tbe  paitts  of  hm,  to  deter  others  from 
tommittiDf  tbe  uke  crimes  in  lA  time 
tnmh^,      JamesWefldeibun^  A.!D." 

XtST  or  WXTKBS3S8. 

Itakfff  SamhoH,  Esq.  Sheaff-diprte  ngf  the 

Xam  Zhamsn,  eMi  to  Jolm  DtindaOa,  Aeriff- 

d«vk  «f  lAaaAshite. 
600|M  Jkmtmf  iheiiff  «Aeer  In  Ciewgiw. 
MaZttlJ^,4aerk4otbesaid  /iteDsyaWe. 

tigbett  JUemmdm't  tiebaaaDnis^  GlaMoir* 
MMkeuf  Xawitm,  tailer  ifceie. 
JoAa  M^tcaibm^  town^flker  thiMt. 
M99m4»  Ziorfsr^  towm  lotfoer  there* 
Jamet  i^rrii^  ^ewn-ofioer  fhert. 
ififgilWfmoi^  libsuMf  ^MttPt. 
jMifffii^w  00^,  noir<«r  l^raierlgrMsidilig  in 
TcAiagD  H^ratt,  OImi^ww 

imm  WaiM^  samaM  thaM. 


ArtMbaU  Cockrm  of  Ashkirk. 
James  Gordon^  meochant  in  Dalkeith. 
4Jemrf^^Batj,  weaver  diere. 
Siiwiii  IRtfteffftyn,  saddler  there. 
Thomm  Doddi,  famer,  EdgeUw. 
Jamei  Boaft,  iaimer,  Broachrigg. 

Camty  (f  BaAimgUm, 

Wmiam  AUehuon  of  Drummore. 
John  'Fowler  t)f  WtndygowH. 
Robert  fiotocfea,  temer,  Chiq^l. 
John  BurUy  farmer,  Kingston. 
Joftn  Howden,  do.  Congalton  Mains.  ' 

CmayvfljmMgem. 

Jama  Joteph  Hope  Vert  of  CraigiehalL 

Jamei  Dumku  of  Dundas. 

Robert  Jngia,  residing  at  CowdenhiU. 

Jamet  Trotterj  farmer  at  Newton,  parish  of 

Aberoom. 
John  Simmo,  fanner  there. 

CUy  0fEiMurgk. 

Peter  Bor^, smith  hi  EdmbM%h. 
Pairiek  Can^pheU^  hotel-ke»>er  there. 
WUUam  BMhrnudy  boola^lWrllhere. 
Jomet  Macgregw^  hotel-keeper  thee^' 
Jamet  White,  bookseller  AierSb 
Ebenexer  GUchritt,  banker  rtbaie. 
John  lAfcUy  wine-meidmnt4hAi<i. 
Thomat  &amr,  baker  there. 
J^hn  Mackay,  post-master  there. 
'^Maegjmmny 


\h. 


.  ffiaker  aiere» 
Andrew  Broion,  fo«mder  there. 
Robert  White,  pewterer  there. 
WiUiam  Ped/Sk^  leatber^nHmBhamt  these. 
JbrdkiibddJMmdainep  merchant  these. 
WUUam  ^Boggf  doth-merobaatAhem. 
Jksander  (S«w,  acceantaattheaa. 
William  WjaddeO^  fmater  Iheve. 
John  SmL  Siai^pton,  sil«er*^ter  ihtse* 
Jafta  Faabaim^  bodoellar  theie. 
Sobo-/ Agic^  dothier  there. 

ToumcfLeith. 

JammGaUm^  Hope  Stneet,  biih.    * 
Mem^  i^«r Jsa,  builder  thaaa. 
Rabmt  Jftyng,  grocer  ia  'L&Uk. 
ianmt  Bei(  aaerolnBt  tfanrab 
Mokert  BrmXf  maaager  fat  the  Lottde^  aod 
SdiuEbfUD^  Shipping  GomMy  «t  Leith . 
John  Poaf^aeed  aerchatit  in  Leilh. 
Reberi  Uikan,  merchant  there. 

D.  BOTLB. 

An.GitUEa. 
David  DouoLas. 

bri  JalKiie  CAsrJk.-i*^19i^l  l>oag1tfs,  What  do 
you  tcy  to  this  imdicmwntf'^afe  ytro.  '^uiiir|^ 
or  not  jguilty  ? 

iWarfi    Hal  Oaillf ,  my  leid: 

XatA  SMice  Cterk.^ftx9^  the  coomft^  fttr 
the*  pKti^l  «ny  d^jactiom  to  the  lelevanqf  «C 
ihia  indictment  I 


fi^^]         Vnkertalot  PrtudUrpJor  High  TreawH.    .     A.  9(^  \^% 


)Ar«  Ji^9w,^No»  my  lord*  W«  bavt  sjittn 
In  defenoM  tor  Um  piuoiMr. 

l>EVEircE9  ibr  ttie  R«t.  Nid  Don^^  to  tiie 
indictment  against  Um  at  the  -  instance  of 
his  Majesty^  advocate  for  his  Majesty's  in- 
terest* 

The  panel  deoiea  that  he  ia  gniltyof  the 
crioM  chaiged  in  the  indictment^  or  that  he 
ever  made  use  of  the  expressions  there  im- 
piUed  to  him,  or  of  any  similar  eiipresaions. 
On  the  contrary,  he  avers  and  offers  to  prove, 
that  he  has  always  spoken  with  the  ntmost 
icspect  of  the  Sovereign^  and  the  Hoosea  of 
PamaBQent;  has  on  all  oocasioas  eoUoUed  tl^ 
laws  of  the*  country,  and  exhorted  all  his  hear- 
«Ea  to  avoid  and  disoouBtenanoe  every  .a9rt  of 
JlumnU  or  disorder. 

Under  protestation  to  add  and  eik. 

F.  JaFFftBT.  . 
LIST  or  EXCULPJlTOaT  WITVESSES. 

WiUiMi  Warrdl,  weaver  in  Mailboronsb- 
tffoet,  Calto«  of  Glaicom 

AUm  C<ampbeiif  teacher,  Dempsler-etftct, 
Gla^poir. 

Unid  Ymag,  weaver,  Barraek^etrealt  CalloB. 

Jolm  Benioidf  candle^mftker^  Aig]^e<«treel, 
Gksgepw. 

WUUam  NMet,  weaver^  High^stine^  Qtesgoiv. 

JoAn  CAa&nert,  weaver,  Carrick-streetji  Brown- 
field,  Glasgow. 

Bev.  James  Smiti^  St.  Patrick-s^nare,  Edin- 
burgh. 

Rev.  James  Donaldson,  head  of  BladLfiriars*- 
wynd,  Edinburgh. 

Lard  JmHce  Clerk, — Your  lordships  have 
«een  this  indictment,  and  have  heard  the  de- 
fences for  the  prisoner  read ;  and  thovtgh  no 
ohjeetions  to  tlie  relevancy  of  the  indictment 
liavebeen  stated  by  his  counsel,  yet  if,  in  re- 
feenee  lo  tiie  sufficiency  of  the  fhcts  charged 
in  the  minor  proposition  to  establish  the  crime 
charged  in  the  major,  or  in  reference  to  any 
other  cineumstance  in  the  indictment,  any  ob- 
leetions  to  the  relevancry  have  occurred  to  your 
wrdehips,  yen  wiH  now  state  them  to  the 
Cksnst, 

Xoni  Bbrmonci — ^I  should  be  happy  to  find 
ifui.  ikm  charge  of  emploviug  sucn  language 
j!i(gp»ding  the  soveteign  of  this  country  as  tlttt 
iMsdin  die  indicti](ient  should  not  be  brought 
home  to  any  sabjed.  Never  waa  a  sovereij^ 
toa  deserving  qf  such  imputations.  The  in- 
dictment is  unquestionably  relevant. 

Lord  GaUet, — I  see  uo  objections  to  the  re- 
levancy of  Chis  indictment. 

LordJuttice  Clerk, — ^The  usual  interlocutor 
ftuding  the  relevancy  of  the  indictment  falls 
DOW  to  be  pronounced*  Niel  Douglas :  attend 
to  the  interlocutor  of  relevancy. 

''  The  Lord  Justice  OerkandLords  Cosmus- 
W^era  of  Jaaticiary  havins  considered  the  in- 
mtment  lused  9xA  pursuld  attfi^  iuatano*  <^ 


hit  m^estj^a  adnwate^  fpr  \um  a^i^sty^a  i»» 
tam^  agauMyt  Kiel  Dobfflasb  ^el«  find  tl»e 
same  relevant  to  infer  the  paina  of  law  ;  h«t 
allow  the  panel  to  prove  all  foots  and  ^ 
oumstaiKes  that  may  tend.  to.  ssculpa^e  him„^ 
attaviate  hia  goil^  apd  reaut  the  panel,  with 
theindictmeat  aa  found  relevant,  to  the  koaw- 
Mg^of  anassiae. 

<*  p.  BOTM^  J,  P.  TK"" 

Lord  Jvitice  Clerk. — ^The  question  fbr  yvmr 
lordshipa'  determination  now  is,  wbettker  you 
should  proceed,  at  this  late  hour,  to  the  trial 
of  the  prisoner* 

Lord  Advocate. — If  agreeable  to  your  kayi- 
ships,  I  should  wish  that  the  trial  should  now 
proceed,  in  order  to  saw^  trouble  to  tW  Juiy 
and  the  witnesses  who  are  in  attendatfcew 

Mr.  Jeffrey, ^-^  it  oar  vrlsk  on  the  part  of 
the  prisoner  that  the  trial  should  go  on  now,  aa 
he  has  brought  witnesses  from  Ulasgovr;  and 
to  delay  &e  trial  wmM  occasion  addHjjioiMl 
expense  and  trouble.  So  fir  from  lotjecting 
that  the  trial  should  go  on  at  present;  it  ia  o«r 
interest  and  desire  that  it  shwnd  promd now; 
and,  for  niy  own  psrt,  I  bscf  o  no  wisif  for 
delay  on  any  personal  coasidenttons. 

Lord  Hemumd. — I  wish  to  get  quit  oC  tk^ 
monflif«i8.1oad;  el  bntineeswhieh  wt»h49«  at 
present.  TWa  oibeK  impertaMl^  eaidi  at  pre- 
seM  MBMin  l»  ho^diapMad  ol. 

Lord  FUmilly, — ^If  we  proceed  now*  it  would 

Srove  a  serious  interference  with  our  odier 
ttties. 

Lord  JktMue  Ckrk,^^li  weald  b*  mosi  piiin- 
ful  to  me  to  aUesr  any  thing  t»  inlerfore  wji^ 
the  interest  of  the  piiaoner;  m$A  theaalbre, 
atohoogh  iMoftfttiient  w  na  in  aaia*  fMpMtit 
we  shall  proceed  with  th*  tsial. 

The  foll6wing  persons  were  then  named  as 
jurymen. 

_  »  

Tkomat  DoddSj  farmer  at  Edgelaw. 
Jmm$  Baakf  fwrner,  Broacfarigg, 
WaiimH'  AiMtofb  of  Dnimmore^ 
John  Fowknof  Win^gowlK 
Moheri  Bo»dm,  fiuaiMr,  CbapeU 
Jteer  Danrfar  of  Dund^s. 
J«aMX  Troitefs  foimer  a*  Newtoa^ 
Wmam  JUaafaMwd^bookseHer,  Edinbui^. 
men.  <}iUmmi,  bankisr  th«re. 

Jfaftni^aU^  win»-merehaat,  Edinihwgh* 
JaAaJicwfai^  post^aaaster  there. 
WUUam  Waddk,  printer  there. 
Jamee  Betty  merchant  in  lieith. 
Mahert  Enxe^  manager  of  Uie  JU>udon  mi 
Edinbutrii  Shipping  Compaiky  at  Imfk, 
Moiert  Wutonf  merchant  there. 

SVlDBffCE  FOa  TH£   C&OWV. 

i/niwsrihr  OaUan  sworn.— Enfldinad  hf 
Iftr.  MaeQn0eiia^ 

Hit,  Qrant.^-^l  object  to  this  witness,  m "W* 
haTi  h0  nQ  opportuxdty  of  kiiowiAg  any.thiiii 


!^fyg]         57  ^£6BfCE' ill. 

*«b<mt  bim.  It  is  not  sud  when,  or  in  wliat  | 
'oapacityhe  resided  in  Tobago-streety  Calton 
of  Glasgow.  Another  objection  which  we 
-state,  is,  that  we  understand'  his  name  is 
Gillian,  while  the  name  in  the  list  of  witnesses 
annexed  to  the  indictment  is  Gollan.  I  need 
not  take  up  the  time  of  the  Court  in  showing 
that  these  objections  are  sufficient  to  entitle  us 
to  demand  that  the  evidence  of  this  witness  be 
.{ejected. 

Court. — ^What  is  your  name  ?— Gollan. 

Mr.  Maconochie, — ^I  do  not  think  it  necessary 
to  state  any  thing  in  answer  to  the  other  ob- 
-jection. 

,     Cbiir*.— Where  do   you   life  ?  —  Tobago- 
atreet,  Calton. 

-  Jif  r.  Jliaco8odUe.-*WbBt  is  your  profession  ? 
-—I  am  a  weaver. 

Were  you  one  of  the  patrole  of  the  county 
of  Lanark  P-^X  was  one  of  the  patrole. 

Have  you  been  in  the  habit^  upon  any  oc- 
.  casion,  of  attending  Mr.  Douglas's  sermons  ? 
**-Yes,  I  hare  beam  him  once  or  twice. 
.     When? — I  do  not  remember  the  time;  in 
the  month  of  January  or  February  last. 

Where  was  his  meeting? — In  John-street,  I 
think. 

In  the  Andersonian  Institution  f — ^Yes. 

-  Was  the  meeting  crowded  ? — Yes. 

What  sort  of  persons  attended  it  chiefly  ? — 
They  were  mostly  of  the  lower  orders. 
.     At  what  time  of  the  evening  was  the  meet- 
ing P-^From  six  to  eight. 

On  what'day  of  the  week  ? — Sunday. 
'    Can  you  speak  more  particularly  to  the 
time  ? — 1  cannot  say  more  particularly. 
•    -Did  any  thing  strike  you  particularly  as  to 
<Mr.  -  Douglas's  sermons?     Did  be  introduce 
politics  into  them  ?-^Yes. 
^_    That  is  he  sittine  there  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  rememoer    any  of  the  texts   he 

f reached  from? — ^From  the  fifth  chapter  of 
>aDiel. 

Do  you  remember  his  entering  into  any  dis- 
cussion about  the  king?*— Some  little,  but  I 
remember  but  very  little  of  it  now. 

Tell  what  you  recollect  of  it  P — He  made  a 
simile  of  George  the  third  to  Nebuchadnezzar, 
and  of  the  prince  regent  to  Belshazzar,  and 
•insiitied  that  the  prince  represented  the  latter 
in  not  paying  much  attention  to  what  had 
happened  to  kings ;  and  that  the  king  of 
France  had  not  acted  agreeably  to  the  voice 
of  the  people,  and  brought  himself  to  the  block 
on  that  account.  And,  enlarging  in  his  dis- 
course, he  told  the  people  it  was  necessary  to 
•have  a  reform,  and  he  set  forth,  that  the  only 
means  for  getting  it  was  by  petitioning,  and 
that  he  had  no  doubt  that  by  petitioning  it 
would  be  obtained. 

*Do  you  remember  any  thing  further?^--!  do 
not  remember  much  more  of  his  sermons.  In 
jiis  prayer,  he  prayed  that  the  lord  might  turn 
the  Hbeart  of  the  prince,  calling  him  in&tuated, 
Ihat  be  might  disperse  the  corrupt  counsellors 


Trial  of  Nifil  Douglas t 


[645 


that  were  about  him,  and  place  wise  and 
faithful  counsellors  around  his  throne. 
■  Dp  you  remember  any  thing  further  he  said 
in  his  prayer,  or  in  his  sermon  ? — ^This  was  in 
his  lecture;  that  agreeably  to  the  situation 
every  person  is  placed  in,  he  is  'more  or  less 
accountable  for  the  sins  he  commits ;  and  if 
the  prince,  in  particular,  be  guilty  of  not 
listening  to  the  voice  of  his  people,  he  would 
endure  punishment  for  a  series  of  years. 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  more  f — I  can- 
not  say  that  I  do  at  the  present  time. 

Do  you  remember  if  there  was  any  thing 
said  about  the  House  of  Commons  ? — ^There 
might|  but  I  do  not  remember  at  the  present 
time. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  Habeas 
Corpus  act  P — He  gave  a  statement  of  the 
suspension  of  it,  how  far  it  ran ;  something 
wim  regard  to  that. 

What  did  he  say  P — I  do  not  remember. 

Do  you  remember  the  substance  of  what  he 
said  ?-^No»  I  do  not  remember. 

Did  he  approve  of  the  suspension  of  the 
Habeas  Corpus  act.? — He  fo9nd  fault  with  it. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  those  that  passed 
the  act  suspending  the  Habeas  Corpus  act  ? — 
No,  I  do  not  remember. 

Do  you  remember  if  he  talked  at  all  about 
the  victory  of  Waterloo  ? 

Mr.  Jeffrey, '^l  object  to  that  question* 

Solicitor  General. — ^There  can  be  no  dbubf, 
that,  by  the  practice  of  the  Court,  the  question 
may  be  put  to  the  witness.  The  general  charge 
against  the  panel  is,  that  he  uttered  certain 
discourses  or  a  seditious  nature  and  tendency ; 
and/ in  the  minor  proposition,  there  is  a  speci»> 
fication  of  the  particulars  from  which  the  sedi^ 
tion  charged  is  to  be  made  out.  We  are  not 
restricted  in  our  proof  to  the  particular  words 
charged  in  the  indictment,  but  may  prove  ge- 
nerally whether  in  his  discourses  his  expres- 
sions were  wicked  or  seditious.  There  may  be 
many  circumstances  of  an  apparently  trifUag 
nature,  from  which  the  character  of  these  dis- 
courses may  be  proved'  to  be  either  innocent 
or  seditious.  I  aver  that  the  answer  to  the 
question  which  has  been  put  will  throw  most 
important  light  on  this  matter.  In  the  case 
of  Muir,  a  question  of  this  sort  occurred ;  and 
some  of  your  lordships  will  recollect,  that  an 
objection  was  made  to  questions  being  put  re- 
garding any  expressions  but  those  contained 
in  the  libel ;  and  the  Court  did  allow  the  pro- 
secutor to  enter  into  a  proof  of  circumstances 
not  mentioned  in  the  libel.* 

[He  read  the  debate  from  the  printed  trial.] 

There  was  thus  a  long  debate  on  the  subject; 
and  the  prosecutor  was  found  entitled  to  pro- 
ceed in  his  proof.  Here  the  same  rule  shoutd 
be  adopted. 

•  Muii's  Case,  7,  How.  Mod.  St.  T^,  .I3S^ 
140;  148e/jey.  " 


441] 


UnhSerMitUH  PreadMr^Jir  Seditivh* 


A.  D.  1817. 


[64» 


Mr.  Mfirtjf,*^!  etneas^  «n  not  disjyoMd  to 
Uke  up  the  time.ol  th«  C^nrC  by  a  speecb  io 
•Qpport  of  ay  o^e^ioB  to  this  qnestion.    I 
UEk  fer  from  aiguing^  thAt  the  pablie  prate- 
•utor  if  to  be  tied  down  to  the  very  words 
nentioned  in  the  ainor  propoeition  >,  bat  if 
there  u  any  meaning  at  all  in  recpiiriag  %  spe- 
eiflc  aatement  in  l^e  minor  propoeition,  he 
most  be  United  to  matten  of  the  same  tiani 
or  description  with  these  whioh  are  charged. 
He  is  not  entitled^  nnder  the  general  charge  of 
sedition,   to   inquire   wheUier   the    prisoner 
ottered  any  thing  isdecoronst  nnpatnotic,  or 
improper,  at  the  time  libeUed.    What  are  the 
terois  of  the  chfirge  here  ?    That  the  prisoner 
^  didy    in    the    course   of    divine    worships 
wiekedlyy- slanderously^  falsely,  and  seditiously 
otter,  before  crowded  congregations,  chiefly 
of  the  lower  orders  of  the  people,  prayers, 
sermons,  or  declamations,  containing  widced, 
slanderoos,  false,  and  seditious  assertions  and 
toraarks,  to  the  disdain,  repraacbi  and  co»* 
tempt  of  kii  m^afy^  and  of  Ats  rcyg/  kighnat 
tkcfrmct  regmtf  in  thbir  persons  as  well  as  in 
their  offices ;  and  also  to  the  disdain,  reproach, 
and  contempt  of  <A0  Bffute  of  Commmi,  and  of 
ihe  admim&tfaiwn  ofjiatioe  within  the  kingdom ; 
all  which  wicked^  slandef<on%  felse,  and  sedi- 
tious awciliona  and  remaiks,  were  calculated 
and  inteaded  to  the  hutt,  prajodiee,  and  dis* 
honour  of  his  majesty,  and  of  his  royal  hig^ 
DOSS  the  prtooo  regent,  both  ia  their  persons 
and  offices ;  to  withdraw  from  the  governotent 
and  legislature  the  confideace  and  affections 
of  the  people;  and^  by  engendering  discord 
between  the  king  aad  die  people,  to  inflame 
the  people  with  jealousy  and  hatred  aaainst  the 
fPTorament,  and  tofillthe  realm  with  trouble 
and  dissension."    Row,  «ha(t  poesible  con* 
i|ectioo  can  there  be  between  the  proof  of  any 
of  these  charges,  and  tho  pri^nora  opinion  of 
fihe  battle  of  Waterloo  ?    Supposing  a  perMin 
ahoold  haive  the  singnlariiy,  the  want  of  fteling, 
or  the  wfaiasicaUty  of  thiokiag  the  victory  at 
Waterioo  disreputable  to  our  reputation  or 
||oiy,  is  a  prejudioa  to  be  excited  against  him 
in  a  trial  for  sedition  or  othev  crime,  becanse 
(e  feels  so  little  for  bis  country  as  to  have  such 
sentiments  ?    What  is  it  t^  the  support  of  (his 
indictment,  supposing  the  prisoner  had  sioch 
peculiarity  of  thinking?    I  am  not  now  to 
aripie  whether  the  oKpression  of  such  senti- 
ments would  amount  to  the  charge  of  sedition; 
fof  even  if  that  were  the  case,  and  if  soch 
expressions  had  been  specified  in  the  indict- 
nsentp  yon  could  not  have  allowed  a  proof  of 
them,  as  they  could  not  infer  the  particular 
sorts  of  sedition  specified .  in  the  minor  pro- 
pontioa.    Particular  chsfeges  are^  stated  itt  the 
indictment,  and  are  you  to  aOow  si  paily  to 
M  prejudiced  by  having,  soch  qaestions,  as 
that  to  which  I  now  o^ect, — 1  de  not  say 
answend,*— but  put  to  a  witness  at  all  ?    1  do 
not  care  ibr  the  anawers;  but  Io  allow  the 
prosecutor  to  take  such  a  course,  would  be 
attended    widi  bad  consequences  in    worse 
times,  and  in  other  tiials  for  crimes.  -  At  all 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


vnm%  (he  qaestioa  is  obviously  <}nife  irre- 
levant, and  not  admissible  io  this  trul. 

Loid  GtOet.— What  is  the  paztioohv  qnea- 
tion  objected  to  ? 

Mr.  Jeffrey, — "Do  you  remember  if  he 
talked  at  all  about  the  victory  of  Waterloo  ?^ 

Lord  Hemumd, — ^I  cannot  concave  what  the 
victory  of  Waterloo^  or  the  Uabeaa  Corpus  act, 
has  to  do  with  this  indictment.  It  is  divided 
into  three  heads.  There  are  charged,  1st,  Se- 
<ditious  assertions  and  remarks  against  his 
majesty ;  2nd^  Against  his  royal  highness  the 
prince  regent;  and  8rd,  Agidnst  the  House 
of  Commons  and  the  courts  of  justice.  Yon 
have  charged  Sedition  under  three  heads;  and 
yon  most  keep  to  these  heads« 

Lord  Gillies, — I  concur  in  the  opinion  which 
has  been  given.  As  to  the  battle  of  Waterloo, 
I  should  think  it  strange  to  find  any  difference 
among  people  in  this  country  about  it ;  but 
whatever  the  prisoner's  opinion  may  be  as  to 
that  victory^  mere  is  nothing  relative  to  it  in 
the  indictment.  The  sedition  first  charged  re- 
gards his  roijesly.  Then  a  charge  is  made  re«* 
garding  his  royal  highness  the  prince  regent, 
3iat  the  prisoner  used  the  expressions  libelled^ 
or  some  of  similar  imports  Has  the  battle  of 
Waterloo  any  connexion  with  these  charges  7 
Then  it  is  stated  in  the  indictment,  that  the 
panel  seditiously  asserted  that  the  House  of 
Commons  was  eorrupt:  that  the  members 
thereof  were  thieves  and  robbers ;  that  seats 
in  the  said  House  of  Parliament  were  sold  like 
bollocks  in  a  maikot^— or  that  he  used  express 
sions  of  similar  nnport  What  has  the  battle 
of  Waterloo  to  do  with  this  charge?  The 
same  obeervatiDn  apfriies  in  oonaidering  the 
remaining  charge,  which  represents  ^  panel 
as  having  anarted  that  the  svbjects  of  his  ma- 
jesty were  oondemned  without  trials  and  wiUi* 
out  evidence.  None  of  his  laajestv's  subjects 
were  broofi^t  to  any  other  trial  at  the  battle  of 
Waterloo  than  that  of  skiU  and  vakHff/— a  tpat 
which  Ihey  passed  triumphantly. 

Lord  PitmUfy,-^!  am  of  the  some  opmioA 
with  the  judges  who  have  spoken. 

LordJmtke  Clerk^^l  also  am  of  tbo  saat 
opinion.  I  am  not  giving  an  opinion  on 
the  point,  whether,  if  the  indictment  had 
charged,  that  theaeimon  contained  passagesi 
manifesting  geneml^  the  disaffscted  and  sedi* 
tions  sentiments  of  the  panels  suck  a  qoestiott 
as  that  pat  ibr  the  orewn  would  or  would 
not  have  been  relevant.  Here  the  -  general 
charge  is  sedition;,  but  particvdncs  sse  con- 
descended on,  of  such  a  liod  aa  do  not  aUo^f 
the  going  into  suohqnes^one  ae  that  objected 
to^  regarding  the  battle  of.  Wateiiooi 

1  have  heafdv  diat  thaie  is  an  individaalv 
whom  I  need  not  mention,  whothinks  that tibe 
duk^  of  Wellinig^on  hs»  no  merit  whatever  iff 
any  of  his  campaigns  jot  the  battles- whiah  ho 
has  fought, — but  eoiild  this  indivitkial,  for 
such  singularity  of  thinking,  be  charged  with 
seditiooi  sutii  aft  is  imputed  to  this  piSt^7 

2  T 


04^ 


£7  GEORGE- III. 


Ttiat  qfJWi  Dougisi, 


[644 


Mr.  Macanochk.^'Yon  said,  that  in  ipeak- 
ing  of  the  king  atid  the  prince,  be  made  a 
•imtle  between  them  and  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
BeUhazzar ;  did  he  say  any  thing  else  as  to 
the  king  personally? — He  said,  that,  in  his 
opinion,  a  common  executioner  has  a  more 
honourable  situation  than  a  king,  as  an  execu- 
tioner is  guilty  of  taking  only  a  few  lives  in 
the  course  of  a  year,  whereas  a  king  takes 
thousands. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  Bacchus  ?— He 
said  the  prince  was  a  worshipper  of  Bacchus. 

Cotir/:— What  did  he  call  him  ?  how  did 
lie  designate  himP — I  think  the  terms  used 
were,  him  and  his  Bacchanalian  Court.  I  do 
not  remember  particularly  in  what  way  the 
term  was  used. 

Mr.  Maoonochk. — Did  he  say  any  thing 
about  the  prince  and  Belshazzar?-^!  do  not 
remember. 

Did  he  sav  any  thing  about  thietes  and 
n>bbers  F—l  do  not  remember. 

Was  he  very  riolent,  or  did  he  speak  with 
great  composure? — He  spoke  uncommonly 
quick,  so  fiast,  indeed,  that  1  could  not  take  up 
fvhat  he  said. 

Are  you'  one  of  Mr.  I>)uglas's  hearers? — 
Nb. 

What  took  you  to  hear  him  ? — ^I  had  heard 
that  he  preached  uniyersal  redemption  for 
mankind,  add  P  wanted  to  hear  him  on  that 
subject. 


Mr.  I>iifiiffioiitf.-^You  said'hedrew a  simile 
between  those  personages  in  the  Old  Testat>- 
nent  and  the  king  and  tbeprfaice  regenr.-  Is 
that  to  say  that  he  compared  the  king  and  the 
prince  regent  to  them  ?^Yes. 

in  what  respect  did  he  say  they  resembled 
one  another?— He  said  the  king's  infirmity 
rendered  him  incapable  of  discharging  his 
dnCjr,  as  N«biiehadneiiar  was  thrown  nom  the 
•ociety  of  men. 

Did  he  give  any  reason  for  stating  this  ? — I 
do  not  remember ;  but  it  was  in  that  manner 
he  enlarged  in  the  discourse. 

What  conclusion  did  he  draw?  for  what 
irarpose  did  he  state  what  yoit  have  mention- 
ad  r— I  cannot  recollect. 

H6w  did  he  make  out  that  llie  tw^were 
like  one  another?— I  have  mentioned  that 
already.  Nebuchadneszar  had  been  driven 
from  the  society  of  men ;  and  they  l>otfa  had 
been  driven  from  the  society  of  men. 

Did  he  say  why  they  had  been  driven*?— 1 
said  he-  spoke  so  hsty  I  coold  not  hear  the 
ftfth  part  of  what  he  said. 

Give  me  the  fifth  part,  and  I  shall  be  satisfi^ 
ed  ? — ^I  cannot  proceed  &rther  as  to  what  he 
•aid ;  for  I  do  not  now  lemember,  or  did  not 
lollow  him  at  the  time. 

Did  he  or  not  give  the  reasob^  why  Neba<* 
thadaeKar  was  driven  from  the  society  of 
meaP—*!  do  not  remember  whether  he  did  or 
not. 

Did  he  give  any  mf%n  why  the  king  was 


driven  from  the  society  of  men  ?  I  desire  you 
torecollecti  and  to  state  what  yon  know  abouf 
that?'— It  was  in  makmg  a  simile  between  the 
common  executioner^  and  the  king  being  the 
instrument  of  tldringso  many  lives.  He  saidf 
God  had  punished  him  for  his  unjtist  doingy 
towards  the  nation. 

You  said  something  about  an  executioner; 
what  was  that  ? — I  told  that  deliberately.  He 
said,  the  situation  of  an  executioner  was 
honourable  compared  with  that  of  a  king. 

Whom  did  you  understand  by  kimy  when 
the  panel  spoke  of  unjust  doings,  Nebuchad- 
nezzar or  the  king? — With  regard  to  God 
punishing  him^  I  understood  he  meant  George 
the  Third. 

He  compared  the  'prince  regent  to  BeU 
shazzar  ? — ^Yes. 

In  what  particulars*  did  he  say  they  re-* 
sembied  one  another  ?-~In  comparing  the  two, 
he  said,  that,  although  Belshazzar  had  seen  his 
liather  thrown  from  the  society  of  men,  and 
made*  to  eat  witli  the  'beasts  of  the  fteld;  He 
drank  out  of  vessels  forbidden,  and  the  prince 
regent  was  in  the  same  manner,  not  lendmg  an 
ear  to  the  prayers  and  supplications  of  his 
people. 

And  did  he  say  what  was  to  happen  to  hint 
from  not  lending  an  ear  to  them  f— Yes,  that 
God  would  undoubtedly  punish  him  for  iC 
afterwards. 

You  said  that  herecommendM  petitioning? 
—Yes. 

For  what? — ^For  a  reform  in  parliament. 

And  what  did  he  recommena  to  be  done  in 
order  to  promote  the  petitions? — He  said,  that 
by  petitioning,  and  petitioning,  and  petitioning 
agam,  and  again,  and  again,  their  petitions 
would  perhaps  be  heard  and  granted; 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  else'  he  safd 
about  it  ?-^No,  I  do'not  mmember  any  thing 
else  just  now. 

Did  he  take  any  illustration  ftt>m  tibe 
Scriptures  to  explain  how  they  should  proceed 
iD^pon  that  oocasionP— I  do  not  remember. 

Did  he  say  what  they  should  do  in  case  of 
their  petitions  not  being  listened  to?^~-I  da 
not  remember. 

I  wish  you  would  try  ? — I  cannot  recollect 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  House  of 
Commons  ?•— He  spoke  of  corruption  having' 
crept  in  among  them,  in  his  prayers,  sermon, 
ana  lecture. 

Then  he  repeated  at  diffi^nt  times  tiiat 
corruption  had  crept  in  among  them  ?  Did  he 
give  anv  example  of  the  corruption  ?  Did  he 
particularize  any  measure  as  an  illustration  of 
corruption  ? — I  do  not  remember: 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  suspenaimi 
of  the  Habeas  Cotpus  actP — He  meolioasd 
his  not  approving  of  it|  but  I  do  not  remember 
what  he  said; 

I  wish  to  ask  you,  if  the  general  nature  of 
the  prayer  and  sermon  was  rdigious  or  politic- 
cal  ?— Politicals 

And  what  was  the  general  poiideal  fendency 
of  the  discooise  }  [This  question  was  objected 


6451 


VniotrMlut'Preaeier,ybr  Sedition. 


A.  D.  1817. 


E64« 


to,  ftDd  Mr.  Drammond  said  he  had  no  wish 
to  press  it.] 

Alexander  GoQan  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Jeffrey, 

You  mentioned,  Mr.  Gollan,  that  yon  went 
there  chiefly  to  hear  his  opinion  npon  a  parti- 
ciriar  point? — Yes. 

Had  ^ou  heard  any  thing  particular  about 
his  pohtical  opinions  f — Yes.  There  was  « 
general  talk  about  him. 

Had  you  been  desired  by  any  one  to  go  to 
hear  his  political  opinions  F^'No.  I  went  of 
my  own  free  will. 

Are  you  sure  of  that? — ^Yes. 

He  spoke  quickly  P — ^Yes. 

Was  there  any  thing  else  partioular  in  his 
•mode  of  speaking  ?-^e  spoke  somewhat  with 
a  Highland  accent  It  was  not  easy  to  under- 
stand  him. 

You  were  there  once  or  twice  ? — I  was  there 
three  times,  but  only  heard  him  twice. 

Which  time  did  you  hear  him  deliver  a 
lecture  fspm  Daniel  ? — Both  times. 

Aad  what  you  said  of  his  remarks  apply  to 
eome  i«marks  by  him  at  the  one,  and  to  some 
made  at  the  other  meeting,? -To  his  remaiks 
OD  both  occasions. 

Some  of  them  were  then  made  twice  over  ? 
^Yes. 

Jcmei  WaddeU  sworn. ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Maconochk, 

Where  do  you  live  ?— In  the  Gallowgal& 

What  is  your  profession  ? — I  am  a  surgeon. 

Did  you  ever  eo  to  hear  the  prisoner  at  the 
har  preach  ? — I  did. 

Do^ you  remember  when  that  was? — I  am 
not  perfectly  certain;  but  I  think  last  Feb- 
ruary. 

What  was  your  reason  for  going  there  f — I 
«rent  from  motives  of  curiosity. 

Did  an^  thing  particular  strike  you  in  the 
course,  of  Mr.  Douglas's  discourse?— It  was 
altoffether  novel . 

What  was  new  in  it  ? — ^To  discuss  politics 
when  preaching  the  gospel. 

Was  he  very  violent  ^— Occasionally. 

Tell  what  he  said.— I  cannot  do  that.^ 

Such  parts  as  you  remember  struck  you  f — 
The  impression  left  on  my  mind  is,  that  he 
drew  a  parallel  between  Nebuchadnez^car  and 
our  king,  and  Belshaz^ar  and  the  prince  re- 
.gent. 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  more? — Nothing 
strikes  me  at  present  except  a  few  of  the  wprds 
he  used. 

Tell  them  if  you  please. 

Comri, — ^We  want  to  know  what  he  said  in 
drawing  the  parallel? — One  thing  he  said,  that 
jitrikes  me  just  now  is,  that  Nebuchadnezzar 
for  his  sins  was  driven  from  his  throne ;  and 
the  impression  made  on  my  mind  is,  that  he 
,3aid  our  king  was  deprivcid  of  his  reason  for 
^s  sins  and  crimes. 

Court, — It  is  not  so  much  your  impression, 


as  his  words,^  if  possible,  that  we  wish  you  te 
tell  us. 

Mr.  Maconodue. — Did  he  say  in  express 
words  that  our  monarch  had  been  dnven  from 
his  throne?— I  can  only  say  that  was  my  im- 
pression. I  cannot  remember  the  exact  words. 

Was  that  the  meaning  of  (he  words  he  used  ? 
— I  did  not  say  so.  It  is  the  meaning  that  I 
attached  to  them. 

Had  you  any  doubt  that  that  was  his  mean- 
ing at  the  time?— I  had  ne  doubt  at  the 
time. 

SolicUof^General. — Will  you  proceed  to  state, 
whether  bespoke  of  any  tiding  else  in  the 
course  of  your  hearing  him ;  and  state  it  to  the 
jury  ? — ^I  cannot  recollect  just  now ;  my  me* 
morv  does  not  serve  me.  There  was  such  a 
confusion  and  bustle,  and  he  spoke  so  fast; 
that  it  was  only  from  a  few  words  I  could 
gather  what  he  said. 

Mr.  Maconochie* — Do  you  remember  whether 
he  said  any  thing  about  the  king  of  France  ?— > 
Yjbs. 

State  what  your  recollection  is  ? — He  said 
that  the  British  bad  forced  a  king  upon  France 
against  the  wishes  of  the  people.  That  is  the 
only  thing  I  can  recollect  at  present,  but  J 
xlid  not  pay  much  attention  to  it* 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  Louis  XVI  ?— 
Not  that  I  remember  at  present. 

Do  you  recollect  any  expressions  that  he 
used  in  drawing  the  comparison  between  the 
prince  regent  and  Belshazzar? — I  do  not 
remember  the  expressions. 

State  them  as  near  as  jo\x  can  recollect  them. 
— ^He  said«  that  the  night  before  the  taking 
and  destruction  of  Babylon,  Belshazzar  and 
his  counsellors  were  rioting  and  drinking,  and 
that  the  prince  resent  held  his  meetings  of 
the  same  kind;  and  he  added,  that  like  causes 
always  produced  like  effects. 

Do  you  remember  his  saying  any  thing  i>f 
the  suspension  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  act?— He 
mentioned  it. 

What  did  he  say  ? — ^That  it  is  a  deprivation 
of  the  liberties  of  the  people. 

Did  be  say  any  thing  of  the  people  who  got 
it  passed  ?— He  did ;  but  I  do  not  remember 
what  he  said,  I  do  not  remember  .the  ex- 
pressions. 

Do  you  remember  the  substance  ? — ^I  could 
not  say>  He  said  it  was  an  oppressive  and 
unjust  measure. 

Did  he  aay  any  thing  about  their  meeting 
with  punishment  for  getting  it  passed  ? — I  do 
not  remember. 

Do  you  remember  his  applying  any  other 
epithet  to  the  prince  regent? — I  do  not  at 
present. 

Do  you  remember  his  saying  any  thing  of 
Parliament,  or  the  House  of  Commons?— I 
could  not  give  a  precise  answer. 

Do  you  remember  the  substance  ?-^I  do 
not. 

SolkiiDr  {Teiiero/.-oWhen  you  say  y-ou  do 


•471 


57  GEORGE  III. 


Trial  oflMl  Dm^m^ 


fAlS 


not  remenber^  do  y^u  oMtii  thtt  |!Oii  do 
Dot  remember  the  expressions^  or  that  yoQ  do 
not  remember  the  substance  P — I  could  not 
say  with  certainty  that  I  do  remember  the 
substance. 

Do  you  remember  his  saying  any  thing 
about  a  gibbet  ? — No. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  prince  re- 
gent being  infatuated  ? 

Mr.  Jejfra/.^l  object  to  that  question. 

Hr.  Drummoni. — Under  your  lordship's 
correction^  I  submit  that  tbe  question  put  by 
Mr.  Solicitor-General  is  perfectly  proper,  and 
that  ve  are  entitled  to  put  it,  otherwise  the 
exampation  is  reduced  at  once  to  tbe  single 
question,  what  did  the  panel  say  ? 

Mr.  Je^rvy^-**!  object  to  tke  question  being 
pill;  «nd  I  really  most  4jdce  this  oppottomty 
bf  stating,  that  thii  examination  has  been 
conducted  in  a  way,  from  first  to  last,  that  I 
never  heard  of  before  in  this  Court.  They 
bave  all  along  been  asking  the  witness,  not 
what  words  he  heard  used,  but  what  was  his 
impression*  and  his  imagination  of  what  Mr. 
Douglas  said. 

How  would  such  a  proceeding  be  taken  on 
A  trial  for  murder,  or  any  other  felony?  In 
answer  to  a  question,  the  witness  says  he  has 
a  faint  remembrance ;  and  he  is  then  asked 
what  his  impression  is ;  to  which  be  replies, 
that  so  long  an  interval  has  elapsed,  he  re- 
members little  about  it,   but   has  a   vague 
impression  on  the  subject.    I  object  to  the 
whole  strain  of  such  an  examination ;  and  I 
hope  ^our  lordships  will  express  your  disap- 
piobation  of  the  attempt  to  bnog  circumstances 
to  the  mind  of  the  witness  in  this  manner. 
When  the  question  at  issue  is,  whether  an 
individual  used  a  particular  expression,  is  it 
tolerable  that  that  very  expression  should  be 
put  in  a  quastion  to  the  witness,  with  all  its 
concomitants  ?  They  should  have  asked,  in  a 
^neral  way,  whether  the  witness  heard  the 
panel  use  any  expressions  derogatory  to  the 
prince  regent.    To  attempt,  in  the  way  now 
done*  to  state  in  a  question  to  the  witness  the 
veiy  words  charged  against  the  panel,  cannot 
be  allowed.    They  might  as  well  read  over  to 
the  witness  the  whole  discourse  at  once,  and 
then  ask  him  if  he  remembers  this  sentence, 
or  this  paragraph,  or  this  discourse.    They  are 
not  entitled  to    proceed  in  this  way.    The 
general  question  which  may  be  put  to  the 
witness  is.  What  did  yon  hear  tbe  panel  say  ? 
or.  Do  you  remember  hearing  him  say  any 
thing  relating  to  such  and  such  a  matter.^  But 
in  an  examination  in  chief  thev  are  not  en- 
titled to  take  up  their  precognition,  and  pro- 
ceed in  the  manner  now  attempted. 

The  witnesses  oome  with  a  knowledge  that 
there  is  a  precognition ;  and  they  feel  them- 
selves in  some  degree  h^  down  to  a  statement 
which  they  know  to  be  in  the  possession  of 
the  Crown  counsel.  I  say  that  von  are  not 
entitled  to  put  your  own  words  into  the 
inoftth  of  a  witness;  bat  that  you  most  first 


pat  qaestions  generally,  and  cannot  ptt  in  « 
question,  in  thM  way,  the  very  woras  whick 
are  libelled.  ' 

Lofi  Juitice  CZerft.—- In  reference  to* the 
examination  of  witnesses,  I  wish  that  each 
examination  should  be  followed  out  by  only 
one  counsel.  The  examination  of  the  same 
witness  by  several  counsel  tends  to  introduce 
an  obscurity  into  the  evidence  that  may  easily 
be  avoided.  And  I  apprehend,  that  the  nde 
of  law  is  clear,  that  in  examining  a  witness, 
a  geneni  question  should  first  be  put  as  to 
his  recollection  of  any  psit  of  the  speech  or 
discourse  :  and  when  he  answers  that  he  doea 
not  remember  particulafly»  it  is  then  eonpe- 
tent  to  ask  him  whether  he  heani  sach  an 
observation  or  expression  employed. 

Lord  OiUia.— I  concur  with  what  yoat 
lordship  has  said,  and  would  particnlariy  press 
the  propriety  of  only  one  counsel  fi>r  each 
party  examining  a  witness.  Geneial  qnestiona 
should  first  be  put  to  a  witness;  and  it  is 
wrong  to  start  at  once  horn  the  ndddle  of  aa 
examination  as  to  one  point  to  any  other 

KnnX ;  to  go,  for  instance,  all  at  onee  mm  the 
abeas  Corpus  act  to  the  question,  whether 
the  panel  said  the  prince  regent  was  in- 
iatuated. 

Mr.  Maemioehie, — Do  you  remember  Mr* 
Douglas  using  any  expression  relative  to  the 
prinoe  regent  being  inAituated  f-— I  cannot 
say  with  certainty. 

You  said  you  remember  Mr.  Douglas  having 
mentioned  the  suspension  of  the  Habeas 
Corpus  act.  Do  you  remember  whether  he 
said  any  punishment  awaited  the  persons  who 
had  carried  that  act  through  f — I  cannot  say 
with  certainty,  either.  The  impression  is  not 
strong  enough  upon  my  mind  to  enable  me  to 
remember  so  long. 

I  ask  you  generally,  do  you  remember  whether 
he  said  any  thing  at  all  about  the  House  of 
Commons  ?— He  did. 

Do  you  remember  what  he  said  P — ^I  do  not 
with  certainty. 

SoUeUoT'Gentral, — ^When  you  say  you  do 
not  remember  with  certainty,  do  you  mean 
that  you  do  not  remember  the  paiticular 
words,  or  the  substance  of  what  tne  panel 
said  ? — I  only  remember  tbe  impression  made 
on  my  mind.  It  is^  that  the  members  of  tbe 
House  of  Commons  are  unjust  and  corrupt. 

Have  you  the  least  doubt  of  that  impression 
having  been  made  on  your  mind  at  the  timet 
— Not  the  least. 

Lord  Judkt  Clerk. — ^It  is  not  as  to  yov 
impression  that  we  ask  you;  bnt»  did  you 
hear,  him  use  words  which  plainly,  distinctly 
and  unequivocally  meant  that  he  was  charging 
the  House  of  Commons,  or  any  part  of  the 
legislature,  with  being  unjust  or  corrupt?  It 
is  not  the  general  scope  of  the  disoourse,  or 
your  impression,  we  ask;  but  whether  you 
heard  words  to  that  efiect? — ^What  he  said 
had  that  effect  or  impiassioB  upon  me.  I  d^ 
net  cemenber  the  weeds. 


6i9] 


VttivemUd  Pimehtftjbr  tkdbion. 


A*  D.  i6IT« 


(95«^ 


Afe  we  to  mdmstaaA  tktt  91M  60  *ot 
femember  hiii  umg  the  worde  m^ost  or  cor« 
xttptf'^l  do  not  remember  these  words;  bat 
fiom  what  he  sMd,  I  heve  taeatioiied  'ttjr 
opnuoii* 

SdkUor'G^nerol. — ^HtTe  you  then  aoy  doubt 
from  what  he  said  that  snch  was  bis  meaning? 
— None.  • 

Jwy,r^YiSa  have  mcbtioMd  yow  iiapteesioi^. 
Ton  do  not  remember  wbtt  were  the  words? 
•«--l  do  ttot  Remember. 

Was  ft  on  a  Suaday  evening  you  beard  tfa^ 
eBr«on?**^Yes,  oosm  tisse  betwiit  m  and 
nine  o^dock. 

Yen  ^ofMil  reeoUeet  tbe  «mct  day  *f  the 
■Kftklh  ?<--^o» 

Lord  JttMke  CferA.-4)id  te  lecture  ilr 
preach  ?— Be  lectvred. 

Do  yott  remekftbet*  upon  what  put  of  Seri{>* 
fore}— On  a  passage  in  Daniel. 

What  diaplerf--I  do  not  remen^ber. 

Yon  are  not  ente  npon  what  thapter  he 
leeinred. — Was  this  when  yon  beani  aboat 
Kebofihadneatar  and  Belshaaart-«It  was  my 
lord* 

Let  me  ask^on  ibis  question  for  the  satis- 
Diction  of  the  jury  and  the  Court  Yon  heard 
liitt  likewise  pray  f — Yes. 

Was  there  any  resumption  in  the  prayer  of 
Any  pakt  of  the  lectore  ?«-Oocasionally  he  did 
00  resume. 

Ha? e  you  any  recollection  of  any  partieolar 
pmyer  he  made  upon  that  occasion  r— I  hate 
no  teooUection  of  the  precise  words. 

Did  you  go  often  to  hear  him  ?— •!  went  four 
Mines  at  least. 

VfkB  this  the  itet  or  last,  or  any  of  the 
intermediate  times  of  ^Adth  you  have  spoken  ? 
—He  was  always  upon  the  same  subject. 

Are  we  lo  understand  there  was  the  same 
l>arallel  drawn  npon  these  sevetal  occasions! 
—There  was. 

Arc  we  to  understand  this  was  on  font 
Hifereat  Sundays  ?-^Yes»  I  am  not  certain 
jof  the  precise  period)  but  it  wu  all  about  the 
jnoettme. 

Aksmdar  Twhr  sworn.*— Examined  by 
Mr.  JJtifmmond. 

Are  yen  a  feown-officer  at  Glasgow  ?— -I  am. 

Do  you  know  that  man  f — I  do. 

Did  you  ro  fee  bear  him  pseach  last  winter? 
•—Repeatedly. 

Wbei  month  P— I  tUnk  Febmaiy . 

How  often  did  you  go}<— I  waa  sent  ex* 
pvaasiy  twice* 

Both  times  in  Febiuaiy  f-^I  tUak  they  were  j 
it  la  a  oonsiderabletittC  ainoe,  snd  I  oauld  noi 
be  teiy  positive^ 

What  did  he  prenrii  i^out?-*He  gareont 
niaatlike  other  cietiti  men  frem  a  imlnit*  from 


What  about?  Do  you  remember  anything 
■enenHy  of  the  nature  of  the  teitf*— Ireaaem- 
tiernotlMngof  tbe  text  itseli    It  was 
wiwattd  ))y  him- again  after  be  gave  it.out. 


Do  pm  wxMaitbeT  any  perts  of  the  setmon  or 
tootnref  Did  anything  particular  strike  your 
asemoiy  ^^I  leeollect  he  said  thate«ata  in  the 
House  of  Commons  were  sold  like  bullocks  in 
amaitoet. 

.  Did  he  say  anything  more  abeut  tbe  House 
of  Commons^  or  the  members  of  it  ? — He  said 
they  were  greatly  subject  to  corruption^  ind 
words  to  that  efibct 

iDo  you  remember  any  more  of  the  words  7-^ 
I  remember  he  represented  Great  Britain  al 
present  as  the  modem  Babylon. 

How  did  he  make  that  out?— He  endea« 
voured  to  prove  it  the  best  way  he  could.  He 
hoped  the  oapny  period  was  come  o(  tbe  down- 
fall  of  the  modem  Babylon. 

Do  yon  remember  anything  more  ?— He  re^ 
commended  to  his  hearers  to  pray  very 
eamtttly,  that  God  would  put  it  into  the  hearts 
of  his  majesty  the  king,  and  of  die  prince  regent, 
lo  turn  their  attention  to  the  cries  of  the  people. 
And  he  said,  that  a  good  prayer  woula  have 
more  effect  than  ten  tfiousand  armed  men. 

Welly  sir,  do  you  remember  anything  more  ? 
— I  remember  bim  speaking  much  of  the  an- 
cient John  Knox.  He  quoted  him  repeatedly 
from  the  pulpit. 

For  what  did  he  quote  him  ? — Aa  an  exem- 
plary character  of  his  time,  and  he  recommended 
nim  to  the  notice  of  his  hearers. 

Did  he  say  anything  of  the  king  and  the 
prince  regent  ?—  Yes,  I  thought  he  spoke 
rather  disrespectfully  of  them. 

What  did  he  say  of  them  ?— Of  the  prince 
regent^  in  particular,  he  said  that  he  was  a 
man  he  did  not  think  bdiaved  well  somehow. 

Did  he  say  what  was  done  that  was  wrong  ? 
Did  he  find  any  particular  fiiult? — He  seemed 
to  do  so;  but  I  hsTC  fornot  the  particular 
words  Mr.  Douglas  used,  nom  tbelapie  of 
time. 

Do  you  remember  the  substance  of  whnt  he 
said  ? — ^He  drew  a  simile  between  the  Regent 
and  Nebuchadnezzar. 

How  did  he  compare  them?  In  what  did 
he  say  they  resembled  one  another  ? — He  drew 
a  Tcry  strong  simile.  Nebuchadnezzar  was 
dri?en  from  ttie  presence  and  society  of  men 
to  feed  wi  th  the  bullocks  of  the  field .  He  drew 
a  disrespectiul  snnile  between  them. 

Did  he  say  the  prince  regent  was  driten 
fiom  the  society  of  men  ^— No,  hodid  not. 

What  did  he'  eay?--4  forget  the  premec 
words.  There  was  a  dedaratton  in  which  I 
noticed  parts  of  his  discourse,  but  it  was  given 
away. 

I>id  he  say  anything  more  about  the  king  ?— i 
Yes.  he  did. 

what  was  it  ?— He  spoke  in  a  manned  iii 
if  he  justly  dese^ed  the  vengeance  of  God  and 
his  wrath. 

Who  deserved  that? — Rings  in  general, 
pointing  to  the  kings  of  Europe. 

Did  he  say  anything  about  the  late  king 
of  Fmnee  ?^  dtnnot  ay  I  remember  be  did 

Did  he  sayanythiqg  aboiii  tbf  mjiwier  M 


^0         57  <jfE<>RdB'UI. 

%hich  th«  law  of  tbe  coantty  ii  adiinistttM } 
— He  did  not  seem  to  reliih  tbe  present 
aiode  of  the  administration  of  tbe  law,  firom 
what  be  said. 

Wbat  did  lie  say? — He  said  that  there  is 
such  a  corruption  of  the  Houses  of  Parliament, 
that  thto  law  is  not  administered  with  equity 
and  justice. 

Did  be  use  any  epithets  of  contempt  or  di9^ 
respect  more  than  what  you  have  said  ? — I  re- 
collect he  certainly  did  so. 

Wbat  were  the  words  ? — ^I  know  the  words 
were  talcen  down  in  my  declaration;  but  I 
have  rather  forgotten  them/ 

Do  you  remember  none  of  them  at  all  f 
Wbat  was  the  nature  of  them  ?— They  were 
rfiarespactfal,  but  I  cannot  name  them  now. 


Trial  of  Neil  Douglau 


resa 


John  MaecaUum  sworn. — 
Mr.  Macono^ie, 


ned  by 


Do  you  know  tbe  prisoner  at  the  bar  ?— I 
do. 

Did  YOU  ever  go  and  bear  him  preach  f — I 
was  ordered  by  &e  magistrates  of  Uiasgow  to 
hear  him  two  Sundays  successively. 

Did  you  go? --Yes,  to  John-street. 

What  time  was  this? — ^In  the  month  of 
March ;  it  might  be  before  or  after,  I  am  not 
tm  certain. 

Do  you  remember  the  text  from  which  be 
preached?— 1  remember  the  subject,  but  the 
chapter  has  escaped  me. 

What  was  the  subject  ?~0n  the  impious 
least  of  Belshazzar. 

Do  you  remember  any  comparisons  be 
made?— I  have  mentioned  in  my  declara- 
tion— 

Cioart.— You  are  only  to  tell  us  what  you 
'teoottect  of  these  two  preachings? — Well,  I 
will  do  justice  to  my  own  conscience,  and  the 
•Ul^t  also. 

Mr.  Maconockie. — ^Tell  what  you  remember? 
r-There  is  very  little  that  I  do  remember. 
.   Tell  what  it  is  ? — He  hinted  or  spoke  to  the 
import,  that  Britain  is  the  mystical  Babylon 
mentioned  in  Scripture. 

Did  be  draw  a  comparison  between  tbe  two  ? 
—I  do  not  remember. 

Cour$% — ^Do  yoQ  remember  his  saying  any 
thing  of  them  together? — He  just  made  a  con»- 
parison,  saying  Britain  is  tlie  mystical  Babylon 
mebtioned  in  the  S^ripturei 

Mr.  Maamochie. ^-Did  he  say  any  thing 
about  the  king  or  the  prince  ? — As  &r  as  I  re- 
collect, he  made  observations  as  to  the  king, 
and  said,  of  all  rulers  who  follow  the  conduct 
of  Belshaxzar,  that  their  &te  would  be  the 
same.  I  do  not  remember  that  he  made  any  i 
more  particular  allusions-  to  our  rulers,  than 
to  those  of  any  other  nation  of  the  present 
liffl^.  , 

Comi» — ^Yon  say  he  made  no  particular 
allusion,  but  spoke  only  of  kings  and  rulers  in 
feniral  P-^Yes,  my  Wd. 


Mr.  MMncdUe.— Did  he  mtntion  tbe  king 
or  Uie  prince  regent  upon  any  of  these  occ^ 
sions  .^-^With  regard  to  the  king  and  the 
prince  regent,  he  did  not  name  them  but  in 
this  way.  In  speaking  of  Nebuchadnezzar  and 
Belshazzar,  he  mentioned  tbe  conduct  of 
Belshazzar,  in  forgetting  the  judgment  of  God 
upon  Nebuchadnezzar.  He  mentioned  that 
Daniel  addressed  Belshazzar  to  the  effect,  that 
notwithstanding  the  judgment  of  God  upon 
Nebuchadnesiar,  yet  Belshazzar  did  not  mend 
his  ways.  And  be  said,  that  notwithstanding 
the  phnct  regent  saw  the  state  of  bis  fiitber  for 
diese  seven  years,  he  did  not  mend  his  ways  j 
or  words  to  that  import. 

Did  Mr.  Douglas,  upon  either  of  these 
occasions,  mention  the  House  of  Commons  T— • 
He  made  some  remarks  upon  the  House  of 
Commons ;  but  to  what  extent,  or  wbat  he  said^ 
I, could  not  positively  enter  into,  I  cannot  say 
I  can  recollect  now.  At  the  time,  I  may  bav* 
bad  more  remembrance. 

Do  you  remember  the  substance  of  what  be 
said  about  the  House  of  Commons  P— Upoor 
that  bead,  I  do  not  wish  to  say  any  thing,  as  I 
am  not  safe  to  do  it. 

Do  you  remember  )us  mentioning  tlie 
Habeas  Corpus  act  f — ^I  remember  it  sounded 
in  my  ears  as  if  he  mentioned  it,  but  I  could 
not  take  up  what  he  said  about  it. 

Do  you  remember  whether  Mr.  Douglas 
said  any  thing  about  tbe  administration  of  jus* 
tice  in  the  country  ? — I  i-emember  something 
of  his  remarks  on  our  courts  of  judicature. 

What  did  he  say  ?— There  was  so^ietbing  he 
was  not  satisfied  with ;  their  procedure  was 
not  what  he  would  recommend.  He  said  that- 
the  Courts  condemned  some  of  the  reformers 
without  judges  or  jury ;  that  is  to  say,  without 
sufficient  evidence,  which  tlie  Scriptures  de« 
mand,  that  in  the  mouths  of  two  or  three  wit- 
nesses every  thing  should  be  established. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  judges  in  the 
time  of  our  Saviour  ? — I  wish  to  make  a  re- 
mark, in  order  to  do  justice  to  both  sides  of  the 
question.  He  said,  Aat,  in  the  time  of  Com- 
wallis  in  Ireland,  a  seijeant  was  condemned, 
upon  the  testimony  of  one  witness,  for  keep- 
ing company  with  United  Irishmen;  that  it 
actually  nappe.ned  that  the  man  had  retired  to 
a  private  plao^  for  devotion,  at  the  tine  when 
he  was  accused  of  being  with  the  United 
Irishmen;  and  he  said  that  Comwallis  got  the 
man  off,  after  being  condemned. 

I  ask  youy  whether  be  inade  any  observa* 
tions  on  tbe  Judges  in  the  time  of  our  Saviodrf 
Did  he  make  any  comparison  between  them 
and  the  present  judges  of  this  country  ? — It 
followed,  if  not  immediately,  in  some  portion 
of  the  lecture  or  discourse.  He  said  the  ji^dg^s 
6f  this  Couiitiy  are  worse  than  tbe  judges  in 
the  time  of  our  Saviour ;  for  they  did  not  cdn^ 
demn  persons  without  a  competent  number  of 
witnesses,  grantifigtbey  were  fiilse  witnesses. 
Repeat  this  P— be  said  that  the  judges  in' 
onr  day  are  worse  than  the  judges  in  thi 
time  of  our  Saviour,  in   this  respect,  tMt 


0591 


VnherwUii  Preaehetfjbr  SedUioH. 


A«  D.  1817. 


1654 


ih%f  do  not  find  sufBdent  witnetoes  to  condemn 
those  that  are  considered  guilty.  He  said 
that  they  are  worse  than-  the  Jews  who  Qon<- 
demned  our  Saviour ;  that  the  Jewish  judges 
found  a  competent  number  of  witnesses^ 
allowing  them  to  have  been  false  witnesses. 

Did  this  remade  allude  to  the  witnesses  in 
the  court-martial  you  spoke  of,  or  in  the  trials 
of  feformers  ?— I  could  not  say. 

Do  you  remember  his  saying  any  thing 
about  the  vessel  of  the  state  1 — He  considered 
that,  if  it  be  not  conducted  in  a  better  way, 
and  unless  compiitted  to  a  skilful  pilot,  it 
would  not  reach  tlie  shore  in  safety. 

Do  you'  remember  his  making  use  of  the 
word  millennium  ?—Yes,  I  think  so. 

What  did  he  say? — ^This  age  is  the  millen* 
nium  of  corruption. 

Do  you  remember  what  he  said  immediately 
after  that? — I  am  not  able  to  say. 

MaitMew  Lowtbn  swom.'^^Ezamined  by    . 
Mr.  DnantoHtU 

Do  you  know  that  man  at  the  bar  ? — ^Yes, 
I  do. 

Mr.  Douglas  P — ^Yes. 

Do  you  remember  going  to  hear  him  preach  ? 
— Sometimes  in  April  or  March. 

Was  there  a  week  or  a  month  between  the 
times  ? — ^A  week  or  two,  more  or  less. 

How  often? — I  think  three  times  altogether. 

Did  he  preach  from  the  Same  text  ? — I  re- 
member notie  of  his  texts  but  one,  about  the 
handwriting  on  the  well. 

Was  there  a  (^eat  crowd? — ^There  was  a 
▼ery  fun  house. 

Was  the  congregation  of  the  lower  ranks  of 
■fhe  people? — I  do  not  know.    They  were  all 
▼ery  well  dressed.    I  cannot  tell  nigh  from 
low  at  these  times,  at  least  on  Sundays. 

Do  you  reniember  what  he  was  preachinff 
abont  ? — ^I  remiember  he  said  that  Nebucha£ 
fiezzar  was  driven  from  the  society  of  men 
among  the  beasts  of  the  field,  but  repented, 
and  glorified  Ood ;  ind  that  Belshazzar  took 
no  tramrng  from  his  fkie;  that  the  king  is 
driYen  from  the  society  of  men,  but  not  to  that 
of  beasts,  and  that  the  prince  regent  takes  no 
warning  from  the  circumstance. 

Hare  yon  a  distinct  recollection  of  these 
words  ?-^aite  distinct. 

You  said  something  more  of  that  kind  ? — I 
could  not  always  distinguish  what  he  said. 
He  spoke  as  if  he  was  short  of  the  tongue.  He 
got  mto  a  rapture  sometimes,  and  his  voice 
afterwards  fell  low;  and  until  he  recovered 
his  breath  I  could  not  hear  him. 

He  was  very  animated  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  Hoose  of 
Commons  f — I  remember  hit  wp^aittng  about 
a  corrupt  House ;  I  remember  his  speaking 
il>outthat« 

Cmtrt. — Do  you  mean  to  m  he  cafled  the 
House  of  Comitf  ons  a  corrupt  tiouse  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  he  said  about 
M — ^Kot  that  I  remember  of.  He  prayed 
heartily  for  the  king  and  the  prince ;  that  the  I 


Lofd  might  duAge  the  hearts  of  his  evil- 
counsellors,  and  place  righteous  men  in  theip 
stead. 

Did  he  sayany thing  about  the  House  of 
Commons?— That  it  is  a  corrupt  House,  and 
shonld  be  reformed. 

Any  thing  more } — I  do  not  remember. 

Do  you  remember  the  psalm  upon  that 
occasion  ? — I  remember  -  it  was  the  second 
pealm.  He  commented  on  the  lines  as  he. 
read  them. 

Did  be  say  any  thing  about  the  prince 
during  the  psalm  or  any  other  time  ?-*I  believe 
he  prayed  tot  the  poor  infatuated  prince,  that 
the  Lord  might  turn  his  heart. 

Hugh  PtUenan  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Dmmmond. 

Do  you  remember  going  to  hear  Mfit 
Douglas  preach  ? — Yes. 

On  Sunday  evening  ?— ^Yes. 

At  what  date? — I  do  not  remember  the 
date. 

In  the  month  of  March  ? — Either  the  month 
of  March  or  latter  end  of  February. 

More  than  onee? — ^Yes. 

How  often  P— Twice. 

What  did  he  preach  from  N— Ftott  DanieK 

Do  you  remember  any  part  of  what  he  said  f 
—Some  words. 

What  were  they? — ^Do  you  remember  his 
saying  any  thing  about  the  prince  regept  ?-* 
Yes,  I  recollect  of  that 

Was  it  in  his  prater  or  sermon  he  spoke  of 
the  regent  f--4  tiimk  I  remember  that  he 
mentioned  the  regent  in  his  prayer.  He  was 
prayinff  to  his  Maker  to  turn  his  hean,  that 
ne  migtit  dismiss  his  corrupt  Court,  and  plac^ 
in  their  ttead  better  men,  i^ho  would  take 
better  charge  of  the  prinoe. 

Did  he  apply  any  disrespectful  expressions 
to  the  prince  regent! — To.  the  best  of  my 
recollection,  be  called  hiift  a  bewitohed,  or 
poor  wretched  prinee>  or  some  aoeh  expres- 
sion. 

What  else  did  hesay  alxmt  hfmf-^Hiere 
was  little  more  in  the  prayer  that  I  recollects  * 

Was  there  any  thing  about  htm  in  the 
sermon  ? — ^^Yes,  I  think  Uier^  was. 

And  what  was  in>  the  sermon? — He  waa 
speaking  about  not  taking  a  warning  from  his 
father's  tete. 

What  did  he  say  wonld  hotppen  to  him  if 
he  did  not  take  a  warning  from  his  father's 
fiite  ?— rl  do  not  recollect  it  at  present,      -s 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  NebuchadnesMr } 
—Yes. 

What  about  him?<-^That.  Neihudiadoeiaar 
wae  dri.ven  from  the  aodely  of  iMiiy  add 
suffered  mudi-fiom  the  different  sins  thnt  he 
had  committed. 

Did  he  malce  any  comparison  to  Nebncbad? 
nezzar? — ^Yes,  that  our  king  had  been^rirea 
also  from  his  state  and  the  society  of  men. 

What  more  di|i  he  say  about  our  kin^  ?  Did 
he  sav  "why  he  had  been'  driven  from  his  state 
and  mm  the  society  of  men?— Not  that  I  re- 


6ftft]       57  GEORGB  lit. 

member.  I  did  nol  Mif  muienftand  til*  wwda 
wbich  he  Qsed  at  the  Uxae. 

Was  there  anything  about  BeUhaziat?'-?* 
The  prinoe  wm  coiii|wnd  with  Betohesar. 

fiy  the  panel  is  hia  pieachingf— Yafc 

What  point  of  resemblance  did  be  i&d 
betweea  tbeni?— BeUhazsv  had  poOnted  the 
^pmU  of  the  saoctManr  or  lenpte  o£  Jeraia- 
larn^  in  dciokiiif  but  of  the  veaaelt,  he  and  hia 
}mtd$p  aad  Wiwesi  wd  aoiicabinei^  to  the  ho* 
BOUT  of  idols. 

Hew  did  he  cdmpeie  the  vegtal  ta  hkml— 
Beeanae  he  also  had  rioted. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  aay  other  king? 
^-About  the  king  of  Fianoe. 

The  late,  or  the  present  king  of  France  ? — 
Louis  the  Sixteenth. 

What  of  him  F-^As  &r  as  I  can  recollect,  or 
cofedd  mderstandy  he  said  that  he  was  advised 
by  bis  own  Court,  and  the  other  Courts  of  £«• 
rope,  aninst  his  own  people. 

'  CWf .— What  do  you  say  ?— That  by  follow- 
ing  the  advice  of  his  counsellors,  he  lost  his 
file,  and  is  either  in  hell  or  pui^atoty, 

Mr.  Drummtmd, — Did  he  connect  such  re* 
flections  witb  our  kine  ot  prince  regent? — 
Oar  prace»  he  sliid,  lue  the  king  of  Fnace, 
ivjould  apt  liaten  to  the  wishea  of  lus  people. 

What  wishes  had  the  prince  not  Ualened  to  ? 
'-The  'Veiea  of  his  people,  or  cries  of  poor 
pelitionan  who  had  petitioned  him. 

Court, — Do  you  mean  to  say  upon  oath,  that 
though  a  comparison  was  autde  between  the 
prince  and  Relshawar,  you  cannot  state  the 
pobtaoC  comparison  t-— I  cannot  come  upon 
flieni  at  present. 

JUbt  WkHeil  swom«— Examined  by 
Mr*  Maemochie* 

Doyouknoirthe  priaoner  Donglaa?-^Ihave 
seen  tha  gentteman  sefval  times. 

Did  yen  go  i»  heat  Imn  preach  ?— Yes. 

When  ?— -Ten  or  twelve  weeks  ago. 

Snd  <rf  Bftuochf^Ead  of  lftudl»  or  begin- 
ning ef  April. 

Did  yon  goofien ?— -Three enrenings. 

Upon  what  sn^ect  or  tsst  did.  he  pnm^^ 
The  fifth  chapter  of  Daniel. 

All  the  thne  eveninp  upon  the  same  ohapi- 
ter  ? — ^The  two  first  upon  the  sane  dwptec, 
snd  upon  the  same  tent  I  d6  not  recollect 
particolarly  as  io  the  thirdr 

Did  he  say  anylhcmg  abmit  the  king,  or  the 
pfinoe  regent;  v^on  these  oocMlona?— I  heard 
nim  speak  of  the  prince  regent.  There  ia  an 
imfreaiian  on  ngr  mind>  that  h^  aaid.  the 
prince-  Bigent  k-  aa*  fit  for  *  gibber  aa>  a 
thrtmti 

Jiirif.p~Di4  he.  say  these  words,  or.  do  you 
think,  ne  meant  tliem  ?— I  thought  he  said  so  at 
the  time  *..  but  there  was  a  good  deal  of  confioi- 
aion,  and  he  spoke,  very  hurriedly. 

Tour  impression  is,  that  he  said  them  .'—I 
think  he  da 


qfNeU  Baugba.  [ 

Cpirl.— -WW  do  yon  mean  by  a  good  deal 
of  confnsion  ?-rFrom  the  pressure  of  the 
people  that  wese  in  the  fobby^  er  entiance  to 
the  seats. 

John  WaddeU  cross-examined  by  Mr.  J^frty. 

Ave  yon  any  relatian  to  Jamea  WaddeU  F — 

Biotheff. 
Was  he  with  yen  npeft  these  occasions? — ^No« 
Do  yon  reler  in  ther  answer  which  yen  have 

given  above  Io  the  first  or  second  night  yon 

heaid  Denglsn  >^The  first. 

Ccurik — Were  you  constantly  present  from 
the  time  the  service  began  ?— It  was  begun  be- 
fore I  went  in. 

How  long  might  you  be  there  ? — ^About  an 
hour  and  a  half,  or  twenty  minutes. 

WiU  you  be  so  good  as  tell  us  if  you  recollect 
any  other  passage  either  of  his  prayers  or 
sermon  but  this  that  you  mentioned  ? — Nothing 
that  struck  ase  with  any  kind  of  fovea. 

How  did  he  taeat  of  thia  fifth  chapter  of 
Daniel  ? — That  is  what  I  cannot  exactly  re* 
capitulate. 

Do  you  remember  anything  that  preceded  <Ar 
that  followed  these  remarkable  expressionathat 
have  been  given  ua? — Relative  to  the  prince 
regent? 

Yes  7 — I  did  not  hear  the  expressions  pre* 
vioos  to  that. 

Canyon  tell  us  what  made  him  use  snch 
strong  expressions?— I  thought  I  heard  him 
utter  them,  but  I  did  not  hear  what  he  said* 
previooalv.- 

What  followed  P*-I  do  not  recollect  indeed. 

Are  we  to  nodeistand  that  you  cannot,  tell 
any  one  thing  he  said  but  what  yon  have  men^ 
tioned  ?-»Nothing  else  khat  he  said  that  first 
^ght. 

You  say  you  went  again  ?— That  night  fort* 
ni^t. 

Da  you  recollect.anything  he  said  that  night 
fi>rtnigbt?--Yes,.  I  recollect  he  used  the  ex- 
pressions, speaking  of  the  battle  of  Waterloo, 
that  some  of  those  connected  with  it  mi^^t 
consider  it  an  honour^  but  for  his  part  he  would 
rather  consider  it  as  a  disgxaoe. 

Nothing  else,  sir? — ^Nouiing.. 

How  did  he  treat  the  chapter  of  Daniel  that 
night  }—-l  do  not  recollect  anything  more  than 
vrhat  I  have  mentioned.  I  beard  him  very  in« 
dbtinctfy. 

Was  diat  from  the  noise,  or  from  his  mode 
of  speaking  ? — ^From  the  noise,  and  bis  mode  of 
speaking,  and  from  the  pxessnre  of  the  con- 
gregation. 

When  you  heard  these  remarkaUe  ex- 
prfmioos  yon  have  spoken  to,  did  yon  men- 
Qon  th(^  to  any  one  at  the  time  ? — ^Nbt  at 
the*  time. 

Not  ^at  night  to  anybody  T— Io  none  thai;  I 
recollect  of. 

When  did  you  mention  it  f«-I  could  nek 
exactly  say.  i  heard  such  things  mentioned 
by  others.  There  was  just  a  goMral  kind  of 
speaUng  about  him. 


Unioenklut  PrtMiir,Jor  IkditioH. 


9971 

'Wkeinr  did  yoo^  orivlmii  did  TDti^^ention 
tlM«KpnNio»to  aiifbody  eise  ?— I  bdiev«  I^ 
IwTe  mentioDed  Ihem :  hat  I  do  not  reoMmber 
I,  or  wberei  or  to  whoo. 

The  feUowng  Dedarattons  of  the  panel 
were  thea  read : 

At  Ola^^  March,  15thj  1817. 

^In  presence  of  Robert  HaiDilU>n»  £sq^ 
advocate  Sheriff-depute  of  LanarkBhire, 
eonpeared  Niel  DouglaSy  Universalist 
preacher,  inGlasgow ;  whobeiiigexamiDedy 
dedares.  That  for  the  hist  eleven  yearj  he 
hatbeoD  apreaeberio  Glasgow,  and  during 
tfaatperiod  hashad  Sabbath  eveninglectures 
and  sermons,  whicby  for  aboot  the  last  five 
yean,  he  has  delivered  in  the  Andersonian 
lostitutton  Cias9-room,  and  his  audience 
has  been,  particularix  for  the  last  seven  or 
eight  monttis,  Tery  nomerous  and  respec- 
table: That  his  precentor's  name  is 
Nicholson,  who  is  employed  in  the  ware- 
house of  Mr.  Robertson,  a  quaker^  a 
maaufecturer,  in  Commercial-bnildings, 
Candlerig|(8 :  That  M'Dowal  Pate  used 
oocaaiooalty  to  preceat,  and  he  did  so 
lately.,  and  he  is  not  certain  but  be  did  so 
last  SabbaOi :  That  he  keeps  no  oopy  of 
his  sermons  or  lectures,  but  he  premedi- 
tates, and,  by  the  assistance  of  notes,  en- 
deaevoars  to  adhere  as  close  as  possible ; 
aad  lie  is  noc  conscious  of  having  made 
aay  improper  deviation  from  die  object  of 
bis  text:  That  iorthe  last  two  years  the 
dedarant  in  his  evening  sernmas  has 
oommeoted  or  preached  from  the  book  of 
Daaid ;  and  last  Sabbath  evening  his  text 
was  ia  the  latter  part  of  the  5th  chapter , 
of  the  book  of  Daniel:  That  befbre  be 
commenced  the  service,  David  Young, 
one  of  his  deaeoas,  informed  him  that 
three  spies  were  supposed  to  be  in  the 
loom:  That  the  declarant  accordingly 
Bsentioned  this  to  the  audience,  and  never- 
theless prooeeded  with  the  discourse: 
That  the  declarant  had  no  notes  of  that 
disooune,  or  of  any  other  siace  hai  last 
illness:  That  James  M'Ewan used  to  sit 
in  the  declarant's  meeting-house,  but  the 
declarant  never  heard  fiK>m  him  or  any 
other,  of  any  seciat  association  being 

'  formed,  or  means  used  for  procuring  a 
reform  ia  pailiament:  That  at  different 
times  the  declarant  has  published  some 

'  little  tiacts,  some  of  wfaleh  treat  of  the 
politics  aad  state  and  condition  of  the 
country ;  and,  in  his  evefning  sermons,  he, 
as  drfamstaacee  suggest,  has  occasionally 
taken  opportaoity  to  animadvert  upoa 
these  topics,  but  be  never  did  so  with  any 
iBfvidious  intention :  That  in  some  of  his 
lale  discoBfses  he  spoke  of  a  chmd  which 
1nbi|^  OTOr  this  country,  and  would  soon 
b«mt ;  by  vrhich  he  meant  nothing  more 
than  the  misery  and  wretched  state  of  the 
osmmanity  from  want,  as- also  the  great 

VOL,  xxxm. 


A.  D.  1817. 


C6S8 


progress  of  infidelity;  aad  he  prayed  that 
U  imght  not  be  allowed  to  burst :  That 
the  declarant  prayed  for  the  prince-regeot 
and  that  he  nugfat  profit  by  the  affliction* 
of  his  father ;  but  tie  does  not  recoUept  of 
having  said,  that  notwithstanding  of  what 
the  prince  had  seen  of  his  father  for  these 
seven  years  past  he  had  not  amended  his 
ways :  That  in  this  discourse  he  did  not 
say  that  seats  were  sold  in  the  House  of 

'  Commons  as  merchandise,  or  that  there 
was  a  great  deal  of  corruption  in  that 
house,  or  that  several  members  of  it  were 

.  thieves  and  plunderers,  and  divided  the 
spoil  of  their  rich  neighbours  among  them ; 
but  he  recollects  thanking  Ood  that  there 
were  still  some  members  in  our  senate 
who  dignified  their  own  character  in 
maintaining  the  rights  of  the  people: 
Tbat  he  took  occasion  to  express  his^ 
disapproval  of  the  suspension  of  the 
Habeas  Corpus  act,  as  a  measure  by  which 
the  accuMd  were  deprived  of  the  means 
of  their  own  vindication ;  but  he  does  not 
recoUeet  of  saying  that  the  country  had 
been  condemned  without  witnesjes,  judge 
or  jury;  and  the  declarant  is  still  of 
opinion  that  parlmmeat  never  acted  so 
imprudently  as  passing  such  an  act  on  an 
occasion  where  the  minds  of  the  people 
were  so  aggrafated :  That  the  dedarant 
did  identify  Britain  with  the  mvstical 
Babylon  mentioned  in  tbe  18th  coapter 
of  the  Revelations ;  and  he  is  not  singular 
in  this,  as  many  commentators  think  with 
him,  that  Britain,'  not  Rome,  which  last 
was  not  a  maritime  nation,  is  meant  by 
the  Babylon  there  mentioned :  That  when 
speaking  of  the  Habeas  Corpus  act  bdng 
suspended,  he  observed,  that  bad  as  the 
Jews  were,  they  did  not  condema  our 
Saviour  without  a  form  of  trial ;  but  he 
does  not  recollect  of  saying  anything  by 
way  of  contrast  as  to  the  present  execution 
of  the  law  since  the  passing  of  this  act : 
That  in  this  discourse  be  did  not  condemn 
the  expedition  to  Holland :  That  he  does 
not  consider  that  the  battle  of  Waterloo 
was  a  matter  of  rejoidng,  but  on  the  con- 
trary, and  he  believes  he  did  say  so. 
Denies  that  he  spoke  anything  of  the 
profligacy  of  our  rulers,  of  the  unjust  ad« 
ministration  of  the  laws,  of  a  laxness  in 
the  administration,  or  that  he  called  the 
member^  of  the  House  of  Commons  thievas 
or  plunderers. 

(Signed)        **  Nist  Dovolas. 
**  R,  Hakilton.^ 

The  above  examination  adjourned  tiU 
Monday  next  the  17th  current,  at  eleven 
o'clock  forenoon,  when  Mr.  PougUs  if 
required  to  attend. 

Ji  Okugvm,  ike  \7ih  ManOk,  lOlT. 
^  In  pmenee  of  Robert  Haiailton,  esq. 
advocate.  Sheriff-depute  of  Lanailtshire, 
compeared  Niel  Doiigles,  and'  the^  fore- 
2  U 


659]         ^7  GfiOHGE  HI. 

•  'going  declanttion*  being  read  over  to'him, 
he  begs  leave  to  make  the  followiog  cor* 
rectioiis  on  it:  That  he  is'sixty-aeTen 
years  of  age,  and  has  been  a  preacher 
twelve  years  in 'Glasgow ;  for  the  eight 
last  of  these  the  congregation  has  been  as- 
-senibled  in  the  Andersorrian  Institution- 
room:     That  instead  of   David  Young 

>  saying  that  the  persons  were  spies,  he 
said  there  were  three  persons  suspected  to 
be  spies ; .  and  with  these  corrections  he 
I  adheres  to  his  former  declaration.  De- 
<:lares.  That  in '  reading  a  passage  in  the 
27th  chapter  of  fisekiel,  where  it  mentions 
that  the  '  rowers  have  brought  us  into 
deep  waters/  the  declarant  expressed  a 
wish  and  prayer  that  our  rulers  might  not 
be  allowea  to  row.  the  Vessel  of  state  into 
deep  waters,  and  left  to  perish  between 
the  straits ;  and  if  so,  he  prayed  that  a 
greater  than  man  might  be  a  pilot  to  a  safe 
haven.  On  further  recollection  he  did  not 
on  this 'occasion  mention  the  rulers  of  the 
nation  :'  That  in  his  discourse  he  animad- 
▼erted*  on  the  impropriety  of  this  nation's 
■conduct  in  regard  to  the  late  wars,  and  in 
•  the  support  which  they  had  thereby  given 
to  the  '  bourbon  family,  and  to  idglatry : 
Thai  he  never  recollects  of  saying  that  the 
present  period  was  thjMnillennium  of  cor- 
ruption.- And  beinjpnterrogated,  What 
ffeason  and  view  he  has  in  animadverting 
so  often  on  political  matters  and  the 
measures  of  Q^vemment  in  his  sermons 
a^  xomiiients  on  Scripture,  and  par- 
dcularly  when  the  same  are  addressed 
to  Uie  lower  orders  of  the  people,  and  at 
>a  period  when,  he  confesses,  they  are  at 
present  suffering  from  want?  declares. 
That  he  does  not  comment  often  upon  the 

•  *  tfaid'subjects :  but  when  in  his  discourses 

.  they  Qome  upon  him,  he  cannot  restrain 
expressing  the  spirit  of  God.  And  being 
interrogated.  How  he  expects  to  remedy 
the  abuses  he  complains  of  by  harangues 
to  his  hearers,  instead  of  addressing  and 
admonishing  those '  persons  with  whose 
actions  he  is*  displeased  ?  declares.  That 
when  expounding  the  Scripture,  he  has 
•feit  it  his  duty  to  point  out  to  the  people 

•  those  measures  of  the  government '  of  his 
country  which  he  has  seen,  for  this  some 
time' back,  to  be  drawing  down  the  ven- 

•  geance  of  heaven  upon  this  country,' which 
.  measures  he  has  observed  for  some  years 

to  have  been  followed  by  our  government, 
and  the  suspension  of  the.Habeas  Corpus  act 
is  a  erowning  one,  and  as  such  he  has  held 
rit.  And  the  following  he  Hegs,maybe 
taken  down  as  part  of  his  decLaration,  and 
that  it  may  reach  the  ears  of  the  rulers  of 
this  nation :  That  his  royal  highness  has 
more  to  apprehend  from  the  measut^es  of  < 
his  official  servants  than  fram  the  madness 
4>f  his  people ;  which  expression,  as  to  the 
madness  of  the  people,  is  used  in  the 
prayers  of  the  Church  of  England  as  to  the' 


Trial  o/NeU  Dougj^h  TMt 

recent  esdhpe  of  bb  royal  bighneB^,  «^f|e 
dedannt  thinks  with  <  great  iminop^ie^y 
but  he  never  made  this  .  declaration  in 
public :  That  the  declarant  has  published 
different  little  tracts,  and,  among  others, 
one  intituled,  'Causes  of  oar  Ptiblic 
Calamity;'  another,  intituled,  'The 
Baptist ;'  and  a  third,  intituled,  '  A 
Word  in  Season,'  each  of  which  the  de- 
clarant got  printed,  and  a  few  of  each  of 
the  copies  have  been  at  different  times 
sold  by  the  door-keeper  of  the  meeting- 
house after  sermons ;  and  to  the  said  pro- 
ductions there  is  now  affixed  a  sealed 
label,  which  is  doaueted  and  subscHbed 
by  the  declarant,  sheriff-examinator,  and 
clerk,  as  relative  hereto :  That  of  these 
publications  there  were  about  five  hun- 
dred printed,  and  there  might  be  forty 
copies  at  the  least  sold  of  them,  but  ci 
the  precise  number  he  cannot  b^  certain : 
Tbat  the  name  of  the  door-keeper,  ta 
whom  the  declarant  has  given  his  tracts 
to  be  sold,  is  Samuel  Gourlie,  a  weaver 
in  the  Westeigate  of  Glasgow.  Dedaro, 
That  he  has  frequently  inculcated  on  his 
hearers,  and  declared  in  public,  that  no 
man  who  liad  the  fear  of  God  would  be 
concerned  in  the  pulling  down  of  one  go- 
vernment and  setting  up  another,  and 
that   those   who    did  so  were  destitute 

,  of  the  fear  of  God;  and  that  so  far 
from  approving  any  violent  measures  to 
oppose  our  rulers,  or  compel  the  legis- 
lature to  adopt  any  popular  measure,  he 
is  convinced  m  his  cionscience  that  Chris- 
tianity condemns  all  wars  whaitever^  And 
being  interrogated,  If  he  was  never  afraid 
that  the  introduction  of  these  political 
subjects  into  his  sermons,  and  especially 
his  avowed  condemnation  of  the  measures 
of  government,  and  of  the  .  legislature, 
would  create  a  spirit  of  discontent  amongst 
the  people^  and  his  hearers  inrparticular  ? 
declares,  That  in  the  course  of  his  lectures 
upon  Daniel,  he  was  naturally  led  to  make 
these  remarks ;  but  he  always  cautioned 
his  hearers  against  every  thing  that  migjfat 
tend  to  disturb  the  peace  and  good  order 
of  society.    In  witness,  &c. 

''  DuMcjkN  Clark,  vritness. 

"  JoRK  Leslie,  witness. 

(Signed)        'vNiel  Doitglas. 

"  R.  HAllILtt>K.*' 


(( 


"  At  Gloigow,  iSth  March,  1817. 
In  -presence  of  Robert  Haipilton, 
Esq.  advocate.  Sheriff-depute  of  Lanark- 
shire, and  in  the  petition  and  cocoplaint 
presented,  &c.  compeared  Niel  Dboglas, 
present  prisoner  in  the. tolbooth  of' Glas- 
gow ;  who  being  examined,  iand  his 
declaration  emitted  on  the  15th  and  17th 
days  of  March  instant, .  being  read  over 
to  him,. declares  and  adheres  thereto';  and 
farther  declares.  That  his  religious^  creed 
diffen  from  that  of  the  church  of  Scodaod 


•61] 


Vnhertalut  PnadurtforSedkioH. 


A.  D.  1817. 


CMS 


r  only  in  tluSj  'of  hit  bdiering  in  the  uai- 
Tenal   restoration  of  mankind,;  and  he- 

.  acknowMger  no  head  as  sdpreme  in  the 
choich  eicept  Christ.  And  bein^  inter- 
rogatedy  If  it  is  cnsioaiary  with  ministers 
of  {usperaoasion  of  secession,  to  mingle 
their  discourses  with  political  obserratious 
">  or  censures  on<  measAres  adopted  by 
government,  wh#n  these  last  happen  to 
be  disapproved  of  by  the  preacher  ?  de- 
clares, That  he  feels  it  to  be  his  duty,  a^ 
a  preacher  in  the  sight  of  God,  as  a  sab- 
ject  and  servant  of  the  Prince  of  Peace, 
to-  testify  in  his' doctrine  against  whatever 

.  offends  God,  violates  his  law,  infringes  the 
essential,  right  of  his*  subjects,   and  is 

Erejudicial  to  the  best  interests  of  man- 
ind,  and.  believes  that  to  be  the  duty  of 
every  professed  minister  of  Christ..  And 
being  shewn  a  sheet  on  which  are  written 
certain  heads  of  discourse,  which  begins 
with  'Jesus  said,'  declares,  That  the 
same  contains  his  speech  delivered  at  a 
meeting  at  Anderston,  held  for  the  pur^ 
pose  of'  having  it  resolved  whether  they 
should  petition  for  reform,  and  it  ^as 
copied  by  a  young  lad,  aa  apprentice  to 
a  writer  in  town,  with  the  exception  of 
'  the  lower  part  of  the  fourth  page,  which 
\s  written  by  himself:.  That  it  was  in- 
tended his  speech  should  be  publbhed  in 
the  newspapers,  but  it  was  never  done, 
and  the  said  paper  is  doqueted  and  sub- 
scribed by  the  declarant,  and  sheriff- 
examinator,  and  clerk,  as  relative  hereto. 
And  beiofsbewn  a  hand-bill,  which  is  nnw 
doqueted  and  siened,.  as  relative  to  this 
dedhration,  and  which  announces  the 
publication  of  the  Baptist,  &c.  declares, 
That  he  got  five  hundred  of  these  pub- 
lished, and  he  got  one  of  them  pasted 
upon  the  door  of  his  meeting-house,  bnt 
there  never  was  any  other  of  them  used  ; 
and  if  the  Court  requi^  it,  he  will  not 
make  use  of  them  tiil  better  times,  as  be 
iias  no  wish,  however  innocently,  to  give 

I        cause  of  offence.    In  witness,  &c. 
**  Geoegs  Duncan,  witness. 

•    ''James  Thomson,  witness. 

(Signed)       **  Niel  Douglas. 

'       '.'•  "  R.  Hamilton." 

EVIDENCE  for  THE  PANEL. 

AUm  Cumcroik  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Jeffrttf, 

Do  yon   know  Mr.   Douglas  at  the  bar 
there  f — Yes. 
-    Are  you  a  hearer  of  his  ? — ^Yes,  Sir. 

A  regular  aitender  at  his  place  of  worship? 
— ^I  have  attended  his  preaching  about  eighteen 
monlns. 

lyo  youi  remember  whether  you  attended  his 
JactoreB  or  prea^iiogs  on  the  Sundny-evenings 
in  the  begining  of  March  last  ? — Yes.    - 

£iranr  Sdnday-eirenihg  :ddring>  that  time  ?---f 
T«s,I^iett'Idid:*' 

Do  yon  remeniher  his  lecture  fxotti  Daniel 


about  Nebuchadnezxar  and  Belshazxar? — Yes.  • 

You  remember  that  r — ^Yes.  i      . 

Do.  you  remember  his  making  ;any  com- 
parison  between  the  condition  of  our  unfor-  . 
tunate  sovereign  king  George,-  and  that  i^to 
which  Nebuchadneszarfell?— Yes,  I  remend)ei 
an  imperfect  parallel  which  he  drew.  .   .  « . 

In-  what  respect  did  be  make  the  parallel 
bet^ween  them  ? — As  to  the  duration  of  their 
derangement. 

Did  he  begin  suddenly  upon  that,  subject, 
or  had  he  gone  regularly  through  Daniel  ?— -  . 
He  had  been  going  jegularly  through  Daniel. 

Do  you  remember  .hearing  him  say  any 
thing  about  the  cause  of  this  infliction  of  Pro* 
vidence  on  our  sovereign  ? — No,  he  specified 
none. 

Did  he  say  thM  he  was  smitten  by  divine 
^  viengeance  on  account  of  his  infidelity  .or  sins  ? 
—Never. 

You  are  sure  of  that? — I  am  certain  of  it. 

Did  he  mention  anything  of  his  recovery? — 
Yes,  he  prayed  and  fervently  wished  the  king 
might  be  again  restored  to  his  throne ;  and-  if 
not  to  his  throne  on  earth,  to  a  throne  in 
heayen. 

.  In  the  course  of.  his  leeture,  while  led  to 
notice  the  king's  unfortunate  malady,,  did  -  he 
utter  any  expression  of  reprobation  or  blamt 
towards  the  king  ? — No. 

Did  he  speak  of  him  with  respect  ?—^Yes» 
always  with  respect. 

Was  he  .  in  the  i  habit  of  praying  .for  .his 
majesty  7 — Yes,  generally ;  he  never  missed  a 
day  in  my  recollection  without  praying  for  the 
king. 

.  Was-  these  any  thing  in  these  prayers  thai 
implied  blame  upon  the  king  ?— No. 

To  what  effect  did  he  pray) — I  do  not  .re* 
collect  the  exact  words. 

You  have  attended  the  established  church 
sometimes  P — ^Yes.  , 

You  have  heard  them  pray  there. for  the 

To  the  same  general  effect  ? — I  think -Mr. 
Douglas^  was  more  partictilaiXi 

In  what  respect?— He  pmyed  more  fervently 
for  him  than  those  I  had  heard. 

Do  yon  remember,  on  these  occasions, 
while  going  oa  with  his  scriptural  history,  bis 
saying  any  thing  of  tiie  prince  regent?— No,  I 
do  not  recollect. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  the  prince  regent 
was  a  Vrorship(tor  of  Bacchus  ?— I  never  did. 

Can  you  take  it  upon  you  to  swear,  wbelhor 
he  ever  said  the  prince  regent  was  a  poqr 
infatuated,  bewitched, -or  wretched  prince? — 
I  could  answer  upon  oath  he  never  did. 

Did  you  pay  particular  attention,  to  the 
political  expression  of  Mr.  Douglas's  sermons 
about  the  time  I  have  mentioned  P — ^Yes. 

Had  you  any  particular  cause  for  this  ?-^ 
Upon  the  night  of  the  9th  of  March  I  paid 
particular  attention  to  what  he  said.  I  was 
mf&rmed  there  were  spies  present,  and  I 
paid  attention  lest  he  should  utter  any  thing 
that  might  be  charged  against  him.  ' 


easi         ^  GEOBQB  HI. 

Did  yoo  Imw  bim  opoa  any  occasion  aboat 
diat  time  say  any  thtng^  about  the  Houses  of 
periiameaty  especially  the  House  of  Commons  * 
-.No,  Sir. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  the  House  of 
GommoDS  was  corrupt  or  mriost  ?— No,  I  nerer 
did. 

Did  yoa  ever  hear  him  say  the  members  of 
that  House  were  thieres  and  robbers  ? — ^No,  I 
never  did. 

Have  you  heard  him  about  that  time,  or  at 
any  other  time,  make  remarks  about  the  ad- 
ministration of  the  law  in  this  country  } — No, 
he  always  spoke  with  high  respect  of  the 
law. 

Did  you-  erer  hear  what  he  said  on  die 
administration  of  the  law  ? — He  bestowed  as 
matenooraiums  npon  the  administration  of 
Sie  law  as  language  can  vsps^oMf  or  ingenuity 
inyent. 

Frequently,  Sir? — ^Always. 

You  say  he  did  this  generally;  you  were 

'going  on  to  mention  an  instance? — He  said 

after  his  fon's  trial,  that  he  was  happy  he  was 

a  native  of  a  oountvy  where  the  law  was  im* 

partially  administered. 

This  was  after  his  sou's  conviction  ?>— Yes. 

Do  you  know  what  he  bad  been  tried  for  ? — 
Swhidiing.    He  said  it  was  his  high  satisfao- 
tion  to  be  a  native  of  a  country  where  the  law 
^  is  so  impartially  admiaistered. 

Did  he  say  thb  from  the  pulpit  ? — ^Yes. 

In  express  reference  to  nis  son's  trial  and 
€ODvictk>n  f .— Yes. 

He  mentioned  them  ?«-~Yes,  he  did. 

Are  you  sure  this  was  said  seriously,  and 
tfMkt  there  was  no  irony  in  what  was  said  ? — 
It  was  said  quite  seriously. 

Are  you  acquainted  with  Mr.  Douglas  in 
private  life  ? — ^i es. 

From  what^ou  have  heard  him  say  uniform- 
ly in  the  pulpit,  and  on  other  occasions,  what 
were  his  habitual  expressions  about  the 
ioverign  and  the  prince  regent  ? — ^He  always 
•poke  with  great  respect  of  them. 

Was  he  an  advocate  for  a  reform  in  parUi^ 
tneiitl — ^Yes,  for  a  constitutional  reform. 

Did  he  ever  mention  publidy  or  otherwise, 
lis  sentiments  as  to  the  means  of  pursuing 
this  object  ? — ^Yes,  by  petition. 

Did  he  express  his  sentiments  about  the  use 
of  violence  or  force  of  any  kind?— Yes,  he 
« deprecated  it  very  much. 

IMd  he  say  any  thins  of  the  riots  ?*-Yes, 
when  liott  were  in  the  Calton,  he  desired  his 
bearers  not  to  give  any  countenance  to  them* 

Did  he  do  thb  earnestly,  Sir? — ^Yes. 

Upon  these  occasionsi  during  February  or 
Ifaroh,  can  yon  take  it  upon  you  to  swear, 
whether  iu  the  pulpit  he  ever  said  that  the 
prince  regent  was  as  lit  for  a  gibbet  as  a 
throne  ?— He  never  did ;  I  can  answer  it  upon 


Trud  ^  IMi  Dm^itis^ 


tCM 


WWm  Worrell  sworn.—! 
Mr.  Cod^jbunk 

Arc  you  a  weaker?— YfS* 


by 


Do  you  know  Ifr.  Douglas  teie  ?— Yes,  I 
know  him. 

You  know  he  preaches  the  gospel?— Yes. 

Yon  were  accustomed  to  attend  him  ?— >For 
about  thirteen  months. 

The  last  thirteen  months? — ^YeSy  sir. 

ConsUntly  ?— Yes. 

Yon  recollect  doing  so  during  his  ordinary 
disoouiaes,  last  F^ruary  and  March  I — Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  his  lecturing  or  preaohing 
fh>m  Daniel  ? — ^Yes. 

About  Nebttchadnessar  and  Belshanarf — 
Yes. 

Did  he  lecture  upon  these  just  when,  be 
came  to  them  in  his  course  of  lectaringy  or  did 
he  go  out  of  bis  course  to  get  at  tbem?-^He 
took  them  as  they  came. 

Do  you  remember,  whether  when  talking 
of  Nebuchadneaar  on  that  occasioo,  he  made 
any  oomparison  between  him  and  our  king  ? — 
Yes,  witn  respect  to  the  length  ef  tbor  safier- 
inn. 

Merely,  or  principally  upon  that  ^ — ^Princi- 
pally  upon  the  length  of  their  sufferings. 

Do  you  remember  his  assigning  any  roasoii 
vriiy  F^xmdenoe  afflicted  our  sovereign  f — He 
said,  that  for  the  sins  of  the  nation,  t^  head 
was  afflicted. 

Did  you  understand  he  said  or  not,  that  his 
majesty  was  afflicted  in  this  way  for  his  own 
sins  P — I  never  heard  him  mention  that. 

DM.  he  mention  the  fact  of  Nebuchadnexzar 
having  been  restored  to  his  throne  and  reason  ? 
—Yes. 

Did  he  express  any  wish  that  such  a  sesnlt 
should  happen  to  George  the  third  W-He 
prayed  for  it  frequently. 

Was  he  in  the  practice  in  his  discourses  of 
speaking  respectfully  of  the  king  f— Remark- 
anly  so. 

Was  he  accustomed  to  pray  with  apparent 
sincerity  and  earnestness  fov  me  king  f—With 
great  sincerity. 

Do  you  know  him  in  private  ? — ^I  never  was 
at  his  house  more  than  tnree  times  altogether. 

Was  he  in  the  habit  of  recommending  to 
his  audience  to  love  die  king  as  he  seemied  to 
do  ? — He  was  in  the  habit  oif  impressinjg  that 
upon  our  minds ;  he  ordered  us  to  pray  for 
huB. 

Did  yon  ever  hear  him  mention  the  House 
of  Commons  ? — Yes,  I  have  heard  him  mentioa 
the  House  of  Commons. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  the  members 
were  thieves  and  robbers  ? — No. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  use  language  of  that 
tendency? — ^No,  never. 

Did  you  ever  bear  him  make  use  of  tho  ex- 
■preiBslon,  thieves  and  robbers,  to  any  descrip- 
tion of  men  at  all  I — ^I  believe  he  did  whea 
speaking  of  patronage,  of  those  who  did  not 
come  in  at  the  door ;  he  said  thaft  those  wbo 
do  not  coaM  in  at  iIm  door,  oeme  m  seas* 
other  way. 

And  he  appUed  thisN-Not  to  the  mnisleis 
of  state,  but  to  the  ministsss  o£  the  gDspe)» 
Did  )W€vesbear  hii»taHc^ol.  tlss>9«^  in 


«6Sl 


Vnioaitaliit  Frk^ier^for  Sedition. 


A.  IX  1817. 


[ieoo^ 


wUch  ibe  Ittw  is  ftdimistiwcd  in  tbit  eomilry  <? 
— Ye8,  I  hftT«  hewd  him  pftjr  the  gvMtMt  en- 
eoniimM  to  the  adminif  trmtieo  ef  tiM  law.  He 
said  he  was  proud  to  be  a  native  of  a  eeuirtry 
in  which  the  laws  were  so  well  administered. 

You  never  heard  him  speak  of  them  as  ad- 
ministered  unjustly  I — No,  never.. 

Did  you  ever  hear  that  he  had  a  son  tried 
let  fraud  or  something? — ^Yes. 
•  Did  you  ever  bear  him  speak  of  his  son's 
trial  7 — After  he  came  baek  mm  fidtuburgh. 

What  did  he  say } — ^That  he  had  never  before 
had  the  honour  of  seeing  a  jury  impanelled, 
and  he  had  a  secret  pride  in  being  a  native  of 
a  country  where  the  laws  were  so  impartially 
administered. 

This  was  after  the  conviction  of  his  own 
son  ?7-Yefc- 

About  the  9th  of  last  March,  or  on  any 
ether  occasion,  did  you  hear  hiro  say  that  he 
thought  the  prince  regent  was  fitter  for  a  gibbet 
than  a  throne  f — Never  in  my  hearing. 

Nor  any  thing  of  that  purport } — Never  at 
aU. 

If  he  had  said  so,  could  it  have  escaped 
yoa?*-I  think  not  so  remarkable  an  expression 
as  that. 

Is  there  any  thing  particular  about*  Mr. 
DoagWs  utterance  or  mode  o#  speaking  ? — 
He  speaks  very  rapidly  sometimes. 

What  sort  of  a  dialect  Or  aeeeot  has  he  ? 
As  much  Highland  as  any  thing  else  ? — He  has 
rather  a  little  of  the  Scottish  accent. 

Is  he  distinctly  heard,  or  is  an  effort  re- 
quired to  hear  him  ? — ^To  me  he  is  distinct* 

Have  you  been  long  accustomed  to  hear 
him  ? — ^Thirteen  months. 

When  vou  heard  him  for  the  first  time,  did 
you  hear  him  distinctly  ^•^Yes,  it  was  so  with 
me.    I  always  heard  him  distinctly. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  mention  the  prince 
legentywhep  speaking  of  Nebachadneizar  uk) 
Belshazzar? — Yes. 

What  did  you  ever  hear  him  say  about  the 
prince  f — ^Tbat  he  is  a  benevoletit  prince. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  be  was  a  poor 
tnfotuated  wretch  ? — Neve^ 

A  devotee  of  Bacchus  ? — Never. 
'  A  poor  bewitched  creature?— -No.  He  said 
he  was  a  humane  and  compasstdnate  prince, 
having  pardoned  more  crimmals  since  he  came 
to  his  station  than  had  ever  been  done  within 
eo  short  a  space  he  believed. 

WilUam  NUhet  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Grtmi^ 

Yon  are  a  weaver  by  trade  I  believe,  and 
lende  at  Glasgow  I-— Yes. 

Are  yon  acquainted  with  Mr.  Donglas  the 
prisoner?— I  know  the  .gentleman. 

Yott  have  attended  his  chapel  ^— For  seven 
^ycars  and  more. 

00  yov  temembet  having  been  at  bis  chM)el 
ome  taday  in  the  beginning  obtest  March f— 
J  am  ahhost  always  thMein' tile  evenings. 
V.  Do  yen  lemeMbes  Sunday  the  9tb  of  MaichT 


I  Wattheieaaytbiag  that  evening  thai  earned 
yon  to  pay  particular  attention  to  what  Mr*. 
Dpuglas  said  ? — No,  sir. 

Do  you  know  a  person  of  the  name  ^  James 
Pirie,  town<^iBcer? — Yes. 

Have  yon  seen  him  to-day? — ^Yes. 

Was  he  at  church  that  night? — He  was. 

Were  any  other  strangess  these  ?-^Tbere  was 
another  town-officer  there.  ^ 

And  how  did  that  other  employ  himself  #1 
What  was  he  doing  ? — ^He  was  sitting  beside 
Msccallom. 

Was  there  another  town-officer? — There  wan 
a  third. 

Where  was  be  sitting  ?-^Up  towvds  the 
baick  of  she  place  of  woi^p. 

Did  they  seem  to  be  paying  great  attention; 
to  |ir.  Douglas  ? — I  did  not  see  what  the  one 
who  was  back  did ;  but  the  one  in  the  for* 
part  sat  and  wrote  ai  times. 

Do  you  tecoUect  the  subject  of  discoocse 
that  evening  ? — A  passage  in  the  5th  of  Daniel. 

Was  he  lecturing  upon  it,  or  was  it  a  dis- 
course from  one  text  ?-^Ue  was  lecturing  upon 
it. 

Had  he  come  to  that  chapter  in  the  course 
of  lectures  he  was  delivering,  or  had  he  fixedl 
upon  the  subject  of  that  night's  discourse  by 
itself? — In  the  course  he  was  delivering,  be 
took  it  in  rotation. 

How  long  had  he  been  lecturing  in  this  ro* 
tation  in  the  book  of  Daniel  ?— For  two  years ; 
at  times  leaving  it  and  returning  to  it  oeca^ 
sionally. 

And  when  he  had  left  it  and  returned  to  it, 
did  be  return  to  the  place  at  which  he  had 
stopped  ? — ^Yes. 

la  it  the  5th  chapter  of  Daniel  which  treats 
of  Nebnchadnezsar  ?— -Yes. 

Do  you  remember  particularly  what  Mr. 
Douglas  said  upon  that  occasion  with  regdrd 
to  Nebnohadnesiar  ?  Did  he  mention  the' 
i^iction  with  which  he  was  visited  ?^Yes. 
-  Did  he  draw  avf  patallel  between  our 
sovereign  and  kino*  Neouchadneisar  on  that 
occasion? — i  heard  him  draw  one  stnule  or 
parallel. 

How  did  he  exptess  himself  ?— That  as  Ne- 
buchadnezzar was  raised  up  from  his  affliction 
to  his  throne  and  dignity,  if  it  was  the  will  of 
God,  he  hoped  that  our  sovereign  might  be 
raised  up  to  his  throne  and  dignity,  and  be 
enabled  to  adopt  the  song  of  the  good  old 
Simeon,  "  Lord  lettest  now  thy  servant  de- 
part in  peace,  for  mine  eyes  have  seen  thy 
salvation.'' 

Are  you  positive  about  these  expcessions  ? — 
Yes. 

And  can  swear  to  their  having  been  used  b^ 
Mr.  Douglas  that  night  ?-rMany  nights. 

Upon  that  tiight? — I  cannot  say  as  to  thai 
particular  night,  but  he  always  prayed  fbr* 
irently  in  these  and  similar  words. 

And  that  night,  did  he  diaw  any  parSllel 
between  his  majesty  and  NebuchadnesEar,  cal^ 
enlated'Md  inte«d«d  to  the  bnr^,  prejiidice| 
anddishoaoitrolhisiM^e8tjFf-*^V««  ' 


«67J 


57  GEORGE  IlL 


TruU  ofNM  DoMg^^ 


[&B» 


Did  b0  «ia«  this  exprasflkm,  thai  Us  miietty 
like  Neboobadnezzur,  driven  from  the 
sooiety  of  meo  for  his  infidelity  mod  cormp- 
tioo  i — No. 

Did  be  use  aay  words  of  this  import? — ^No. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  use  words  of  that 
import  f— No. 

l>id  you  hear  him  make  meBtion  of  the 
prince  regent  upon  that  occasion  2  —He  alwaya 
mentioned  the  prince  regent. 

In  what  way  f — ^In  praying  for  him. 

Pid  he,  upon  that  occasion,  say  .any  thing 
about  anv  body  being  an  infatuated  wretch, 
a  poor  infatuated  devotee  of  Bacchus  ? — -No. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  apply  these  or 
similar  eipressions  to  his  roysil  highness  the 
prince  regent? — ^No. 

Did  you  e?er  hear  him  speak  of  the  prince 
regent  in  terms  at  all  of  that  import  ? — ^No. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  toat  the  prince 
regent  was  fitter  for  a  gibbet  than  a  throne  ? — 
No,  never. 

Are  you  quite  sure  of  tliis  ?~Yes. 

Gould  he  have  made  use  of  this  expression 
without  your  having  observed  it  f — No. 

Could  he  have  used  those  other  expiesaiens 
without  your  observing  it  ? — ^No» 

And  you  now  swear,  upon  your  solemn 
oath,  that  you  never  heasd  nim  make  use  of 
the  expressions  which  I  have  mentioned?-^ 
No,  I  never  did. 

Were  you  there  every  Sunday  evening  in 
February  and  March  last  ? — No,  I  canndt  say 
I  was. 

How  many  nights  were  you  absent  f — I  can- 
not recollect  but  of  one. 

You  can  speak  to  the  night  when  you  saw 
Pine  there !— Yes,  I  am  very  certain  as  to 
that  night,  Mr.  Douglas  did  not  use  such 
expressions. 

Did  vou  ever  hear  him  mention  the  fiUe  of 
the  fiabvlonian  empire,  in  the  course  of  his 
lectures  r^  Yes. 

He  did  not  then  make  use  of  anv  of  the  ex* 
pressions  which  I  have  mentioned) — No. 

Did  you  hear  him  talk  of  the  administration 
of  justice  in  this  country  ? — Yes. 

In  what  terms  ?— With  great  praise* 

Did  you  ever  hear  that  he  had  the  misfor- 
tune of  having  a  son  tried  for  any  offence  ? — 
Yes. 

Diid  you  hear  him  preach  after  his  son's  trial 
liad  taken  place? — I  did. 

Did  he  make  any  allusion  to  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice  upon  that  occasion? — He 
extolled  the  just  laws  of  our  country. 

Did  he  make  use  of  any  particular  expres* 
dons  or  remarks? — He  said  it  was  a  great 
blessing  to  liVe  in  a  nation  in  which  such 
laws  were  observed,  that  no  man.  could  be 
harmed  without  proof  being  regularly  led  of 
his  guilt. 

Did  you  eyer  hear  him  talk  of  the  members 
of  the  House  of  Commons  as  thieves  and 
robbers  ?-T  No. 

Did  you  ever,  bear  him  apply  these  ^pithet^ 
to  any  description  of  penons  ? — ^Yes. 


•  To  whom  ?^To  the  miniates  of  the  Gospels- 
To  what  description  of  the  ministers  of-  the 
Gospel? — ^He   was   applying   the  words  o^ 
Scriptave  to  them. 

What  are  these  words  ?— -All  those  that  do- 
net  enter  by  the  door  to  the  sheep-fold,  but 
climb  op  sooM  other  way,,  are  uiievoe  andr 
robbers* 

Was  Mr.  Douglas  in  favour  of  patronage  in 
the  Church,  or  against  patronage  f— The  voice 
of  the  people,,  accoiding  to  the  word  of  God^ 
as  he  held  forth,  was  the  door. 

JbAn  RaitoHl  sworn. — Examined*  by 
Mr.  Jeffrey, 

You  are  a  candle-maker  P — ^Yes. 

Do  yon  know  Mr.  Douglas  ? — ^Yes.  • 

Do  you  attend  his  place  of  worship?— » 
Yes* 

Have  you  done  so  long?— A  doeen  of 
years. 

Have  you  attended  peetty  reguiariyi — ^Yes,. 
I  think  I  have. 

I  ask  you,  in  particular;  were  you  regular  in. 
attendance  since  the  beginning  of  this  year,  in 
February  and  March? — Yes,  I  have  heta^ 
him  three  times  every  day  when  he  wns< 
preaching. 

All  the  Sunday  evenings  ? — ^I  am  certain  I 
have. 

Do  yon  remember  that  about  Ih^it  time  he 
was  lecturing  on  the  book  of  DanielP — ^I  mind 
that  well. 

Do  you  remember  his  coming  tathe  history 
of  Nebuchadnezsar  and  BeUhaasar  ? — ^Yes,  I 
think  I  do. 

Do  you  remember  upon  that  occasion  hi» 
making  any  kind  of  parallel  between  Nebu* 
chadnesxar  and  George  the  Third  ? — ^No.      ■  • 

Qid  he  make  any  mention  of  the  king  upon 
that  occasion  ? — NotUng  farther  than  mention- 
ing  his  name.  I  cannot  exactly  say  what  wem 
tiie  words  that  he  used. 

Did  he  make  any  observation  as  to  the  king 
being  afflicted  .with  a  malady  ?— Never  in  any 
reproachful  wav.  I  have  heard  him  often 
prayinff  he  might  have  a  lucid  interval  before 
nedied. 

Do  yon  remember  his  making  aUusion  to ' 
Nebucfaadneznr's  restoration  to  his  throne? — 
1  do  not  recollect 

Do  you  recollect  his  ever  saying  that  onr 
king  had  been  driyen  from  the  societv  of  men,. 
on  account  of  conduct  like  Nebuc^adneuar's  ? 
—Never. 

Did  you  attend  to  his  discourse  at  that  time? 
—Yes.  r  . 

Could  he  have  used  such  an  expression 
without  yott  obeerving  it  ?-^I  don't  tnink  he 
could.  I  have. heasd  him  say  that  infidelity 
prevailed  from  the  palace  down  to  Uie  street 
scavengers. 

CooM  •  you  swear  he  did  not  make  use  of 

th^  expression  to  which  I  have  already  allnded  ? 

— ^It. was  not  done  to  my  knowledge.  ^f. 

'You  mentioned  he  was  in  &  habit.  ^ 

praying  for  the  king?— Yes. 


VniverHOht  Preacher^Jhr  SedUiotu^  A.  D,  1I?I7.  [670 

*  How  dM  yo6  yourself  take  faioi  up  at  first  ? 

«rNot  wbU  at  tot,  bfit  I  nciw  ibUow,  him 

.  pretty  well.  ,  . 

Are  you  acquainted  with  Mr.  Douglas  in 
private  life  ? — A  little. 

You  have  attended  his  ministry  for  twelre 
years,  and  know  him  a  little  in  priYate ;  what 
sentiments  has  l^e  been  in  the  haoit  of  express- 
ing as  to  his  majesty  and  the  constitution  ?-— I 
have  always  heard  him  speak  favourably  of 
them. 

Hare  you  ever  heard  him  recommend  the 
use  of  violence  or  force  in  procuring  a  reform 
in  Parliament?—!  never  did. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  it  would  be  a 
good  or  a  bad  thing  to  use  such  means? — 
About  the  time  of  drawing  up  petitions  for 
reform^  he  exhorted  the  people  to  conduct 
themsdves  peaceably  and  to  act  constitu- 
tionally, s  . . 
' .  To  avoid  ail  disorder  ? — Yes. 

David  Y&mg  swomw— Examioed  by 
Mr.  Codtham. 

Do  you  know  Mr.  Douglas  who  is  sitting 
between  the  soldiers  there? — Ye^yl  Juiow  him. 
,   Do  jou  attend  his  chapel?^— I  do.  . 

How  lopg  bad  you  attended^there  before  he 
was  apprehended  ? — About  six  years. 

Did  you  attend  regularly  in  February  and 
March  last?— I  did.  , 

How  often  ? — Generally  three  times  a-dav. 

Did  you  attend  every  evening  during  mat 
time  ? — Every  evening  except  one,  I  oouUl  not 
get  in,  early  in  March. 

Do  you  remember  his  being  apprehended? 
—Yes. 

Did  you  hear  him  the  Sunday  evening  be- 
fore he  was  apprehended  ? — ^Yes. 

Had  you  heard  that  spies  had  been  sent  to 
hear  his  discourses  ? — ^Yes.  .  . 

And  you  were  there  at  that  time? — Yes. 

On  what  portion  of  Scripture  did  he  dis- 
course ? — On  the  fifth  chapter  of  DanieL  ■ ' 

About  Nebuchadnexzar  and  Belshazzar? — 
Yes. 

Do  vou  remember  his  comparing  our  king  to 
Nebucmadnezzar  ? — No. 

Did  he  spieak  of  Nebuchadnexzar  at  all  f — 
Yes. 

What  did  he  say  ? — ^In  bis  pmyer,  he  prayed 
that  our  king,  like  Nebuchadnezzar,  might  be 
restored  to  his  throne,  and  that  his  last  days 
might  be  more  glorious  than  the  first. 

JDid  he  say  that  Nebuchadnezzar  was  driven 
from  his  throne  on  account  of  his  sins  ?-*-Yes. 
that  Nebuchadnezzar  was. 

That  George  the  Third  was  ?— No. 

Did  he  use  disrespectful  langpage  towards 
the  king  ? — The  very  reverse. 

If  not  upon  'that  night,  did  he  upon  any 
occasion  use  disrespectful  laognage  to^ardk 
the  kinff? — On  the  contrary,  he  soils etimes 
prayed  n>r  him  three  times  a -day,  and  r'eisom- 
mend^  loyalty  send  obedience  to  the  law. ' 
^  ^id  he  mention  Belshazsftr  upon  this  occa« 
siOh'-^Hedid.  '^ 


«69l 

"••'  T)fd  be  pray  eam*tly'fbr  himP^Eamestly, 
wore  SO  tlwn  any  mniiier  I  ever,  heard. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  use  '  disrespeetfiil 
terms  in  speaking  of  the  king  ?---No,  never. 

How.  did  he  speak  of  him  ? — He  always 
spoke  of  him  with  respect. 

Do  you  remember  his  saying  any  thing  as 
to  the  prince  regentin  going  over  this  chapter? 
— I  really  cannot  remember.  I  cannot  be 
positive  what  he  did  say  about  him.-    • 

Did  he  call  him  a  worshipper  of  Baochns  P 
— Never. 

.    Aa  infatuated  prince  or  poor  wretch? — 
Never. 

If  he  had  used  these  expressions  you  must 
have  heard  him? — ^I  think  so;   but  I  never 
ilieard  him,  to  my  knowledge. 

Have  you  heard  him  speok  of  the  House  of 
•Commens  ?-— Yes,  I  have  heard  him.-  • 
•«>  Did  you  «ver  hew  him  speak  of  the  mem- 
bers being  corrupt  or  unjust  f'-^I  heard  hkn 
once  mention,  that  if  he  could  believe  the 
public  prinu,  a  member  of  the  House  had 
.ofimd  to  prove  thatther^  had  been  seats 
bod^tand  sold.  ■  ■  , 

•    Did  vou  ever  hear  Mr.  Donglas  call  mem- 
bers* of  the  House  of  Commons » thieves  or 
clobbers? — No.'  -  ^       ,  * 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  apply  these  mthets 
'40  airy  other  description  of  pessons  P — I  -have 
lieasd  him  make  some  obeenvtions  on  the  way 
ministers  were  thrown  by  patronage  into  some 
places  of  the  country. 

•.  And  he  used  these  expressions  in  reference 
to  that  circumstance  ?— That  was  my  opinion 
of  it.  '  ' 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  any  thing  in  his 
dbcotirses  about  theodininistration  of  the  law 
in  4his  country?— He.  commended  it  fre- 
^pently. 

Often  ^ — I  could  not  sa^  how  often.    He 
said  be  was  happy  to  live  ma  country  where 
^the  law  was  so  justly  administered. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  make  any  ob- 
servations of  an  opposite  tendency? — I  never 
did. 

Do  yon  happen*  to  know  he  had  a  son  tried 
for  some  ofence  last  summer  ?-^Yes^ 
.  Do  you  remember  Mr.  Douglas  making  any 
remarks  after  his  return  from  Edinburgh  on 
that  occasion  ? — ^I  do  not  remember  the  exact 
words  he  used,  but  he  was  thankful  that  justice 
was  administered  so  ^rly. 

That  was  the  substance  of  what  he  said  ? — 
That  was  the  way  I  took  it  up; 
;  Do  you  knaw  whether  Mr.  Douglas  was  a 
reformer,  whether  be  wished  a  reform  of  Mr- 
liaroent'Or  not?— I  have  heard  him  speak  of 
€ffeeti0g  reform  in  a  constitntional  manner. 

Do  you  remembef  his  saying  anything  as  to 
the -manner  in  which  it  should  berpursued  ? — ^I 
cannot  say  enctfy* 

Was  there  any  tiling '  particular  in  Mr. 
Douglas's  manoer  -of  "delivery /in  the  ^Ipit? 
Did  he ^speak. fiEBt  or  islow ?— I< don't  think  a, 
strangei"  could. make  much  of  him  the  first 
tine  ofheartng*  him.* 


671)       57  GEORGE  III. 

'  Did  yoa  hear  Ihid  eomptre  ^y  body  to  hlin  f 
•^Ho.  I  did  Bdt  hetr  hioil  compare  any  body 
te  him. 

Did  he  compare  the  prince  regent  to  him? 
•—No. 

Did  he  call  any  body  a  poor  infiatuated 
wretch?— No. 

Or  devotee  of  BacchttS  ? — ^No. 

Then  he  did  not  call  the  prince  inch?— No. 

If  snch  an  expression  had  been  used,  must 
you  have  heard  it  P— Yes. 

You  know  his  mode  of  speaking  f — ^Yes. 

Were  you  quite  within  nearing  of  him  ? — 
Yes. 

IMd  he  say  any  thing  that  night,  or  upon 
any  ooeanon  you  ever  heard,  against  the  mode 
in  which  the  law  is  administered  ?— The  very 
reterae.  The  first  time  he  preached  after  his 
son's  trial,  he  spent  a  whole  discourse  upon 
the  justice  and  equity  of  the  law,  and  the  im<* 
partial  administration  of  it  in  the  kingdom, 
and  more  eepeeiaUy  in  this  hi^  CowL 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  use  language  incon« 
littent  with  that  which  you  have  mentioned  ? 
—1  never  did. 

Did  yon  hear  bim  upon  the  occasion  when 
the  spies  were  there,  say  any  thing  of  the 
House  of  Commons  f — ^I  do  not  remember  tiiat 
I  did. 

You  did  not  hear  him  call  any  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  House  of  Commons  thieves  and 
robbers  P— *No. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  use  that  expres- 
sion f — As  to  dergymen  who  come  in  by 
patronage. 

Did  you  9rei  hear  him  sav  that  seats  in  the 
House  of  Commons  were  soli  like  bullocks  iii 
«'m«riretf— Ko. 

Do  you  know  Mr.  Douglas  in  private  life  ? 
-^I  have  had  a  good  deal  of  private  conveha- 
tion  with  him. 

H  he  peaceably  disposed  ? — ^He  is  peaceably 
dlniosen. 

Is  he  a  friend  to  refbrm  f — Yes. 

How  did  he  wish  to  get  it? — By  petition- 
ing. 

Did  be  fecommend  violence  ?— "Dke  veiy 
veverse. 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  discourage  it? — 
Often.  In  his  sermons  he  discharged  his  peo- 
ple fn>m  having  any  thing  to  do  with  either 
riots  or  private  meetings. 

Cowrt, — By  private  you  meaa  secret  .meel- 
wg»r — ^Yes* 

John  Chdmen  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Jeffrey, 

Do  yo»  kpow  Mr.  Douglas  ?— Yes,  I  do. 

Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  attending  his 
«httndi  ?— Yes.  I  have  heard  him  often  4ese 
u  nootbe  peat« 

Werayoutheve  the  Sunday  evenings  in' Fe- 
.bciMiy  end  March  lest  ? — Some  of  them* 

W«¥«  yon  there  when  he  was  lecturing  u|>Qn 
Jh*  fifth  chapter  of  Dawel  ?-*!  heard  sooie  of 
his  lectures  upon  it. 


Trial  of  Nml  Doiti^ 


im% 


His  lectures  about  Nebuchadiienar  end  Bel- 
shassar?*— Yes,  I  hevd  some  of  hts  diaeottsiei 
upon  thai  subject. 

Did  you  hear  him  make  any  oomparison  b^^ 
tween  the  case  of  our  king  and  Nebuchadnes-^ 
zar  7 — I  do  not  remember  of  «ny  comparison 
between  the  two.  I  heard  him  pray  fervently 
that  the  king  might  be  restored  to  his  reason 
aJbd  his  government. 

Upon  what  oeoaaioo  ?— Upon  the  oecasioB 
above  alluded  to.  And  he  prayed  fervently 
that  the  affliction  might  be  sanctified  fer  Uie 
anStfuctioa  of  the  natioa  and  his  own  son,  and 
that  we  mi^ht  all  learn  to  fear  God  uni  levt* 
Tence  the  k^ng. 

Did  he  say  the  malady  was  the  ooMsquenee 
of  infidelity  and  wickedness  ^-^-I  never  heasfi 
him  «se  s«eh  an  expraseioo. 

Did  he  pray  for  the  king? — Ferveotly,  for 
his  temporal  and  spiritual  welfeie ;  and  he  ve- 
oomaaended  to  his  hearers  lo  do  ao  likewise. 

Did  you  ever  hear  hun  use  terms  of  disre- 
epect  or  reproach  towards  the  king? — ^Nevtr 
towards  his  OMf  eS^,  his  person  or  government. 

Towards  the  prince  regent?— -I  do  not  ve- 
member  of  any  <expfessioiis  of  disrespect  to* 
ward*  hsm.  He  prayed  fervently  for  him,  thit 
he  might  reign  for  the  glory  of  God,  aad  the 
good  of  hts  people  ever  whotti  he  presided. 

Did  you  ever  oeathim  call  him  an  infirtnatod 
wretdi? — I  never  heard  him  use  any  words 
likethaL 

Did  you  ever  hear  him  say  any  tinng  abont 
the  House  of  Commons  ?-*I  remember  some- 
thing about  that.  He  said  there  were  aome 
things  about  the  House  of  Commons  that  he 
thought  it  would  bo  of  benefit  to  have  Kformed. 
He  professed  himself  a  well-wisher  to  the 
minority  in  the  House.  He  mentioned  it  was 
stated  in  the  newspapers  that  seats  were  sold 
ii  in  a asarfcet;  and  he  said  diis  certainly  was 
odious. 

Did  he  point  out  in  what  way  a  refofi^ 
should  be  set  about  ? — I  do  not  recoUeet  what 
he  said  as  to  tiiat.  He  exhorted  the  people  lo 
petition  in  a  legal  and  constitutional  form. 

Did  he  evtt  faint  tbut  good  was  to  be  done 
by  violence  or  ibrco?*— The  reverse.  He  al- 
ways recommended  loyal  and  peaceable  mea- 
sures. 

Did  yon  ever  hear  him  say  any  thing  about 
the  administration  of  the  laws  ?— I  do  not  re- 
collect of  him  speaking  of  that  particular  point. 

Is  there  any  thing  particular  in  his  manner 
of  delivery  ? — I  was  several  days  hearing  hlln 
before  I  could  understand  his  mode  of  delivery. 
It  was  difficult  for  me  also  to  follow  bin,  his 
views  being  diiferent  from  those  to  which  I 
had  been  aoeustoraed.  I  heard'  him  several 
tioMS  before  I  was  able  to  nndeistand  him. 

Does  he  speak  fast?— The  pecnliari^  of  hb 
delivery  arises  rather  from  his  age  and  frailty. 
Hie  is  nemmsi  and  his  voice  is  extended  too 
hxA  and  then  fells  aw^.  On  account  of  the 
inlmiity  of  l:is-vDioe»  he^ndeavonst  to  raise  it. 


Mr.  Jeffrty.'^Tt^re  ^xt  otiber  s>rtdessss  in 


am 


VnioemdUt  Prtttektr,Jbr  StiMim. 


A.  a  i8ir. 


t6U 


aitvndtnoe;  Vat  H  appears  touanimtoessary 
to  take  up  the  tiiDe  of  the  Court  by  caUiag  in 


Lord  JuOkt  CZer^.— You  judge  rightly;  to 
call  any  more  witn^es  to  the  same  point  must 
he  quite  unnecessary. 

'  Mr.  SoUdior  Geiwrvi/.  — From  the  coorM 
which,  in  the  present  circttmstaiicet,  I  deem  it 
proper  to  pursue,  the  duty  now  to  be  performed 
oy  you  will  not  be  attended  with  that  pain  or 
responsibility,  from  which,  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  trial,  I  considered  it  to  be  insepa^ 
nble. 

The  charge  against  die  panel  at  the  bar  is 
that  of  sedition — a  charge  of  which  the  rele- 
vancy has  been  established  by  a  judgment  of 
fhe  Court,  and  cannot  admit  of  dispute.  The 
sedition  charged  consists— ^in-  having  uttered  a 
aeditiotts  libel  against  his  sacred  majesty  the 
'  king,  and  against  his  royal  highness  the  prince 
regent — in  having  uttered  a  seditious  libel 
against  the  House  of  Commons — and  in  having 
vttered  a  seditions  libel  against  the  administra-» 
tion  of  the  laws  of  this  kingdom.  And,  un- 
doubtedly, if  it  had  been  proved,  that  the  panel 
had  endeavoured  thus  to  alienate  the  affections 
of  the  people  from  any  or  all  of  these  objects  of 
their  allowance,  he  would  have  been  guilty  of 
•  very  heinous  offence.  If  such  attempts  had 
been  attended  with  either  partial  or  total  suc# 
eeas — ^if  the  fidelity,  reverence,  and  attach- 
ment of  the  people  to  any  or  to  all  of  these 
objects  had  been  shaken — ^theie  would,  in  the 
mie  view,  have  been  very  little  left,  and  in 
another  view  much  of  those  principles  would 
be  dertroyed,  to  which  the  allegiance  of  the 
•ubject  must  be  attached,  or  by  which  good 
mdix  throughout  the  kingdom  can  alone  be 
maintained. 

The  peculiar  circumstance  with  which  this 
sedition  is  attended,  is,  that  it  has  been  com- 
mitted bj  a  clergyman — ^by  a  person  exercis- 
ing duties  of  a  very  important  description, 
wUch  are  far  removed  from  any  connection 
^th  political  discussions.  And  if,  in  ordinary 
aitnations,  and  b^  persons  in  the  ordinanr  avo- 
cations of  dvil  life,  the  uttering  of  a  seditious 
libel  be  criminal,  beyond  all  doubt  it  must  be 
iidUiiiriy  more  criminal  in  the  case  of  a  person 
vhose  province  it  is  to  impart  useful^  moral, 
and  religioas  instruction.  A  person  who  has 
wmik  duties  to  perform  is,  in  his  unjustifiable 
m»i  vricked  abeirattoos  from  his  du^^  guilty 
«f  a  great  and  dangerous  offence,  llie  fitnc- 
tioiis  of  a  clergyman  are  among  the  most  im- 
p^fftini  in  crnl  society,  whether  the  nature 
Mid^-  purpose  of  his  duties,  or  the  dangerous 
JKJitties  and  great  trust  with  which  he  is  ne- 
oesaarily  invested,  are  considered.  His  duties 
8ie^  to  communicate  moral  and  religious  in- 
struction ;  and  in  proportion  to  the  vital  im- 
portance of  these  duties  and  objects  wheu  well 
performed,  is  the  criminalitv  of  his  conduct 
when,  under  the  mask  and  disguise  of  his 
Iboction,  he  disseminates  the  poison  of  dis- 
content and  sedition,  He  is  latnilted  with 
V0L.7LXXnL 


Ae  wteklv  power  and  opportunifjr  ^  a^sem^^ 
bUng  ana  addressing  crowded  congfkegationi 
for  one  lawful  purpqpe  only ;  and  the  danger 
of  permitting  such  opportunities  to  be  turned 
to  any  other  purpose  but  that  of  enforcing  the 
duties  of  religion,  peace,  virtue,  and  charity^ 
need  not  be  enlaiiped  upon  here. 

The  first  part  of  the  seditious  libel  uttered 
by  the  panel  against  his  sacred  majesty  and 
against  me  prince  regent,  consists  in  a  scrips 
fursl  allusion ;— in  the  perversion  and  misap- 
plication of  a  portion  of  Scripture,  of  which,  I 
nelieve,  there  are  few,  either  in  die  ordinary  or 
more  intelligent  ranks  of  society,  who  are  ig- 
norant; and  it  is  jost  as  possible,  in  this  indi-' 
rtct  manner,  and  by  preference  to  particular 
portions  of  Scripture  history,  to  utter  libellous 
or  seditious  matter,  as  by  the  most  direct  word» 
which  language  affords.  There  h  no  blas- 
phemy or  sedition,  how  abominable  and  atro^ 
cious  soever,  that  may  not  in  this  form  be 
spread  about.  The  name,  character,  and  con- 
duct of  his  majesty,  whether  public  or  private, 
I  have  been  habituated  to  consider  as  sacred 
Sttlyects,  not  to  be  pro&ned  by  investigatioir 
and  discussion j  either  in  parliament,  in  courts 
of  law,  or  in  churches.  This  is  the  true  prin- 
cinle  of  the  constitution ;  and  the  whole  tenor 
or  the  evidence  of  this  day's  trial  shows,  that 
it  is  a  principle  from  which  it  would  be  unwise 
to  depart. 

If  the  case  bad  stood  upon  the  evidence 
brouffht  in  behalf  of  the  Crown,  I  should  have 
called  upon  you,  without  hesitation,  fbr  a  ver- 
dict of  guilty  upon  two  of  the  diaxges  stated 
in  the  libel ;  Jint,  the  charge  of  uttering  9 
seditious  libel  against  his  samd  majesty  and! 
the  prince  re^nt;  aind,  ieeondy  the  charge  of 
uttenog  a  seditious  libel  against  the  House  of 
Commons.  With  regard  to  the  third  and  rei* 
maining  ground  of  charge  against  the  panel, 
in  the  minor  proposition  of  this  indictment^ 
there  has  been  no  evidence  brought  before  you* 
At  the  same  time,  I  must  observe,  that  the 
evidence  on  the  part  of  the  Crown  &Us  fu 
short  of  what  I  expected  to  have  laid  before 
yo».  Hie  inquiries  or  precognition  taken  in 
the  ordinary  course  of  the  duties  of  local  poHce^ 
when  the  nets  were  fresh  in  Ihe  recollection  of 
the  witnesses,'  and  when  they  had  recentlv 
heard  the  seditious  preachings  of  the  panels 
exhibited  to  me  a  case  on  whidi  I  entertained 
not  a  donbt  of  the  measures  to  be  taken,  and 
on  which  I  am  confident  vou  would  not  have 
entertained  a  doubt  as  to  what  yourduty  would 
have  required  of  ^ou.  From  the  interval  of 
time,  however,  which  necessarily  has  elapsed^ 
the  recollectioQs  of  the  witnesses  have  become 
more  imperfect  and  upcertain.  In  these  ob» 
servations,  I  am  far  from  saying,  or  meaning 
to  insinuate,  that  you  ought  to  believe,  or  be 
at  all  influenced  by  any.  thing  which  has  not 
been  laid  regularly  in  evidence  before  you.  f 
merely  sttfte  these  things  in  explanation  of  the 
course  of  conduct  which  I  am  in  this  case  t» 
adopt. 
On  the  supposition  that  fbU  credil  is^diie  Wk 

2    A 


§J^^       57CyBO»G»HI. 

the  tritMsaea  on  botili  side9»  Uiere  «m  aont 
chflurget  inad^  oul  agaiast  Um  pandl^  which 
render  his  oooduct  highly  cnminal— which 
•aUhlish  against  him  a  very  great  malveraatioa 
of  duty,  and  .which  briog^  home  to  him  a  chini- 
aatity  not  to  be  diatidgtushe^^  from  aeditioo. 

It  is  proved  by  aU  the  witnesses  lor  the 
prowo^-^t  is  proved  by  thoae  witnesses  for 
the  panel  to  whom  any  credit  is  due — it  i| 

gro?ed  by  lus  own  declarations,  which  cannol 
e  beard  without  pity  for  his  foUy,  and  indigv 
nation  for  his  impiety,  that  he  is  a  political 
preacher.  To  all  who  hare  paid  attention  to 
uie  prozreas  of  the  trial,  it  must  be  clear  that 
he  has  oeen  in  the  habit  of  arraigningi  in  his 
discourses,  the  measures  of  government,  and 
of  infusing  among  his  hearers  political  diasar 
tisfaction.  I  say,  that  this  general  conduct  is 
most  dangerous,  criminal,  and  seditious,  whe- 
ther occurring  in  a  sectarian  like  the  panel,  or 
in  a  minister  of  the  establishment.  In  a  sectap 
lian  like  the  panel,  it  is  more  dangerous,  be- 
cause  he  is  liable  to  no  ecclesiastical  supenn- 
tendance  and  jurisdiction.  Such  conduct,  in* 
deed,  might  lead  to  doubts  as  to  the  eaq;>edienoe 
of  that  unlimited  toleration  which  Uie  benignity 
of  our  constitution  confers.  In  the  one  caae  or 
the  other,  I  repeat  it,  it  is  a  prostitution  and 
malversation  of  one  of  the  mosC  important 
duties  of  civil  society. 

That  the  panel  and  all  Christian  pastoca 
ought  10  pray  lor  the  prosperity  of  the  uind  in 
which  he  lives-^hat  he  should  pray  for  tran* 

S^uillity  and  good  orders— that  he  should  pn^ 
or  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men — that  he 
should  pray  for  his  majes^,  as  the  first  and 
highest  personage  in  the  land — that,  above  all, 
he  should  earnestly  pray,  that  this  venerated 
person,  who  is  followed  into  his  retirement  by 
the  reverential  sympathy  and  tenderness  of  afi 
his  subjects,  should  be  relieved  from  the  cala- 
mity with  which  he  is  afflicted,  are  essential 
parts  of  his  duty.  But,  beyond  this,  all  is  for- 
bidden ;  imd  the  anraignment  of  present  public 
measures,  and  the  discussion  of  daily  politics^ 
is  equally  a  criminal  departure  from  bis  duty 
m  a  Christian  pastor,  and  from  his  duty  jm  a 
Bntiah  subject. 

That  a  general  eriminaUty  ehaneterises  his 
eonduet  in  these  respects,  no  ipan  can  doubt. 
But,  besides  all  this,  the  evidence  of  particular 
Offsnoe  is  not  slight.  That  he  did  presume  to 
draw  a  parallel  between  Nebuchaduezzar  and 
our  sacred  soivereign,  admits  not  of  a  doubt 
Such  a  parallel  was  most  criminally  imprudent 
^nd  indiflcreet.  Of  this  fact  there  can  be  no 
dispute;  but  then  does  exist  ^ome  oh8<;urity 
•s  to  the  extent  to  which  that  pamllel  was 
drawn.  Ti^  witnesses  for  the.  Crown  prove 
that  it  was  drawn  to.  the  utmost  lingth  of  the 
^riptuK  history.  The  witnesses  for  the  panel 
saw  chat  it  was  not  drawn  to  any  improper 
eroct — some  of  them  say  that  it  was  drawn 
partially — some  of  them  aay  that.it  was  onlv 
drawn  as  to  the  duration  of  the  infonity  with 
which  the  Babylonish  king  was  by  the  special 
visitation  of  Heaven  alBicM.    But  I  do  affirm, 


TfM^fMtDimglM, 


fey* 


i 


thai  k  was  impossible  to  draw  my  parallel—- 
it  was  impossible  to  allege  asiag^  point  of  re- 
semblance,  between  his  most  sacred  mt^estf 
and  the  personage  mentioned  in  Scripture,, 
without  seditious  criminality.  Whether  the 
cause,  nature,  or  duration  of  that  awful  inftrmi^ 
be  referred  to,  it  was  impossible,  without  cn- 
miaality,  even  ia  the  ovist  remote  degree,  to 
insiauayte  the  resemblance  or  paralleL  If  the 
resemblance  waa  pUcod  on  the  duration  of  tha 
infirmitv,  what  was  Itl  It  was  till  his  heart 
returned  to  his  God-^t  was  till  ^  he  knew 
that  the  mq^t  high  God  ruled  in  the  kingdom 
of  men."  Who  is  there  with  the  heart  of  a 
Christial),  or  with  the  loyalty  of  a  British  sub- 
ject, that  can  dare  to  impute  the  resemblaQoe  ? 

With  regard  to  the  lioel  against  the  House 
of  Commons,  there  is  some  contraidiction  ia 
the  evidence.  The  witnesses  for  the  Crown 
do  certainly  say  that  the  panel  did  uae,  to- 
wards that  branch  of  the  constitution,  the  ex* 
preasions  charged  in  the  indictment,  or  eome* 
thing  of  similar  meaning.  It  is  proved  by  his 
own  declaration  that  he  discussed  the  merits 
of  that  Uouae  in  a  way  not  la^o\uabla  to  its 
dkaraoter;  and  the  witnesses  whom  he  h<» 
adduced  in  defence  do  not  give  such  an  at* 
planation  as  to  exculpate  him.  They  jujf  that 
he  mentioned  the  expressions  narraiad  in  the 
indictment  as  having  been  uttered  in  that 
House  by  some  of  its  members,  in  stating  the 
manner  in  wjiich  seats  in  it  were  acqmred* 
There  are  many  things,  however,  repgrted  to 
be  decljdmed  within. the  walls  of  parliasaaai* 
which  would  be  sedition  if  uttered  9ay  when 
else;  and  the  most  wicked  and  seditious  hhala 
might  in  this  manner  be  diasemiuaied  with 
impuni^,  if  such  a  justification  wera  aufficient. 

It  is  impossible,  therefore,  io  hold  the  paael 
as  guiltless.  Even  if  he  had  been  a  la^raiaB^ 
he  would  have  been  criminal,  and  much  «v>re 
ia  he  culpable  as  a  clergyman,  emoyiog  the 
free  exerciae  of  teaching  religion  to  his  feUow- 
pubjects,  and  professing  to  toach  a  feligiion  of 
whKsh  the  characteristic  is  charity. 

Notwithstanding  these  cireumstaoces,  hoi^ 
over,  I  am  satisfied  that  the  proof  has  faltaa 
short  of  what  J  expected  at  the  institution  oT 
this  trial.  In  some  part  of  the  charge  tha 
evidence  is  not  sufficiently  certain  and  esqAicaut: 
in  some  part  of  the  charge  there  is  room  to 
doubt  if  ikerobe  not  some  misuadentandiair 
in  the  witnesses  for  the  Crown;  and  in  ana 

fart  of  the  charge  there  is  no  evidenca  at  ^1* 
n  one  particular,  perhaps,  the  evidence  for 
the  panel  has  affbraed  something  like  an  ex* 
planation. of  a  suspicious  circumstance,  alp- 
though  the  greater  part  of  the  evidence  )ed  am 
his  behalf  exhibits  a  degree  of  tutoring  and 
preparation  not  in  lavour  of  its  orodihililjr* 
But,  on  the  whole,  I  am  dear  that  the  evidenoa 
is  not  such  as  to  be  pressed  on  a  jury,  and  ssa 
this  opinion  mv  inclination  and  oifikaal  duty 
coincide.  I  submit  to  you,  that  while  a  Tordiei 
of  Noi  GuiUjf  cannot  be  reconciled  with  tlia 
evidence,  the  proper  return  fo«  yaa  to  giva  ia 
th^t  of  Noi  JPrvtMn. 


Vunermlut  FrtaAeftfir  Sedition. 


htard,  I  Ao«ld  tUnk  ayself  grettly  to  Wwnt 
if  I  were  to  detain  jrou  with  lomy  words. 
K^w  tlMt  the  prisoner  at  the  ber  is  safe,  wi- 
c|tiestioiiably  toy  great  anzietjr  is  reaoved. 
At  the  sane  -timey  I  canoot  help  regrettiBg', 
thai  my  learned  and  faonoarabie  friCTd^  who 
htts  made^  on  the  whole,  each  an  use  of  the 
•vidence  as  is  to  the  credit  of  his  sagacity  awl 
candour,  did  not  carry  fab  liberality  a  little 
fiirther;  for  had  he  only  said,  as  I  think  he 
nost  have  felt,  that  you  should  ftnd  a  verdict 
ef  Nat  Chaity,  instead  of  a  Tordict  of  Nti 
Fnvtny  I  should  not  have  been  called  on  to 
address  you  at  all.  But,  fe^ng  that  the  pri- 
soner is  entitled  to  be  freed  altogether  from 
the  grievous  charges  in  the  indictment,  I  must 
trouble  you  with  a  very  lisw  repiarks. 

No  doubt  there  is  some  contrariety  on  the 
fece  of  the  evidence.  The  witnesses  lor  the 
Crown,  youvriU  recollect,  said,  but  with  the 
utmost  hesitation,  that  their  impression  was, 
tfiat  certain  wbrdi  vrere  used,  which,  if  you 
could  folly  believe  to  have  been  used,  would 
vidoubtedly  have  attached  blamo— and  blame 
of  considerable  magnitude — to  the  prieoner. 
But  even  if  that  endenee  had  steod  uncontrat 
dieted,  the  singular  hesitation  and  uncertainty 
of  their  statements,  and  the  manifest  bias 
which  some  of  them  had  obviously  received 
tkoat  the  character  of  their  employment,  do  eo 
aieet  their  testimoay,  that  you  could  never, 
upon  the  strength  of  it,  think  for  a  moment  of 
touching  the  liberty  of  a  fellow  subject. 

But,  when  you  take  into  consideration  the 
fects  disclosed  in  the  evidence  for  the  prisoner^ 
H  appears  to  me  that  you  can  have  no  hesitsl« 
tioo  in  finding  him  not  guilty  of  the  charges 
Mefcned  against  him.  hi  saying  thi%  I  am 
ine  I9  state,  that  I  have  no  inclination,  and  i 
feel  great  satisfaction  that  I  am  not  obliged, 
toinspeachthe  veradtvof  any  of  the  witnesses 
yoa  have  heard  this  day.  But  the  witnesses 
te  the  Crown  were  one  and  all  substantially 
stnngen  to  the  preacher,  and  altogether  no- 
■eenslomed  to  his  manner,  which,  as  you  have 
haasd,  is  so  rapid  and  peculiar,  aa  to  render 
hnm  nearly  umntdligible  to  those  to  whom  it 
is  not  femiliar*  Omr  witnesses,  on  the  other 
hand,  were  aU  persons  who  were  in  the  habit 
of  attending  his  ministry.  Some  of  them  had 
heafi  many  months  his  hearers,  and  were  quite 
feniliar  with  the  general  strain  of  his  remarks  ^ 
mod  passages  difficult  to  be  followed  by  others, 
on  aeeount  of  the  preacher^s  pecuharity  of 
style,  or  infirmity  01  organs,  were  to  tkem 
perfectly  plain  and  intelligible*  If,  then, 
thore  had  been  any  discrepancy  in  the  evidence 
oata  vrtml  he  said  on  the  oeoasioD  in  question^ 
Aoee  who  anderBtood  the  language  he  en»- 
floyed  were,  beyond  aH  doubt,  tha  best  judges 
<tf  what  was  meant  by  him  when  he  may  have 
Won  etacure  and  nninteUigilde  to>  6r  mis* 
HBdetsiood  by  sttangets. 

But  indepeiidently  of  thai  allogether,  it  is  a 
cireoBolanoe^  ja  this  easey  quite  overwhelming 
and  decisive,  that  the  peaona  whom  we  ad^* 


A.  D.  1617. 


r«7t 


1 


dueed  as  witneises  knew  periRBCtly  what  waft 
<he  general  strain  und  tone  of  this  gentleman's 
political  observations.  All  of  them  were  his 
hearers  the  whole  time  libeled  on,  and  for 
many  months  before  and  afterwards,  down  to 
the  period  when  he  was  apprehended.  They 
wem  all  femiliar  with  the  character  of  his 
topics,  and  the  tone,  tonper,  and  import  of  his 
elnervations.  Can  you,  then,  hesitate  to  believe 
this  set  of  witnesses  in  preference  to  the  other? 
Can  you  hesitate  to  believe  those  who  heard 
and  understood  all  he  said,  and  who  swear 
positively  to  the  words  he  employed?^* and 
that  too  when  their  statement  is  precisely  co»- 
formable  to  the  strain  that  he  had  uniformly 
maintained  for  months  and  for  years  before  ? 
To  hesitate  between  these  two  classes  of  wit- 
nesses would  be  to  hesitate  between  the  report 
of  persons  who  understood  a  language,  and 
perMws  who  had  but  a  smattering  of  it ;  or  to 
construe  an  ambiguous  expresMon  without  any 
reference  to  the  general  scope  of  the  composi* 
tion  in  vdiich  it  occurred. 

Some  of  the  witnesses  for  the  Crown  went 
to  Mr.  Douglas's  church  in  order  to  discoTcr 
whether  he  uttered  any  thing  improper  or 
seditious;  and  is  it  to  be  supposed  that^ 
ikem  he  abondoiied  his  usual  counef  It  is 
proved  that  he  had  been  accustomed  to  pray 
m,  and  to  speak  in  fevour  of,  the  prince  regent, 
and  the  royal  femily,  for  a  long  time  before; 
and  the  persons  who  were  quite  aware,  by 
furevious  experience,  of  the  nature  of  his  sei^ 
timents,  language,  and  deliveiy,  all  speak 
positively  as  to  what  took  place  on  that  occa^ 
sion,  and  on  all  other  occasions.  Their  evi^ 
dence,  therefore,  must  completely  annihilate 
and  swallow  up  the  contrary  evidence;  and  tlyit 
without  supposing  any,  malice  or  intentional 
mis-statement  on  the  part  pf  the  witnesses  for 
the  Crown,  some  of  whom  were  perfect 
strangers  to  Mr.  Douglas,  and  others  were 
sent  to  hear  him  vrith  their  minds  biassed  by 
the  magbtratesb  .  I  am-  not  saving  that  it  was 
improper  to  send  them,  but  the  errand  upon 
which  they  wove  sent  was  aft  unpleasant  one, 
and  must  naturally  have  Jbiassed  their  minds. 

The  snlneet  at  which  Mr.  Douglas  had  ar- 
wved,  in  the  course  of  his  lectures,  was  the 
menial  derangement  and  subsequent  restora- 
tion of  Nebuchadnezzar,  and  the  incurable 
profligacy  of  his  successor.  Could  any  thing 
DO  more  natural  than  for  my  client,  when  talk- 
ing of  the  unhappy  malady  of  itoA  ancient 
sovereign,,  to  be  struck  with  what  had  hap- 
pened to  our  own  sovereign,  and  at  one  and  tne 
seme  time  to  dxaw  a  parallel  between  their 
sttnaUons,  and  a  contrast  between  their  cha« 
raaters— between  the  infidelity  €4  Nebuchad* 
nesBur  aad  the  piety  of  our  king  1  He  thought 
it  feir  and  reasonable  to  point  out  what  was 
similar  tn  their  situations  and  diiTenent  in  their 
eharactsB.'  Is  it  necessary  to  suppose  that» 
because  he  remarked  a  oonfornnly  in  one 
point  between  Nebuchadneisar  and  ouf  sovo* 
ftign,  he  maintained  that  this  conformity 
existed  as  to  nil  pniaui    Yom  hnvn  it  prored. 


«9D] 


57  OBOROE  UL 


TVUqfikUDomg^ 


C6B0 


<by  abmidaiiM  of  tcftinoiqr  that  Mr«  Dooglas 
«nteflitDed  the  most  loytl  •entinents  towaras 
Ins  soTereigii^  and  that  he  ferreiitly  ptayed  for 
liim  three  times  a-day<— that  he  expraaed 
loyal  sentiinents  in  loyal  language.  It  is 
proved  he  expressed  a  wish  that  onr  sovereign, 
like  Nebachadoenar,  might  be  relieved  from 
l&ts  suflertngSy  and  that  the  glories  of  his  dosing 
lifo  might  be  greater  than  those  of  his  early  days. 

Is  it  in  anyrespect  unosnal  or  improper^  that 
11  minister  of  the  gospel  shoold  make  such  an 
improvement  and  application  of  these  remaik- 
«ble  events  f  But,  at  the  same  time,  is  there 
-any  thing  mote  likely  than  that  persons  coming 
^th  a  prepossession  that  they  were  to  hear 
eedition,  and  finding  a  parallel  drawn  between 
•N^vchadneiKar  and  the  sovereign  of  this 
jcountry,  should  fall  into  the  mistake  of  think* 
ing,  that  the  parallel  extended  to  the  whole 
liistory,  and  that  when  the  preadier  repsesented 
Nebuchadaenar  as  cast  down  from  tne  throne 
«n  acconnt  of  his  infidelity  and  sins,  he  made 
the  same  statement  with  regard  to  oar  king  ? 
T%e  witnesses  do  not  even  pretend  to  remem- 
"ber  the  words  which  he  usea ;  and  they  plainly 
liave  no  right  to  give  their  impressions  instead 
of  his  woras^  Ibey  have  an  impression ;  but 
they  did  not  remark,  or  do  not  recollect  what 
was  said.  It  :s  evident,  therefore,  that  they 
are  not  giving  testimony  aa  to  facts,  but  pro> 
aoundng  judgment  upon  facts  which  they  do 
not  know.  Thay  are  usurping  your  province, 
without  any  evidence  before  them ;  and  even 
if  they  were  entitled  to  ffo  upon  vague  impres- 
•ions  witliout  any  distinct  recollection,  they 
ahould  have  been  aware  that  it  was  impossible 
'  Slot  to  commit  mistakes,  prepossessed  as  thejr 
4iere,  and  exposed  to  the  incalcidable  disad* 
vantage  of  not  hearing  distinctly  the  words 
arhioh  were  uttered. 

The  same  observations  aj^ly  to  all  the  other 
fMurts  of  the  case. 

As  to  the  House  of  Commons. — ^This  gen- 
tleman's sentiments  are  no  doubt  in  favour  of 
reform  in  the  Commons*  House  of  Parliament. 
But  he  thought  this  reform  should  be  set  about 
only  by  constitutional  means;  wad  he  had  fre- 
quently taken  occasion  to  exhort  his  hearers 
to  abstain  from  violence.  He  was  a  friend  to 
petitioning;  but  he  stated  that  a  prayer  to 
Ood  would  have  more  effect  than  a  body  of 
armed  men.  I  really  cannot  think  that  per- 
sons who  advocate  the  cause  of  reform  by^such 
instruments  and  such  means,  are  very  danger- 
ous reform^ra — or  very  fit  objects  for  pro- 
eeeution. 

^e  vrhole  strain  of  the  evidence  for  the 
Crown  is  of  the  same  nature  upon  that  part  of 
the  indictment  which  relates  to  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  law.  The  witnesses  may  have 
supposed  he  was  talking  of  the  administration 
of  the  law  of  this  count^,  when  he  was  speak* 
ing  of  otlwr  ,<countries  where  it  is  notorious 
iJboA  men  have  been  treated  with  injustice,  and 
liave  been  iudidaHy  murdered.  One  memo- 
vahle  proot  of  his  sentiments  in  regard  to  the 
#iiiBin»tratioil of  ihe  Javia  this emutry  was 


dalaited  to  -yov  in  evidtMew  Tkia  tevuend 
person  was  afflicted  in  his  old  age,  by  tbnmia* 
CQudnct  and  public  aiTaigninent  of  hie  eon  at 
this  bar.  He  went,  for  the  first  time  in  his 
life,  into  a  court  of  Justice,  to  support  his 
unhappy  bov  on  that  occasion  ;  and  coming 
home  with  laoerated  feelings  upon  the  event 
of  the  trial,  he  showed  the  healing  efieet  of 
religion  and  patriotism;  and,  bowing  under 
the  dispensabon  of  God,'  kissed  the  rod  of 
divine  oiastisement,  and  next  paid  a  tribute  to 
the  justice  of  the  country,  by  which  the  libeiw 
ties  and  lives  of  his  nugesty's  subjects  ar« 
guarded,  and  by  which  no  person  can  be  con* 
victed  without  convincin|p  proof  of  his  guilt. 
In  the  course  of  that  trial,  being  impressed 
with  the  solemnity  and  cautiousness  of  tne  pro* 
ceedings,  and  with  the  impartiality  and  mer^ 
with  which  Uie  criminal  law  is  administered  in 
this  tribunal,  he  took  the  earliest  opportuni^ 
of  delivering  an  encomium  upon  that  law, 
under  which  he  was  then  sufierins  in  his  feel- 
ings as  a  parent,  on  account  of  we  ignominy 
and  disgrace  of  his  unhappy  child. 

In  these  drcumstances,  I  say,  he  is  entitled 
to  a  complete  verdict  of  not  guilty  under  this 
indictment:  and  I  am  persuaded,  and  think 
you  must  feel,  that  no  issue  can  be  attended 
with  such  good  effects,  or  can  be  so  likely  to 
promote  love  of  the  oon8titutioa^--4ove  of  the 
Iaw,-^and  duty  to  the  sovereign,  as  that  wliiic^ 
shall  send  him  home  again  to  testify  in  favour 
of  that  law  under  which  hb  son  fell,  and  by 
which  he  is  saved.  It  will  be  your  duty  to 
send  him  back  with  his  character  untainted, 
and  his  voice  uuiropaired,  to  praise  more  loudly 
than  ever  the  blessings  of  that  constitution 
under  which  he  lives,  and  to  inspire  worthy 
and  ferourable  sentiments  on  this  subject  into 
his  hearers,  who  are  stated  to  form  a  pret^ 
numerous  congregation. 

And  here  I  must  take  leave  to  intimate,  my 
dissent  from  what  was  said  as  to  the  duties  of 
the  clergy  of  this  country.  It  is  their  first  and 
appropriate  office  no  doubt,  to  teach  the  doo- 
trines  of  rdigion  and  morality ;  but  it  is  their 

Srivilege  and  function  also  to  allude  to  our 
uties  to  government,  as  wdl  ae  to  those  we 
owe  our  neighbours.  In  those  cases  espedally^ 
in  which  the  hearers  are  indebted  for  all  the 
information  they  receive  to  thdr  aftteodanon 
in  church,  there  would  be  something  wantiM^ 
if,  besides  the  exhortations  and  spiritual  ad* 
vice  which  are  afforded,  allusions  were  not 
occasionally  made  to  the  public  duties  of  the 
peofde,  as  well  as  to  their  other  moral  and 
xdigious  obligations. 

In  the  political  sentiments  of  the  defendant^ 
affection  tor  the  coostitoftion  has  always  been 
tibe  leading  feature;  and  it  is  dear,  from  his 
whole  discourses  mid  character,  that  he  wee 
not  given  to  disguise  or  ooneeafanent  of  any 
kind.  The  whole  of  his  diseouiaes  have  been 
remarkable  for  thdr  loyalty,  and  respeclfor 
the  constitutioii  as  by  law  eatablislied,  and 
were  soc^  indeed  es  to  be  ie  ^  points  dMHio* 
teristtc  of  a  good  dtisen^ . 


VnhmmUt^PrmQkmJir  8$dUm. 


«B11 

I«OBon.v<8^  in* your  rudidt}  and  yotf  will  not 
do  jwtioe,  if  joa  do  odt  toad  Mr.  DoogUs 
tent  witib  hiiivpiitatioB  allogcdier  tuittaiiMd : 
yMA  70Q  can  do  in  00  otlior  way  than  hy  a 
Twiyol  aoqmltinffhiinenluefyof  tliachaifeay 
and  pioaoimcing  mai  not  gnilty> 

Lord  Jugtice  Clerk. — ^I  am  extremely  happy, 
that  from  the  course  this  trial  has  taken,  you 
are  relieved  from  all  anxiety  with  regard  to  the 
result.  The  Solicitor-general  has. stated,  that 
he  cannot  ask  you  to  find  a  verdict  of  guilty 
against  the  panel  as  to  any  part  of  the  charges 
contained  in  the  indictment  The  only  ques- 
tion for  you  to  decide,  on  considering  all  that 
has  taken  place,  is,  whether  you  are  entitled 
to  express  in  thererdict  your  opinion  that  the 
prisoner  is  not  'gidUy  of  the  charges,  hy  which 
you  will  free  him  from  all  hlame,  or  whether 
you  must  limit  yourselves  to  finding  that  the 
charges  are  not  proven.  In  such  a  case,  I 
flhoiud  deviate  from  my  duty,  were  I  to  say 
more  than  that  the  if  sue  is  in  your  hands,  ana 
that  you  will  return  that  verdict  which  io  your 
consciences  you  think  right. 

The  jttiy  tetirad;  a^,  after  n  few  minutes 
cation,  they  retained  an  unanimous 
of  Not  Ooaty, 


JL  D.  1«17. 


fiM 


Lord  Justice  Clerk, — Gentlemen,  I  am  happy 
to  relieve  you  of  any  further  attendance. 

Neil  Douglas,  in  consequence  of  the  verdict 
which  a  Jury  of  your  country  has  returned, 
pronoundiDg  you  not  guilty  of  the  crime  of 
sedition  charged  against  you  in  this  indictment, 
it  is  now  the  duty  of  the  C!ourt  to  assoilzie  you 
sm^lidteTj  and  to  dismiss  you  from  the  har. 


It  mat dNngft  ba  a  aatiafimiaalo  the  Cottft, 
when  the  dicamatanoes  of  any  case  are  auch 
as  to  wanrant  a  vaidict  of  not  guihy.  I  oon* 
gcatalate  yon  upon  that  verdiet;:DQt,  at  the 
same  time,  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  state  to  yon, 
tha^  if  you  consider  your  interest  in  fiiture, 
yon  wiU,  in  the  discharge  of  your  sacred  func- 
tions, be  careful  in  the  selection  of  your  topics. 
Notwithstanding  the  verdict  which  has  oeen 
returned,  I  cannot  at  all  commend  ^e  taste 
which  you  have  shewn  in  selecting  the  subjects 
vpon  which  you  have  been  accustomed  to 
dilate*  I  trust  and  hope,  however,  that  you 
will  see  the  proprietor  in  future  of  selecting 
onl^  those  passages  in  Holy  Writ,  which, 
while  they  eiud>le  you  to  discharge  yonr  sacred 
fanctois  to  your  God,  may  not  give  rise  to 
oaBMnents  susceptible  of  such  a  construction, 
as  to  lead  hearers,  even  by  mistake,  to  suppose 
that  you  utter  or  inculcate  seditious  sentiments. 

Neil  Douglas,  attend  to  the  interlocutor  of 
the  Court  upon  the  verdict  now  to  be  read. 

^  The  Jury,  by  the  mouth  of  James  Dondas 
their  chancellor,  find  the  said  Neil  Douglas, 
panel,  Not  Guilty. 

<<  The  Lord  Justice  Clerit  and  Lords  Conn 
asssioners  of  Justiciary,  in  respect  of  the  ver- 
dict above  recorded,  assoiMe  the  panel  mm§U 
eHeTf  and  disaiM  him  from  the  bar. 

«  D.  BOTLB,  I.  P.  D." 

Neil  Boi^lat. — ^I  cannot  refrain  from  declar* 
ing,  before  I  leave  this  Court,  that  I  lutve  a 
high  regard  for  his  majesty  and  for  the  royai 
family,  and  I  pray  that  every  Bnton  may  have 
the  same.  I  return  you  and  the  whole  Court 
and  Jury  cordial  thanks  for  this  decision. 


702.  The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  Arthur  Thistle- 
wood*,  for  High  Treason,  before  the  Court  holden  under  a 
Special  ComoiissioD,  for  the  Trial  of  certain  Offences  therein 
mentioned,  on  the  17th,  18th,  and  19th  days  of  April: 
1  Geo.  IV.  A.  D.  1820, 


•^ 


On  Monday,  the  27th  of  March  the 
Special  Commission  was  opened  at  the 
S^ons^Hoiise  on  Qerkenwell  Green., 

•  Ftesentf 

The  Eight  Hon.  Sir  Charki  Abbott, 
lent  Lord  Chief  Justice  of  his  majesty's 
€onrt  of  King's  Bench. 

The  Rl.  Hon.  flr  JRofierf  JDallat,  kut. 
Lord  Chief  Justice  of  his  majesty's  Court 
of  Common  Pleas;  and'  othara  his  ma- 
^s  JnstioeSy  kc. 


^  CoDcenung  him  see  the  case  of  James 
VTatiOD  the  eldtt^^K  Iht  pnoadi&g  Toluiiie  of 


After  the  Commission  had  heen  read, 
the  Sheriff  delivered  in  the  pi^el  of  the 
Grand  Jury,  when  the  following  gentle- 


men were  sworn : — 


The  Grand  Jmy. 

Job  Raikesy  esq.  Fore-    J.  H.  Pakenham^  esq. 

John  Warren,  gent. 


fiuzn. 
John  Stocky  esq. 
Thomas  IVlUroy,  esq. 
Robert  Batson^  esq. 
William  Hills,  gent 


G.  F.  Yoongy    ship- 
builder. 
R.  Meaoock,  gent 
Richard  Jennings,  eiq« 


H.  Thommouy  brewer.  James  Taylor,  esq. 
Richard  Uibbi,  esq.  John  Johnson,  esq. 
TlMiaas  L«^^tte,«sq-    Fiaoda  Douce,  esq. 


tfM] 


1  GECiKjQE  IV. 


TrM  qf^rikat  IStmikmod 


[«M 


Jftnei  Gtfnton,  es^.  J.  W.«ll<ffiky»  «tq« 

W.  Andtfsesy  e^i..  W.  V«BmBf,  gent. 

WiUiam  Fwry,  est}.  Stephen  Xi jlor,  esq. 
Jobn  Boothy  esq. 

C&AftdE. 

Lord  Chief  Judke  ilMD/t.«-Oettt}eiiMn 
o£  the  Grand  Inquest ;  we  afe  assembied 
in  this  pUoe  under  ^e  antliority  of  kis 
majesty  s  special  cenasissicfny  issued  fl>r 
the  purpose  of  inquiring  into  and  bearing 
and  deteraDining  certain  ofiences  therein 
particularly  menttoned  t 

These  offences  are. 

First,  all  High  Treasons^  eiueptMcb  m 
relate  to  the  coin : 

Secoudiy,  MisprisioBS  of  Treasoa  t 

Thirdly,  The  murder  of  one  Bichaid 
Sim  tbefSy  deceased,  and  any  other  crime  Off 
offence  touching  thedeatk  of  that  person : 

Fcnrthly,  All  offences  agunst  tne  per- 
.aon  of  Ftrederick  Fiti-aamiice,  Wimam 
Iieggy  James  EUis.  Johu  Surman,  Willij^ 
Westcoatt,  William  Chaiies  Brooks,  John 
'  Muddock,  and  Benjamin  Gill,  or  any  of 
them,  contrary  to  the  form  of  an  Act  passed- 
in  the  43rd  year  of  the  ^ign  of  his  late 
mijesty,  for  (amongst  other  things)  the 
fiuther  preteotiott  of  malicioas  whooting 
and  attevDiiiig  to  dischaige  hiaded  fiie^ 
atmi,  .stabbing,  cutting,  and  wounding. 

It  is  my  present  duty  to  offer  to  your 
consideration  sqme  remarks  upon  each  of 
'  these  subjects,  for  your  assistance  in  the 
exercise  of  the  important  functions  that 
will  presently  devolve  upon  you,  when 
bills  of  indictment  shall  be  laid  before  you« 
'  The  particular  kinds  of  Treason,  to 
which  it  may  be  proper  for  me  to  call  your 
MteaiMHi,  sure  ui  part  vo  ve  mvbv  mi  cBe 
ancient  Statute  of  the  25th  year  of  the 
reign  of  Kiqg  Edward  the  Tnurd»  an4  in 
part  in  a  Statute,  passed  ror  very  wise 
punKwes,  ih  the  reim  of  his  late  majesti^.* 

ay  tne  former  ox  these  Statutes^  it  is 
dtdared  to  be  Tieaaon,  if  a  man  do  com- 
, .  pass  or  imagine  the  death  of  our  lord  the 
King ;  m  if  a  man  do  levy  war  against  our 
lord  the  King  in  his  realm.  By  the  latter 
Statute  it  is  enacted,  That  if  any  person 
shallj  within  the  realm  or  without,  com« 

Sass.  imaeine,  invent,  devise,  or  intend, 
earn  or  aestruction,  or  any  bodily  harm 
tending  to  death  or  destruction,  maim  or 
wounding,  imprisonment  or  restraint  of 
the  person  of  our  lord  the  Ring ;  or  to 
deprive  or  depose  him  Irom  the  style, 
honour,  ,or  kingly  name  of  the  imperial 
crown  of  this  realm,  or  of  any  other  His 
majesty's  dominions  or  countries;  or  to 
" '  levy  war  against  his  majesty  witMn  this 
^alm,  in  order  by  force'or  constraint  to 
compel  him  to  change  hie  measures  or 
counsels  ;  or  in  order  to  put  any  force  or 
conttraint  upon  or  overawe  both  Houses 


^  Sttta6.0.drd,eifv 


w  litbwr  liiiMd  ef  FaiiiMunt  _  wr^nrser. 
eon  to  offenduig  shail  oe  dewsd  and 
adjudged  to  be  a.  Traitor. 

You  Witt  have  oheenrad  thsttin  ilie 
aeveral  desoriptiens  of  ofame  which  I 
have  enwDCMled  (esoeDi  the  levying  war 
mentioned  in  the  ancient  Statnte)  the 
crime  is  made  to  consist  in  the  compass- 
ing, imagination,  or  intention  (which  are 
all  words  of  the  same  import)  to  perpetrate 
the  acts,  and  not  in  the  actual  perpetration 
of  them.  But  it  is  further  required,  by 
the  ancient  Statute,  that  the  party  accused 
of  high  li'reason  shall  be  thereof  proveably 
attainted  of  open  4eed ;  and  by  the  modem 
Statute,  that  the  party  shall  express*  utter, 
or  declare  his  intention,  by  publishing 
some  printing  or  writing,  or  by  some 
overt  act  or  deed.  The  law  has  thus 
wisely  provided  (because  the  public 
safelj  requires  it),  that  in  cases  of  this 
kind,  which  maoifestly  tend  to  the  most 
eztensiye  public  evil,  the  intentipn  shall 
Constitute  the  crime ;  but  the  law  has  at 
the  same  time  with  equal  wisdom  provided 
(because  the  safety  of  individuals  requires 
it),  that  the  intention  shall  be  masiifosf  ed 
by  some  act  tending  towards  the  necon* 
plishment  of  the  criminal,  olijeet. 

Before  the  passing  of  the  late  Statute  it 
had  been  settled,  by  several  cases  actually 
adjudged,  and  by  the  opinions  of  tiie  text- 
writers  on  this  branch  of  ihe  law,  that 
aU  attempts  to  depose  the  Kin^  from  his 
royal  state  and  title,  to  restrain  ms  person, 
or  to  levy  war  against  him,  and  all  conspirai- 
cies,  consultations  and  agreements  for  the 
accomplishment  of  these  objects,  were 
overt  acts  of  compassing  and  imagining 
oretieBni  Of  tne  mng.  uy  mn  otatun^  ine 
compassing  or  intending  to  commit  these 
acts--that  is,  to  depose  hismajestyj^  to 
restrain  his  person,  or  to  levy  war  agunst 
hiffl  for  the  purposes  timt  I  ha^e  mentioned 
—is  made  a  substantive  treason;  and 
Ihenby  the  law  is  mderad  more  clear 
and  plain,  both  to  those  who  are  bound  to 
obey  ir,  and  te  those  who  are  engaged 
in  jthe  administration  of  St.  It  mav  be 
proper  for  me  to  add,  that  it  has  been 
established,  in  the  like  manner,  that  the 
pomp  and  circumstauces  of  militanr  array, 
such  as  tisually  attend  regular  warfare,  are 
by  no  means  necessary  to  constitute  an 
actual  levying  of  war,  within  the  trae 
meaning  of  the  mident  Statute.  Insor- 
rections  and  risings  for  thn  pittpooe  of 
eiieotin^  hjfowe  Muln«mbe»— however 
ill-arranged,  piovided  or  ovganiied*-«-aiiy 
innovilioii  w  a  pnbUe  natwe^^sr  redress 
of  supposed  pnuiegrinnAQsSy  in  which 
the  parties  had  no  wgrneiaX  or  particular 
interest  or  concem^  have  been  deemed 
instances  of  tiie  actual  levying  of  war  i 
and,  consequendy,  to  compass  or  imagine 
snch  an  iBsarrectioD,'*in  order,  b^- force 
and  nukbers,  to  compel  Me-mi^esty  to 


99&} 


Jir  l^i  SV«MHi< 


A-  D.  X9». 


CfM 


alter  hi»  inaimtt^  or  ooumU,  wtXi  be  to 
cpmpass  or  imngiae  tbe  levying  of  war 
againet  hU  latgestj  for  that  pvrpeeef  wi^- 
in  the  just  neaaiaf  of  the  a(ie4er9  Sutate. 
Bebellioii,  at  ks  finliioninieiiceaient,  ii 
rar^y  foepd  in  military  discipline  or  array 
althoegh  a  little  eapee^e  nay  eooa  enable 
it  tf9  aisavA  tlieiii* 

I  have  already  ii|^ate4»  UuiJt  any  act 
manifesting  tbe  cnminel  intention,  and 
tending  towards  the  accomplishment  of 
tj^  cnmii)^  Q))ject  is»  in  the  language 
of  the  laW)  an  ewrf  «c(.  It  will  be.  obvious, 
that  overt  i^cts  may  be  almost  infinitely 
various ;  biit  ia  ee^ee  wbem  the  criminal 
object  h^  not  been  aoeompliBhedy  the 
overt  acts  have  frequently  consisted  of 
i^eeting^.  coneultatioqsy  and  conlerences 
about  the  object  proposed,  and  the 
means  of  its  accomplishmeQt ;  agreements 
and  promises  of  mutual  support  and  as- 
sistance ;  incitemeait  to  othera  lo  become 
parties  to  and  engage  in  the  scheme; 
assent  to  pvopoeed  measures;  or  the  pre- 
paration of  weapons  or  other  things  deem- 
ed necessary  to  their  fulfilment*  AU  these, 
and  other  matter*  of  the  like  nature,  are 
oompetent  overt  acta  of  the  particular 
kind  of  treason^of  the  particular  com- 
passing and  imagination  to  which  they 
Em  happen  to  a^y. 

In  Uif^  Treason  the  law  acknowledges 
no  acoeMaries ;  all  who,  ia  «»y  way*  or  at 
any  tioie>  become  partekecs  in  the  |woject, 
are  oowdered  as  prinoipali*  And  in  con- 
epiraeies  of  a  treasonable  natiire^  a$  well 
as  in  inibiior  eonspiraciei»  it  will  be  found 
almost  universally  to  happen,  ^at  some 
persons  are  pustive  in  forvarding  one  part 
«f  the.  means  of  ezeeutiiig  the  design, 
others  another  part ;  some  are  imxe  zeal- 
cms  mid  ardenty  others  more  eool  and 
resenrad;  some  engage  theosselves  in 
an  earliest  others  in  a  later,  sUfe  of 
the  cwfeddiracy ;  but  the  act  of  each 
iodividijial,  in  puraneiv^e  and  prosecu- 
tion of  Ae  general  design,  is  con- 
sideied  as  the  act  of  all  who  beoome  pri^ 
^uid  «Hisenting.to  the  design,  although  it 
ney  hf  ve  taken  place  out  of  their  presence, 
or  evep  before  they  had  engaged  in  the 
des^^  because,  by  their  subsequent 
engagement,  they  adopt  ail  that  may 
have  been  previously  done  toward  the 
psomotion  of  the  general  object,  urhich 
they  ultimately  engage  to  accomplish; 
A  I  w^eBBt  Ihat  strictly  and  properly 
relates  to  the  fi>rwardi&g  and  ftdfilment 
of  that  object. 

Frem  what  has  been  said,  it  will  appear 
that  the  emr^  aet$  are  mOst  important 
matters  in  a  judicial  investigation  of  any 
alleged  treason;  and  the  law  requires  in 
fi&vouf  of  the  accused,  that  the  overt  acts, 
t(y  the  proof  f^Mweef  ^  aecnsation  is  to 
be  fliftpported,  eball  be  set  forth  on  the 
itidmtment,  in  order  U^et  he  may  bare 


notice  ef  Uwn,  aai'  be  prepared  for  his 
delMMe.  But  it  is  not  required  that  all 
tbt  artMaSf  eitenmalanoety  and  nutters 
|e  tegisM  in  eetdfnm  should  be  disclosed 
by  the  ittdiotment ;  *t  is  enough  that  the 
aptt  whether  ef  meeting,  oonwiltation,  iu- 
eiteeiteat,  oeosent^  preparatiaa^  or  other 
mafttei^  be  ebarged  with  eonveniiBlit  cer- 
tain^Ty  leaving  the  nroof  of  the  aet  to  be 
made  eui  by  suitaUe  teeiimeny  in  this, 
as  IA  oUier  ceees.  It  if  farther  required 
by  Statute,  that  there  shall  be  two  wit- 
nesses to  prave  the  evert  acts ;  not  two 
to  one  and  the  same  overt  act ;  hnt  either 
two  to  one  end  the  same  evert  act ;  or 
one  to  one  evert  ayst,  and  aaetber  to 
anedier  overt  act,  of  the  aame  species  of 
treason. 

I  should  add  that  seese  one  overt  act 
must  be  proved  to  have  takea  place  in 
the  eonni^  wherein  the  bill  of  inaictment 
if  preferred,  which  is,  in  the  ^reoent  in- 
stance, the  county  of  Middleaea.  If  this  be 
done,  tiie  proof  of  other  orert  acts  in  other 
eowities  is  to  be  received  ac  cemprtent 
to  sustain  the  indiotm^st.  And  if  several 
overt  acts  be  charged,  satisfaetory  proof 
of  any  one  in  the  proper  county  is  suf- 
ficient. 

liamg  made  these  general  observa* 
tions,  it  will  be  expect^,  that  I  should 
new  adveit  in  some  manner  to  the  par- 
tleolar  case  which  is  UkeLy  to  bocame  the 
eid)je(t  of  yoar  inqniry.  It  is  Act  my  pur* 
poseyhowiever,  to  enter  intoaaydelailor  cir- 
enamt^nces  iip<m  this  subject  to  the  eitent 
even  of  the  limited  knowledge  that  I  now 
possess.  Sueh  detail  is  not  necemaiy  for 
your  goidaAce,  and  might  by  pomibility 
operate  injurioosly  upon  the  persons  ac- 
cused. It  is,  howsTer,  proper  for  me  to 
describe  the  subBtanoe  and  general  out- 
line of  the  n«ttcrs  of  faet  that  are  likely 
10  be  laid  before  yon,  ia  order  that  my 
pbeervations  upon  Ae  law,  as  apptieable 
to  these  or  the  like  mattersi  may  be  ren« 
dered  intelligible. 

It  has  bein  supped  (and  for  the 
present  yon  wSk  oonsider  what  I  am  aibout 
tO'Sayas  anppooition  9tAy%  that  a  con- 
spiiaey  was  formed  to.  assassinate  the 
several  persons  chiefly  intmstea  by  his 
mijesty  with  the  administmtion  of  the 
affairs  of  his  goterpment^  when  they 
should  h»  assembled  at  a  dinner  at 
the  house  of  one  of  them  on  the  23ni 
of  February  last;  and  that  other  and 
more  extensive  measures  of  treasonable 
hostility  against  the  existing  government 
and  constitution  of  this  country  ^ere  in- 
tended by  the  conspirators,  to  accompany 
and  fottow  this  intended  assassination. 
|t  has  forther  been  supposed  that,  this 
design  having  by  some  means  been  di»- 
cov^ed,  several  .persons  assembled  for 
its  alnuet  immediate  perpetration,  were 
iMmd  together,  in  m  stabrn  or  loft  in  an 


06fl 


1  GE0R6E  IV* 


Trial  ^Afikur  TkitUmbood 


cestf 


obsenN  sCMet,  with  mau  and  ^/(kumw 
weuMM  fuiublt  to  tlie  iceomplishment 
«€  ttt  propoMd  MMMUMtiiM^  and  per^ 
liapf  also  0f  otW  tndtONOt  porpMM ; 
tiiat  theie  pexsoBs  lentted  the  peace  offi- 
cers by  whom  thej  were  fcNwdy  and 
the  military  who  cane  to  the  aid  of  the 
officers ; that inthe course  of theiscresist- 
•nee  and  endeavours  to  escape  (which  as 
to  many  of  them  were  for  tiiie  time  at 
least  successftil)  Riduurd  Svithersy  one  of 
the  iMrsons  named  in  this  commission^ 
lest  his  lifcy  by  the  act  of  one  of  diose 
whom  it  was  intended  to  arrest;  and  that 
pistols  were  discharged  and  weapons 
pointed  against  some  or  aU  of  the  other 
persona  therein  also  named.  Of  these 
matters,  or  such  as  these»  you  have  all, 
irithoBt  doubly  pievioasly  heard  and  read ; 
and  I  therefore  take  the  liberty  most 
earnestly  to  cautioir  yon  to  confine  your 
attention,  on  the  present  occasion,  to  the 
evidence  that  will  be  laid  before  you, 
and  to  banish  from  your  minds  all  such 
information  as  you  may  have  previously 
received,  either  as  to  the  nature  or  object 
of  the  supposed  conspiracy,  or  as  to  the 
conduct  or  character  of  the  paiticular 
individuals  supposed  to  have  participated 
in  it,  or  to  nave  been  actors  in  these 
transactions. 

Upon  the  law  u  applicable  to  diese 
supposed  matters  of  met,  I  shmdd  tell 
vou,  that  a  conspiracy  to  murder  a  num- 
oer  of  individums,  whether  in  a  private  or 
public  station,  hovrever  high  or  miportant 
the  pubUe  station  may  happen  to  be, 
grounded  only  upon  prioate  maiioe  bar- 
Domed  against  them  in  the  minds  of  the 
conspirators,  and  for  the  mere  gratification 
of  private  revenge,  and  not  meant  to  be 
accompanied  or  followed  by  any  other 
act  or  matter,  or  to  bring  about  any  object 
of  a  public  nature,  however  odious  and 
criminal  such  a  conspiracy  may  be,  does 
not  in  law  constitute  the  offence  of  high 
treason.  But  if  the  assassination  be  meant 
as  the  signal  for  or  commencement  of  a 
tumultuous  insurrection  of  larse  num- 
bers of  persons  expected  to  Join  the 
conspirators,  and  with  a  view  by  force 
and  numbers  to  take  the  government 
of  the  country  into  the  hands  of  the  lead- 
ersy  or  to  compel  the  sovereign  to  adopt 
s«di  measures  as  they  may  Ubi'Sk  fit  to  dic- 
tate to  him,  then  the  conspiracy  to  assas- 
siaate  will  assume  a  di£ferent  character^ 
and  become  an  overt  act  of  those  species 
of  treason,  which  consist  in  an  intention 
to  depose  Uie  King,  or  to  levy  war  against 
him  lor  one  of  the  purposes  before  men- 
tioned, and  may  also  be  an  overt  act 
of  treason  in  compassing  his  death  ;  be- 
cause we  know  from  experience,  that  the 
death  of  a  sovereign  has  been  the  usual 
consequence  of  his  d^)osition;  and  every 
penMi  muf  reasonably  be  presumed  to 


contemplate  and  intend  the  probable  and 
untmal  consequences  of  his  own  act^ 
Utttd  the  contrary  be  deaify  shown. 

I^  therefete,  a  conspira^  to  take  away 
the  lives  of  his  muesty's  ministers,  either 
in  the  way  that  I  have  supposed,  or  in 
any  other  manner,  shall  be  proved  before 
you,  you  will  naturally  look  out  for  some 
evidence  manifesting  the  object  and  pur- 
pose to  be  attained ;  and  in  weighing  the 
nature  and  efiect  of  such  evidence,  yon 
vrill  doubtless  bear  in  mind  the  number, 
rank  and  offices  of  the  persons  thus  de» 
voted  to  destruction.  The  difficulty  of 
supposing^  an  intended  assassination  to  be 
grounded  only  upon  private  midice,*  and 
meant  for  the  ^tification  of  private 
revenge  alone,  without  any  further  pur- 
pose or  object,  increases  not  only  widi 
the  number  of  the  conspirators,  but'  also 
with  the  number  of  the  intended  victims : 
because,  although  history  fomishes  many 
examples  of  deep  and  deadly  private 
mayce  and  revenge,  borne  by  one  person, 
and  adopted  or  aided  by  bis  family,  de- 
pendants and  friends,  against  another 
pCTMU,  his  fomity  or  dan ;  yet  I  believe 
an  instance  vrill  scarcely  be  found  <^ 
malice  of  a  private  nature  entertained  by 
any  considerable  number  of  persons  not 
connected  vrith  each  other  by  blood  or 
other  b<Hid  of  private  union,  against  any 
considerable  number  of  other  persons 
alike  unconnected  by  any  private  circum- 
stances of  association.  It  is  still  more 
di€k»lt  to  conceive  a  case  of  merely 
private  revenge,  limited  and  confined  to 
the  intended  assassination  alone,  where 
the  intended  victims  happen  to  be  a 
number  of  peisons  conducting  the  ad- 
ministration of  government,  aiwi  not  ap- 
pearing to  be  known  to  the  conspiiutors 
otherwise  than  by  their  public  charbcler 
offices  and  conduct.  -  In  such  a  case  it  is 
natural  to  suppose  that  the  object  in  View 
must  be  of  a  more  public  and  extensive 
nature  than  the  mere  gratification  of  vin- 
dictive feelinp|. 

But  the  focibty  of  one  supposition,  and 
the  difficulty  of  the  odier,  must  not  sup- 
ply the  place  of  proof;  they  only  conduce 
to  the  reception  of  the  proof  that  may  be 
offered,  ana  to  the  credibility  of  evidenoa 
tending  to  the  manifestation  of  ulterior 
designs.  Such  ulterior  designs,  if  'Ihmf 
shall  appear  to  be  of  the  nature  to  whi» 
I  have  alluded,  and  to  relate  tc^  die 
usurpation  of  the  govemment  of  thia 
nation,  or  of  this  metropolis  alone,  in 
ODposition  to  the  constituted  authoritiea 
or  the  realm,  even  for  a  season,  will  appear 
to  the  calm  eye  of  sober  reason  to  be  wild 
and  hopeless :  But  you,  centlemeB,  knovr 
that  rash  and  evil^ninded  men,  brooding 
oter  their  own  bad  designs,  gradualW  lose 
sight  of  the  difficalties  that  attend  tlie 
accoBplishmeiit  of  thair  schemes,  and 


6601 


f»  IBgk  Trtaton. 


BOMfpiify  Ibo  adTwntagwr  to  b«  derived 
fea  tbtfoi. '  Aad  as  il  is  the  natural 
dttnctef  of  neieus  mM  to  tJiiak-  others 
not  less  TioioiiS'  tbas  tbemseives^  those 
who^  fbrm  wicked  pleAs  of  a  public  nature 
easily  believe  that  they  shaU  have  name- 
vans  supporteit^  if  they  can  manifest  at 
once  tlieir  designs  and  their  power  by 
strikioig  some  one  iaif>offtant. Mow.  .This 
belief  lead%  in-  some  instances^  to  a  rash 
and  hasty  eommunicatioD  of  the  vricked 
pttSpose  to  others,  who  are  thought  likely 
to  adopt  it  and  join  in  its  execution,  but 
who  in  {ad  are  not  prepared  to  do  so, 
and  tiiereby  oecasioBally  fttniishes.  evi- 
deooe  agtfinst  tiM)se,  by  whom  the  pur- 
peee  has  been  engendered  and  oonmu- 
nicated.      Dark  aad  deep  designs  are 
seUom  fully  developed,  except  to  those 
who  consent  to  become  participators  in 
them,  and  ean  thevefoie  be  seldom  ex- 
posed and  brought  to  light  eiteept  by  the 
teslimeBy  of  accomplices.     Suoh  testi- 
mony is,  as  ^on  well  know,  to  be  received 
on  all  occasions  with  gieat  caution ;  it  is 
to  be  eareiuUy    watched,    deliberately 
weighed,  and  amdously  considered :  it  is 
competent  in  law  to  be  received  on  all 
ooeeaions;  its  credibility  on  each  par- 
ticainr. occasion  dopende  on  its  own  par- 
tioulBff  character,  with  reference  to  the 
mailer  to  which  it  relates,  and  the  con- 
firmation it  may  receive  from  pore  and 
nnsuapecied  quarteie,  and  on  the  proba^ 
bility  of  the  tacts  related,  raither  than  on 
tlie>  personal  credit  of  the  relator.    He, 
who  attlmowledges  himself  to  have  be- 
come a  party  to  a  guilty  purpose,  does 
by  that  very  acknowledgment  depreciate 
his  own  personal  character  and  credit. 
1£f  however^  it  should  ever  be  laid  down 
as  a  practical  rale  in  the  administration  of 
justice,  that  the  testimony  of  accomplices 
should  be  rejected  as  incredible,  the  most 
misduevous  consequences  must  necessa- 
rily ensue ;  because  it  must  not  only  hap- 
pen thai  many  heinous  crimes  and  onences 
will  pass  unpunished,  but  great  encou- 
ragemeni  will  bo  given  to  bad  men,  by 
withdrawing  from  their  miiids  the  fear  of 
detection  and   punishment   through  the 
instrumentality  of  their  partners  in  guilt, 
and  thereby  universal  confidence  will  be 
substiiuted  for  that  distrust  of  each  other, 
whidi  natumlly  possesses  men  engaged 
in  vricked  purposes,  and  which  operates 
as  one  of  the  most   effectual  restraints 
i^;ainst.  the  commission  of  those  crimes, 
to  which  the  concurrence  of  several  per- 
sons is  required.    No  such  rule  is  laid 
down  by  the  law  of  England  or  of  an^ 
otfaea  country.    The  credit  of  such  testi- 
mony is,  by  the  law  of  this  country  sub- 
mittnd,  in  .the  fiorst  instance,  to  those  who, 
liJbe:  you»  are  called  together  to  ^lercise 
tbO(  loaetiens  of  a  grand  jufy,  and,  if  re- 
ceived-in  the  first  instance,  is  then  sub- 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


A.  D.  1890.  [fOO 

jeeted  to  the  fbrther  and  more  perfect 
scrutiny  of  that  other  jury,  who  are  finally 
to  pronounce  upon  the  guilt  or  innocence 
of  the  atscused,  after  having  heard  both 
him  and  his  accusers. 

The  next  subject  of  inquiry,  mentioned 
in  this  commission,  is  the  offence  deno- 
minated Misprision  of  Treason,  which  by 
the  common  law,  is  said  to  be,  ^  when  a 
person  knows  of  a  treason,  though  no 
party  or  consenter  to  it,  yet  conoNils  it^ 
and  doth  not  reveal  it  in .  convenient 
time." 

In  high  treason,  there  are  no  accessa- 
ries, as  in  cases  of  felony ;  but  all  .who 
in  any  way  consent  to  become  parties  to 
the  crime,  are  considered  as  principalrtrai- 
tors«  High  treason  being  an  offence  against 
the  general  safeW  of  the  state,  it  becomes 
every  good  and  raithful  subject^  wbdmaj 
happen4o  have  a  knowledge  of  any  trai- 
torous design,  to  communicate  such  know- 
ledge to  some  magistrate  or  other  perK>n 
in  authority,  in  order  that  proper  measures 
may  be  taken  to  prevent  the  aooomplish- 
ment  of  the  design. 

The  law,  therefore,  considen  the  wilful 
concealment  of  treason  as  an  ofienee  of 
very  great  magnitude,  and  has  annexed 
to  it  very  severe  punishment;  no  less 
than  the  forfeiture  of  the  goods  of  the 
criminal,  the  loss  of  the  profits  of  his  lands 
during  life,  and  imprisonment  during 
life. 

But  in  a  case  to  be  followed  by  conse- 
queOces  so  highly  penal,  there  must,  in 
order  to  constitute  ue  crime,  be  a  know- 
ledge not  only  of  the  tieason,  but  also  of 
some  at  least  of  the  traitors.  He  who  has 
barely  been  informed  of  an  intended  iui 
surrection,  without  any  knowledge  of  the 
particular  circumstances  or  persons,  does 
not  become  a  criminal  by  forbearing  to 
communicate  what  he  has  so  vaguely 
heard.  And  for  the  protection  of  persons 
accused  of  this  crime,  the  statute  requires 
that  the  treason,  supposed  to  be  concealed, 
shall  be  proved  by  two  witnesses,  both 
of  them  to  one  overt  act,  or  one  of  them 
to  one,  and  another  of  them  to  another 
act  of  the  same  treason,  as  is  required  in 
the  case  of  those  who  ace  charged  with 
the  treason  itself. 

If  any  bill  for  this  offence  of  misprision 
shall  be  presented  to  you,  it  may  be  pre- 
sumed that  the  treason  charged  vrili  be 
of  the  same  kind,  and  arising  out  of  the 
same  matters  as  that  upon  which  I  have 
already  addressed  you. 

You  will  understand,  that  it  cannot  be 
necessary  to  inquire  into  the  knowledge 
or  concealment,  until  you  shall  be  first 
satisfied  of  die  treason ;  and  if  you  ^all 
be  satisfied  of  that,  then  I  have  no  doubt 
you  will  conduct  the  further  inquiry  with 
all  the  care  and  caution  that  a  matter  so 
highly  peiMd  requires  at  youx  hands. 
2  Y 


691] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  Tkisikwood 


reea 


Con^talment,  as  yon  well  know,  is  pro- 
perly a  negative  fact;  and  therefore,  if 
the  treason  and  the  knowledge  of  it  be 
proved,  and  the  knowledge  shown  to  have 
existed  at  such  a  time,  and  under  -such 
eireumstances,  as  afforded  a  reasonable 
opportunity  for  discoveiy,  the  proof  of  a 
discovery  lies  properly  upon  the  party 
eharged,  thongn  on  the  one  hand,  there 
may  possibly  be  circumstances  from  which 
a  discovery  may  be  inferred,  and  on  the 
other  hand,  there  may  be  circumstances 
manifesting  an  intention  to  conceal,  and 
eonsequendy  excluding  any  presumption 
in  your  minds  in  favour  of  tne  acctlsed, 
though  not  excluding  the  proof  of  a  disco- 
▼eiy,  before  the  juiy  by  whom  (he  party 
may  be  tried,  if  he  shall  be  able  to  offer 
it,  when  he  makes  his  defence  against  the 
charge*  « 

The  consideration  of  all  such  circum- 
stances roav,  I  am  persuaded,  gentlemen, 
be  veiy  safely  entrusted  to  you,  so  ftir  as 
your  duty  extends,  without  further  obser- 
vation on  my  part. 

The  third  subject  of  inquiry,  is  the 
murder  of  Richard  Smithers,  or  any  other 
erime  or  offence  touching  the  death  of  that 
person. 

This  is  the  person  who  is  supposed  to 
have  lost  his  life  on  the  occasion  of  the 
attempt  made  to  arrest  some  of  those  who 
are  now  in  custody  under  a  .charge  of 
high  treason.  It  will  therefore  be  mate- 
rial for  you  to  direct  your  attention  to  the 
place,  the  time,  and  tl^e  circumstances 
under  which  that  attempt  to  arrest  was 
made.    , 

The  caution  required  by  the  law  of 
England  in  the  conduct  of  ofiBcers  and 
ministers  of  justice  proceeding  to  arrest 
for  criminal  matters  persons  who  may 
happen  to  be  in  a  dhoelUng'^lunae^  whereof 
the  doors  are  closed^  is  confined  to  a  dweU- 
kig'-funue  alone.  All  other  buildings,  or 
places  of  meeting,  may  lawfully  be  opened 
and  enteried  for  the  purpose  of  arresting 
criminals,  without  any  notification  of  the 
purpose  previously  made ;  and  the  persons 
who  may  be  found  within,  deriving  no 
protection  from  the  place  where  they  are 
found,  are  bound  to  yield  themselves  upon 
the  same  demand  or  notification  as  if  they 
were' met  with  in  the  field  or  open  street; 
and  this  need  only  be  in  the  first  instance 
a  general  notification  of  the  character  and 
purpose  of  the  officers,  conveyed  in  any 
words,  or  in  any  form  or  manner,  that 
may  be  intelligible,  to  those  who  hear  or 
iiee  them. '  If  the  persons  thus  required 
to  submit  desire  further  information  as  to 
the  authority  to  whidi  they  are  called 
np<m  to  yield,  it  behoves  them  to  demand 
ft ;  for,  if  af^er  such  notification  they  resort 
to  instant  resistance;  and  to  the  use  of 
deadly  weapons,  and  happen  to  slay  any 
of  those  to  whom  they  are  required  to 


yield,  they  do  so  at  their  own  peril;  and 
provided  their  arr^t  would  '  oe  lawful, 
then  he  by  whom  a  death-wound  may  be 
inflicted,  and  all  who  unite  with  him  in 
the  resistance,  become  guilty  of  the  crime 
of  murder. 

An  arrest,  under  the  authority  of  the 
warrant  of  a  competent  magistrate,  for  a 
criminal  matter  specified  in  the  vrarrant, 
by  any  of  the  persons  named  therein,  and 
by  any  others  whom  they  may  take  to 
their  aid,  is  a  lawful  arrest*  So  also  is  an 
arrest  by  peace  officers,  without  warranty 
for  fieleny,  or  other  higher  crime  actually 
committed  or  reasonably  alleged  to  them 
to  have  been  committea  by  the  persons 
arrested.  So  likewise  is  an  arrest  b^  su^ 
officers  of  persons  actually  engaged  m  any 
breach  of  the  peace ;  or  of  persons  as- 
sembled, and  arming,  and  preparing  them- 
selves for  the  immediate  perpetration  of 
murder,. or  other  felony;  becntusesudk 
assembling  and  preparation  are  in  them- 
selves criminal  acts,  and  the  arrest  of  the 
persons  assembled  may,  in  many  oases, 
be  absolutely  necessary  for  the  prevention 
of  the  accomplishment  of  their  still  more 
criminal  purpose.  « 

I  have  mentioned  these  instances  of 
arrest  and  resistance,  because  I  anpr^end 
the  cases  likely  to  be  submittea  to  yonr 
consideration  will  fall  within  one  or  other 
of  them. 

But,  in  order  that  no  inference  may  be 
dnwn  from  my  silence  on  another  topic,, 
it  seems  proper  to  add,  that  it  must  by 
no  means  be  taken  for  granted,  that  per- 
sons required  to  yield  themselves  to  officers- 
of  the  peace,  even  in  case- the  officers  be 
not  duly  authorized  to  arrest  them,  may 
instantly  and  before  any  actual  assault  ok 
their  persons,  and  without  warning  to  the 
officers  to  withdraw  or  stand  off,  attadL 
with  deadly  weapons  and  slay  the  officen,. 
without  subjecting  themselves  to  the  crime 
of  murder.  A  killing,  uader  sudi  cir- 
cumstances, would  undonbtedly  be  man-» 
slaughter  at  the  least ;  and  as  the  ciicum-  * 
stances  appeaf  to  denote  a  wicked  hearty 
a  mind  grievously  depraved,  and  motives 
highly  criminal  (which  is  the  general  notiotn 
of  malice  in  our  law)^  such  a  case,  if  ever 
it  shall  unfortunately  happen,  will  require 
grave  and  serious  consideration* 

In  speaking  of  those  who  may  beoome 
guilty  of  murder,  by  the  slayieg  of  «ii 
officer  under  the  circumstances  that  I  have 
mentioned,  you  will  bear  in  mind  .that  I 
used  the  expression,  ^*all  who  unite  ia 
resistance  with  him  who  gave  the  death 
blew."  -,     .      .♦ 

I  used  these  words, .  becai^se  wben 
several  persons  are  assembled  for  aay 
purpose,  be  it  lawful  or  unlawful,  and 
something  wholly  unexpected  and  Ibreiga. 
to  the  general  design  nappens  to  ocoar 
on  the  sudden,  upon  which  one  or  mem 


i603] 


for  High  TreatOH, 


A.  D.  182a 


\seiA 


fly  to  aurmt,  and  ^eath  ensvesy  those  who 
take  no  part  in  such  new  and  unexpected 
occurrence  are  not  to  be  inrohred  in  the 
^ih  of  their  companions,  as  they  may  be 
in  the  case  of  an  unlawful  act  committed 
in  furtherance  and  prosecution  of  their 
general  design « 

If,  therefore,  an  indictment  against 
aeveral  persons  for  this  alleged  murder 
shaU  be  submitted  .to  your  consideration^ 
yon  will  attend  to  the  conduct  of  the 
di0erent  individuals  charged  therewith 
.  throughout  the  whole  course  of  the  evi- 
dence that  may  be  laid  before  yon  on  such 
indictment;  to  their  conduct  before  tlie 
meeting  at  that  particular  place ;  to  the 
act  and.  manner  of  assembling  in  that 
place,  and  to  their  behaviour  there,  as 
well  at  the  first  appearance  of  the  officers 
as  afterwards,  until  the  fipal  arrest  or 
escape  of.  those,  who  were  originally  as- 
sembled; and  you  will  judge  from  the 
conduct  of  each  how  far,  in  your  opinion, 
he  may  have  concurred  in  that  resistance, 
wherein  the  death  of  this  person  unfor- 
tunately ensued. 

Having  said  so  ranch  on  the  third  sub- 
ject of  in<](hiry,  very  little  remains  to  be 
added  on  the  fourth  and  last :  which  com- 
prises all  offences  against  tlie  persons  of 
rrederick  Fitz-Clarence,  William  Legg, 
James  Ellis,  John  Surman,  William  West- 
coatt,  William  Charles  Brooks,  John 
Muddock,  and  Benjamin  Gill,  contrary 
to  the  form  of  an  act  passed  in  the  43rd 
year  of  the  reign  of  his  late  majesty,  the 
title  whereof  is  set  forth  at  length  m  the 
commission.  So  that  you  will  observe 
that  the  jurisdiction  given  by  this  com- 
tnission  does  not  extend  generally  to  all 
offences  against  the  persons  of  the  indivi- 
duals before-named,  nor  to  all  offences 
against  the  form  of  the  statute  therein 
mentioned,  but  is  limited  to  such  offences 
against  these  persons  as  are  contrary  to 
the  form  of  that  statute.*  That  statute  is 
one  which  has  probably  been  brought 
tinder  the  view  ofmany,  if  not  all  of  you, 
on  former  occasions,  so  that  I  need  trouble 
yon  the  less  upon  it. 

It  is  thereby  enacted,  that  if  any  person 
or  persons  shall  wilfully,  maliciously,  and 
unlawfully  shoot  at  any  of  his  majest/s 
subjects,  or  shall  wilfully,  maliciously,  and 
unlawfVilly  present,  point  or  level  any  kind 
of  loaded  fire  arms  against  any  of  his  ma- 
jesty's subjects,  and  attempt  by  drawing 
a  trigger  or  in  any  other  manner  to  dis- 
charge the  same  at  or  against  his  or  their 
person  or  persons ;  or  shall  wilfnlly,  ma- 
liciously, and  unlawfully  stab  or  cut  any 
of  his  majesty's  subjects,  vrith  intent  in  so 
doing,  or  by  means  thereof,  to  tnurder  or 
Tob,  or  to  maim,  disfigure  or  disable  such 

'  *  48  Geo.  lil.  0. 58,  commonly  called 
Jjord  WenborougVi  Act, 


subject  or  subjects,  or  with  intent  to  resist 
or. prevent  the  lawful  apprehension  and 
detainer  of  the  person  or  persons  so  stab- 
bing or  cutting,  or  the  lawrul  apprehension 
and  detainer  of  any  of  his,  her,  or  their 
accomplice  or  accomplices,  for  any  offences 
for  which  he,  she,  or  they  may  respectively 
be  liable  by  law  to  be  apprehended,  im- 
prisoned, or  detained ;  in  every  such  case, 
tlie  person  or  persons  so  offending,  their 
counsellors,  aiders  and  abettors,  knowing 
of,  and  privy  to,  such  offence,  shall  be 
declared  to  be  felons  without  benefit  of 
clergy. 

There  is,  however,  an  express  proviso 
or  exception  (which  probably  would  have 
been  implied  from  the  language  of  the 
enacting  part  itself),  that  if  the  act  be 
committed  under  such  circumstances  as 
that  if  death  had  ensued  therefrom  the 
-same  would  not  in  law  have  amounted  to 
the  crime  of  murder,  the  person  indicted 
shall  be  acquitted  of  the  felony. 

As  the  cases  likely  to  be  presented 
to  your  consideration  upon  this  statute 
will  have  arisen  out  of  the  resistance 
made  to  the  peace  officers,  and  to  the 
military  or  other  persons  who,  sooner  or 
later  came  to  their  aid,  to  which  I  have 
already  referred,  it  vrill  be  obvious  to  you, 
that  the  observations  which  I  have  already 
offered  upon  the  subject  of  arrest  and  re- 
sistance, m  relation  to  the  death  of  Richard 
Smithers,  may  in  general  be  applied  to 
this  part  also  of  your  inquiry,  and  it  is 
unnecessary  for  me  to  repeat  them  here. 

If  there  should  be  an  instance  of  any 
of  those  malicious  acts  mentioned  in  the 
statute  committed,  not  in  resistance  of  the 
intended  arrest,  or  in  the  endeavour  to 
escape,  but  wantonly  and  wilfully  against^ 
the  persons  of  any  of  the  individuals 
named  in  the  commission,  by  any  person 
not  intended  to  be  arrested,  or  who  had 
so  far  effectually  escaped  as  to  be  for  the 
time  out  of  all  danger  of  immediate  arrest, 
such  act,  if  any  such  there  be,  can  hardly 
be  attributed  to  any  other  motive  than  a 
malicious  design  to  murder,  or  do'  some 
grievous  bodily  harm  to  the  person  who 
was  the  object  of  it,  and  therefore  can 
hardly  fail  to  be  a  felonious  act,  within 
the  description  of  this  statute  ;  except, 
indeed,  it  shall  appear  to  have  been  the 
hasty  result  of  a  contest  vrith  unlawful 
aggressors,  vrfaerein  the  blood  may  have 
been  so  far  heated  as  to  reduce  the  crime 
to  manslaughter,  if  death  had  ensued  : 
but  as  I  do  not  apprehend  that  any  case 
of  this  nature  is  likely  to  come  before  you, 
I  forbear  to  trouble  you  with  any  remarks 
upon  it ;  being  well  assured  that  in  this 
case,  if  it  shall  occur,  as  in  all  othei:  parts 
of  the  important  duty  for  the  discharge  of 
which  you  are  assembled,  the  best  security 
for  a  due  execution  of  the  trust  reposed 
in  you,  is  to  be  found  in  your  own  good 


0|»f  J        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial^jirHmr  TkitOmood 


tflee 


sense,  and  in  your  own  geoeod  knowledge, 
.lemper,  and  discretion. 

It,  however,  any  unexpected  difficulty 
shall  arise  in  Uie  progress  of  your  inves- 
tigations, the  court  will  be  at  aU  ^times 
ready  to  assist  you  with  such  further  ad- 
vice as  you  may  have  occasion  to  require. 

GeDtfemen,  having  detained  you  so 
long,  with  such  observations  as  I  thought 
necessary  to  offer  to  your  consideration, 
you  will  now  withdraw  to  your  chamber 
to  consider  of  such  Bills  as  may  be  laid 
before  you. 


Ihe  Tower  to  Newgate,  and  Richwd  Brad- 
bumaJphn  Shaw  Strange,  James Gilolinst, 
and  Charles  Cooper  were  deliYered  by  the 
governor  of  the  House  of  Correction  for 
the  county  of  Middlesex  into  the  OMPtody 
of  the  keeper  of  Newgate* 


Od  Tuesday,  March  the  28th,  the  grand 
jury  returned  a  true  bill  against  Arthur 
'Thistlewood,  William  Davidson,  Barnes 
Jngs,  John  Thomas  Brunt,  Richard  Tidd, 
James  William  Wilson,  John  Hax^ison, 
Richard  Bradbum,  John  Shaw  Strange, 
James  Gilchrist,  and  Charles  Cooper,  for 
High  Treason. 

The  Court,  on  the  motion  of  Mr.  At- 
torney General,  ordered  that  the  Sheriff 
should  deliver  to  the  solicitor  for  the  pro- 
secution, a  list  of  persons  quali^d  to 
serve  on  Juries  upon  trials  for  High  Trea- 
son to  be  returned  for  the  trial  of  the 
defendants,  and  directed  that  notice  should 
be  given  to  each  of  the  prisoners,  that  an 
indictment  was  found  against  him,  and 
that  on  application  to  any  of  the  judges 
named  in  the  commission,  counsel  would 
be  assigned  to  him,  and  ap  order  made  for 
such  counsel  and  his  solicitor  to  have 
access;  which  notice  was  given  accord- 

^ly- 

On  Wednesday,  the  29th  of  March,  the 
grand  jury  returned  a  true  bill  against 
Arthur  Thistlewood,  John  Tliomas  Brunt, 
Richard  Tidd,  James  William  Wilson, 
John  Harrison,  and  John  Shaw  Strange, 
for  the  murder  of  Richard  Smithers. 

A  true  bill  against  Arthur  Thistlewood, 
for  maliciously  shooting  at  William 
Westcoatt. 

A  true  bill  against  James  Ings»  for 
roaliciouiily  shooting  at  William  Charles 
Brooks. 

A  true  bill  against  Richard  Tidd,  for 
maliciously  shooting  at  William  Legg, 

A  true  bill  against  James  William  Wil- 
son for  drawing  the  trigger  of  a  loaded  pis- 
tol, with  intent  to  shoot  John  Muddock. 

On  the  3rd  of  April,  Mr.  Maule,  solici- 
tor for  the  treasury,  delivered  to  each  of 
the  prisoners  a  copy  of  the  caption,  and 
of  the  indictment  for  High  Treason,  a  list 
of  the  Jury  for  their  trial,  and  a  list  of  the 
witnesses  to  be  produced  on  their  trial  for 
proving  the  said  indictment. 

On  Friday,  the  14th  of  April,  Arthur 
ThisUewood,  William  Davicfson,  J[ames 
Ings,  John  Thomas  Brunt,  Richard  Tidd, 
James  William  Wilson,and  John  Harpson, 
wer^  removed  by  Habeas  Corppra  from 


SESVSIONS  HOUSJS,  OLD  BAILEY. 
Satubdat,  April  15th;  1820. 

The  Bifjt^Kim.  Lord  Chief  JmtkeJbkati. 
The  Right  Hon.  L(fni  Chief  JtuCioe  Dtdim. 
The  Right  Hon.  The  Land  Chirf  Barm  [Sir 

R.  Richards.1 
The  Hon.  Mr.  Juatice  Bkkardmn. 
The  Comtnmi  Sergeant. 
And  other  His  Majesty's  Justices,  Ice. 

The  several  indictments  found  under 
special  Commission,  were  delivered  into 
court  with  the  following  Caption : 

Caption,  f  Be  it  BEKEKBSfiEn  TkMi  at  a 
iliu/<^ejr>  special  session  of  Oyer  and 
towU.    J  Terminer   of    our  sovereign 
lord  the  king  of  and  for  the  county  of  Mid- 
dlesex holden  at  the  Session  House  on 
Clerkenwell  Green  in  the  said  county  on 
Monday  the  twepty-seventhday  of  Mardi 
in  the  nest  year  of  the  ^igQ  of  our  so- 
vereign lord  Qeorge  the  murth  by  tiie 
grace  of  God  of  the  united  kingdom  of 
Great  Britain  and  Lreland  King  Pe/knder 
of  the  Faith  before  the  Right  Honourable 
Sir  Charles  Abbott  Knight  Chief  Justice 
of   our  said  lord  the  King  assigned  to 
hold  pleas  before  the  King  hi^ejf  &r 
Robert  Dallas  Knight  Chief  Justice  of  onr 
said  lord  the  King  of  his  court  of  pom- 
mon  Pleas  and  others  their  Fellows  Jus- 
tices and  commissioners  of  our  said  lord 
the  Kine  assignejd  by  letters  patfint  of  our 
said  lora  the  Kins  under  his  great  seal  of 
the   united  kingdom  of   Great  Britain 
and  Ireland  made  to  them  and  otheup  and 
any  two  or  more  of  them  (of  whom  one 
of  them  the  aforesaid  Sir  Charles  Ai>bott 
and  Sir  Robert  Dallas  amongst  others  in 
the  said  letters  patent  named  our  said 
lord  the  King  willed  should  be  one)  to 
inquire  by  the  oath  of  ffood  and  Ifiwfiil 
men  of  the  county  of  Middlesex  pf  all 
high  treasons  and  misprisions  of  high 
treason  (other  than  such  as  relate  tp  the 
coin)  and  of  the  murder  of  one  Richud 
Smithers  deceased  and  of  any  other  crime 
or  offence  touching  the  death  of  the' said 
Richard  Smithers  and  of  any  offiBo^  or 
offences  against  touching  or  conceming 
the  persons  of  Frederick  Fits-Charence 
William^Legg  James  piis  John  S^ilnncui 
William'    Westcoatt    William    Caries 
Brooks    John  Muddock  aod  Be^|amiu 
Gill  or  any  of  them  contrary  to  the  Imna 
pf  an  a^  mad«  aad  ftssAdiv  tbe  forty, 
third  year  of  ^  iei|tt0{  Jto  Iftto  n^esty 


eerl 


fir  Higfi  TreasoUi 


EiMOem^fJu^  ibird iDtitnled  ^Ab  act 
fi»r'^e^tolher  pwientiftii  of  viaUcious 
#liootii^   Mid   attempting  to  dtaekarge 
.londed  Aro  arms  stebbiog  cutting  woand- 
iog  poisooiog  ftud  the  maliooMi  «W)g  of 
BMaiM  to  pnoeuie  tbe  nitcaivtage  of  wo- 
men and  aiflo  the  malicio«a  tettiag  fire 
to  buildiags  aad  also  for  repealing  a  cer- 
Uin  act  made  in  England  in  the  Iwenty- 
firat  year  of  the  late  King  Jamee  the 
§ni  intituled  **  An  act  to  prevent  the  des- 
troying 4»d  murtbering  of  bastard  chil- 
dren'' and  atoo  an  act  OMide  in  Ireland  in 
the  sixth  year  of  the  reign  of  the  late 
Qaeen  Anne,  also  intitalea  ^  An  act  to 
prevent  the  dettsoying  and  murtbering 
of  bastard   childrany    and    for  making 
other    provisioBe     in    lieu     thereof '' 
and   also   the    aocessafies  of  them  or 
any  of  them  within  the  eoonty  afore- 
eaid  as  well  within  Itbertiesy  as  with- 
onty  by  whomsoerer  and  in  what  manner 
eoever  done   committed   or  perpetrated 
when     how     and    after   what  manner 
And  of  all  other  articles  and  cironmstan- 
ces  ooneeming  the  premiaes  and  every 
or  any  of  tbem  in  any  manner  wfaatsoeyer 
and  the  said  treasone  and  other  the  pre- 
mises aoeofding  to  the  laiws  and  onetoms 
of  England  for  this  time  to  hear  and  de- 
termine by  the  oath  of  Job  Rdkes  esquire 
John  fileck  esqnim  Thoasas  liilny  es- 
qaire    Robert  Bataon  esquire    William 
Hills  gentleman  Henry  Thompson  brew- 
er Kii^ard  Gibbe  esquire  Toomai  Ler- 
mette  esqmre  James    Gordon    esquire 
William     Anderson     esquire     William 
Parry  esqnire  John  Booth  esquire  John 
Henry  Pakeoham  esquire  John  Warren 
f^cntleman  George  Fr^leikk  Yovng  ship- 
builder B<obeit  Heacock  gentleman  Rich- 
ard Jennings  esquiie  James  Taylor  esquire 
John  Johnson  esquiie    Francis  Douce 
esqnire  John  William    Horsley  esquire 
William  Venning  gentleman  and  Stephen 
Tayler  esqnire  g<K>d  and  lawfol  men  of 
#he  £awity  aforesaid  now  here  sworn  and 
charged  to  «nqnire  for  our  said  lord  the 
lUng  for  the  body  of  the  said  county 
tonchiag  and  oonoeming  the  premims  in 
the  eaid  letters  patent  mentioned    It  is 
.pfeseatodin  manner  and  form  as  foiloweth 
<that  ie  to  say) 

Alirfrfrsor  }  The  jnron  for  onr  lord  the 
io  wU,  I  King  upon  iheir  oath  present 
tbat  Arthur  Thistlewood  late  of  the  parish 
0i  Saini  Clanent  Danes  in  the  oouDty  of 
Middlesex  gendeBmn  William  Dandson 
Inle  4b4  the  parish  of  Saint  SCaiylebone  in 
tiw  eoonty  of  Middleaaa  labonnr  James 
lags  late  of  London  labonnr  John  Hiomas 
Bnmt  late  of  Ifce  paiiBh  of  Saint  Andrew 
Holbom  in  the  eonn^  of  Middlesex 
labeusee  Bichard  Tidd  latetyf  the  parish 
mi  Saiat  Andrew  Holbom  in  the  eoonty  of 
Middlesex  labeunr  James  WiUiem  Wilson 
iMa  of  the  panib  of  Saint  Mwyiebone  in 


A.  D.  18Sa  [i 

the  cannly  of  Middlesex  labourer  John 
Hanison  late  of  the  parish  of  Saint  Mary- 
lebone  in  the  county  m  Middlesex  labourer 
Bichaid  Bradbnm  late  of  the  parish  of 
Saint  Giles-in«-the-fields  in  the  eounty  of 
Middlesex  labourer  John  Shaw  Strange 
late  of  London  labourer  James  Gilchrist 
late  of  London   labourer  and  Charles 
Cooper  late  of  London  labourer  being 
suliyects  of  our  said  lord  the  King  not 
having  the  fear  of  God  in  their  hearts  nor 
weighiug  the  duty  of  their  aUegianee  but 
being  moved  and  seduced  by  ^  instiga* 
tion  of  the  devil  as  ialse  traiton  against 
our  said  lord  the  King  and  wholly  with- 
drawing the  love  obedience  fidelity  and 
aUegianee  which  every  true  aad  foithfol 
subject  of  oar  smd  lord  the  King  should 
and  of  right  ongkt  to  bear  towards  our 
said  lord  the  King  on  tiie  fifth  day  of 
Febmary  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign  of 
our  said  poesent  sovereign  lord  George 
the  fourth  by  the  grace  of  God  of  the 
united  kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire- 
land King  Defender  of  the  Faith  and  on 
divers  other  days  and  times  as  well  before 
as  after  with  force  and  arms  at  <he  parish 
of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the  county  of 
Middlesex  maliciousfy  and    traitorously 
amongst  theasselves  and  together  with 
divers  other  false  traitors  wnose  mmes 
are  to  the  said  jnrors  unknown  did  com- 
pass imagine  invent  devise  and  intend  to 
deprive  and  depose  our  said  lord  the  King 
of  and  from  the  stj^e  honour  and  kingly 
name  of  the  imperial  erown  of  this  realm 
And  the  said  compassing  imagination  in- 
vention device  and  intention  did  then  and 
there  express  utter  and  declare  by  divers 
overt  acts  and  deeds  heveinafter  mentioned 
that  is  to  say  IN  onnxa  *ro  fuvil  perfect 
and  bring  to  eS^ct  their  most  evil  and 
wicked  treason  and  treasonable  compass* 
ing  imagination  invention  device  and  in« 
tention  aforesaid  they  Uie  said  Arthur 
Thistlewood    WiUiakn   Davidson   James 
Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Eiehard  Tidd 
James  William  Wilson   John  Harrison 
Bichaid  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
such  felse  traiton  as  aforesaid  on  the  said 
fifth  day  of  February  in  the  first  year  of 
the  aeign  aforesaid  and  on  divers  other 
days  and  times  as  well  before  as  after  with 
foroe  and  arms  at  die  said  parish  of  Saint 
Marylebone  in  the  said  eoonty  of  Middle- 
sex malieiously  and  traitorously  did  assem« 
ble  meet  conspire  aad  consult  amongst 
themselves  and  together  witii  divers  other 
4ahe  traiton  whose  names  are  to  the  said 
juron  unknown  to  devise  arrange  and  ma- 
tuTO   ptans  and  means  to  subvert  and 
destroy  the  constitution  and  government 
of  this  reslm^as'by  law  established    Akd 
rvsnxa  to  tvlhis  perfect  and  bring  to 
efiect'tbeir  most  evil  and  wicked  treason 
fnd  trsMonable  compaisipg  imagioiition 


0991 


1  GBORGE  IV. 


Trial  ^Arthur  HHtOraood 


[700 


inTentioa  device  and  intention  aforesaid 
they  the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood  William 
Dandion  James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brant 
Richaid  Tidd  James  William  Wilson 
John  Harrison  Richard  Bradbitrn  John 
IShaw  Strange  James  Gilchrist,  and  Charles 
Cooper  as  such  false  traitors  as  aforesaid 
on  toe  said  fifth  day  of  Febiuary  in  the 
first  year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  and  on 
divers  other  days  and  times  as  well  before 
as  after  with  force  and  arms  at  the  said 
palish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the  said 
county  of  Middlesex  maliciously  and  trai- 
torously did  assemble  meet  conspire  con- 
sult and  agree  amongst  themselves  and 
together  with  divers  other  felse  traitors 
whose  names  are  to  the  said  jurors  on- 
known  to  stir  up  raise  make  and  levy  in- 
•nrrection  rebellion  and  war  against  our 
«aid  lord  the  King  within  this  realm  and 
to  subvert  and  destroy  the  constitution 
and  government  of  this  realm  as  by  law 
established  And  further  to  vvlhl  per- 
lisct  and  bring  to  effect  their  most  evil  and 
wicked  treason  and  treasonable  oompass- 
ing  imagination  invention  device  and 
intention  aforesaid  they  the  said  Arthur 
Thistlewood  William  Davidson  James 
Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Bichard  Tidd 
James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Bichard  Bradbura  John  Shaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
such  folse  traitors  as  aforesaid  on  the  said 
AfUi  day  of  February  in  the  first  year  of 
the  reign  aforesaid  and  on  divers  other 
days  and  times  as  well  before  as  after  wiUi 
force  and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint 
Marylebone  in  the  said  county  of  Middle- 
sex maliciously  and  traitorously  did  as- 
•emble  meet  conspire  consult  and  agree 
amongst  themselves  and  together  with 
di?ers  other  false  traitors  whose  names 
are  to  the  said  jurors  unknown  to  assassin- 
ate kill  and  murder  divers  of  the  privy 
council  of  our  said  lord  the  King  employed 
by  our  said  lord  the  King  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the.  affairs  and  government  of 
this  kingdom  And  further  to  fulfil 
perfect  and  bring  to  effect  their  most  evil 
and  wicked  treason  and  treasonable  com- 
passipg  imagination  invention  device  and 
intention  aforesaid  they  the  said  Arthur 
Thistlewood  William  Davidson  James 
Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Richard  Tidd 
James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richard  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charies  Cooper  as 
such  false  traitors  as  aforesaid  on  the  said 
fifUi  day  of  Febraary  in  the  first  year  of 
the  reign  aforesaid  and  on  divers  other 
days  and  times  as  well  before  as  after  with 
force  and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint 
Marylebone  in  the  said  county  of  Middle- 
sex maliciously  and  traitorously  did  pro- 
cure provide  and  have  divers  large  quan- 
tities x>f  arms  to  wit  guns  muskets  blun- 
derbusses pistob  swords  bayonets-  pikes 


pikehandles  and  '  pikeheads  and  divers 
large  quantities  of   ammunition  to  wit 
gunpowder  leaden  bullets  slugs  and  hand* 
grenades  with  intent  therewith  to  arm 
themselves  and  other   Mae   traitors  in 
order  to  assassinate  kill  and  murder  divers 
of  the  privy  council  of  our  said  lord  the 
King  employed    b^  our  said   lord    the 
King  in  toe  administration  of  the  affairs 
and  government  of  this  kingdom    And 
FURTHER  TO  FULFIL  perfect  and  bring  to 
effect  their  most  evil  and  wicked  treason 
and  treasonable  compassing  imagination 
invention  device  and  intention  aforesaid 
they  the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood  William 
Davidson  James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt 
Richard   Tidd   James   William  Wilson 
John  Harrison   Richard  Bradbum  John 
Shaw  Strange  James  Gilchrist  and  Charles 
Cooper  as  such  fabe  traitors  as  aforesaid 
on  Uie  said  fifth  day  of  February  in  tibe 
first  year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  and  on 
divers  other  days  and  times  as  well  be- 
fore as  after  with  force  and  arms  at  the 
said  parish  of  Saint  Maiylebone  in  the 
said  county  of  Middlesex  maliciously  and 
traitorously   did    procure    provide'  and 
have  divers  large  quantities  of  arms  to 
wit  guns  muskets  blunderbusses  pistols 
swords  bayonets  pikes  pikehandleS^  and 
pikeheads  and  divers  large  quantities  of 
ammunition   to  wit    gunpowder   leaden 
bullets  slugs  and  hand-grenades  with  intent 
therewith  to  arm  themselves  and  other 
false  traitors  in  order  to  raise  make  and 
levy  insurrection  rebellion  and  war  against 
our  said  lord  the  King  within  this  realm 
and  to  subvert  and  destroy  the  constitu* 
tion  and  government  of  this  realm  as  by 
law  established    Akd'furtber  to  fu]>' 
FiL  perfect  and  bring  to  effect  their  most 
evil  and  wicked  treason  and  treasonable 
compassing  imagination  invention  device 
and  intention   aforesaid    they  the  "  said 
Arthur  Thistlewood    William  Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt 'Richard 
Tidd  James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richaid  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Strang^ 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
such  false  traitors  as  aforesaid  on   the 
said  fifth  day  of  February  in  the  first  year 
of  the  reign  aforesaid  and  on  divers  other 
days  and  times  as  well  before  as  after  witfi 
force  and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint 
Marylebone  in  the  said  county  of  Middle- 
sex maliciously  and  traitorously  did  aasem- 
blemeet  conspire  consult  and  agreeamongmt 
themselves  and  together  with  divers  other 
false  traitors  whose  names  are  to  the  said 
jurors  unknown  to  seize  and  take  poeses* 
sion  of  divers  cannon  warlike  weapons 
arms  and  ammunition  in  divers  pla«2es 
deposited'  and  being  with  intent  by  and 
with  the  said  cannon  warlike  wei^pons 
arms- and  ammunition  to  arm  themselves 
and  other  fislse  traitors  and  to  raise  levy 
and  make  insurrection  re^Dion  aiid.^ar 


701] 


for  High  Trtaum, 


A.  D.  1820. 


t70« 


agHinst  our  laid  lord  the  King  within  this 
reBdm  and  to  subvert  and  destroy  the  con- 
stitution and  government  of  this  realm  as 
by  law  established  And  furtheb  to 
FULFIL  perfect  and  bring  to  effect  their 
most  evil  and  wicked  treason  and  treason- 
able compassing  imagination  invention 
device  and  intention  aforesaid  they  the  said 
Arthur  Thistlewood  William  Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Richard 
Tidd  James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richard  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
such  false  traitors  as  aforesaid  on  the  said 
fifth  day  of  February  in  the  first  year  of 
the  reign  aforesaid  and  on  divers  other 
days  and  times  as  well  before  as  after 
with  force  and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of 
Saint  Maiylebone  in  the  said  county  of 
Middlesex  maliciously  and  traitorously 
did  assemble  meet  conspire  consult  and 
agree  amongst  themselves  and  together 
with  divers  other  false  traitors  whose 
names  are  to  the  said  jurors  unknown  to 
set  fire  to  bum  and  destroy  divers  houses 
and  buildings  in  and  in  the  neighbourhood 
of  London  and  divers  barracks  of  our  said 
lord  the  King  used  for  the  reception  and 
residence  of  the  soldiers  troops  and  forces 
of  our  said  lord  the  King  ana  to  provide 
and  prepare  divers  combustibles  and  ma- 
lerials  for  the  purpose  of  setting  fire  to 
burning  and  destroying  the  said  houses 
buildings  and  barracks  And  further 
TO  FULFIL  perfect  and  bring  to  effect 
their  most  evil  and  wicked  treason  and 
treasonable  compassing  imagination  inven- 
tion device  and  intention  aforesaid  they 
the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood  William  Da- 
vidson James  Inss  John  Thomas  Brunt 
Richard  Tidd  James  William  Wilson 
John  Harrison  Richard  Bradbum  John 
Shaw  Strange  James  Gilchrist  and  Charles 
Cooper  as  such  false  trailbrs  as  aforesaid 
on  the  said  fifth  day  of  Febraaiy  in  the 
first  year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  and  on 
divers  other  days  and  times  as  well  before 
as  after  with  force  and  arms  at  the  said 
parish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the  said 
county  of  Middlesex  maliciously  and 
traitorously  did  compose  and  prepare  and 
cause  and  procure  to  be  composed  and 
prepared  with  intent  to  publish  the  same 
divers  addresses  proclamations  declara- 
tions and  writings  containing  therein 
solicitations  and  incitements  to  the  liege 
sulnects  of  our  said  lofd  the  King  to  aid 
and  assist  in  making  and  levying  insur- 
rection rebellion  and  war  against  our  said 
lord  the  Kins  within  this  realm  and  in 
sabverting  and  destroying  the  constitution 
•nd  government  of  this  realm  as  by  law 
established  Avd  fubtbrr  to  fulfil 
perfect  and  bring  to  effect  their  most 
evil  and  wicked  treason  and  treasonable 
ccMipaasing  imaj^ation  invention  device 
and   intentiihi  aforesaid  they  the  said 


Arthur  Thistlewood  William  Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brant  Richard 
Tidd  James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richard  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charies  Cooper  as 
sudi  false  traitors  as  aforesaid  on  the  said 
fifth  day  of  February  in  tlie  first  yeaur  of 
the  reign  aforesaid  with  foree  and  arms  at 
the  said  parish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the 
said  county  of  Middlesex  maliciously  and 
traitorously  did  compose  and  prepare  and 
cause  and  procure  to  be  composed  and 
prepared  a  certain  paper  writing  purport* 
mg  to  be  an  address  to  the  liege  subjects 
of  oursaid  lord  the  King  containing  therein 
that  their  tyrants  were  d^tioyed  and  that 
the  friends  of  liberty  were  called  upon  to 
come  forward  as  the  provisional  govem- 
ment  was  then  sitting  with  intent  to  pub- 
lish the  same  and  thereby  to  solicit  and 
incite  the  liege  subjects  of  our  said  lord  the 
King  to  aid  and  assist  in  making  and  levy- 
ing insurrection  rebellion  and  war  against 
oursaid  lord  the  King  within  this  realm  and 
in  subverting  and  destroying  the  constitu- 
tion and  govemment  of  this  realm  as  by 
law  established  Akd  fubtheb  to  fulfil 
perfect  and  bring  to  efiect  their  most  evil 
and  wicked  treason  and  treasonable  com- 
passing imagination  invention  device  and 
intention  aforesaid  they  the  said  Arthur 
Thistlewood  William  Davidson  James 
Ings  John  Thomas  Brant  Richard  Tidd 
James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richard  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Stitmg» 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
suchj  false  traitors  as  aforesaid  on  tfa» 
twenty-thiid  day  of  Febraaiy  in  the  first 
year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  with  force  and 
arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint  Marylebone 
in  the  said  county  of  Middlesex  msdicioua- 
ly  and  traitorously  together  vrith  divers^ 
other  false  traitors  whose  names  are  to- 
the  said  jurors  unknown  did  assemble 
themselves  with  arms  that  is  to  say  with 

funs  muskets  blunderbusses  pistols  swords 
ayonets  pikes  and  other  weapons  with 
intent  to  assassinate  kill  and  murder  divers 
of  the  privy  council  of  our  said  lord  the 
King  employed  by  our  said  lord  the 
King  in  tne  administration  of  the  affairs 
and  goverament  of  this  kingdom  and  to 
raise  make  and  levy  insurrection  rebellion 
and  war  against  our  said  lord  the  Kinar 
within  this  realm  and  to  subvert  and 
destroy  the  constitution  and  goverament 
of  this  realm  as  by  law  estabUshed  Aan 
further  to  fulfil  perfect  and  btmg  Xxy 
effect  their  most  evil  and  wicked  treason 
and  treasonable  compasnng  imagination 
inven&n  device  and  intention  aforesaid 
they  the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood  WU- 
liam  Davidson  James  Ings  John  Hiomas. 
Brant  Richard  Tidd  James  William 
Wilson  John  Harrison  Richard  Brad- 
bum John  Shaw  Strange  James  Gilchrist 
and  Charles  Cooper  as  such  fidse  traitors 


TOdQ 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qf  Arthur  TMstUfmod 


[7M 


a»  aforesaid  <m  the  said  ttventy-third  day 
of  February  is  the  first  year  tit  the  reign 
aforesaid  aad  onr  diners  other  days  and 
tines  SB  well  before  as  after  with  force  and 
arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint  Marylebone 
in  the  said  county  of  Middlesex  together 
with  divert  other  false  traitors  whose 
names  are  to  the  said  jurors  unknown 
armed  and  arrayed  iis  a  warlike  manner 
that  is  to  say  with  guns  muskets  blunder- 
busses pistols  swords  bayonets  pikes  and 
other  weapons  maltctously  and  traitorously 
did  ovdain  prepare  levy  and  make  public 
war  against  our  said  lord  the  King  within 
this'  realm  io  contempt  of  our  said  lord 
the  King  and  his  laws  to  the  evil  example 
of  all  others  contrary  to  the  duly  of  the 
allegiance  of  them  the  said  Arthur  Thistle- 
wood  WiUiim  Davidson  James  Ings  John 
Thomas  Brunt  Richard  Tidd  James 
William  WUoon  John  HarrisoD  Ridiard 
Bradbum  Joh«  Shaw  Strangle  James  Gil- 
christ and  Charles  Cooper  against  the 
form  of  the  Statute  in  such  case  made 
and  ptovided  and  against  the  peace  of 
eur  said  lord  the  King  his  crown  and 
dignify. 

Seeind  Coi0ir.r— And  die  jurors  afore- 
said upoKlhear  oath  aforesaid  do  further 
Bieseat  that  the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood 
WilKam  Davidson  James  Ings  John  Tho- 
mas Bnltit  Richard  Tidd  Jaaes  William 
Wilson  John  Harrisoa  Richard  Bradbum 
Joha  Shaw  Strangle  Jamies  Gilehrist  and 
Charles  Cooper  being  subjects  of  our  said 
lood  the  King  not  having  the  fear  of  God 
m  their  hearts  nor  weighing  the  duty  of 
their  allegiance  but  being  moved  and 
seduced  by  the  instigation  of  the  devil 
aa  Mat  traitors  agsainst  our  said  lord  the 
King  and  wholly  withdrawing  liie  love 
cA>edUence-  6delity  and  allegiance  which 
every  true  and  fiathful  subject  of  our  said 
lord-  the  King  should  and  of  right  ought 
•to-  beer  towards  our  said  lord  the  King 
o»  the  fifth  day  of  February  in  the  first 
year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  and  on  divers 
other  dayd  and  timea  a»  wdi  before  as 
aftcSr  with  force  and  arms  at  the  said 
parish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the  said 
ceuafy  of  Middlesex  maliciously  and 
ftraitors^ly  amongst- themselves  and  to- 
gether withdi^rS  other  false  traitors  whose 
names  aie  to  the  said  jurors  unknown  did 
cempast  imagine  and  intend  to  move  and 
excite  insurrection  rebellion  and  war 
against  our  said  lord  the  King  within  this 
vMhtt  and  to  subvert  and  alter  the  legis- 
lature rula  and  government  now  duly  and 
happUy:  established  within  tine  realm,  and 
to  bring  and  put  our  said  lord  the  King  to 
death  [The  lUditstmanl!  then  states  the 
aanre  eieteii  orbrfractd  duugiad  in  the  first 
Coant]. 

27Mrtf  Ctt<ii4»*«AadDfhe  jukon'itfdvesaid 
upon  their  bath'  afoeeMad  de>  tether  ^re- 
aent  Hisit  tfat  aaid  Acthur  Xhiktevood 


William  Davidson  James  Ings  J«lin  Tho- 
mas Brunt  Richard  Tidd  James  William 
Wilson  John  Harrison  Rickaid  Bcadbum 
John  Shaw  Strange  James  Gikhrial  and 
Charles  Cooper  being  subjects  of  oub  said 
lord  the  King  not  having  the  foar  of  God 
in  their  hearts  nor  wei^og  the  duty  of 
their  allegiance  but  being  iMved  and  se- 
duced by  the  instigation  of  the  deiil  as 
folse  traitors  against  our  said  lord  the 
King  and  wholly  withdrawing  the  love 
obedience  fidelity  and  allegiaaoe  which 
eveiy  true  and  faithfui  subject  of  our  said 
lord  the  King  should  and  of  right. ought 
to  bear  towaids  our  said  lord  the  King 
on  the  said  fifth  da^  of  February  in  the 
first  year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  and  on 
divers  other  days  and  times  as  well  before 
as  after  with  force  and  asms  at  the  said 
parish  of  Saint  Maryld>one  itt  the. said 
county  of  Middlesex  midickuisfy » and 
traitorously  amongst  themselves  and  to- 
gether with  divers  other  false  traitors 
whose  aaaus  are  to  the  said  jurois  un- 
known did  compass  imagioa  invenlE  de- 
vise and  intend  to  levy  war-  against  our 
said  lord  the  King  withm  thia  realm  in 
order  by  force  and  constraint  to  compel 
him  to  change  his  measures  and  counsels 
and  the  said  last-mentioned  compassing 
imagination  invention  device  and  inten- 
tion did  then  and  there  express  utueii  and 
declare  by  divers  overt  acts  and  deeds 
hereinafter  mentioned  (that  is  to  say) 
IN  OR  DEE  TO  FULFIL  perfect  aod  bring 
to  effect  their  most  evil  and  wicked  trea- 
son and  treasonable  compassing  iooagina- 
tion  invention  device  and  intention  last 
aforesaid  they  thesaid  Arthur  Thistlewood 
William  Davidson  James  lags  John 
Thomas  Brant  Richard  Tidd  James  Wil- 
liam Wilson  John  Harrison  Richard  Brad- 
burn  John  Shaw  Stmnge  James  Gilehrist 
and  Charles  Cooper  as  such  false  traitors 
as  last  aforesaid  on  the  said  fifth  day  of 
February  in  the  first  yeas  of  the  neiga 
aforesaid  and  on  divers  oth9r  dagpe  and 
times  as  well  before  as  after  with  force 
and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint  Mary- 
lebone in  the  said  county  of  Middlesex 
maliciously  and  traitonmsljf  did  assemble 
meet  conspire  and  consult  aaaongst  thenw 
selves  and  t(^ther  vnth  divers  other  false 
traitors  whose  names  are  to  the  said  jurors 
unknown  todevise  arrangeandmatuie  plans 
and  means  by  force  aadconstraint  to  com- 
pel ouE  said  lord  the  King  to  change  his 
measures  and.  counsels  And  puKTBaa  to 
FtTLFTL  perfect  and  bring  to  effect  their 
nmst  evil  and  wicked  treason  and  treason- 
able compassing  imaginatioa  inventioii 
device  ana  intention  last  afionnaid  thej 
the  said  Arthur  ThistlewioBod  Williana 
Davidson.  James  IngsJdhii  ThousB  Aunt 
Riehaid  Tidd  Janms  WUfiam  Wilson  Jobia 
Harebon  Ricfaand  Bradburu  John  Shrnw 
Stmngv  Jame*  GUclsist  stod   Charles^ 


70^ 


fi»  High  Treawn, 


A.  D.  1890. 


f70<5 


Co«fMrjM  sttebfifebetrattoraaiUatiifofe- 
Mid  on  tb^  caid  fifth  day  of  Febrmur  in 
thft  fiif  t  ywt  of  tha  rei|o  aforesaid  and  on 
difeit  o&er  dayi  and  tinws  as  well  befoie 
as  after  with  force  and  arms  at  the  said 
^ttish  of  Saint  Maiylebone  in  the  said 
oo«nty  of  Middleses  maliciously  and 
tNitOfoaaly  did  assemble  meet  eonspire 
consult  and  agree  amongst  themselves  and 
together  with  divers  other  felse  traitors 
whose  names  are  to  the  said  jurors  un- 
known to  stir  up  raise  make  and  levy  in- 
surrection lebellion  and  war  against  our 
said  lord  the  King  within  this  realm  -  And 
FvmTBEE  TO  tvufiL  perfect  and  bring  to 
offset  their  most  evil  and  wicked  treason 
and  treasonaUe  compassing  imagination 
invention  device  and  intention  last  afore- 
aaid  they  the  said  Arthur  Thbtlewood 
William  Davidson  James  Ings  John 
Thomaa  Brunt  Richard  Tidd  James  Wil- 
liam  Wilson  John  Harrison  Richard  Brad- 
bum  John  Sbaw  Strange  James  Gilchrist 
and  Charles  Cooper  as  such  false  traitors 
as  last  aforesaid  on  the  said  fifth  day  of 
Febmanr  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign 
aiorasaid  and  on  divers  *  other  days  and 
times  as  well  before  as  after  with  force 
tad  arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint  Mary- 
lebooe  in  the  said  oouoty  of  Middlesex 
maliciously  and  traitorously  did  assemble 
meet  conspire  consult  and  agree  amongst 
tbenmelves  and  together  with  divers  other 
ftjse  traitors  whoM  names  are  to  the  said 
jurors  unknown  to  assassinate  kill  and 
mmder  divers  of  the  privy  coundl  of  our 
said  lord  the  King  employsd  by  our  said 
lord  the  King  in  the  administration  of  the 
aAdn  and  government  of  this  kingdom 
AvD  vvBTHBR  TO  FVLFiL  perfect  and 
bring  to  efieet  their  most  evil  and 
wicked  tieason  and  treasonable  compass- 
ing imagination  invention  device  and  in- 
tention last  aforesaid  they  the  said  Arthur 
Thiatlewood  William  Davidson  James 
logs  John  Thomas  Brunt  Richard  Udd 
Jaaies  WiUiam  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richard  Bradbum  John  Sbaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
such  &lse  traitors  as  last  aforesaid  on  the 
aaid  fifth  day  of  February  in  the  first  year 
of  the  reign  aforelaid  and  on  divers  other 
daye  and  times  as  well  before  as  ^fter 
wnk ibroa and  armsat  the  said  parish  of 
Saint  Marylebone  in  the  said  county  of 
Middlesex  maliciously  and  traitorously 
ittd  procure  provide  and  have  divers  large 
qiiasrtities  or  arms  to  trit  guns  muskets 
Muiderbusses  pistols  swords  bayonets 
pifcee  pikehandles  and  pikehaads  and  di« 
TCia  large  quantities  of  amm^ition  to 
wit  gunpowder  leaden  bullets  sh^^  and 
bnndgrenades  with  intent  iheKwHb  to 
am  themselvea  aasd  other  false  traitors  in 
ordier  to  assassinate  Idlland  murder  divers 
pf  the  privy  council  of  our  said  lord  the 
King  emploved  by  oar  said  lord  the  King 
V0L.XXX1IL 


in  Ike  administralion  of  the  affairs  and 
government  of  this  kingdom  Avn  Fua^ ' 
THEE  TO  FVLViL  perfect  Aud  bring  to  ef- 
fect their  most  evil  and  wicked  treason 
»id  treasonable  compasein|  imagination 
invention  device  and  intention  last  afore- 
said they  the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood 
William  Davidson  James  Ings  John 
Thomas  Brunt  Richard  Tidd  James  Wil- 
liam Wilson  John  Harrison  Richard  Brad- 
bum  John  Shaw  Strange  James  Gilchrist 
and  Charles  Cooper  as  sudi^  false  traitors 
as  laist  aforesaid  on  the  said  fifth  day  of 
February  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign 
aforesaid  and  on  divers  other  days  and 
times  as  well  before  as  after  with  force 
and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of  Saint  Mazy- 
lebone  in  the  said  county  of  Middlesex 
maliciously  and  traitorously  did  procure 
provide  and  bare  divers  laige  quantities 
of  arms  to  wit  guns  muskets  blnnder- 
btisses  pistols  swords  bayonets  pikes  pike- 
handles  and  pikeheads  and  divers  large 
quantities  of  ammunition  to  wit  gun- 
powder leaden  bullets  slugs  and  handgre- 
nades  with  intent  therewith  to  arm  them- 
selves and  other  false  traitors  in  order  to 
raise  make  and  levy  insurrection  rebellion 
and  war  against  our  said  lord  the  King 
within  this  realm  Avn  fuethee  to  ful* 
FiL  perfect  and  bring  to  efiect  their  most 
evil  and  wicked  treason  and  treasonable 
compassing  imagination  invention  device 
and  intention  last  aforesaid  they  the  said 
Arthur  Thistlewood  William  Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Richard 
Tidd  James  William  Wilson  John  Harrison 
Richard  Bradbum  John  Shaw  Strange 
James  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper  as 
such  felse  traitonr  as  last  aforesaid  on  the 
said  fifth  day  of  February  in  the  first  year 
of  the  reign  aforeAid  and  on  divers  other 
days  and  times  as  well  before  aa  after 
with  force  and  arms  at  the  said  parish  of 
Saint  Marylebone  in  the  said  county  of 
Middlesex  maliciously  and  traitorously 
did  assemble  meet  conspire  consult  and 
agree  amongst  themselves  and  together 
with  divers  other  false  traitors  whose 
names  are  to  the  said  jurors  unknown  to 
seise  and  take  possession  of  divers  cannon 
warlike  weapons  arms  and  ammunition 
in  divers  places  deposited  and  being  with 
intent  by  and  with  the  said  cannon  war- 
like weapons  arms  and  ammunition  to 
arm  themselves  and  other  felse  traitors 
and  to  raise  levy  and  mak»  insurrection 
reb^onandwar  against  our  said. lord 
the  King  within  this  realm  Avn  FunTHcn 
To  FULFIL  perfect  and  bring  to  effect  their 
most  evil  and  wicked  treason  and  treason- 
able compassing  imagination  invention 
derice  ana  intention  last  aforesaid  they 
the  said  Arthur  Thistlewood  WiUiam 
Davidson  James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt 
Richard  Tidd  James  William  Wilson 
John  Harrison  Richard  Bradbum  John 
2Z 


7CII7J        1  oeORGfi  IV. 


Triat  tf  Arthur  TkuUewood 


r7o« 


Shttw  Sttangtt  James  Gilchrist  tnd  Charies 
Cooper  as  such  false  tiaitors  as  last  lifore- 
said  6d  the  said  fifth  day  of  Febniair  in 
the  first  Tear  of  the  reign  afoiesaxl  and  on 
divers  other  days  and  times  as  well  be- 
fore as  after  with  force  and  arms  at  the 
said  parish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the 
said  county  of  Middlesex  maliciously  and 
fnitoroosly  did  assemble  meet  conspire 
consult  and  agree  amongst  themselves  and 
together  with  divers  other  false  traitors 
whose  names  are  to  the  said  jurors  un- 
known to  sec  fire  to  bum   and  destroy 
divers  booses  and  buildings  in  and  in  the 
neighbourhood   of  London  and  divers 
barracks  of  our  said  lord  the  King  used 
for  the  reception  and  residence  of  the 
soldiers  troops  and   ibices   of  our  said 
lord  the  King  and  to  provide  and  prepare 
divers  combustibles  and  materials  for  the 
purpose  of  setting  fire  to  buminff  and  de- 
stroying the  said  houses  buih&ngs  and 
barracks    Avn  fubtbeb  to  tvlfil  per- 
fect and  bring  to  effect  their  most  eiil 
and  widced  treason  and  treasonable  com- 
passing imagination  invention  device  and 
intention  last  aforesaid  they  the  said  Ar- 
thur   Thistlewood    William     Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brant  Richard 
Tidd  James  William  WUson  John  Har- 
rison   Richard   Bradbum    John    Shaw 
Strange   James    Gilchrist  and   Charles 
Cooper  as  such  false  traitors  as  last  afore- 
said on  the  said  fifth  day  of  February  in 
the  first  year  of  the  reign  aforesaid  and 
on  divers  other  days  and  times  as  well 
before  as  afler  with  force  and  arms  at  the 
said  parish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the 
said   county  of  Middlesex  malidoosly 
mid  trailorouslY  did  compose  and  prepare 
and  cause  and  procure  lo  be  composed 
and  prepared  with  intent  to  poblisn  the 
same  divers  addresses  prodamatioos  de- 
clarations and  writings  containing  therem 
iolidtations  and  indtements  to  the  liese 
subjects  of  our  sdd  lord  the  King  to  aid 
and  assist  in  making  and  levying  insur- 
rection rebellion  and  war  against  our  said 
lord  the  King  widiin  this  realm    Avn 
TUETBxa  TO  FULFIL  pcrflbct  Qttd  bring  to 
eifect  their  most  evil  and  wicked  treason 
and  treasonable  compassing  imagination 
invention  device  and  intention  last  ftfore- 
aaid  they  the  said  Arthur  Thistiewood 
William  Davidson  James  Ings  John  Tho- 
mas Brunt  Richard  Tidd  James  William 
Wilson  John  Harrison  Richard  Bradbum 
John  ShawL  Strange  James  Gilchrist  and 
Charies  Cooper  as  such  false  traitdrsas 
Mst  aforesaid  on  the  said  twentT-thiid  day 
of  February  in  the  first  year  of  the  reign 
aforesaid  with  f4»ee  and  arms  at  the  sud 
parisii  of  Saint  Maxylebene  in  the  said 
ooanty   of  Middlewx   malidoualy   and 
ttaitoiously  toMliir  with  rdivers   other 
fUse  tndtoff  wiioee  names  are  to  tlM  said 
jiMon  anknowii  did  asMmbie  tbemieliies 


with  arms  (that  is  to  say)  with  guns  mus- 
kets blundeiAiusses  pistms  swoids  bigronet» 
pikes  and  other  weapons  with  intent  tit 
assaMinate  kill  and  murder  divers  of  the 
privy  ooondl  of  our  said  lord  the  King 
employed  by  our  said  lord'  the  King  in 
the  administration  of  the  a£birs  and  go* 
vemment  of  this  kingdom  and  to -raise 
make  and  levy  insurrection  rebellioD  and 
war  against  our  said  lord  the  King  within 
this  realm  Ann  fukthxe  to  fulfil  per- 
fect and  bring  to  effect  their  moel  evil 
and  wicked  treason  and  treasonable  <coaft- 
|>assing  imagination  invention  device  and 
intention  last   aforesaid    they  the  said 
Arthur  Thistlewood  William  Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Richard 
Tidd  James  WilUam  Wilson  John  Har- 
rison   Richard    Bradbum    John  Shaw 
Strange    James  Gildirist  and   Charies 
Cooper  as  such  false  traitors  as  last  afore- 
said on  the  said  twenty-third  day  of  Febru- 
ary in  the  first  year  of  the  rdgn  aforesaid 
and  on  divers  other  day  v  and  times  as  well 
before  as  after  with  force*  and  arms  at  the 
said  parish  of  Saint  Marylebone  in  the 
said  county  of  Biiddlesex  together  witb 
divers  other  false  traitors  whose  namte.aie 
to  the  said  jurors  unknown  armed  and 
arrayed  in  a  wariike  manner  (that  is  to 
say)  with  guns  muskets   blunderbusses 
pistols  swonis  bayonets  pikes  md  other 
weapons  maliciously  and  traitoitrasly  did 
ordain  prepare  levy  and  make  pnbhc  war 
against  our  said  lord  the  King  within 
this  realm  in  contempt  of  our  said  lord 
the  King  and  his  laws  to  the  evil  ex- 
ample  df  all    others  contiary   to   the 
duty  of  the  allegiance  of  them  the  said 
Artimr  Thistiewood  William  Davidaon 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brant  Richard 
Tidd    James    William     Wilson    John 
Harrison  Richard  Bndbura  John  Shaw 
Strange  James   Gilchrist  and    Chariea 
Cooper,  against  the  form  of-tiie  staante  in 
puch  case  made  and  provided  and  against 
the  peace  of  our  saia  lord  the  King  his 
crown  and  dignity. 

Famik  Omnt.-^AaA  the  jurors  afore- 
said upon  their  oath  afofesaid  do  fiiirther 
present    That  the  said  Arthur  Thiatie- 
wood  William  Davison  James  Ings  John 
Thomas  Brant  Richard  Tidd  JaoDes  W^il- 
liam  Wilson  John  Harrison  Ridmd  Brad- 
bum John  Shaw  Strange  James. Giicluist 
and  Charies  Cooper  \mD%  subjects  of  our 
said  lord  the  King  not  having  tiie  fissur  of 
God  in  telr  hearts  nor  wdgfaing  dM  dntw 
of  their  allegiance  but  hmxi%  mnved  aM 
seduced  by  the  instigation  of  ^  devHk 
as  foiss  tndtors  agaiost  our  said  le»d  tfao> 
Kins  and  whoUy  wiihdiawwg  tlUft   lowe 
obefienc^  fidditT  aad  allsghiiwe  "uribiok 
•veiy.  true  and  faithfal  sohjeet  of  ovr  asmd 
knd  tiM  King  shoaM  and  of  rig^t  on^bt 
to  hear  towards  oar  said  lord  the  Kine 
on  the  said  twenty-third  day  of  February 


7091 


Jbr  High  Hytanm. 


A.  D.  1820. 


1710 


in  lh«  tint  y«w  of  tht  reign  aforasaid 
with  tofOB  and  arms^at  tha  said  pariah  of 
Saint  Maiylebone  in  the  said  oonnty  of 
Middlesex  together  with  divers  other 
false  traitors  whose  names  are  to  the  said 
jurors  unknown  anned  and  arrayed  in  a 
warlike  manner  (that  is  to  say)  with  guns 
muskets  blunderbusses  pistpls  swords 
bayonets  pikes  and  other  weapons  being 
then  and  there  unlawfully  maliciously  and 
traitorously  assembled  and  gathered  toge- 
ther against  our  said  lord  the  King  most 
widtedly- maliciously  and  traitorooslv  did 
levy  and  make  war  against  our  said  lord 
the  King  within  this  realm  and  did  then 
and  there  maliciously  and  traitorously  at- 
tempt and  endeavour  by  force  and  arms 
to  subvert  and- destroy  the  constitution 
and  government  of  this  realm  as  by  law 
established  and  to  deprive  and  depose 
our  said  lofd  the  King  of  and  from  the 
style  honour  and  kingly  namd  of  the  im- 
perul  crown  of  this  realm  in  copntempt  of 
our  said  lord  the  King  and  his  laws  to 
the  evil  example  of  all  others  contrary  to 
the  du^  of  the  allegiance  of  them  the  said 
Arthur  Thistlewood  William  Davidson 
James  Ings  John  Thomas  Brunt  Richard 
Tidd  Janes  William  Wilson  John  Har- 
rison Bichard  Bradbum  John  Shaw 
Straoge^  James  Gilchrist  and  Charies 
Cooper  against  the  form  of  the  statute  in 
such  case  made  and  provided  and  against 
the  peace  of  our  said  lord  the  King  his 
ccown  end  dignity. 

The  prisoners,  Arthur  Thistlewood, 
Wilham  Davidson,  James  logs,  John 
Thomas  Brunt,  Richard  Tidd,  James 
William  Wilson,  John  Harrison,  Richard 
Bradbum,  John  Shaw  Strange^  James 
Giiehnst,  and  Charles  Cooper^  being  f>«t 
to  the  bar  and  arraigned  upon  this  in- 
dictment, severally  pleaded  Not  Guilty, 
with  the  exception  of  Wilson,  and  for 
their  trial  put  themselves  upon  God  and 
their  Country.  James  Ings,  however,  in 
the  first  instance,  to  the  question, — ^  How 
will  you  be  tried?"  having  answered  **  By 
the  laws  of  Reason,"— on  the  governor  of 
Nevrgate  remonstrating  with  him,  he  re- 

eed,  '^By  God  and  my  Countiy — the 
vs  of  Reason  are  the  laws  of  my  country.' 

Wilson  refused  to  answer  to  the  name 
of  James  William  Wilson,  stating  that  his 
name  was  James.  Wilson,  and  tendered  a 
plea  of  misnomer  which  was  verified  by 
nis  affidavit:  the  plea  was  directed  by  tl^ 
Court  to  be  recorded,  and  time  was  given 
to  the  attorney-general  to  reply. 

Arthur  Thistlewood,  John  Thomas 
Brunt,  Richard  Tidd,  James  William 
Wilson,  John  Harrison,  and  John  Shaw 
Strange,  were  arraigned  on  the  indictment 
for  the  murder  of  Richard  Smithers. 
-Wilson  again  {beaded  in. abatement  his 
jnisaomer;  the  others  pleaded  not  guilty. 


£^d— «My  lofd,  I  wish  to  know  how  we 
.are  going  to  be  tried,  whether  together  or 
separately  ?  My  wish  is  to  be  tried  se- 
pwatelys  I  know.  I  can  clear  up  the 
charges  made  against  me. 

Lord  Chid'Juitke  AlfboU.^VrohMf  you 
will  have  tibat  opportunity;  but  this  is  not 
the  proper  time  to  make  application :  by 
and  oy  it  vrill  be  attended  to. 

Arthur  Thistlewood,  William  Davidsons 
James  Ings,  Charles  Cooper,  Richard 
Tidd,' John  Shaw  Strange,  Richard  Brad- 
bum, James  Wilson,  and  James  Gilchrist, 
were  arraigned,  on'^the  Coroner's  inouisi- 
tion,  for  the  murder  of  Richard  Smithers, 
and  sevendlv  pleaded  not  guilty. 

ArUiur  Thistlewood  was  arrai^ed  on 
the  indictment  charging  him  with  ma-  . 
liciously  shooting  at  William  Westcoatt, 
to  which  he  pleaded  not  guilty. 

James  Ings  was  arraigned  on  the  in-' 
dictment  charffing  him  with  maliciously 
shooting  at  William  Charies  Brooks,  to 
which  he  pleads  not  guilty. 

Richard  Tidd  was  arraigned  on  the  in- 
dictment chamng  him  with  maliciously 
shooting  at  William  Legg,  to  which  he 
pleaded  not  guilty. 

James  William  Wilson  was  arraigned 
on  the  indictment  charging  him  with 
drawing  the  trigger  of  a  loaded  pistol, 
with  intent  to  shoot  John  Moddock,  to 
which  he  again  pleaded  in  abatement  his 
misnomer.* 

At  the  request  of  the  several  prisontit 
the  following  gentlemen  were  assigned 
by  the  Court  as  their  counsel :— For 
Arthur  Thistlewood,  William  Davidson, 
James  Ion,  John  lliomas  Brunt,  Richard 
Tidd,  and  James.  William  Wilson,  Mr. 
Cnrwood,  and  Mr.  Adolphus.  For  John 
Harrison,  Richaid  Bcidbum,  John  Shaw 
Strange,  James  Gilchrist,  and  Charles 
Cooper,  Mr.  Walford,  and  Mr.  Broderick. 

Mr.  AttonK^  General, — My  lord,  the 
gentlemen  who  are  assigned  as  counsel 
for  the  prisoners,  having  intimated  that 
it  is  the  intention  of  the  prisoners  to 
challenge  separately,  I  am  under  the  ne- 
cessity of  desiring  that  they  may  be  tried 
separately.  I  propose  beginning  with  the 
trial  of  Arthur  Thistlewood,  on  the  in- 
dictment for  high  treason,  on  Monday 
morning. 

*  On  Monday,  April  24th,  an  indict- 
ment for  high  treason,  found  under  this 
special  oomminion,  against  James  WiU 
son,  to  th^  same  effect  as  the  former  in- 
dictment found  against  him  by  the  name 
of  James  William  Wilson,  an  indictment 
against  him  .for  the  murder  of  Richard 
Smithers,  and  an  indictment  acainst  him 
for  drawing  the  .trigger  of  a  lo^ed  pistol, 
with  intent  to  shoot  John  Muddock,  were 
delivered  intp  court. 


7in 


I  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  0/ Arthur  ThhUiwod 


CTlfl 


Lord  Chif  JuMtiee  AIMt.'^Ut  the 
•pnsoner  Tbistlewood  b«  inibraiedy  that 
bis  trial  for  high  treason  win  commenoe 
on  Monday  morning,  at  nfaie  o'clock. 

_  • 

.    The  piisoner.Thistlewood  was  informed 
accordingly,  by  the  derk  of  Arraigns. 


fiBBSIONS  HOUSE,  OLD  BAILBY. 

MoxDAT,  Apkjl  17|  iBiO', 

PtetaU, 

The  Right  Hon.  Lard  ChirfJuUiee  Abbott. 
The  Right  Hon.  Lord  ChitfJuttice  Dallat. 
The  Right  Hon.  the  Lord  Chief  Baron.  [Sir  R. 

RichardsJ. 
The  Hon.  Mr.  Juttiee  RichardMon^ 
The  Common  Sergeant. 
And  others  his  Mi^esty's  Justices,  &c. 

Countelfor  the  Crown. 

The  Attorney  General  [Sir  R.  Giffoid ;  alter-  I 
.  wards  snccessiTely  C.  J.  C.  B.  and  Master 
oftheRc^lsl. 
The  SoMtor  General  [Sir  J.  S.  Copley]. 
Mr.  Gyrney, 
Mr.  Uttmale  [aftenfrards  one  of  the  Justices 

of  the  Court  of  KiagVbench]. 
Mr.  AeynoUr. 
Mt.BoUand. 

Solieitor. 

fteerge  Mauley  Esq.  Solicitor  for  the  afiairs  of 
his  Mijesty's  Treasory. 

Gowudfor  ike  Frieomr. 

Mr.  Cwvfood. 

Mr.  Adolphu. 

SotkUor. 
^r.  Jama  Harmer» 

The  Court  bttng  oponed)  Arthur  Thistle- 
jwood  was  set  to  fine  bar. 

The  Jurors  returned  by  the  Sheriff  were  called 
over,  when  it  was  ascertained  that  the  fol- 
lowing were  not  freeholders  of  the  county  of 
Middlesex  to  the  aqiquAt  of  «f  ip  a-year. 

Geor^  Ksid^  esq. 
Jamei  Hammam,  plombtr. 
Charlet  Bowen,  esq. 
(horge  LaieeU,  grocer* 
-      Jmepk  Mcnyari^pai^QMttmB. 
John  (hdhiake,  rope-iaakef . 
Tbomae  Snodt,  shipirrigliC. 
Tkoma$  Savage f  waichmaker. 
JiMPiUtey  ihipwiight. 
Bobert  Soldiagf  esq. 
TAmms  Lamherif  builder.. 
Samiael  Smkh^  esq. 
WiUiam  Atlee,  cupenter. 
f^tBiam-Ymoigf  esq. 
ffiSUkm  Lamtficei  baker. 


Vahit9ne  LtAraWy  dAMist. 

ffuncst  Search  f  feather  hi  rasscr> 

Peter  Fiaky  leather-eetter. 

Thomae  Barfbot,  gentleman. 

John  9ammer$y  esq. 

Joibi  Broufhf  esq. 

2Vmtdt  LUtkwood,  farmer. 

haae  Bryant,  timber*merchant. 

Jamea  Arid,  watchmaker. 

Jamee  WhiAm,  painter. 

Joeeph  Warren f  gentlemm. 

Job  Leader,  joiner. 

William  Afukreon,  gentieman. 

WiUiam  Meredith,  watchspring-maker. 

EAoard  Harefkll,  gentleman.. 

Thomae  Beach,  market-gardener. 

Jame$  Cooper,  japanner. 

WiUiam  Fountatn,  sibetsmiliu 

Michael  Bomne,  milkman. 

Jo/m  Lee,  stationer. 

John  Themai  Gmm,  coackmaker. 

Thomai  Hollingt,  lightermtti. 

John  Ctnpage,  esq. 

Henry  ijamon,esq,,  andpiano-fortemaker. 

Chartee  Neat,  teaoier  of  music. 

nomas  Gabriel,  esq. 

George  Ihfkx,  TictuaHer. 

James  Bason,  china-man. 

JohnLodtett,  gentleman  and  tavere-keeper. 

John  Marrington,  dyer. 

George  Mnny,  geimemaii. 

The  following  Jurprs  were  excused. 

Bdamrd  Bushes,  gendeman,  on  aecoont  of  ill* 

ness. 
Edieard  Grant,  cowkeeper,  on  account  of  ill* 


WUHam  Stark,  gentleman,  not  properly  de- 
scribed in  the  panel. 

Thomas  Framton,  dkeesemonger,  on  account  of 
deafness. 

WiUiam  Jasony  rope-maker,  on  aecount  of  deaf- 
ness. 

Thomas  Mitcheson,  cooper,  on  aocoont  of  deaT* 


Hasry  Ramsey,  boat-buiMer,  on  account  off  ill- 
ness. 

Robert  Brmne,  gentleman,  on  account  of  deaf- 
ness. 

James  Thompson,  gentleman,  on  accouftt  of  iR. 
ness. 

John  ReynMs,  watch-chain  maker,  on  account 
of  deafness. 

Joseph  Clements,  market-gardener,  on  account  of 
illness. 

Alexander  Ross,  esq.,  on  account  of  age  and 
illness. 

Thomas  Austin,  esq.,  on  account  of  iUnesa* 

nomas  Phillhs,  jeweller,   not  properly  de» 
scribed  in  the  panel. 

William  Winser,  gentleman,  not  sumasoiked^ 
haying  removed. 

Rkhard  Norton,  gentleman,  on  aoeovnt  off  we. 

Robert  Craneh,  gentleman,  not  properly  de- 
scribed in  the  paneU 

Thomas  Gmrett,  gentleman,  on  account  oif  a|^ 

Samuel  Wimbush,  horse-deder,  for  the  preaent^ 


713} 


^  Higk  Tf'iuuaii* 


A.  IX  USa 


1714 


not  bdng  pnputi  to  ieptu  vivlher  h$ 
was  a  freidioldw  in  kUMm  rigbt* 
JMmi  Qreawmf  gentlaaua,  on  acoomit  of  ill* 


JoAm  Belij  esq.  and  briidir^  not  piopaity  de- 
scribed in  the  paneL 

CharUi  J^fery,  gentleman,  not  piopeiiy  de- 
scribed in  the  paneL 

Patrkk  Bmiletiy  esq.,  not  boving  received  the 
summons  in  time* 

Eijfak  Prtce^  jentleman,  on  aocount  of  age. 

WUku  Booii^  siWeramitby  npt  properly  de- 
scribed in  the  paneL 

Aiktrt  Ooocfty  watchmaker,  not  }iaTing  been 
sorvod  with  the  snmnonsy  being  on  a  journey  • 

WiUUm  Bmigeif  esq.,  on  account  of  age  and 


nomm  Bmhtt^  timber-merehant,  not  properly 

described  in  the  panel,   his  name  being 

Hacker. 
Tk&mm  HeiUky  om).  and  tea-dealer,  on  account 

of  age  and  illness. 
JnHm  UmiU,  ^ntleman  and  calieo*printer,  on 

account  of  illness. 
Tkomat  Fenjf  larmer,  on  account  of  age  and 

dealness. 
JMn  Fnuier,  pentleman,  daimed  his  priTilege 

as  a  practising  attorney  and  solicitor  which 

was  allowed. 
JMNiPdbsr,  gonllemanien  aeeountof  iUness. 
ChaHa  Cotkf  tojrmaker,  not  suinaionedy  no 

such  peteon  bemg  known. 
T%omai  GftsvdryyShip-dMmdlery  not  summoned, 

havngremcired  out  of  the  countv* 
S^SBMt  Mb^  esq.,  on  account  ol  iuness. 
Himry  IWend^  esq.,  on  aooonat  of  illness. 
PeUr  RokerlBim,  gentleman  and  builder,  on  ao- 
count of  illneas. 
Jbkn  Jleiserqpy  grocer,  not  properly  described 

in  the  panel,  his  name  bemg  Moeciop. 
Bemy  Knevd,  maxket-gaidener,  on  account  of 

deafiiess. 
JcKpk  IVocfer,  gentleman,  nothsiving  luoeived 

the  summons* 
Wiilum  fbrfyfA,  esq.,  on  account  of  illness* 
Jbkn  Bnah,  sprtnget  and  liner,  on  aeoount  of 

illness. 
l^t^fvni  Ptiety  gentlemaB  and  currier,  on  a^ 

count  of  illness  in  his  ftmily. 
Join  Appkf  druMffinder,  on  aocount  of  ilhMss. 

Prwmer. — ^WUl  your  lordship  be  pleased  to 
allow  me  a  seat  f 

U^  Ode/  Ju$tke  ilMoff.— Considering 
tin  lengtii  of  time  tte  trial  may  be  IHtely  to 
Mscupy,  tiie  court  will  allow  you  Hud  in^ 
dnlgenee* 

The  list  having  been  gone  through^  the  Do- 
iaulters  were  oJled  over. 

AMmellilflqp^S^  baker,  eacqsed  on  neoount  of 
iHnen* 

Johi  JFaArook^  brickmaker,  fined  for  non-at- 
tendance, but  the  fine  aftarwardi  remitted, 
on  proof  of  illness. 

JMn  Mttt,  undertaker,  fined  for  non-uttend* 
mice,  but  the  fine  afterwards  remitted  #n  his 
^qppearance. 


The  Jurors  who  had  answered  to  their  names 
were  again  called  over. 

WiUiam  Plauon^  gentleman,  challenged  by  the 
Crown. 

Alexander  Barclay ^  gentleman  and  grocer  sworn. 

Thomai  LetUr^  bookseller,  challenged  by  the 
Crown. 

Jmqh  Sh^gfddf  evq.  and  ironmonger,  chal- 
lenged by  the  prisoner. 


Tkomai  Goodchilif  esq.  swort. 
mpHim 
Crown. 


JoHtpA]  flayuet,  bri 


eso.  swo 
ickiayer. 


challenged  by  the 


Koberi  Sitpkamm,  anchorsmitii,  challenged  by 

the  Crown. 
Skhard  Bbaa,  gentleman,  challenged  by  tilo 

prisoner. 
Jmoc  Ommi,  baker,  chiHeuged  by  the  Crown. 
WUliam  ChurddUy  gentleman  and  wine-mer- 
chant, challenffed  by  4he  Crown. 
TRomof  S^Mi  lUeney,  esq.  sworn. 
Thomai  wuhmonf  farmer,  challenged  by  ^ 

prisoner. 
Stumid  Fiihf  tobacconist,  challenged  by  the 
-  prisoner. 

Einond  CoUmgridge^  water-gilder,  challeUg^ 
•  by  the  Crown. 

Wmiam  Shorty  farmer,  challenged  by  the  Crown. 
nfantt  turhtfi^  carpenter,  sworn* 
Mm  Shooier,  gentleman. 

Mr.  SkaUr^    My  name  is  incorrectly  spelt, 
I  speQ  it  ftmter. 

Lord  Chief  Juitiee  Abbott-^Th^  sound  seems 
to  me  to  be  the  same,  that  is  no  importani 
variation  as  it  appears  to  me. 
Mr*  Aofsr  was  sworn. 
Jotiak  BarthoUmiewy  watch-maker,  diiltenged 

by  the  prisoner. 
j€km  Jmrn,  carpenter,   challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
Tkomoi  Brrnkmy  ooadimaiLer,  diallengedl^  the 

prisoner. 
Smmtd  Oratigeff  lichterfiiail,  sworn. 
George  Dictaissn,  builder,  sworn. 
l^smst  PorMwon,  wpholsterer,  challenged  by 

the  prisoner. 
2%0Hlai  AeMon,  mt^*  and  ship-chandler,  dwl^ 

longed  by  the  prisoner. 
Jamee  WUmi,  maiket  gardener,  diallettged  by 

the  Crown. 
George  PhUSpe,  jeweller,  challei^  by  ^ 

prisoner. 
l^omas  Bird,  distiller,  challenged  by  the  pri- 
soner* 
WUliam  hhaam,   baker,   ehaHenged  by  llie 

Crown* 
John  Edmatd  Sh^ihard,  gentleman,  swoin. 
Samael  Omdd,  celico  printer,  challenged  by  the 

Cro^nib 
Jasict  IF«isior8^esq.,ohaUeUffedby  the  prisoner. 
lHhsmt  BrtNBN^  oinnn,  chuenged  t^  the  pri-^ 


Gsor||v  Mm^  bitss  fiMndor,  dnHengedby  the 

prisoner* 
iriMMMi  Meedf  esq.,  challenged  by  the  prisoner* 
Otorgp  Dmdtf  cdOper,  challee^ed  by  the  ftU 

sener* . 


7W 


1  GSOSGE  IV. 


Trial  ofAr&var  ThkOetoood 


1716 


John  FktnieB,  brewer,  challenged  by  the  pri- 
soiier. 

JtmaihaH  Tauhngham^  fonner,  chifllenged  by 
the  Crown. 

JoKpA  Drakcj  draper,  challenged  by  the  pri« 
soner.  « 

Jckn  FcwUr,  iron-plate-worker,  sworn. 

Satrnxl  BMetf  esq.,  and  cow-lceeper,  cfaal- 
Unged  by  the  prisoner. 

Wiiian  OAU  Roberti,  cooper,  sworn. 

Bkhard  Smiihf  esq.,  challenged  by  the  Crown. 

JcMph  Pefidered,  iion-plate-worker,  challenged 
by  ttie  Crown. 

IVeiet  Garrett,  shipwright,  challenged  by  the 
Crown. 

Matthew  Aiktanf  coachmaster,  challenged  by 

.  the  prisoner. 

Bi^ard  Hatchetty  esq.,  and  fiumer,  challenged 

.  by  the  prisoner. 

J<^  Dicheruony  builder,  challenged  by  the  pri- 
soner. 

John  Dobeonj  esc|..  sworn. 

Thomat  Dicks,  silversmith,  diallenged  by  the 
Crown. 

ThmoM  Wood,  painter,  challenged  by  the  pri- 
soner. 

Jamei  Gnotoi,  joiner,  challenged  by  the  prisoner. 

Mobert  Welk,  fturmer,  challenged  by  the  Crown. 

WUiiam  FUhy,  brickinaker,  excused,  not  pro- 
perty described  in  the  panel,  his  name  being 

Edward  BraeAridge,  watchmaker,  challenged 
by  the  Crown. 

John  Jonei,  stockbroker,  ohallenged  by  the 
Crown. 

TTtomat  Partridge,  farmer,  challenged  by  the 
prisoner. 

BiSmy  HUlard,  watch-gilder,  not  property  de- 
scribed in  the  panel,  his  name,  being  Hil- 
liard* 

Otorge  flbw,  ship-chandler,  diallenged  by  the 
Crown. 

Thomas  Harby,  es^.,  and  rope«maker,  chal- 
lenged by  Uie  prisoner. 

WiiUnn  Jarrett,  watch-engraver,  challei^ed 
by  the  prisoner. 

John  Butfti^y  gentleman,  and  tailor,  chaU 
lenged  by  the  Crown. 

VTUuMi  DaweSf  farmer,  challenged  by  th^. 
Crown. 

Cooper,  gentleman,  sworn. 

TH£  JU&Y. 


Alexander  Barclay, 
Thomas  Goodchild, 
T.  Snffield  Aldersey, 
James  Herbert, 
John  Shuter, 
Samnel  Granger, 


George  Dickenson, 
John  Edw.  Shephard, 
John  Fowler, 
Wm.  Gibbs  Roberts, 
John  Dobfon, 
William  Cooper. 


Lord  Chitf  Jmtke  AhhoH^^As  there  aie 
feTeral  persons  chai|;ed  by  this  Indictment 
whose  trials  may  come  on  snocessiTcly,  the 
Court  thinks  it  necessary,  for  the  furUierance 
of  justice,  strictly  to  prohibit  the  publication 
of  the  proceedings  on  this  or  any  other  trial, 
wifil  all  the  trials  shall  bs  gonethrougl^i    It  is 


highly  natasaiy,  for  the  pinpoMS  of  justioe, 
that  the  public  aiad,  oritfae  minda*  of  those 
who  may  be  to. senre.as  jurors  on  trials  here- 
after, may  not  be  influenced  by  the  publicatioD 
of  any  thins  which  takes  place  on  toe  present- 
trial.  We  nope  all  persons  will  observe  this 
injunction.  * 

The  Jury  were  charged  with  the  prisoner  in 
the  usual  form. 

The  Indictment  was  opened  by  9fr.  BolktmL 

Mr.  Attorn^  General* — Gentlemen  of  the 
jury ;— You  are  assembled  to  disdiarge  one 
of  the  most  important  duties  that  can  devolve 
upon  a  jury— to  decide  upon  the  giuH  or 
innocence  of  a  fellow  subject  diarged  with 
the  crime  of  high  treason;  the  h^est  of> 
fonce  known  to  |he  law.  Upon  such  an 
occasion,  I  am  satisfied  it  is  unnecessary  for 
me  to  bespeak  your  ptftient  attention  jlo  the 
statement  which  it  will  be  my  duty  to  make  to 
3rou;  still  less  to  point  out  the  necessity  of 
entering  upon  the  investigation  with  unbiassed 
and  unprqudiced  minds— of  discarding  from 
your  recollection  every  thing  you  have  heard  or 
read,  relative  to  the  chaiige  preferred  against 
the  pri^ner,  of,  confining  your  attention  ex- 
dusivdy  to  the  evidence  which  will  be  adduced 
in  support  of  that  charae,  and  of  forming  your . 
ded^ion  upon  that  eviaence  alone. 

The  charge  is,  as  I  have  stated  to  yon,  (me 
of  the  highest  nature  known  to  the  law ;  other 
crimes,  generally  speaking,  however  heinous 
and  enormous,  terminate,  except  so  for  as  oc- 
ample  is  concerned,  with  their  perpetration  ; 
but  high  treason,  not  only  in  its  inception* 
but  stiU  more  if  it  be  successfuL  draws  aner  it 
consequences  of  the  most  dreadful  kind,  afiect* . 
ing  not  only  individuals,  but  the  community 
at  large. 

I  shall  not  trouble  you  with  any  lengthened 
obsttvations  upon  the  law,  as  it  appUes  to  the 
crime  imputed  to  the  prisoner,  because,  if  I 
mistake  not  greatly,  that  law  is  so  undis* 
puted,  and  the  foots  which  will  be  proved  to 
you  wiU  so  clearly  and  satisfoctorily  establish 
the  charge  contained  in  the  indictment,  that  it, 
would  be  an  idle  parade  in  me  to  refer  either 
to  the  authority  of  decisions,  or  to  the  opinions 
of  our  ablest  commentators  upon  the  subject. 
If  the  overt  acts  laid  in  this  indictment,  or  «, 
sufficient  number  of  them,  shall  be  8atisfo<>- 
torily  proved,  I  will  venture  to  affirm  that  no 
man  who  hears  me  will  entertain  the  slightest 
doubt,  that  they  will  establish  one  or  other  of 
the  counts  of  this  indictment,  and  bring  home 
to  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  the  high  treason 
with  whidi'he  stands  ehaiged. 

The  four  counts  in  this  indictment  wiU  aU 
be  proved  to  you  by  the  same  evidence ;  and 

*See  the  proceedings  on  April  34th  and  35th 
upon  this  subject,  during  the  trial  of  John 
Ihomas  Brunt;  and  the  further  proceedings 
on  April  38th  at  the  conclusion  ouibe  trials»' 
under  this  Special  Commission,  v^hu    . 


7171 


far  High  TreatM. 


A.  t>.  18^6. 


[718 


the  evidence  which  establishes  one,  >win«  I 
believe^  completely  support  the  others.  The 
offences  char^  are  compassing  and  ima^« 
ing  the  deposition  of  the  king  from  his  throne; 
compassing  and  imagining  the  death  of  the 
king ;  conspiring  to  \ery  war^  in  order  to  cota- 
pel  the  king  to  change  his  measilres ;  and  lery* 
ing  war  against  the  king.  It  is  hardly  neces- 
sary for  me  to  state,  that  in  proof  of  these 
charges  it  is  not  essential  that  the  plans  of  the 
patties  accused  shonld  aim  directly  and  im- 
mediately either  at  the  deposition  or  at  the 
life  of  his  majesty,  becanse  ii  they  werepointed 
against  that  form  of  goTemment  which  now 
exists,  if  they  were  intended  to  bring  about  a 
change  in  the  established  system  by  means  of 
force,  they  naturally  and  obriously,  in  the 
event  of  their  being  successful,  tended  to 
effect  the  removal  of  the  kins  from  his  kinglr 
dignity,  or  the  destruction  of  his  life.  It  will 
therefore  be  quite  sufficient  for  me  to  apprize 
you,  in  the  first  instance,  that  the  plans  or  the 
conspirators  were  of  such  a  nature  and  de- 
scription, that  though,  in  their  primary  opera- 
tions, they  were  directed  against  the  govern- 
ment, as  they  will  indisputably  be  proTod  to 
have  been,  and  not  immediately  aimed  at  the 
destruction  either  of  the  authori^  or  the  life  of 
his  majesty,  they  would,  in  their  oonseauences, 
inevitably  lead  to  those  results.  And  there- 
fore, not  to  bewilder  you  in  the  inquiry  upon 
which  you  are  about  to  enter,  I  think  it  quite 
sufficient  in  the  outset  to  state  to  you — that  in 
which  I  believe  I  shall  be  confiiined  by  the 
highest  authority  the  law  knows  when  this 
case  shall  be  summed  up  to  you — that  if  the 
overt  acts,  that  is,  the  &cts  stated  in  this  in- 
dictment as  indicating  and  evincing  the  trai- 
torous intention  of  the  conspirators,  shall  be 
proved,  they  will  establish  tue  chaise  laid  in 
this  indictment.  It  is  unnecessary,  therefore, 
to  trouble  you  at  present  with  anv  further  dis- 
cnsnon  of  the  law  applicable  to  the  charge. 

Important  and  anxious  as  the  duty  is  which 
yon  are  called  upon  to  discharge,  mine,  I  may 
say,  is  no  less  so.  In  my  address  to  you,  I  do 
assure  you  m^  only  purpose  is,  to  mak^  you 
acquainted  with  the  nature  of  the  charge 
against  the  accused,  and  the  evidence  by  which 
that  charge  will  be  substantiated.  It  is  nei- 
ther my  intention  nor  my  wish  to  lead  you  to 
any  conclusion  which  the  evidence  itself  will 
■ot  warrant ;  for,  God  knows,  if  the  facts  shall 
be  proTcd,  as  I  have  eveiy  reason  to  believe 
they  will  be,  they  want  no  addition  to  bring 
the  minds  of  any  unprejudiced  persons  to  the 
inevitable  oondnsion  of  guilt.  My  duty  is  to 
state  the  cu4  to  you  Ivrly,  as  between  the 

ribfic  and  the  unfortunate  man  at  the  bar,  as 
expect  it  will  be  proved,  without  exagger- 
ation on  the  one  side,  or  timid  reserve  on  the 
other. '  If  I  should  unconsciously  err ; — ^if, 
when  the  time  arrives  at  which  yoo  are  to 
determine  upon  the  verdict  you  shaH  give,  you 
tfmll  think  either  thai  the  statement  I  have 
bid  before  you  has  not  b^en  proved,  or  that 
the  observalioDS  and  inferences  I  have  made 


and  drtt#n  are  not  borne  out  by  the  proof, 
dismiss  them  from  your  nlinds,  and  confine 
your  attention  to  the  iBfvidence  alone.  But  if 
yon  shdl  be  satisfied  that  the  statement  I  shidl 
have  made  is  supported  by  the  facts ;  if  you 
believe  that  the  observations  introduced  in  the 
course  of  that  statement  fairly  and  naturally 
arise  out  of  those  facts,  then  you  will,  as 
honest  men,  give  to  them  that  weight  whidi 
th^  deserve. 

Having  said  ^hus  much,  I  shall,  without 
further  preface,  call  your  attention,  as  perspi- 
cuously and  as  brieflr  as  I  can,  to  the  drcum- 
stances  which  will  be  given  in  evidence  to 
substantiate  the  charge. 

The  prisoner  at  the  bar,  Arthur  Thistlevrood, 
must  be  already  known  to  you  bv  name ;  bnt, 
as  I  have  already  said,  let  nothing  that  you 
have  known  or  heard  of  him  before  you  came 
into 'this  Court  to  discfaarve  the  soleosh  duty 
you  are  to  perfbrm,  have  w  least  effisct  upon 
the  Terdict  you  are  to  pronounce.  The 
prisoner  has,  I  fear,  for  some  time  conceived 
Uie  wicked  and  nefarious  purpose  of  attempt-^ 
ing  to  overturn  the  government  as  by  law 
established  in  this  kingdom:  and  it  will  ap- 
pear to  you,  that  all  the  other  persons  included 
m  this  indictment,  and  whose  names  will 
occur  in  the  course  of  the  investigation,  were 
paridcipators  with  him  in  this  guilty  design. 
Some  of  them,  it  is  true,  entered  into  the  con^ 
spiracy  at  a  later  period  than  otfiers,  but  all 
concurred  in  that  act  which  was  to  luiTe  been' 
the  commencement  of  the  tragical  operations 
they  had  in  contemplation.  At  present,  how- 
ever, I  shall  call  your  attention  snore  particu* 
lariy  to  two  of  the  prisoners,  James  Ings,  and 
John  Thomas  Brunt. 

The  prisoner  resided,  during  the  time  of  the 
transactions  which  I  am  about  to  relate  to  you, 
in  Stanhope-street,  Clare-market.  Brunt  wae 
a  shoemaker  or  boot-clOser,  linng  at  a  place 
which  will  be  flrec|uently  menticmed  in  the 
course  of  this  inquiry,  Fox-coulrt,  Oray's-inn- 
lane;  he  inhabited  two  rooms  on  the  second 
floor  of  a  house  in  that  court,  in  one  of  whtch- 
his  trade  was  carried  on,  and  in  the  other  he 
and  his  mh  slept.  His  family  consisted  of 
bis  wife,  a  son,  and  an  apprentice  of  the  name 
"of  Hale.  — 

I  shall  not  carry  you  Tory  far  beck  in  the 
narrative  of  these  transactions ;  it  vHU  be  suffi- 
cient for  me,  in  this  statement,  to  call  your 
attention  to  drcumstances  which  took  place 
from  the  close  of  January,  until  the  S3rd  of  the 
following  month.  It  will  appear  to  you,  that 
long  anterior  to  that  period,  the  prisoner  at 
the  bar,  the  two  persons  I  have  mentioned^ 
and  several  of  the  others  whose  names  are 
indoded  in  this  indictment,  had  consultiM 
together,  and  devised  plans  for  the  purpose  of' 
overturning  the  government.  Ihey  had  held 
frequent  meetinn  at  a  public  house  called  the- 
White  Hart,  in  Brook's-nuurket,  and  in  a  room 
behind  that  public  house.  At  the  latter  end 
of  the  month  of  January,  or  the  commesieeinenC^ 
of  the  month  of  February,  they  thonghl  it 


719] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Tnat  qf  Arthur  Tkiitkmood 


W«^ 


prudent  (o  lemove  Uieir  nettiagi  Snw  thoio 
places,  and  tjiRt  it  woold  be  better  tbat  tbe¥ 
•bould  be  earned  oa  ui  the  hiooae  ia  wfaieb 
BniBt  reaidedy  ia  FeK-eawt;  and,  to  avoid 
«iiapicioi%  they  contrived  that  another  room  in 
that  hoiue,  and  upon  the  save  floor  upon 
which  Brunt  lived,  ahould  be  taken  for  the 

Kisoaer  logs,  who,  I  beUere,  waa  bj  trade  a 
tchef .  Brant  and  Ings,  it  will  be  proved  to 
you,  hired  that  room  for  the  avowea  porpoee 
•fa  lodging  for  the  piiaoBerlnny  bat  for  the 
secret  and  reel  object  of  holcung  meetings 
there,  at  which  they  might  mature  their  plans, 
aad  prepare  the  means  for  canying  them  into 
execution,  it  being  a  place  of  more  inmediate 
secaiity  and  greater  secrecr  than  they  had 
previously  been  enabled  to  obtain. 

Having  prepared  means  for  efiectoating 
their  pliyNf  their  meetings  at  the  room  in 
Brant's  hoase  became  more  frequent  and 
numerous*  Gentlemen,  I  here  regret  that  I 
have  to  state  in  an  Enfdish  eourt  of  justice 
the  horrible  plans  which  liad  entered  into  the 
minds  of  these  conspirators,  and  the  act  with 
which  they  intended  to  commence  the  neforioos 
woject  they  had  in  view.  It  was  thought  by 
Ba^lishmen,  that  the  assassination  of  all  hw 
maiesty's  ministers  would  be  a  proper  com- 
mencemont  of  the  revolution  which  thev  wished 
tQ  bring  about  j  and  you  vrill  find,  that  they 
frequently  deliberatod  and  consulted  upon  tlie 
means  by  which  that  most  widied  design  was 
to  be  aooomplished.  They  entertained  hopes 
that  th^  should  be  enabled,  at  some  meeting 
of  bin  ma}est/s  miniiten,  to  perpetrate  the 
bloody  deed  >-»having  effected  that,  theyia^ 
landed  to  set  fire  to  various  parts  of  this 
metropolis,  to  endeavour  to  obtam  possession 
of  the  cannon  at  the  artillery  ground,  and  at 
the  sUble  of  the  City  Light  Hone  Volnnteersi 
I  believe  in  GnyV4nn-lane — to  create  ae 
much  confusion  and  dismav  as  they  could  by 
these  various  opemtions,and  then  to  estabUsn, 
what  in  their  vain  expectations  the^  had 
imagined  themselves  capable  of  erectiiig^  a 
provirional  government,  the  seat  of  whidi  was 
to  be  at  the  Mansion-house. 

They  had  frrauent  deliberations  upon  these 
plans.  You  wiU  rec<4lect  his  late  most  ex- 
cellent majesty  died  on  the  39th  of  January. 
It  was  thought  at  one  of  the  meetings,  that  tne 
night  of  the  king's  funeral  might  be  a  proper 
time  for  them  to  commence  the  work  of  de« 
struction.  They  had  intimation  that  on  that 
occasion  die  greater  part  of  the  troops  quartered 
in  the  metropolis  would  b^  removed  from  it 
to  Windsor,  to  attend  the  ceremony  of  bi3  m^ 

Sky's  interment;  and  thsy  imbued  that  would 
an  c^;>portunejMriod  for  pottinv  their  sohemes 
ia  execution.  However,  they  abandoned  that 
iateotiaa ;  they  found  that  their  plana  embraced 
men  ehiacts  than  they  had  men  to  effect ;  and 
Xifjon  tbttttil^a,  thenfore,  they  did  not  attempt 
flfm  purpose  they  bad  in  view.  But,  brooding 
oapr  their  ndlarious  machinationB,  many  of  theaa 
wJM  bAQWft  extrsmely  iawatient  at  the  delays 
wm«h  WW  frem  time  to  tune  ist^posed  ba^ 


tween  the  present  day  and  that  which. they 
thought  would  be  the  completion  of  their  hopes^ 
and  yau  will  find,  that  at  a  meeting  wUch  they 
held  at  Brunt's,  on  Saturday,  the  10th  of 
February,  the  impatience  became  so  great,  on 
the  part  of  many  of  them,  that  they  then  deteiw 
mined  to  vrait  no  longer ;  but  that  if  no  oppor- 
tunity in  the  mean  time  should  ooour,.  of  their 
being  able  to  accomplish  the  assasrinaUon  of 
his  majesty's  ministersy  by  finding  them  idl 
assembled  at  the  same  house,  at  aU  events  on 
the  following  Wednesday,  the  23rd,  some  blow 
should  be  struck,  and  that  the  revolution  whidi 
they  had  in  contemplation,  should  actoally  have 
its  commencement. 

Having  thus  determined,  they  appointed  a 
meetins  on  the  next  day,  the  Sunday,  at  Brunt*» 
house,  for  the  purpose  of  fonoing  a  committer 
upon  whom  should  devolve  the  organisation  of 
the  plan  of  operations  for  the  ensuing  Wed* 
nesday.  At  Uiat  meetina,  and  indeed  at  all 
the  meetings,  you  will  find  that  the  prisoner  at 
the  bar  was  the  leader  upon  whom  they  mainly 
relied  for  the  success  of  their  enterprise.  Yoa 
will  find  that  he  was  generally  the  person  who 
addressed  them,  who  suggested  the  course  of 
their  proceedings,  and  in  whose  counsel  and 
advice  th^  placed  the  most  implicit  confidence. 
It  was  the  prisoner,  Thistlewood,  who,  on  tiie 
19th  of  February,  proposed  that  whidi  I  have 
stated  to  you ;  he  said,  tiiat  as  it  did  not  ap- 
pear from  ai^  intelligence  thay  could  collect, 
that  ministers  were  lU^ely  soon  to  be  together 
at  a  cabinet  dinner,  they  should  immediately 
asoortain  the  strength  of  their  respective  parties, 
and  that  having  ascertained  it,  those  partiea 
should  be  divided  into  different  bodies,  upon 
some  of  whom  should  devolve  the  horrible  task 
of  destroying  as  many  of  his  majesty's  ministers 
as  came  vridiin  their  reach;  upon  others,  tfie 
duty  of  settinff  fire  to  various  parts  of  the  me- 
tn^lis,  and  that  to  the  rest  should  be  assigned 
the  execution  of  other  parts  of  the  plot,  vriuc^ 
were  then  detailed  bv  tlie  prisoner  Thistlewood. 
This  plan  vras  at  mat  meeting  seconded  by 
Brunt ;  and  it  vras  agreed,  ^at  on  the  following 
day,  the  Sunday,  a  meeting  should  take  place 
at  Bhmt's  room,  in  order  to  appoint  a  com- 
mittee to  complete  the  final  arrangement  of  the 
operations  of  the  following  Wednesday. 

Accordingly,  on  that  Sunday  a  meeting  took 
place  at  Brunt's.  It  was  attended  tnr  the 
prisoner  lliistlewood,  Ings,  Harrison,  Wilson, 
and  others  of  the  conspirators.  With  all  their 
names  I  do  not  at  this  moment  trouble  you^ 
because  your  attention  should  be  confined,  at 
present,  to  the  charge  against  the  prisoner  upott 
trial ;  at  the  same  time  I  must  observe,  that  if 
in  the  course  of  the  investigation,  we  shafl  con- 
nect all  Uie  persons  accused  in  one  eommon 
Slot,  and  one  common  design,  the  acts  aad 
ecUrations  of  all  of  them  will  become  most 
important.  They  vrill  eadi  be  answerable  for 
the  acts  and  declarations  of  the  others,  made 
aad  done  in  furtherance  of  their  commcn  o1^ 
jeet  The  plan  was  again  detailed  by  Thisye*' 
woady  was  again  approved  by  the  peneas  pre- 


7ai] 


font  High  TreoMon, 


A.  D.  1820. 


[722 


sent  (their  rnmber  being  fonrtgen  or  fifteen), 
and  it  ^tns  resolred  that  no  actmty  should  be 
-wwitifig  in  the  mean  time,  in  making  the  pre- 
parations necessary  to  enable  them  to  eneet 
their  atrocious  deisigns. 

Upon  that  occasion  it  Was  ^^^  that  they 
should  meet  agsdn  on  the  following  Monday; 
and  you  will  find  they  did  accordingly  meet  at 
Brunt's.  The  same  plan  was  canvassed — ^no 
objection  was  made  to  it — ^and  tfiey  then  se- 
parated for  the  purposes  of  communicating  it 
to  their  followers,  in  the  difibrent  parts  of  the 
town,  and  of  collecting  as  many  persons  as 
tUey  should  be  enabled  to  dO|  for  meeting  on 
this  following  'Wednesday. 

On  the  morning  of  Tuesday,  the  22nd  of 
February,  a  meeting  took  place  at  Brunt's, 
and,  upon  that  occasion,  one  of  the  conspirators 
communicated  to  those  who  were  present,  that 
he  had  discoyered  by  a  newspaper  that  a  ca- 
binet dinner  was  to  be  had  on  the  following 
day,  Wednesday,  at  the  house  of  lord  Harrow- 
by,  in  Grosvenor-square.    you  wiU  be  shodced 
when  you  hear  the  eridence  of  the  exultation 
with  which  this  intelligence   was   receiTed. 
Brunt,  with  an  impiety  at  which  eveiy  well 
regulated  mind  must  reToit,  exclaimed  that  till 
then  he  had  disbelieved  in  the  existence  of  a 
God,  but  that  now  he  was  satisfied  that  the 
Almighty  was  favouring   their  designs,  and 
that  this  meeting  was  appointed  on  the  follow- 
ing day  to  enable  them  at  one  blow  to  effectuate 
that  purpose,  which  had  been  levelled  against 
each  of  his  majesty's  ministers  5  and  that  they 
might  be  enabled,  by  the  means  they  had  pro- 
cured, at  once  to  destroy  every  member  01  the 
cabinet  who  should  be  present  upon  that  occa* 
ston.  The  exultation  was  notoonnned  to  Brunt 
alone ;  you  will  find  that  Ings,  and  the  other 
persons  present,  equally  rejoiced  in  the  con- 
templation of  the  speedy  success  of  their  in- 
£unous  designs,  exclaiming  that  on  the  follow- 
ing night  they  should  attain  that  which  had 
been  so  lone  the  object  of  their  desire,  and  for 
which  they  had  been  preparing  with  such  un- 
remitting anxiety.    A  newspaper  was  then  sent 
for  in  order  to  see  whether  tne  intelligence  was 
true :  on  its  being  brought,  it  was  <uscovered 
to  be  so,  and  then  they  immediately  resolved 
that  instead  of  the  plan  which  had  been  pre- 
viously arranged,  namely,  the  endeavouring  to 
assassinate  some  of  his  majesty's  ministers  at 
their  respective  residences,  or  wherever  they 
might  be  found,  the  house  of  lord  Harrowby 
should  be  the  object  of  attack ;  and  that  in  the 
evening,  at  nine  o'clock,  after  the  guests  were 
assembled,  and  when  they  were  seated  in  se- 
curity at  table,  the  house  should  be  entered  by 
a  chosen  party  of  the  conspirators,  and  the 
ministers  should  be  destroyed  by  the  means  I 
shall  presently  describe  to  you. 

Upon  this  intelligence  their  activity  was  re- 
doubled ;  they  met  again  in  the  evening ;  their 
different  partizans  were  requested  at' once  to 
coOect  together  all  the  fire*arms  they  had  ob- 
tained, tiM  ammunition  they  had  purchased, 
andthe  difibreht  instruments  of  mischief,  which 

VOL.  xxxm. 


you  wiU  find  they  had  prepared  for  the  occa- 
sion ;  every  thing  was  to  be  put  in  a  state  of 
preparation  against  the  following  evening. 

r  should  have  stated  to  you,  gentlemen,  be- 
fore I  arrived  at  this  part  of  the  narrative,  that 
a  person  of  the  name  of  Udd,  who  is  included 
in  the  indictment,  and  who  livedo  I  believe,  at 
a  place  called  Hole-in-th^Wall  Passage,  near 
Brook's-maricet,  had,  early  in  the  plot,  become 
one  of  these  conspirators,  and  had  embarked 
in  all  their  plans.  His  house  had  been  made 
a  d6p6t  for  some  of  their  arms  and  ammunition. 
As  tneir  meetings  were  at  Brunt's,  they  had  a 
suspicion  that  they  might  be  watched  and 
overiooked,  and  they  considered  it  unsafe  that 
his  house  should  be  the  sole  place  of  deposit. 
Tidd's,  therefore,  had  for  some  time  been  ap- 
pointed to  be  another  receptacle  for  the  powder, 
nail,  ammunition,  and  other  instruments  of  de- 
struction, idiich  they  had  prepared,  and  which 
will  be  produced  to  you  in  the  course  of  the 
trial. 

As  Brunt's  house  was  at  some  considerable 
distance  from  Grosven<»-square,  where  their 
operations  were  to  commence,  they  thought  it 
better  to  procure  some  place  of  rendezvous 
nearer  to  the  residence  of  lord  Harrowby;  and 
you  will  find,  therefore  (though  it  was  not 
communicated  at  that  moment  to  the  different 
parties  who  were  engaged  in  the  transaction), 
that  the  spot  selected  was  a  small  obscure 
street  called  Cato-street,  which  runs  into  John 
street,  in  the  Edgware-Road.  In  this  street  a 
stable  was  procured  by  Harrison,  one  of  the 
conspirators,  for  the  purpose  of  their  meeting 
on  the  following  evening,  preparatory  to  their 
going  to  the  house  of  lord  lianrowbyjin  Gros- 
venor-square. 

It  providentiallyhappened  in  this  conspiracy, 
as  will  generally  occur  in  plots  of  a  similar 
nature,  that  some  of  the  parties,  previous  to 
its  execution,  began  to  feel  compunctious  visit- 
ings  of  nature,  and  startled  at  the  crimes  they 
were  about  to  commit ;  and  you  will  find  that 
upon  the  Tuesday  (the  day  on  which  the  intel- 
ligence was  received  by  them  that  there  would, 
on  the  following  day,  be  a  dinner  at  lord  Har- 
rowby's)  a  person  of  the  name  of  Hiden,  who 
will  be  examined  as  a  {witness— a  person  to 
whom  this  plan  had  been  divulged,  and  who 
the  conspirators  had  hoped  would  be  a  partici- 
pator in  the  execution  of  their  designs — felt 
a  visiting  of  conscience  which  impelled  him  to 
communicate  to  lord  Harrowby  himself  the 
scheme  that  was  in  agitation.  This  person 
watched  an  oppOrtuni^  of  lord  Harrowby's 
going  from  his  house  into  the  park,  and  there 
made  his  lordship  acquainted  with  the  mischief 
that  was  intended. 

It  will  also  appear  to  you,  that  on  Tuesday 
some  little  alarm  had  beeu'Cxcited  in  the  mind 
of  one  of  the  parties  (a  man  of  the  name  of 
Adams)  that  their  plans  were  suspected,  and 
thatHhey  therefore  incurred  some  hazard  in 
meeting.  On  ^hat  day,  at  Brunt's  house, 
Adams  inform^  Thistlewood  and  the  others, 
that  a  commuoicatJOQ  had  been  made  to  him 
3  A 


72S] 


1  QEORGE  IV. 


Trial  if  Arthur  ITaOimdod 


C7«« 


by  the  landlord  of  the  White  Habrt,  idtimatiDg 
that  their  meetings  at  that  pabliofaouse  had, 
he  thought,  been  obseired  by  some  of  the  police 
officers,  and  Adams  expressed  his  apprehension 
ttiat  their  schemes  were  discovered,  or  were 
likely  to  be  so.  This  excited  in  the  minds  of 
some  of  the  persons  assembled  the  greatest 
agitation ;  they  stated  that  they  were  astonished 
that  Adams  should  venture,  in  the  presence  of 
men,  some  of  whom  were  comparatively 
straneers,  to  hint  that  there  was  a  possibility 
that  their  plans  could  be  detected.  Brunt,  in 
order  to  satisfy  them  whether  there  was  any 
ground  for  the  suspicion  which  had  been  en- 
tertained by  Adams,  proposed  that  certain  of 
the  party  should  be  appointed  to  watch  lord 
Harrowby's  house  on  that  evening,  and  early 
on  the  following  «ioming,- to  see  whether  any 
persons  were  introduced  to  resist  the  intended 
attack,  and  to  ascertain  whether  their  inten- 
tions* were  known.  You  will  find  that  they 
carried  the  proposal  of  Brunt  into  effect,  by 
sending  two  of  their  party,  one  of  whom  was 
Davidson,  a  man  of  colour  (who  will  be  very 
conspicuous  as  an  active  partisan  throughout 
the  whole  of  this  transaction),  on  that  evening, 
about  six  o'clock,  to  watch  lord  Harrowb^s 
house.  These  watchmen  were  to  be  relieved 
about  eight  or  nine  by  two  others  of  the  party, 
who  were  to  remain  three  hours  at  their  post, 
and  their  places  were  then  to  be  suppliea  by 
two  others,  who  were  to  continue  there  during 
the  night.  It  will  be  proved  that  these  watches 
were  actually  set  on  that  night,  and  that  the 
men  performing  the  duty  were  seen  by  differ- 
ent persons  in  Grosvenor-square.  Finding, 
as  was  the  case,  that  there  appeared  to  be  no 
alarm — that  no  police  officers  or  troops  were 
admitted  into  lord  Harrowby's  house,  or 
stationed  in  the  neighbourhood — ^the  conspira- 
tors felt  quite  satisfied  that  the  fears  expressed 
by  Adams  were  groundless,  and  that  there  was 
no  reason  to  suspect  a  discovery. 

On  Wednesday,  great  preparations  were 
made  by  them ;  arms  were  brought  of  various 
descriptions,  guns,  pistols,  sabres,  swords,  and 
engines  which,  when  you  see  them,  you  will 
perceive  to  be  calculated  for  the  most  deadly 
purposes.  These  engines  they  had  themselves 
prepared,  and  their  most  appropriate  appellor 
tion  is  hand-grenades.  They  are  formed  thus: 
— a  quantity  of  powder,  from  three  to  four 
ounces,  is  enclosed  in  a  tin  case,  to  which  is 
attached  a  tube  for  the  insertion  of  a  fuse : 
round  this  case  is  tied  a  quantity  of  tow,  and 
on  the  outside  of  that  tow  ai«  fastened,  as  tight 
as  they  can  be,  sharp-pointed  pieces  of  iron 
of  various  descriptions.  Thus  closely  confined 
the  powder  would  explode  with  considerable 
force,  and  the  pieces  of  iron  would  be  scat- 
tered around  in  every  direction.  It  was 
stated  at  their  meetings,  without  an^  dis- 
guise, that  the  purpose  to  which  these  instru- 
ments were  to  be  applied  was  this: — when 
the  attacking  party  entered  the  room  where  his 
majesty's  ministers  should  be  assembled,  the 
fuses  were  to  be  lighted^  and  the  grenades 


thrown  amongst  them,  iBflieUag  by  their  explo* 
slon,  wounds  and  death  upon  the  persons  is 
that  room.  Of  these  they  had  prepared  a  great 
number,  I  know  not  how  many.  They  had 
also  provided  themselves  with  preparationa 
which  they  chose  inhumanly  to  call  illumina- 
tion baUs ;  these  were  made  for  the  purpose 
of  setting  fire  to  any  buildiLgs  which  it  should 
be  their  intention  and  object  on  tliat  night  to 
burn .  They  had  also  collected  a  laige  quantity 
of  ball  cartridges,  the  amount  of  which  wiU 
probably  surprise  you,  but  it  will  appear,  that 
they  had  between  eleven  and  twelve  hundred 
rounds;  they  had  also  cartridges  for  loading 
cannon,  which  they  had  made  of  flannel  bags 
in  each  of  which  a  pound  of  powder  was  con- 
tained. They  had  lastly  got  together  a  great 
number  of  pikes  and  pike  handles,  for  the  pur> 
pose  of  arming  those  of  their  friends  and  asso- 
ciates who  might  have  no  other  weapons. 
These  preparations  had  been,  as  you  may 
naturally  suppose,  the  work  of  considerable 
time ;  they  were  ready  upon  the  23  rd  of  Feb« 
ruvy,  for  the  purpose  for  which  they  were 
intended. 

On  the  morning  of  the  23rd  of  Februarye^ 
the  conspirators  assembled  at  Brunt's  house, 
.where  they  were  engaged  in  completing  the 
hand-grenades,  puttiiig  flints  into  their  pistol^ 
loading  their  arms,  and  making  every  prepara- 
tion for  the  meditated  attack.  I  have  already 
told  you,  that  for  the  purpose  of  their  meeting, 
and  for  the  convenience  of  having  some  place 
near  to  lord  Harrowby's  house,  a  stable  had 
been  procured  by  one  of  these  conspirators,  in 
Cato-street.  I  know  not  whether  curiosity  may 
have  led  any  of  you,  as  it  has  led  a  great  nnm* 
her  of  the  public,  to  visit  that  spot,  but  if  it 
has  not,  I  will  endeavour  to  describe  it  to  you, 
and  I  think  you  will  agree  with  me,  that  a 
more  appropriate  situation  for  the  purpose 
they  contemplated,  could  hardly  have  been 
selected.  It  is  an  obscure  street,  having  a 
very  narrow  access  at  each  end  ;  it  is  acces- 
sible by  a  horse  or  carriage  at  one  end  only* 
The  entrance  at  one  extremity  b  under  an 
archway,  and  at  the  other  there  are  posts,  to 
prevent  the  passage  of  any  but  foot  passengers. 
The  east  end  leads  into  John-street,  the  west 
into  Queen-street;  both  which  streets  ran 
parallel  to  each  oUier  into  the  £dgware-road. 
This  stable  is  the  first  building  on  the  ri^t 
hand  side  as  you  enter  Cato-street,  fix>m  John- 
street  and  it  is  nearly  opposite  to  a  small 
public-house  called  the  Horse  and  Groom;  it 
belongs  to  General  Watson,  who  is  abriNid^ 
and  had  been  occupied  by  a  person  of  the  nam^ 
of  Firth^  bT  whom  it  was  let  to  Harrison*  It 
consistSybelow  stairs  of  three  stalls,  and  a  small 
place  adjoining,  for  the  reception  of  a  cart ; 
nearly  opposite  the  door  is  a  step  ladder,  lead* 
ing  up  into  a  loft,  by  the  side  ot  which  loft  are 
two^  small  rooms  immediately  over  the  cart- 
house.  It  will  be  proved  to.  you,  that  previous 
to  the  meeting  which  was  to  take  place  oetweeia 
seven  and  eieht  o'clock  on  that  evening,  pre-^ 
paration»  had  baen  nad«  by  Hanuoiii  tad  hy 


T3tf1 


7&r  ffijgA  IWwM. 


A.  D.  1890. 


C7M 


flefenl  of  tiM  peitons  who  will  be  nkmed  to 
you,  for  the  reception,  at  this  ttabley  of  those 
who  were  oomtng.  A  piece  of  oaBras  had- 
been  nailed  up  against  the  window  of  the  loft, 
to  prevent  persons  observing  from  the  opposite 
side  of  the  street,  what  might  be  passing  with- 
in ;  and  it  was  noticed  by  several  of  the  neigh- 
bours, that  this  place  was  visited  by  a  great 
number  of  persons  during  the  afternoon,  who 
were  carrying  in  Various  things  on  their  backs, 
the  nature  of  which  those  persons  could  not 
discover,  but  which  I  tUnk  you  will  have  no 
doubt,  after  the  discovery  made,  were  the  arms 
and  other  instruments  of  mischief,  which  were 
found  collected  there  on  the  evening  when  the 
prisoners  were  taken. 

Harrison,  who  was  known  to  one  of  the 
witnesses  who  will  be  called,  was  observed  m 
the  idlternoon  going  to  this  stable,  and  upon 
being  asked  what  was  his  business  there,  and 
how  it  was  that  he  had  possession  of  the  sta- 
ble, he  said  he  had  taken  it  from  Firth,  and 
that  he  was  cleaning  it  up.  About  six  o'clock 
Davidson,  the  man  of  colour,  was  also  ob- 
served waiting  close  to  this  stable,  and  going 
into  it,  with  something  upon  his  back,  or  under 
bis  arm,  and  a  number,  of  candles  in  his  hand, 
and  ^ou  vrill  find  that  he  applied  at  a  house< 
adjoming,  about  six  o'clock,  to  light  one  of  the 
eimdles,  which  he  afterwards  carried  into  the 
stable. 

One  party  was  to  meet  that  evening  at 
Brant's,  in  order  to  proceed  from  thence  to 
the  place  of  rendezvous.  Tidd,  whose  name 
I  hare  mentioned  to  you  already,  was  to  bring 
up  another  party,  and  Bradbum  was  to  accom- 
pany a  third.  They  had  not  communicated 
to  all  their  associates  the  precise  spot  where 
the  meeting  was  to  be  held :  some  of  them 
were  directed  to  the  Horse  and  Groom,  and 
others  were  told  to  repair  to  the  Edgeware 
Road,  near  John-street,  where  persons  would 
'be  in  waiting  to  point  out  to  them  the  place 
•f  assembling.  Between  seven  and  eight 
o'clock,  Brunt  and  some  others  from  his  house 
took  their  departure  for  Cato-street,  with  arms 
which  Ihey  had  provided  concealed  under  their 
coats.  On  their  arrival,  they  found  Thistle- 
wood,  Harrison,  Ings,  Wilson,  and  some 
others.  The  party  proceeded  to  the  loft ;  in 
it  were  collected  arms  of  different  descrip- 
tioBtf,  blunderbusses,  pistols,  swords,  pikes, 
hand-grenades,  and  a  considerable  quantity  of 
staves,  with  ferules  fitted  to  one  end,  in  which 
a  hole  was  drilled  to  admit  the  screw  of  a 
pike.  They  are  rouffh  ash  sticks,  of  a  con-, 
siderable  length  and  size,  and  will  be  pro- 
duced to  you,  together  with  the  other  weapons 
seized  on  that  memorable  night. 

At  first  the  party  in  Cato-streel  consisted  of 
fourteen  or  fifteen  persons  only,  and  some 
little  alarm  and  suspicion  were  evidently  raised 
in  the  minds  of  Thistlewood  and  some  of  the 
others,  at  Tidd's  not  making  his  appearance 
at  the  appointed  time,  and  a  remark  being 
made  by  one  of  the  penons  present,  that  their 
fuuDb^v  were  not  so  large  as  they  were  ei« 


pected  to  be,  it  was  stated  bv  Thistlewood 
and  others,  Uiat  mere  would  by  and  by  as- 
semble, and  that  detached  parties,  who  were 
not  to  accompany  them  to  lord  Harrowby's, 
were  gone  on  difierent  expeditions,  about  the 
metropolis.  A  short  time  afterwards,  however, 
Tidd  made  his  appearance  with  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Monument,  a  person  who  had  been 
only  recently  induced  to  participate  in  this 
crime ;  he  bad  before  been  introduced  to  This- 
tlewood, and  had  a  communication  with  him 
generally  on  the  state  of  political  affairs,  with 
a  view  to  the  change  the  prisoners  at  the  bar 
wished  to  effect,  but  had  not  till  that  evening 
been  invited  by  Brunt  to  accompany  them  to 
Cato-street,  and  probably  was  not  aware  of 
their  exact  and  precise  plans,  until  he  arrived 
at  the  spot ;  altooogh  no  doubt  he  must  have 
been  aware,  that  the  conspiracy  had  for  its 
object  some  great  political  change.  He  ar- 
rived with  Tidd  about  seven  oVlock,  and  the 
party  at  that  time  consisted,  I  believe,  of  four 
or  five  and  twenty  persons,  two  of  whom  were 
appointed  to  remain  below,  as  sentries,  in 
oraer  to  prevent  interruption  fcom  any  persons 
who  might  not  be  connected  with  them.  Those 
two  persons  (who,  I  bel«uve,  were  Davidson 
and  Ings)  were  occasionally  in  the  loft  when 
their  plan  was  talked  of,  and  it  was  finally  ar- 
ranged that  they  were  to  proceed  to  the  house 
of  lord  Harrowby  about  eight  o'clock.  Some 
apprehension,  as  I  have  already  told  you,  hav- 
ing prevailed  in  the  party,  that  their  strength 
was  hardly  adequate  to  the  execution  of  tluir 
design,  Thistlewood  and  Ings  said,  that  the 
opportunity  must  not  be  lost ;  that  there  were 
enough  of  them  to  effect  the  destruction  of  the 
ministers ;  that  other  parties  would  set  fire  to 
various  parts  of  the  metropolis;  and  that  when 
the  decisive  blow  was  struck,  and  the  town 
was  in  flames,  hundreds  of  the  people  would 
join  them,  and  their  body  would  become  too 
formidable  for  opposition.  This  statement 
allayed  their  fears;  and  between  seven  and 
eight  o'clock  they  proceeded  to  a  selection  of 
those  who  should  compose  the  party  to  eater 
the  house  of  lord  Harrowby,  and  destroy  the 
ministers.  The  scheme  had  been  already 
settled,  Thistlewood  was  to  knock  at  the  dooc, 
under  pretence  of  luiving  a  note  to  deliver  to 
lord  Harrowby,  and  having  obtained  access 
to  the  hall,  they  were  to  secure  the  servants, 
whom  they  expected  to  find  unarmed,  and 
whom  therefore  they  should  have  no  difficulty 
in  compelling  to  show  them  the  room  where 
the  ministers  were  at  dinner.  The  party  wa« 
then  to  make  its  way  to  that  room,  and  with- 
out remorse  to  destroy  indiscriminately  every 
one  of  his  m^esty's  ministers  who  should  be 
there  assembled. 

I  have  stated  to  you  already,  the  exultation 
and  the  impiety  displayed  by  Brunt  on  one 
occasion,  and  I  cannot  conceal  from  you  a 
fiict,  as  it  affects  another  of  the  persons  charged, 
I  mean.  Ings.  This  man  had  been  a  butcher, 
and  he  had  armed  himself,  on  this  occasion, 
not  only  with''  a  blunderbuss  and  a  sword,,  but 


7371 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  tfAHhur  Tkiiilewood 


[738 


with  a  large  butcher's  knife,  which  will  be 
exhibited  to  you  ;  and  for  the  purpose  of  en- 
abling himself  to  use  it  with  more  effect,  he 
had  twisted  round  the  handle  a  quantity  of 
wax  end,  in  order  that  when  he  grasped  it,  it 
should  not  slip  from  his  hand,  and  he  then 
stated  in  the  most  gross  and  horrible  language, 
that  with  that  knife  he  would  murder  and  mu- 
tilate some  of  the  honourable  persons  assembled 
at  the  house  of  lord  Harrowby.  This  barba- 
rous idea  of  mutilation  was,  I  am  afraid,  bor- 
rowed from  scenes  which  some  years  ago 
disgraced  a  neighbouring  country;  and  was 
formed  under  the  expectation  that  the  exhibi- 
tion of  the  heads  of  some  of  his  majesty's 
ministers,  after  their  murder  had  been  effected, 
might  inflame  the  populace,'  and  thus  enable 
the  conspirators  to  succeed  in  their  nefarious 
purposes.  That  yeiy  knife  was  found  and 
taken  from  the  person  of  Ings,  upon  the  nig^t 
of  the  23rd  of  February,  in  the  stable  in  Cato- 
street.  I  mention  that  fact  as  corroborating, 
if  corroboration  shall  be  needed,  the  circum- 
stances which  I  have  detailed  to  you,  and 
which  will  be  narrated  by  the  witnesses. 
Happily  for  this  country,  that  ProTidence 
which  had  been  so'  impiously  profoned  by 
Brunt  on  the  occasion,  interposed  to  prevent 
the  accompUshment  of  the  diabolical  scheme. 
From  the  communication  which  had  been 
made  to*  lord  Harrowby,  by  Hiden,  and  from 
other  information,  the  gotemment  was  satisfied 
that  these  persons  intended  to  meet  in  Cato- 
street.  Means  were  taken  to  secure  the  parties 
after  they  had  there  assembled,  and  oefore 
they  should  proceed  to  execute  the  mbchief 
they  designea. 

in  order  to  prevent  any  suspicion,  it  was 
wisely  determined  by  lord  Harrowby,  and 
those  with  whom  he  consulted,  that  the  dinner 
which  had  been  provided,  and  was  intended 
for  his  majesty's  ministers,  should  be  prepared. 
It  was  evident,  that  if  any  alterktion  had 
taken  place  in  the  time  or  place  of  the  enter- 
tainment, and  such  an  alteration  had  been  by 
any  means  made  known  to,  or  had  been  sus- 
pected by  the  prisoners,  their  course  of  pro« 
ceeding  would  nave  been  changed,  and  weir 
meeting  would  have  been  postponed  to  a  fu- 
ture and  more  convenient  opportunity. 

Precautions  had  been  taken  to  prevent  the 
accomplishment  of  this  plan;  a  number  of 
Bow-street  officers,  and  of  the  patrole,  had 
been  directed  to  go  to  Cato-street,  to  watch 
the  movements  of  those  who  might  assemble 
there ;  and  at  a  convenient  season,  before  they 
should  take  their  departure  from  thence,  to 
secure  those  who  were  assembled.  A  party 
also  of  the  Guards,  who  were  stationed  at 
Portman-street  bairacks,  were  directed  to 
attend  in  John-street,  to  aid  the  civil  power ; 
and  you  will  find,  that  at  the  very  momeht 
when  they  were  selecting  tiiose  of  the  party 
who  should  be  the  foremost  in  the  execution 
of  their  daring  and  horrible  enterprise :  at  the 
very  time  when  Thistlewood  in  the  loft  #as 
separating  iiom  the  rest  those  to  whom  was  to 


be  assigned  this  assassination  amd  murder,  the- 
officers  entered  the  stable.  Upon  their  en- 
trance they  discovered  two  persons ;  one  will 
be  proved  to  be  Davidson,  he  was  remarkaUe 
from  his  colour,  as  he  is  nearly  a  black ;  he 
had  cross  belu  over  his  shoulders,  and  a  belt 
about  his  loins ;  in  one  of  the  former  was  sus- 
pended a  sword ;  he  had  a  gun  upon  his 
shoulder,  and  pistols  in  the  belt  Uiat  was  round 
his  waist :  he  was  stationed  just  within  the 
door.  The  other  man,  who  will  be  clearly 
identified  to  be  Ings,  was  posted  at  the  bottom 
of  the  ladder.  He  was  armed  with  the  knife 
I  have  mentioned,  a  gun,  and  a  cutlass. 

The  officers,  with  a  resolution  hardly  credi- 
ble, when  you  consider  the  desperation  and 
the  determination  of  the  consnirators  who 
were  assembled  above,  ascendea  the  ladder. 
The  first  who  went  up  was  Ruthven,  he  was 
followed  by  Ellis,  after  whom  came  an  officer 
whose  name  undoubtedly  yon  must  have  heard 
mentioned,  the  unfortunate  Smithers,  who  met 
his  death  that  night  by  the  band  of  the  prisoner 
at  the  bar.  Upon  Ruthven's  ascending  the 
ladder,  one  of  the  men  below  called  out  to 
those  above,  as  a  signal  for  them  to  be  upon 
their  guud;  and  when  Ruthven  had  gained 
the  loft,  Thistlewood,  who  was  at  a  little  dis- 
tance from  the  landing  place,  and  whom  the 
officer  distinctly  saw  (for  there  were  lights  itt 
the  loft),  receded  a  few  paces ;  the  officers  an- 
nounced who  they  werci  and  deiiiauded  die 
surrender  of  the  persons  in  the  loft.  Ruthven, 
as  I  told  you,  was  followed  by  Ellis,  who  drew 
up  close  by  him ;  Smithers  proceeded  forward 
in  a  direction  to  seize  Thistlewood,  the  prisons, 
who  instantly  retreated  into  one  of  those  small 
rooms'  which  I  have  described,  and  the  moment 
he  saw  Smithers  approaching,  he  drew  back 
his  hand,  which  hela  a  sword,  «md  inuiediatdy 
thrust  it  ^i  the  unfortunate  man ;  he  received 
the  wound  near  the  heart,  and  had  only  time 
to  exclaim,  '*  Oh  God,  I  am  killed  I"  before  he 
sunk  into  the  arms  of  Ellis  and  died.  EUie 
seeing  the  blow  given  by  Thistlewood,  imme- 
diately discharged  a  pistol  at  him,  whidi 
missed  its  aim;  a  great  confusion  ensued;  the 
lights  were  struck  out ;  die  officers  were  forced 
down  the  ladder ;  many  of  the  party  followed ; 
Thistlewood  amongst  the  rest  came  down,  and 
not  satisfied  v?ith  the  blood  of  one  person 
whom  he  had  already  killed,  he  shot  at  one  of 
the  officers,  as  he  descended  the  ladder,  a  man 
of  the  name  of  Westcoatt ;  he  then  proceeded 
through  the  stable  with  his  sword  in  his  hand, 
cutting  at  every  one  who  attempted  to  oppose 
him;  and  the  soldiers  at  that  moment  not 
having  arrived  at  the  spot,  Thistlewood  ran 
into  John-street,  and  so  towards  the  BSgewaie 
Road,  and  was  not  at  that  time  taken.  The 
other  persons  were  equally  desperate  in  the 
resistance  tiie^  made ;  eonsdoua  of  their  pur- 
pose, they  waited  not  to  know  on  what  diarge 
they  were  to  be  apprehended.  You  vrill  fisid, 
that  Ings,  Davidson,  Tidd^  and  Wilson,  aU 
made  a  desperate  resistance^  and  each  of  th^n, 
I  believe^  fired  at  the  officers  and  soldkis  who 


7«9] 


fw  Higk  TrtaiOH, 


attempted  to  amtl  tbem ;  bat  their  reeistance 
watf  ineifectiial,  and  they  were  fortunately  se- 
cured. Davidson,  logs,  Tidd,  Wilson^  Brad- 
bum,  Stnnge,  Gilchrist,  and  Cooper,  were 
taken  either  in  the  street,  or  in  the  loft.  The 
only  persons  who  then  effected  their  escape, 
out  of  the  eleven  comprised  in  the  indictment, 
were  Brunt,  Harrison,  and  Thistlewood.  Se- 
veral others,  assembled  upon  that  occasion, 
whose  names  are  not  known,  also  made  their 
escape. 

The  officers  not  only  secured  the  prisoners, 
but  possessed,  themselves  also  of  the  various 
articles  of  arms  and  ammunition  that  were  in 
the  stable :  they  will  be  produced  to  you  in 
the  course  of  the  trial. 

Brunt  went  home,  and  you  will  find  by  his 
apprentice  Hale,  that  he  arrived  therebetween 
nine  and  ten  o'clock;  the  boots  which  he  wore 
were  covered  with  dirt.  He  was  immediatdy 
followed  by  another  man,  whose  name  the  boy 
does  not  know,  but  who,  from  the  conversation 
with  Brant,  was  evidently  one  of  the  party  at 
Cato-stieet.  When  he  appeared.  Brunt  was 
rejoiced  to  see  him;  and  from  what  passed. 
Hale  collected  that  they  had  been  together, 
and  bad  both  escaped ;  but  that  the  stranger 
had  been  seriously  hurt  by  blows  be  bad  re- 
ceived. Brunt  fancied  that  having  so  eicaped , 
his  person  had  not  been  discovered,  and  that 
no  one  would  disclose  the  transaction.  He 
slept  at  home  that  night,  but  on  the  following 
morning  be  rose  early,  called  the  apprentice 
boy,  asked  him  if  he  knew  some  street  in  the 
Borough  which  he  named,  and  stated  that  he 
vranted  him  to  take  to  that  street  two  baskets, 
which  were  in  the  room  that  had  been  let  to 
the  prisoner  Ings.  Those  baskets  were  tied 
up  1^  Brunt,  and  one  of  them  was  wrapped 
in  an  apron  belonging  to  his  wife,  and  which 
had  been  nailed  up  against  the  vrindow  of  the 
room  occupied  by  Ings,  for  the  purpose  of 
preventing  observation.  He  had  hanlly  ef- 
fected this  operation,  and  gone  into  his  ovm 
room,  when  the  officers  who  had  received  in- 
formation that  he  was  one  of  the  party  in 
Cato^treet,  entered  the  house,  apprehended 
bim,  and  at  the  same  time  seized  the  two 
baskets.  It  was  most  important  to  Brunt  to 
have  conveyed  away  those  proofr  of  his  guilt, 
for  in  those  baskets  were  contained  srrenades, 
fireballs,  and  other  preparations  which  had 
been  made  for  accomplishing  their  design. 
He  aflected  ignorance  of  the  contents  of  die 
baskets;  but  you  will  find,  from  evidence  that 
cannot  be  contradicted,  that  he  had  just  packed 
them,  to  be  sent  into  the  Borough. 

Thistlewood  did  not  return  to  his  house  in 
Stanhope-street ;  he  secreted  himself  in  a  house 
in  White-street,  Finsburv-equare,  belonging  to 
a  man  of  the  name  of  Harris.  Intimation, 
however,  was  received  by  some  of  the  police 
that  he  was  there  concealed,  and  between  ten 
and  eleven  o'clock  on  the  Thursday  morning,  a 
party  of  officers,  headed  by  Bishop,  went  for  the 
purpose  of  securing  him.  They  first  searched 
the  looms-  up  atain>  and  not  finding  him  there, 


A.  D.  1820.  r73Q 

they  descended  to  the  ground  floor,  end  observe* 
ing  a  idoor,  which  on  trying  it  was  found  to  be 
lodged,  leading  into  a  room  opposite  the  sittipg 
room  of  the  people  of  the  house,  Bishop  de- 
manded the  key,  and  knowing  the  desperation 
and  determination  of  the  prisoner  at  the  bar, 
he  opened  the  door  as  softly  as  he  could.  On 
entering,  he  perceived  that  the  window-ehuU 
ten  were  closed ;  but  there  were  holes  in  them 
to  admit  the  light,  by  which  he  discovered  the 
prisoner  Thistlevirood  in  bed.  Thistlewood 
raised hishead :  Bishop,  immediately  recognised 
him,  and  threw  himself  on  the  bed  to  secure 
him ;  and  Thistlewood,  perceiving  that  resist^ 
ance  was  unavailing,  surrendered. 

By  these  means  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  was 
taken  into  custody,  and  here  the  nanrative  of 
the  fiuts  would  naturally  have  closed,  but  theie 
is  one  important  ciicumstance  whidi  I  have 
omitted  to  mention,  and  vdiich  I  must  now 
bring  to  your  notice.  On  the  23rd  of  February, 
when  they  met  at  Brunt's  room,  previous  to 
going  to  Cato-street,  after  their  plans  were 
discussed,  tiieir  objects  avowed,  and  they  had 
resolved  upon  the  assassination  of  his  majesty's 
ministers  (thinking  that  by  that  event,  such 
dismay  and  confiuion  would  be  every  where 
excited,  that  they  should  the  more  readily  at- 
tain the  ulterior  objects  they  had  in  view)  they 
held  some  further  consultation  as  to  what 
should  be  done  after  that  blow  had  been  strudc. 
I  have  already  told  you,  that  part  of  their  plan 
was,  to  set  fire  to  certain  buildinss;  and 
amongst  others  the  King-street  barracks,  near 
Portman-square,  yrem  fixed  upon  for  conflag- 
ration. Harrison,  one  of  tne  conspirators 
(who  had  been,  I  am  sorry  to  state  to  you,  in  his 
migesty's  service),  vras  acquainted  with  the 
situation  of  that  building;  and  had  stated  that 
he  could  easily,  by  means  of  a  window  which 
opened  at  the  back  part  of  the  premises,  and 
communicated  with  a  loft  in  which  straw  and 
hay  were  kept,  throw  in  one  of  the  fire-balls, 
which  woula  create  great  conftision  among  the 
troops  who  were  quartered  there,  and  would 
prefent  their  setting  themselves  and  ihdr 
horses  accoutred,  when  they  were  called  upon 
to  act. 

Upon  that  occasion  Thistlewood  sat  down 
to  write  a  proclamation  addressed  to  the  in« 
habitants  at  large  of  this  metropolis.  For  the 
purpose  of  writing  this  proclamation,  some 
sheets  of  cartridge  paper  were  wanted,  and  the 
boy  Hale  v?as  sent  out  to  obtain  it ;  on  his  re- 
turn, Thistlewood  vrrote  in  large  letters  the 
following  words,  or  to  the  following  effect  :^ 
«Your  tyrants  are  destroyed,  the  friends  of 
liberty  are  called  on  to  come  forward,  as  the 
provisional  government  is  now  sitting."  If 
any  doubt  could  be  entertained  of  the  ulterior 
designs  of  these  conspirators,  and  that  they 
were  not  confined  to  Che  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers,  this  proclamation  would 
put  the  matter  out  of  all  doubt  i  he  vrrote  two 
or  three  copies  of  it— he  read  it  aloud  to  the 
parties  assembled,  and  told  them,' it  was  to  b^ 
stuck  up  near  the  bouetf  on  fire,  that  the  peo- 


7311 


1  GEOEGE  IV. 


Triai^AHhut  TkuOemod 


[73^ 


pie  mig^  the  mon  leftdily  see  it.  He  after- 
wards endeawnred  to  compoee  another  address 
to  be  issaed  to  the  soldiers.  It  contained  a 
call  apoQ  tkem  to  join  the  friends  of  liberty,  and 
a  promise  of  their  immediate  dischaise,  with 
Aill  pay  for  life,  and  a  donation  of  20/.  to 
take  them  to  their  respective  homes.  Whether 
or  not  that  address  was  absolutely  completed 
may  be  doubtiiil  on  the  endence,  but  the  pro- 
clamation, of  which  I  gave  yx>u  die  substance, 
was  read  by  Thistlewood.  .  The  written  pro- 
clamations were  taken  away  by  the  prisoner, 
but  there  will  be  no  doubt  whatever  or  the  con- 
tents of  them ;  they  will  be  proved  to  you  by  a 
person  who  heard  them  most  distinctly. 
I  was  stating,  before  I  mentionel  this  im- 

S>rtant  circumstance,  that  I  had  nearly  dosed 
e  narrative  of  the  facts  which  will  be  proved 
against  the  prisoner  at  the  bajr,  and  I  ask  you, 
if  these  facts  §fe  proved,  wheUier  any  one  of 
yout  calmly  and  dispassionately  considering 
Ahese  facts,  can  entertain  a  doufai  of  the  guilt 
of  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  What  answer  can 
be  given  to  them,  I  am  at  a  loss  to  conjecture. 
Will  any  be  given,  or  attempted  ?  If  no  an- 
swer be  given  by  evidence,  what  can  be  said 
by  way  of  observation  ?  Will  it  be  urged  to 
yoQ,  that  this  plan  was  so  wild  in  its  nature, 
•o  impracticable  in  its  execution,  that  its  exist- 
ence cannot  be  credited  in  a  court  of  justice  ? 
Is  that  arffument  to  be  used  upon  this  occasion  ? 
Yon  and  I,  judging  of  others  by  ourselves,  are 
Tery  inadequate  judges  of  the  belief  to  be  en- 
tertained of  the  existence  of  a  plan  of  thb  sort. 
If  en,  with  heated  passions,  and  a  determined 
purpose,  conceive  schemes  which  in  themselves 
may  be  impracticable,  or  not  likely  to  be  brought 
to  a  successful  result:  but  as  the  inventors 
brood  over  them — as  they  consider  their  ma- 
chinations from  day  to  day->  they  work  them-i 
selves  up  into  a  belief  at  last,  that  their 
means  are  more  powerful  than  they  really  are ; 
th^  diminish  the  difficulties  which  are  inter- 
posed between  the  conception  of  their  plan  and 
Its  completion;  they  tancy  that  there  are 
other  persons  as  widied  as  themselves,  who 
though  -they  cannot  be  prevailed  upon,  in  the 
first  instance,  to  embark  in  their  nefarious 
schemes,  will,  when  a  blow  is  struck — ^when 
something  is  done  to  excite  their  feelings  and 
their  passions,  immediately  join  the  standard 
of  insurrection.  You  and  I,  gentlemen,  rea- 
soning calml^f  may,  as  I  have  said,  be  very  in- 
adequate judges  ot  the  workings  of  the  minds 
of  men  of  this  description;  but  facts  will  be 
proved  which  admit  of  no  solution,  which  al-* 
low  of  no  explanation,  consistent  with  the  in- 
nocence of  the  prisoner  and  his  associates. 

Your  judgment  is  not  to  be  formed  upon  an 
inquiry  whether  the  scheme  of  these  men  was 
practicable,  or  whether  it  could  ever  have  en- 
tered into  rational  minds.  Those  are  not  the 
questions  for  your  determination.  If  a  plan 
has  been  formed  for  the  purposes  chargea  by 
this  indictment — however  wild  and  however 
visionary  it  may  appear  to  you — if  you  are  con- 
fjinced  that  such  a  plan  did  enter  into  the 


minds  of  the  prisoners^  and  that  tbey  took  one 
sinffle  step  towards  its  accomplishment,  then^ 
and  I  state  it  without  the  hazard  of  contradic-' 
tion,  that  conviction  will  justify  a  verdict  of 
guilty. 

I  have  no  doubt  it  will  be  stated  to  yon,  that 
many  of  the  facts  in  the  case  are  proved  (for 
they  can  only  be  so  proved)  by  persons  who 
were  participators  in  all  the  criminality  of  the 
transaction :  and  it  will  be  urged  to  you,  with 
great  force,  that  accomplices  are  not  to  be  be* 
Ueved  unless  they  are  confirmed  by  other 
witnesses.  In  plots  of  this  nature,  contrived  in 
secret,  and  which  can  only  be  effected  by  con- 
cealment (I  mean  in  their  original  concoction 
and  formation),  if  the  testimony  of  an  acoom* 
plice  were  not  to  be  received,  perfect  immuni- 
ty would  at  once  be  held  out  to  the  inventors 
of  the  blackest  schemes.  Fortunately,  it  is 
neither  the  law  of  England,  nor  can  it  be  the 
law  of  any  country  that  has  reason  for  its 
guide,  that  an  accomplice  in  a  crime  cannot  be 
a  witness  to  prove  its  existence.  But  as  in  this 
case  I  am  far  from  being  anxious  to  press  the 
proof  one  iota  further  than  it  ought,  m  justice 
to  the  community,  to  be  carried,  I  freely  ad- 
mit that  the  testimony  of  an  accomplice  would 
be  received  by  you  with  the  greatest  jealousy 
and  caution ;  you  should  watch  the  manner  in 
which  he  gives  his  testimony;  you  should 
wagh  the  credibility  of  his  story ;  but  above  all 
you  should  see  whether  he  be  or  be  not  con- 
firmed in  the  material  parts  of  that  stoiy  by 
other  and  uncontaminated  evidence;  not  in 
every  particular,  because  if  it  were  possible  so 
to  coimrm  him,  then  you  need  not  his  testimony 
at  all ;  the  witness  by  whom  he  could  be  so 
supported  would  render  the  testimony  of  the 
accomplice  unnecessary.  If  his  account  is 
corroborated  to  such  an  extent  as  to  render  his 
whole  testimony  credible;  if  you  find  hioa 
speakine  truth  in  those  parts  cutable  of,  and 
which  flhall  have  received,  connrmation,  you 
have  a  right,  you  are  bound  to  conclude  Uiat 
the  rest  of  his  narrative  is  true.  There  are  air- 
ways in  these  transactions  some  things  which 
cannot  be  proved  except  by  the  participators 
in  guilt.  No  men  contriving  sudi  a  plan  as 
this  would  ever  venture  to  discuss  it  iu  the 
presence  of  others  whom  they  did  not  believo 
to  be  fully  prepared  to  go  a*ll  lengths  with  them 
for  the  completion  of  it ;  their  secret  deliber- 
ations, known  only  to  themtelves  and  to  God, 
cannot  be  divulged  unless  the  testimony  of 
their  accomplices  be  admitted.  I  say,  there- 
fore, '  to  declare  that  an  accomplice  is  not  a 
credible  witness,  that  he  is  one  upon  whose 
testimony  a  jury  cannot  act,  would  oe  at  once 
to  establish  the  principle  that  the  darker  the 
design,  the  more  netarious  the  purpose,  the 
greater  shall  be  the  immunity  of  the  offend- 
ers, the  less  their  liability  to  detection.  The 
more  heinous  the  crime,  the  more  secret  it  will 
naturally  be  kept ;  and  it  will  be  utterly  impos- 
sible to  bring  to  justice  those  who  contrive  and 
execute  schemes  of  villainy,  unless  the  evi- 
dence of  others  who  have  been  to  a  certain  ex* 


7931 


Jvir  Hi^  TtaatM. 


A.  O.  1890. 


[734 


tent  particlpaton  in  the  guUt,  can  b»  resoited 
tO|  and  made  available. 

Not  only  »  it  the  law  of  Bngland,  but  i^ 
is  the  daily  practice  of  its  courts,  to  admit  the 
testimony  of  accomplices.  In  trials  for  mur^ 
der,  how  often  do  you  find  not  only  that  an 
accomplice  is  received,  but  that  reward  and 
pardon  have  been  held  out  to  him  to  induce 
nim  to  become  a  witness  against  the  accused  ? 
Happily  for  the  ends  of  justice  in  this  case, 
no  question  of  doubtful  confirmation  will 
occur;  a  man  of  the  name  of  Adams  will  be 
called,  a  guilty  accomplice  witU  the  prisoners, 
meeting  them  and  consulting  with  them  daily, 
from  the  latter  end  of  the  month  of  January 
till  they  assembled  in  Cato-street.  He  will 
prove  what  passed  when  he  was  present,  and 
the  acts  to  which  he  was  a  party.  The  ac- 
count be  will  give  you  of  the  treasonable  con- 
spiracy will,  in  a  variety  of  its  leading  circum- 
stances, be  so  confirmed  both  by  the  oral 
testimony  of  unimpeachable  witnesses,  and 
the  production  of  the  arms  found  upon  the 
persons  and  in  the  houses  of  the  conspirators, 
and  in  the  loft  in  Cato(>street,  as  to  leave*  I 
fear,  upon  your  minds,  no  doubt  whatever  of 
the  guilt  of  the  unhappy  man  at  the  bar. 

Another  witness  1  shall  present  to  you  is 
not  so  implicated ;  I  mean  the  man  who  first 
communicated  the  transaction  to  lord  Har- 
rowby.  To  a  certain  extent  he  had  been 
made  acquainted  with  the  schemes  of  the 
prisoners ;  and  had  listened  to  the  detail  of 
them,  with  apparent  approbation ;  but  without 
at  all  engaging  in  tl\em,  he  immediately  dis- 
closed what  had  been  imparted  to  him. 

We  cannot  idways  account  for  the  operations 
of  the  human  mind.  Some  men,  if  they  had 
once  embarked  in  such  a  plot,  might  mistakingly 
consider  it  an  imputation  upon  their  courage 
to  recede ;  others,  when  the  ultimate  objects 
of  the  conspirators  were  developed,  might, 
from  disapprobation  of  them,  or  ftrom  timidity, 
withdraw  tnemselves,  and  still  be  so  unmindful 
of  their  duty  to  society,  and  of  their  allegiance 
to  the  kinff,  as  not  to  make  known  the  mischiefs 
that  were  m  contemplation ;  others,  when  they 
came  to  reflect  upon  the  matter,  might  feel  that 
they  were  bound  to  make  it  public — ^that  they 
were  called  upon  by  the  common  feelings  of 
humanity  to  avert  from  the  devoted  victims  of 
this  bloody  scheme  the  destruction  that  awaited 
them.  Hiden  is  of  the  last  description,  and  is 
no  a«dit  to  be  paid  to  this  man  r  is  his  testi- 
mony such  as  you  are  to  discredit;  Weigh  it 
in  the  scales  of  caution,  scrutinize  it  anxiously, 
bat  permit  me  to  observe  that  I  see  nothing 
in  the  conduct  of 'Hiden  on  this  occasion  to 
impeach  his  Teracity. 

A  person  will  W  called  to  you,  of  the  name 
of  Dwyer,  who  was  supposed  undoubtedly  by 
Thistlewood  and  some  of  the  others,  to  be 
worthy  of  their  confidence,  and  who  was  ex- 
jiected  to  assist  them  on  the  eTening  of  the 
23rd.  Haring  had  a  previous  acquaintance 
with  Davidson,  Dwyer  was  applied  to  on  the 
momiDg  of  that  memorable  day;  they  com« 


mnnlatted  to  him  their  intention  of  meeting  ia 
the  evening  at  Cato-street,  for  the  homble 
purpose,  of  attacking  his  majesty^s  ministers,  at 
lord  Harrowby's.  He  almost  instantly  eom« 
municated  it  to  an  officer  in  the  army,  with  a 
desire  that  he  would  make  his  majesty's  minis- 
ters  acquainted  vnth  it;  and  that  was  accor« 
dingly  done. 

"Box  this  is  not  the  whole  of  the  case  on  the 
part  of  tlie  prosecution — ^it  will  not  depend 
upon  the  testimony  of  Adams,  Hiden,  and 
Dwyer  only,  for  there  are  facts  in  this  ease 
requiring,  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner,  such  ait 
explanation  as  I  am  afraid  it  will  be  impossible 
for  him  to  give,  but  which,  unless  he  does  give 
will  put  the  seal  to  his  guilt.  What  was  the-  pur- 
pose for  which  these  persons  were  assemol^ 
m  Cato-street  on  that  night  f  Men  with  no 
common  bond  of  union — not  related  to  each 
other— not  connected  with  each  -other,  except 
in  the  nefarious  schemes  they  had  in  contem* 
plation — are  found  assembled  in  a  stable,  ^n 
an  obscure  street,  with  a  large  collection  of 
arms  of  the  description  I  hare  given  you.  In 
addition  to  those  instruments  of  mischief  which 
were  seized  by  the  officers  and  soldiers  in 
Cato-street,  there  were  found  in  the  bouses  of 
two  of  these  persons,  Tidd  and  Brunt,  other 
materials  and  implemeRts  of  death.  For  what 
purpose,  I  ask,  it  their  object  was  confined  to 
the  murder  of  Ins  majesty's  nunistess,  were 
eleven  or  twelve  hundred  rounds  of  cartridaee 
procured  ?  Why  were  Quantities  of  grenades 
and  fire-balls  prepared  r  For  other  objects 
and  other  purposes  than  the  attack  in  Grosvenor- 
square;  for  the  objects  (described,  and  the 
purposes  charged  in  this  iiidictment. 

I  cannot  anticipate  that  the  learned  counsel 
to  whom  the  prisoner  has  confided  his  defence^ 
will  put  it  upon  this  issue.    I  am  convinced  it 
will  not  be  contended  that  this  plan  was  to 
begin  and  end  in   the  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers.     His    majesty's   minis- 
ters I  had  they,  as  individuals,  offended  any 
of  these  prisoners? — ^Had  they,   as  indivi- 
duals, excited  in  the  minds  of   these  men 
any  motives  for  reyenge  ?     No^  gentlemen^ 
the  blow  was  not  aimed  at  them  as  individuals ; 
it  was  directed  against  them  for  the  official 
character  which  thev  filled.    It  was  not  against 
the  earl  of  Harrowby  that  the  dagger  was  to 
be  raised,  but  against  the  president   of  the 
council.     It  was  not  the   earl  of  Liverpool 
who  was  marked  by  the  conspirators  for  de- 
struction— a  nobleman  whose  person  probably 
they  might  not  know,  and  who  could  never  have 
offended  them  in  thought,  word,  or  action ;  it 
was  the  first  lord  of  the  treasury  they  intended 
for  their  victim.    Can  you  doubt  that  when 
they  meditated  the  destruction  of  his  maj^sty^ 
ministers,   they  contemplated  it   as  an   act 
which  was  to  be  the  commencement  of  that 
wild  and   visionary  reyolution  they  had   ia 
view ;  and  with  the  intention  of  establishing 
that  provisional  government  alluded  to  in  die 
proclamation   the  prisoner  Thistlewood  had 
I  drawn  up }    Can  any  in^n^  much  len  penoBH 


7351 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  tfAfihwr  TkUUeotood 


C736 


in  yoar  ttadoa  aiid  rank  of  society.  Imagine  a 
niotiT«  for  this  contptracrf  against  his  majesty's 
ministeiSy  if  the  snbTersion  of  the  gorerament 
was  not  the  «lterior  object  «f  the  conspira- 
Ion? 

With  these  ftets  before  you,  I  shall  not 
fatigae  you  by  the  detail  of  many  minute  dr- 
cumstances  in  which  the  principal  witnesses 
will  be  strongly  confirmed.  I  will  not  allude 
to  the  eridenee  which  will  come  from  uncon* 
laminated  sources,  particularly  from  the  ap« 
prentice  of  Brant,  who  was  no  participator  m 
the  guilt  of  his  master.  If  the  case  rested  on 
the  evidence  of  those  alone  who  may  be  termed, 
by  the  prisoner's  counsel,  partidpators  in  the 
crime,  you  will  have  facts  proved  by  them 
which  must  lead  you  to  the  unavoidable  con- 
clusion that  the  charge  in  the  indictment  is 
substantiated.  What  was  the  conduct  of 
the  prisoners  when  they  were  surprised  in 
die  loft  f  I  assure  you,  I  am  most  desirous 
that  that  conduct  should  not  be  considered  by 
you  any  further  than  as  it  tends  to  the  conclu- 
sion of  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the  prisoners 
on  the  charge  you  are  sworn  to  dedae.  The 
officejrs  endeavoured  to  secure  them.  If  they 
were  there  for  an  innocent  purpose,  why  did 
not  they  surrender  when  tne  officers  called 
upon  them  to  do  so  P  What  was  their  conductf 
-—the  most  determined,  the  most  ferodous ; 
one  of  the  officers  is  inhumanly  killed,  and 
Others  are  attacked  and  fired  at.  Do  not  mis- 
understand me ;  as  fkr  as  the  death  of  the  un- 
Ibrtunate  Smithers  is  concerned,  you  are  not 
trying  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  for  tliat  act ;  but 
you  are  bound  to  take  all  their  acts  in  the 
stable  into  your  consideration,  they  cannot  be 
dismissed  from  it.  It  is  a  &ct  in  the  case, 
that  they  resisted  the  dvil  power  by  all  the 
means  they  had,  to  the  utmost  extremity.    ITie 

Erisoner  at  the  bar  effects  his  escape,  flies  firom 
is  dwelling-house  and  secretes  himself  in  a 
different  part  of  the  town,  and  is  there  (bund. 
With  all  these  facts  before  you,  if  they  shall 
be  proved,  let  me  ask  you,  as  reasonable  men, 
what  conclusion  can  you  draw  from  them 
favourable  to  the  prisoner  ? 

The  issue  of  this  case  is  undoubtedly  of  the 
very  deepest  importance  to  the  unfortunate 
man  who  stands  before  you ;  it  involves  not 
only  his  clnracter,  but  his  life.  On  the  other 
hand,  reflect  upon  the  importance  of  it  to  the 
community  at  large. — If  this  plot  was  contrived, 
if  this  man  invented  or  adopted  it,  and  the 
means  were  used  which  I  have  described  to 
you  to  carry  it  into  execution,  can  you  hesitate 
to  do  that  act  of  justice  to  your  country  which 
such  evidence  imperiously  calls  upon  you  to 
perform? 

When  the  period  for  making  up  your  minds 
upon  this  momentous  question  arrives,  you 
will  weigh  the  evidence  calmly  and  dispas- 
sionately ;— if  you  think  the  scale  preponderates 
in  favour  of  the  prisoner,  an  event  I  own  that 
I  cannot  anticipate,  you  will  satisfy  your  con* 
sciences  by  finding  him  not  guilty ;  but  if  all 
Ae  facts  pio?ed  inevitably  tend  to  the  condu- 1 


don  of  guilk ;  if  the  charges  against  theprisoner 
at  the  bar  be  substantiated,  il  will  be  your 
indispensable  duty,  however  painful  that  duty 
may  be,  to  pronounce  a  verdict  of  guilty. 

Mr.  Gumey, — ^It  will  be  necessary  that  the 
other  prisoners  should  be  present  for  the  pur- 
pose of  their  persons  being  identified. 

Mr.  AdoipkuM. — ^My  lord,  I  have  to  request 
that  the  witnesses  forthe  crown  may  be  directed 
to  withdraw  until  their  examinations,  I  do 
not  desire  it  of  any  persons  in  a  respectable 
situation  of  life,  or  of  the  police  officers- 
Mr.  Aitomeu  Gtnend, — ^Under  those  cir- 
cmnstances  I  should  wish  that  all  the  vritnesses 
should  retire.  The  witnesses  for  the  crown 
will  be  out  of  court  throughout  the  triaL 

Lord  Chief  Jtutke  Abbatt-^lhe  solidtor  for 
the  prisoner  will  take  care  then  that  the  wit- 
nesses for  the  prisoner  shall  be  out  of  court. 

EVIDENCE  FOB  THE  PEOS^CCTION. 

Robert  Adami  sworn* — Examined  by  Mr. 
Sniicitor.Gaieral. 

Where  do  you  live?— No.  4,  Hole-in-the 
vrall  Passage,  Brook's-market. 

What  are  you  by  trade  ? — ^A  shoemaker. 

Were  you  ever  m  the  army  ?— Yes. 

In  what  regiment  ?^The  royal  regiment  of 
Horse-guards. 

How  long  is  it  since  you  left  that  service? — 
Eiriiteen  years  last  Christmas  eve. 

Did  you  know  the  prisoner  John  Thomas 
Brunt  ? — Yes. 

Where  did  you  first  become  acquainted  with 
him  P — At  CttDdbray,  in  France. 

By  what  name  did  he  then  go?— Ibomas 
Morton. 

How  long  is  that  ago?— In  1816, 1  think. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner  Thistlewood  P — 
Yes. 

When  did  you  first  know  him? — Oo  the 
13th  of  January  last. 

Where  did  he  live  at  that  time  ?— ^In  Stan- 
hope-street, Clare^market. 

Where  did  you  see  him  first  on  the  13th  of 
Januaiy  ? — In  his  own  room,  the  two  pair  front 
room. 

How  came  you  to  go  there?  did  you  go 
alone,  or  did  any  person  go  with  you  ? — ^I  was 
introduced  by  Brunt  and  logs. 

When  you  saw  Thistlewood,  what  conversa-i 
tion  passed  at  the  meeting  on  the  13th  of 
January  ? 

Mr.  Ado^tkui, — I  submit  that  this  cannot  be 
evidence.  This  indictment  charges  a  conspir- 
ing against  the  person  and  government  of  our 
sovereign  lord  the  king,  that  is,  the  now  king 
George  the  fourth ;  the  witness  is  talking  now 
of  a  conversation  on  the  13th  of  January ;  that 
was  during  the  reign  of  the  late, king. 

Mr.  Solicitor- General, — I  am  giving  evidence 
of  the  conversation^  not  of  acts.      *  ^  « 


7371 


Jw  High  Treason. 


A.  D«  1820. 


1738 


Lard  Ckkf  Jmtke  AbbatL-^^ppoOiag  that 
the  scheme  began  in  the  reign  of  the  late  king, 
but  was  intended  to  be  carried  into  effect  in 
the  reign  of  the  present  king,  we  must  hear 
the  whole  story. 

Mr.  Adoiphm, — T  would  submit  whether  that 
which  passed  on  the  13th  of  January,  must  not 
be  considered  as  referring  to  the  then  king. 

Lard  Chief  Justice  Abbott, — We  cannot  refuse 
to  hear  the  commencement  of  the  scheme. 

Mr.  AdolpkuM. — ^Then  my  objection  will  be 
too  late. 

Lord  Chief  Jmtice  Abbott.—The  jury  will  of 
course  be  informed,  that  the  parties  cannot  be 
convicted  on  this  indictment,  ifthe  intention  was 
only  to  depose  his  late  majesty :  but  if,  having 
commenced  in  his  late  majesty's  reign,  they 
haye  gone  on  with  the  intention  to  depose  his 

5 resent  majesty,  then  it  will  apply  to  the  in- 
ictment :  we  must  hear  the  whole  of  it ;  if  it 
stopped  short  there,  then  it  would  not  apg|j  to 
the  indictment. 

'b/Lr^Solidtor-GeneroL — When  you  were  intro- 
duced to  Thistlewood  by  Brunt  and  Ings,  what 
passed  P — I  was  introduced  into  the  room  by 
Brant ;  on  going  into  the  room  Brunt  said  to 
Thistlewood,  "  This  was  the  man  I  was  speak- 
ing to  you  about.''  Thistlewood  said,  ''you 
were  once  in  the  life-guards.'' 

He  said  that  to  you  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  you  say  to  that  i — ^No,  I  said,  I 
was  not ;  I  originally  belonged  to  the  Blues. 
He  said,  "  I  presume  you  are  a  good  swords- 
man." I  tola  him  I  could  use  a  sword  suffi- 
cient to  defend  myself,  but  I  could  not  say  I 
was  so  clerer  in  the  sword  as  I  was  some  years 
back,  not  being  in  the  habit  of  using  a  sword 
or  anus  of  any  description  for  some  time.  On 
this  he  began  to  allude  to  the  genteel  people 
of  this  country,  endeaTouring  as  much  as  he 
could  to  make  them  mean  and  contemptible ; 
saying  there  was  not  one  who  was  wotth  ten 
pounds,  that  was  worth  any  thing  for  the  good 
of  bis  country. 

Did  any  thing  further  pass  at  that  time  ? — 
Yea.  As  to  the  shopkeepers  of  London,  he 
Mid  they  were  a  set  of  aristocrats  altogether, 
and  vere  all  working  under  one  system  of  go- 
▼emment,  that  he  should  glory  to  see  the  oay 
that  all  the  shops  were  shut  up,  and  were 

Slandered.  .  His  discourse  then  turned  upon 
Ir.  Hunt;  that  Mr.  Hunt  was  a  damned 
coward,  and  a  man  that  was  no  friend  to  the 
people ;  and  he  had  no  doubt,  were  he  to  get 
nto  Whitehall,  and  exaoune  the  books,  he 
sfaonld  find  Ids  name  there  as  a  spy  for  govem- 
iBcnt. 

That  if  he,  Thistlewood,  got  into  WhttehaU, 
he  diould  find  his  name  on  the  books  of  go<i 
Tenunent  aaa^spy?— rVes.  . 

How  long  did  this  interview  last?«~I  have 
BOt^one.  He  neit  turned  bis  discourse  upon 
Mr.Gbbbctt,  saying  Mr.  Cobbett,  with  all 
bin  wriliagi,  was  cf  no  good  to  the  oonatiy ; 
ai|id  that  ha  was  a  sttn.tbatdidjiot.wifh  them. 

VOL.  XXILIIL 


well ;  and  (hat  he  had  no  doubt. he  was  a  spy 
equally  the  same  as  Mr.. Hunt  himself.  I 
believe  that  finished  the  discourse,  so  fi&r  as  I 
can  recollect. 

You  had  afterwards  the  misfortune  to  be 
confined  in  White-croes  prison  for  debt  ? — ^Yes, 
I  had. 

When  was  that?— On  the  17th;  it  was 
prior  to  the  17th. 

Some  other  conversations'  took  place  between 
you  and  Thistlewood,  before  you  went  to 
prison  ? — ^Yes. 

I  do  not  want  to  go  into  the  whole  of  them  ?. 
— There  were  several  before  the  17th. 

Where  did  those  interviews  take  place?— 
The  next  interview  I  had  with  Mr.  Thistlewood 
was  on  Sunday  the  16th. 

Where  was  that  ?— At  the  White  Hart. 

Where  is  the  White  Hart?  — In  Brook's- 
market.  It  is  kept  by  a  person  of  the  name  of 
Hobbs. 

What  kind  of  room  was  that?  was  it  a 
room  belonging  to  the  public  house,  or  a  room 
in  a  back  yard? — ^A  room  in  a  back  yard  ;  a 
small  room. 

Was  any  person  present  besides  Thistlewood, 
at  that  conversation  ? — ^Yes ;  Ings,  Brunt,  Hall, 
and  in  the  course  of  the  forenoon,  before  it 
broke  up,  there  was  Tidd. 

Mr.  Cun90od,^Wi\l  your  lordship  excuse 
me 

Mr.  SoUdtor^enertd,'-!  am  not  going  to 
ask  as  to  any  thing  that  passed  at  that  meeting ; 
I  have  no  objection  to  your  asking  to  it ;  but 
it  is  not  necessary,  and  therefore  I  vriH  not 
take  up  the  time.  You  afterwards,  you  say, 
went  to  prison  T — Yes. 

How  long  did  you  remain  there  ? — I  came 
out  on  Sunday,  the  day  after  the  death  of  the 
king. 

Inat  was  on  the  30th  ?— Yes. 

Afteryou  came  out,  did  you  go  to  any  place 
where  lliistlewood  was  present?— >!  saw  him, 
on  the  Monday  evening,  the  31st. 

Where  was  it  you  saw  him  t — I  saw  him  in 
a  room  on  the  same  floor  where  Brunt  lives  ; 
in  a  back  room. 

Where  is  that  ? — I  cannot  exactly  tell  you 
the  number  in  the  court. 

What  is  the  name  of  the  court  ?^FoxpCOurt, 
Gray's«inn«lane ;  it  runs  from  Gray's*inn-lane 
to  Brook-street. 

Who  were  present  at  that  meeting  besides 
Thistlewood  ?— There  were  Brunt,  Ings,  HalV 
and  Davidson.  I  cannot  charge  my  memory 
at  this  moment  with  any  body  else. 

Whatconvenation  took  place  at  that  meet- 
ing ? — Nothing  particular  took  place  that  ni^t- 
to  m^  reooUeetion. 

Did  you  meet  them,  on  the  following  night, 
on  the  Tuesday  7 — ^I  cannot  reeoUect  wheSieti 
I  did  or  not. 

When  did  you  meet  them  again,  according 
to  the  best  of  your  recollection? — To  the  best 
of  my  recollection,  I  met  them  on  theWcdoaa- 
day  evening* 

3B 


1991 


I  GBOXQE  IV. 


Trial  cfAritur  TkisAnood 


tMQ 


Who  wete  prtaenl  on  that  Wednesday  ?-<«< 
ThisUewood,  fimnt^  Davidson,  Harrison  and 
£dward!». 

What  passed  at  that  meeting  ? 

Mf«  Ga'wood.^l  moat  ob^  to.  thai,  my 

K>rd,  because  it  is  an  overt  act  not  stated  on 
this  indictment.  They  hate  stated  a  okeeting 
on  the  5th  of  Febraary,  at  the  parish  of  Mary. 
]ie*boiie,  and  at  diveia  other  tines  and  places. 
I  apprehend  '^  dken  other  tinea  and  pUces*'* 
is  not  a  sufficient  statement  to  give  the  prisoner 
notice  to  be  prepared,  I  am  well  avare,  that 
even  a  substantive  treason  may  be  given  i«  evi- 
dence to  support  an  overt  act  of  anoSier  treaaon ; 
hut  in  this  case,  wbeva  they  have  stated  the 
overt  act  of  meeting,  wiAhont  designating  either 
time  or  phiee,  I  humbly  apprehend  it  is  not 
sncb  a  meeting  as  can  be  given  in  evidence 
nnder  ihat  avemenft.  It  i&  necessary  to  state 
the  overt  act  on  the  indictment,  that  the  pri^i 
sonar  maybe  prepared  to  eontradiet  thie  account 
given  of  that  meeting.  That  is  my  short 
objection ;  if  I  have  made  it  oadeeitQOd,  that 
is  all  I  desire. 

LfFd  Chkf  Justice  AbboU.-'Vxis  is  the 
invariable  form  of  every  indictment,  drawn 
either  for  high  treason  or  conspiracy,  that  the 
parties  met  and  did  such  and  such  acts,  and 
iio  objection  has  ever  been  taken  to  the  gene- 
rality of  such  an  averment ;  if  that  objection 
eould  prevail,  and*  it  were  held  necessary  to 
setout)  the  time  and  place  of  every  conversation, 
it  wauifad  lead  to  infinite  prolixity  and  inconve^ 
]»ienoe« 

Mr.  Cunoood,—!  thought  it  my  dqty  to 
submit  thool^ectiou. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — I  shall  be  happy 
to  attend  to  any  objection  which  occurs  to 
you,  Mr.  Curwood. 


>i 


Mn  SoSeitcr  Oeneroi.-— What  passed  upon 
diat  occasion  ?— Nothing  particular  passed 
mpon  that  occasion,  only  that  I  saw  a  number 
01  those  pike  staves.  Thisllewood  was  anxions 
to  have  them  feruled,  and  as  far  as  I  oonld 
vndesstand,  Thistleweod  expressed  hiaoeelf 
rather  surprised  that  Bradbnra  was  not  oeme. 

Is  that  bfadbnm  the  prisonet  ^--^Yes. 

What  w^  findhuni  by  trBde?--That  I 
cannot  say.  Davidson  in  particufair  began  to 
ttpressbtinBelf  d  isHtisftedbeoanseThietlftwood 
said  that  Bradbum.  had  been  supplied  with 
S|oney  to  bey  finules  to  pot  upon  tboae  stavaa, 
and  that  they- wave  not  done« 

Were  those  staves  in  the  roosn  ad  the  time  ? 
Wlliey  wete. 

In  what  state  were  ther^-^llKy  warn  quite. 
RreoB,  9CfA  appealed  as  if  they  had  jnat  come 
ftaaa  thi  ooanciy* 

Sute  any  thing  further  that  passed  at  that 
ipeeting^^^fter  DavJdsoB  eipeessed  hisieelf 
dissati&ed  with  Bradbum  not  coming  forward 
te  ierale  the  scicka  for  the  pikes,  he  said  he 
**  would  not  give   a   damn  for  the  bmui;  he 


dare  fey  he  bad  speot  the  mooegr ; 
like  him  was  not  worthy  of  considefation.' 

Do  you  know  any  thing  else  that  passed  at 
that  meeting  ^--Theie  was  nothing  else  Either 
than  Thistlewood  making  a  reply,  ^  No,  ao." 

I  do  not  ask  you  as  to  any  thing  that  passed 
relative  to  these  disputes,  but  on  any  other 
subject? — ^I  do  not  remember  that  any  thing 
furmer  passed. 

How  often  were  those  meetings  heldf — 
Those  meetings  were  held  twice  a  day. 

U|>  to  what  time  were  they  held  twiee  a 
day  ? — ^Up  to  the  23rd  of  February. 

from  the  time  you  came  out  of  prison  I — 
Yes,  they  were  in  that  room. 

Did  you  collect  from  them  who  had  hired 
the  room? — Yes,  I  heard  Brunt  say  he  had 
hired  the  room  for  Ings. 

Did  he  say  for  what  purpose  the  room  had 
been  hired  ? — No,  he  did  not ;  I  can  only  con- 
jecture for  what  it  was  hired. 

Was  there  any  furniture  in  the  room  f — ^No, 
except  a  stove  tiiat  was  fixed. 

But  the  meetings  continued  to  be  held  there 
from  the  81st  of  January  te  the  2drd  of  fe* 
bruary,  in  that  room  ?— Yes. 

When  did  you  go  there  again? — I  oanaee 
ehaige  my  memory  exactly,  but  I  can  recoilesi 
one  circumstance  particularly.  One  eveaing 
about  nine  or  ten  d^ys  before  the  fimeial  el  tin 
king,  I  went  up  into  the  room  where  a  sseetittg 
was  held ;  there  was  Thistleweod  and  Har- 
rison sitting  hf  the  fire ;  they  were  in  deep 
discourse,  and  dieie  were  two  chairs;  th^ 
made  room  for  me  to  sit  down ;  Harcisoa  sat 
in  the  middle,  and  Thisdewood  on  one'  side 
and  1  on  the  other :  they  began  to  teU  me  th» 
discourse  that  had  passed  between  tiieak 
Harrison  told  Thistlewood  he  had  aiet  wkh 
one  of  the  life-guards,  who  told  him,  thai  all 
the  life-guaids  that  ooukt  be  spared,  and  eoali 
be  mounted,  erould  be  at  the  foneral  oi  the 
king ;  and  likewise  aa  many  foot^geaids  as  eonld 
be  spared,  and  likewise  the-  police  ofikers* 
Hanison  said  it  struck  bias,  after  he  left  thie 
life-guardsman,  that  this  would  be  a  favouMibla 
opportunity  for  whiA  they  had  in  view,  as  the 
fcoldiers  would  be  oat  of  town,  and  the  pobee 
officers  as  well ;  that  it  would  be  a  v«ry  la* 
vonrable  opportaatty  to  kkk  op  a  row,  aad 
see  what  they  could  do  that  night.. 

Harrisan  stated  this  to  TUsticwaod  ?-^Yes, 
and  then  Thistteweod  iasprof  ed  it ;  afteswasda 
Thistlewood  laid  a  plan. 

What  did  IWstlewood  sqr  ?-i«-1h  «puts  flMt 
with' his  appBobafion,  he  said  it  eertaialy  wowidi 
be  a  very  flivomrable  opportaaity,  and'hefaidrBa 
doi^  pnoiided  they  osuld  take.  theed»  nm 
pieces  of  cannon  from  Oray's-inn-lane^  anii  iha 
s2x  pmes  o€  cannon  finn  th*  iUliUeiy  ^eaasd, 
that  ttmy  woald  have  an  epportuntty^  bsfinai 
morning,  to  put  themself  ee  latp-  the  '~ 

ofLeiJeD.- 

IWhat  imtlier  pasaadt^maliuwoa^ 
agreed  witb  the  plan>  aote  as  thfie,  be  woi^. 
if  onee  it  began  had  if  coasaBaucalioac 
fmaLhadoiLto.WittlK»r /ta  inieiBa  Qm 


74H] 


^r  High  rrMCOfi. 


A-  D.  leM^ 


174* 


her«  (hill  lfa«y  were  to  o^ne  to  Le&doii,  tfaejr 
would  be  BO  tired  when  they  got  to  London 
ihej  wovld  not  be  able  to  do  any  thing. 

What  fortber  passed  ?  ^  Mr.  Thistlewood 
eaid^  he  thought  oy  persevering  after  thev  had 
get  the  cannon,  it  might  be  so  ordered  that 
Ibey  €0^kl  go  to  Hyde  Park  and  prevent  any 
orderly  leaving  London  to  go  to  Windsor  to 
wake  any  communication  ctf  what  bad  pasted 
in  London. 

Was  any  thing  further  said  ! — ^la  the  next 
|)laee  be  Mid  it  would  be  highly  necessary  to 
go  to  the  telegraph,  over  the  wateri  and  take 
possession  of  that  to  prevent  any  intelligence 
being  conveyed  to  Woolwich;  he  next  proj^>tted, 
as  he  thought  by  this  time  they  should  be  able  to 
form  a  provisional  government,  to  seek  for  a  pro* 
visional  governmeot|  and  for  that  provisional  go- 
▼emment  to  send  down  to  the  sea-ports  to  pre* 
ventanygentlemen  being  permitted  to  leave  this 
country  without  a  passport  from  the  provisional 
government,  he  particularly  mentioned  Dover^ 
Brighton,  Ramsgate,  and  Margate,  and  last  of 
all  he  bethought  himself  that  Brighton  would 
be  the  most  particular  plaee  of  any ;  he  said  it 
ifrottld  be  neoessary  to  take  a  force  down  there 
auficieat  to  take  it,  **  not  that  I  suppose  the 
new  king  will  be  able  to  be  there  at  that  time, 
or  even  to  be  at  the  funeral  of  his  father,"  he 
did  not  consider  he  was  well  enough,  but  **  it 
ytrill  be  necessavy  to  go  down  there  to  prevent 
any  person  leaving  it;  and  as  to  the  prince 
regent  or  the  king»  we  cannot  think  of  his  ever 
wearing  tbe  crown,  the  present  family  have 
inbelited  the  crown  long  enough.'^ 

Did  any  other  persons  come  into  the  room 
during  that  meeting  that  evening  P — Ings  and 
brunt. 

What  did  you  say  about  uot  wearing  the 
crown  ^ — He  said,  '*!  think  it  is  no  use  the 
new  king  even  thinking  of  wearing  the  crown*" 

Vou  liave  told  us,  at  first  Harrison  and  This- 
tlewood  and  youreelf  were  there ;  did  any  other 
persons  come  in  ?— Brunt  and  Ings  were  not 
iA  the  room  at  the  time  this  conversation 
pnss^,  but  they  came  in  aflerwards. 

After  they  came  in^  was  any  thing  said  to 
tbem  ? — Thistlewood  got  up  and  went  to  Brunt 
and  Ings. and  oommunicated  what  Harrison 
had  brought,  as  to  what  might  be  done  on  the 
night  of  the  funeral  of  the  king ;  Brunt  and 
Ings  heard  what  he  had  to  say,  but  thfy  both 
positively  declared  that  there  was  nothing 
short  of  the  assassination  wbich  they  had  in 
view,  that  would  satisfy  them. 

The  assassination  of  whom  ?-^0f  the  min- 
isters. 

Had  any  conversation  taken  plaoe  on  that 
sulnect  before?— Yes* 

At  that«  or  a  former  meeting  ?-<— At  a  former 


WiU  you  tell  us  what  that  eonversatioa  was 
ttspeetxng  the  assassination  ?  what  that  plan 
ivns  )-^I  asked  tbem  frequently  what  was  the 
pUa,  but  the  first  meeting  I  had  with  Brunt 
he  told  me  what  was  the  intentioQ. 
./ Wbaldidbaiay?— AmM  thfRwecelwo 


or  three  of  tbem  who  bad  drawn  out  a  plan  . 
wich  a  view  to  assassinate  the  ministers  the 
first  cabinet  dinner  that  they  had. 

Was  there  any  talk  either  at  that  meeting  of 
which  you  have  just  spoken,  or  at  any  former 
meeting,  about  this  assassination  ?  *-i-  They 
never  scarcely  met  but  that  was  the  objecV 
part  of  it. 

Was  any  thing  said  as  to  what  was  to  be 
done,  besides  the  assassination  of  the  minis>> 
ters? — Not  at  that  time. 

Not  before  that  meeting  when  the  conversi^ 
tion  took  place  about  the  funeral  ? — No. 

Do  not  speak  to  any  thing  which  took  placf 
after  that  meeting  where  the  conversation  took 
plaoe  about  the  king^s  funeral,  because  we  will 
go  to  that  by  and  by,  but  do  you  recoUeet  any 
thing  further  respecting  the  former  meeting  1-^ 
I  cannot  charge  my  memory  with  any  thing 
further. 

You  say  you  saw  some  pike  staves  in  that 
room ;  was  there  any  thi^g  but  the  pike  staves 
carried  into  that  room  ?— >Ye8. 

Confine  your  atatement  for  the  present  to 
any  thing  previous  to  the  meeting  at  which  the 
king's  funeral  was  spoken  of,  was  there  any 
thing  carried  into  the  room  previous  to  that 
time  ^^— I  cannot  pay  whether  there  were  pre* 
vious  to  that  time,  afterwards  there  were,  \ 
cannot  charge  my  memory  as  to  the  exact  dates 
until  I  come  to  the  19tlt  of  February. 

What  day  of  the  week  was  that? — The 
Saturday. 

What  time  in  the  day  did  you  go  there?— i 
Between  eleven  and  twelve  o'clock  in  the  fore* 
noon. 

This  room  in  Fox-<court } — Yes. 

Who  was  there  at  that  time  ? — I  saw  This« 
tlewood,  Davidson,  Harrison,  Ings,  Brunt  and 
Hall. 

Tell  us,  in  the  order  of  time  as  accurately  aa 
you  can,  every  thing  that  took*  place  at  that 
meeting,  every  thing  that  was  said  and  every 
thing  that  was  done  ? — On  the  Saturday  the 
19th,  on  my  going  into  the  room  they  were  all 
set  round  the  room  seemingly  in  a  sort  of  con* 
fusion,  in  a  deep  study.  I  had  not  been  in 
scarcely  a  minute  before  they  all  got  up  and 
turned  themselves  short  round  upon  their  heels« 
saying,  '<  Well,  then,  it  is  agreed  we  are  come 
to  the  determination  then  if  nothing  eeeurs 
between  this  and  neat  Wednesday  night,  next 
Wednesday  night  we  will  go  to  work.''  It  was 
said  that  they  were  all  so  poor  that  they  coukl 
not  wait  any  longer.  Thistlewood  directly  pro* 
posed  that  a  committee  shenld  sit  to-morrow 
morning,  on  the  Sunday  at  nine  o'clock,  in 
order  to  draw  out  a  plan  to  go  by  what  they 
were  to  do.  Thistlewood  said  to  Brunt  *'  you 
bad  better  go  round  this  afternoon  and  ao<}uaiiit 
what  men  you  think  you  can  bring  forward,  in. 
order  to  bring  tbem  to  the  committee  to-aer- 
Xow  morning."  Brunt  aaid  he  had  sot  some 
work  to  finish,  and  he  did  not  think  he  should 
have  any  time^  but  he  might  get  up  in  the 
morning  and  acquaint  a  fow  that  they  might 
I  nHeadf  but  they  did  not  want  ^  great  many  to 


748] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Triat  tfArtktr  TUHUmod 


[744 


be  in  the  rooniy  Brant  appeared  as  if  he  was 
leaving  the  room,  and  Thistlewood  seemed  to 
recollect  himself,  and  said,  ^  oh,  Brant,  it  will 
be  highly  necessary  for  all  that  attend  the  com- 
mittee to>morrow  morning  to  bring  arms  with 
them  in  case  any  officers  should  come  up/' 
On  this  Brant  said,  **  damn  my  eyes,  if  any 
officers  was  to  come  into  this  room  I  would  ran 
tiiem  through,  murder  them,  and  take  care  after 
I  bad  done  it,  it  should  never  be  found  out.'' 
This,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  finished 
what  I  saw  on  the  Saturday  in  the  evening,  I 
did  not  go  up  on  the  Sunday  moraing  till  just 
turned  of  eleven  o'clock  I  entered  the  room. 

Who  were  in  the  room  at  that  time? 
how  many? — On  going  into  the  room,  what 
with  the  fog  and  thickness  of  the  snow,  the 
room  was  in  a  state  of  darkness.  I  made  to- 
wards the  fire-place,  but  it  was  so  dark  I  could 
scarcely  tell  who  they  were  till  one  spoke  to 
ine ;  that  was  Tidd :  he  said,  *'  How  do  you  do, 
Adams"  f— I  said,  '^Is  it  you,  Tidd  1 1  did  not 
know  who  it  was." 

Did  you  afterwards  collect,  from  the  con- 
versation and  the  looking  around  you,  who 
were  there  ? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

Who  were  there  P— There  were  Thistlewood, 
Brant,  Ings,  Hall,  Davidson,  Harrison,  Cook, 
Bradbura,  Edwards,  myself,  and  Wilson. 

Will  you  tell  us  what  took  place  at  that  meet- 
ing P  tell  us  it  in  the  order  of  time  ? — A  very 
little  while  after  this,  I  found  that  the  business 
they  had  met  upon,  which  was  to  begin  at  nine 
o'clock,  had  not  been  entered  on.  Mr.  Thistle- 
wood, on  looking  round  and  counting  the 
number  of  heads,  says,  **  I  think  it  is  high 
time  gentlemen  to  begin  the  business."  Count- 
ing the  heads  and  seeing  there  were  twelve, 
he  said,  "  I  think  that  is  quite  enough  to  form 
a  committee.*'  On  this  Mr.  Tidd  was  pro- 
posed to  take  the  chair. 

Thistlewood  proposed  that  Tidd  should  take 
the  chair  ? — ^Ycs.  Tidd  takes  the  chair,  and  he 
takes  a  pike,  and  he  sits  with  a  pike  in  his 
hand.;  Mr.  Thistlewood  standing  up  on  his  left, 
and  Brant  upon  his  right.  Thistlewood  began. 
Says  he,  *'  Gentlemen,  I  presume  you  all  know 
what  you  are  met  here  for,"  tuning  his  head  to 
the  door  with  an  allusion  tliat  he  would  not 
name  what  they  had  met  for,  or  call  the  names 
of  the  different  ministers  over,  but  he  turned 
to  the  door  and  said,  ^*  the  west-end  job.*' 
Brant  perceiving  this,  said,  **  Damn  my  eyes, 
never  mind,  mention  their  names,  what  signi- . 
fies  ?  *'  He  was  called  to  order  directly  from 
the  chair.  On  this  Thistlewood  speaks  again 
he  says,  ^'Gentlemen,  we  are  come  to  this 
determination,  as  we  are  all  of  us  tired  in  wait- 
ing so  long  for  the  doin^  this  job,  and  as  we« 
find  there  is  no  probability  of  their  meeting 
all  together—*' 

Of  whose  meeting  til  together  ?-~Of  the 
ministers.  **  If  in  case  they  do  not  dine  all 
together  between  this  and  Wednesday  night 
we  are  come  to  a  determination  within  our- 
selves to  take  them  separately  at  their  own 
Jiouses;  we  shall  not  have  such  an  oppoitwiity 


i 


of  destroying  so  manj  as  provided  they  were 
to  dine  all  together:  it  we  take  them  separately, 
we  must  content  ourselves  with  getting  two  or 
three  or  four,  as  we  can  get  them.  I  sup- 
pose,'' says  he,  **  it  will  take  as  much  as  forty 
or  fifty  men  to  do  the  west-end  job  with :  and 
I  propose,  at  the  same  time,  that  the  two 
pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray*s-inn  lane  shall  he 
taken,  and  the  six  pieces  of  cannon  at  the 
Artillery-ground  shall  be  taken.''  Cook  pro* 
poeed  himself  to  take  the  lead,  and  take  the 
command  upon  himself,  at  the  taking  of  those 
cannon.  He  proposed,  after  these  were  taken, 
taking  the  Mansion-house  as  a  seat  for  the 
provisional  government;  then  they  were  to 
make  an  attempt  upon  the  bank  of  England :  he 
directly  proposed,  that  Mr.  PaUn  should  be  the 
man  that  should  be  intrasted  to  set  fire  to  the 
different  buildings  in  different  parts  of  London. 
Was  Palin  to  do  this  by  himself  ?— If  you 
will  let  me  go  on  in  m^  statement.  To  the 
best  of  mv  recollection  this  pretty  well  finish- 
ed Mr. Inistlewood's  plan  tnat  morning,  and 
he  said  there  was  time  enough  between  that 
and  Wednesday  night  to  improve  it,  as  they 
could  not  come  to  any  decision  what  time  to 
begin,  but  they  should  have  time  between  that 
and  the  Wednesday  night  to  settle  all  that. 
He  said  he  should  drop  the  subject  for  the  pre- 
sent, as  Brant,  or  Mr.  Brunt  (I  cannot  exactly 
recollect  which  of  the  two),  had  a  proposition 
to  make  to  them,  respecting  the  assassination 
of  the  ministers,  how  it  was  to  be  done.  On 
this  Brant  coming  forward  to  state  his  pian, 
Thistlewood  said,  **  Stop,  this  proposition  I 
have  said  to  the  men  in  the  room  had  better 
first  be  put  from  the  chair,  to  see  whether 
tiiey  are  all  agreeable  to  what  has  been  said." 
Thistlewood  said  to  the  chairman,  "  Yoo  had 
better,  before  you  put  the  question,  ask  them 
all  round  separately  whether  they  are  agreeable, 
or  whether  any  of  them  have  any  thing  to  say 
on  what  has  been  said."  It  was  put  by  the 
chairman.  The  chairman  asked  several  of 
them  whether  they  had  any  thing  to  say  on 
what  had  been  said  ;  nobody  speaking,  it  was 

Imt  from  the  chair,  and  was  carried  unanimona- 
y.  Mr.  Brunt  now  came  forwards  with  a 
proposition  that  he  had  to  make.  He  propo^ 
sed  that  as  many  of  the  ministers  as  they  conld 
form  an  idea  that  they  could  assassinate,  that 
it  should  be  done  on  Wednesday  night,  witk- 
out  an  opportunity  occurred  that  the  miniateta 
dined  all  together  between  this  and  the  Wed- 
nesday night.  That  as  many  men  as  they  ooold 
get  together  that  would  go  forwards  to  the  as- 
sassination of  the  ministers,  as  many  as  they 
thought  they  could  assassinate,  those  men  should 
be  divided  into  separate  lots.  After  the  men 
were  so  lotted,  he  proposed  then  that  out  of 
each  lot  there  should  be  a  man  drawn  for  the 
sole  purpose  of  assassinating  the  party  that  they 
went  to  do ;  and  whoever  it  fell  upon  to  do  the 
assassination,  that  man  should  be  bound  to  do 
it,  or  be  murdered  himself.  Whatever  man 
the  lot  fell  upon  to  do  the  part  of  the  Mtmti" 
nation,  if  he  attempted  the  deed,  and  fatted 


745] 


Jar  Higft  TreatoM. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[746 


in  doing  it|  he  swore  bv  all  that  was  good,  that 
man  shonld  be  run  through  upon  the  spot. 
Upon  this  I  got  up  myself,  and  said  to  Mr. 
Brunt,  **  I  wish  to  ask  you  this  question  upon 
the  few  words  you  have  drawn  :  Do  you  sup- 
-pose  it  is  not  possible  for  a  man  to  go  and 
attempt  to.  do  a  thing  like  that,  and  for  the 
man  to  fail  in  it  ?  Do  you  mean  to  say  that 
that  mai9  so  fiailtng  shall  be  run  through  upon 
the  spot  himself?"  He  said,  *' No,  certamly 
not ;  unless  the  man  that  attempts  it,  if  there 
is  the  least  sign  of  cowardice  attached  to  it,  I 
say  that  he  riiall  be  run  through :  but,  if  he 
fails  in  doing  it,  if  he  is  thought  to  be  a  good 
nan,  of  course  he  shall  not  be  run  tJirough/' 
Mr.  Brunt  here  dropped  his  discourse  for  the 
present.  It  was  put  the  same  as  the  measure 
of  Mr.  Thistlewood,  from  the  phair  and  it  was 
agreed  to.  Two  minutes  after  this,  before  any 
thing  had  occurred,  in  came  Palin,  Potter,  and 
Strange;  they  were  asked  to  sit  down  by  the 
fire,  being  wet,  being  covered  with  snow. 
Palin  came  and  sat  down  next  to  me  ;  as  to 
the  other  two  I  cannot  say.  Thistlewood  im- 
mediately proposed,  or  at  least  told  them  that 
the  two  plans  they  had  drawn  up  between  them- 
selves, and  whicn  had  been  proposed  by  him 
and  Brunt,  had  been  stated ;  but  as  they  were 
not  in  the  room  at  the  time  they  were  stated, 
be  thou^t  it  highly  necessary  those  plans 
should  be  stated  to  them. 

Did  he  relate  them  to  them  ? — ^Yes,  the  same 
as  before ;  Mr.  Thistlewood  his  plan,  and  Mr. 
Brunt  his,  and  they  agreed  to  them  the  same 
as  the  rest  had  done.  After  this  had  been  gone 
through  by  Mr.  Thistlewood  and  Brunt,  Palin 
gets  up  and  says,  "Mr.  Chairman,  I  have  a  few 
words  that  I  wish  to  speak  on  what  has  been 
dropped  by  Mr.  Thistlewood  and  Mr.  Brunt. 
Agrreeing  as  I  do  with  the  plans  that  have 
been  proposed,  and  bavins  been  one  amongst 
tiie  number  that  have  held  up  my  hand  to  as- 
sent to  it,  there  is  one  thing  I  want  to  know : 
there  are  so  many  objects  you  have  proposed  to 
carry  all  at  one  time,  certainly  it  it  can  be 
done  it  will  be  a  great  acquisition  to  what  we 
have  in  view,  but  this  is  what  I  want  to  know : 
yoa  talk  of  taking  from  forty  to  fifty  men  to 
the  west-end  job ;  now  I  should  be  glad  to 
know  where  you  are  to  find  those  men  that 
will  take  this  cannon  at  Gra/s-inn-lane  ? 
Those  cannon  at  the  Artillery-ground,  where 
they  are  to  come  from  ?  No  doubt  you  know 
better  what  strength  you  have  got  than  I  do : 
as  for  my  own  part  I  can  give  no  satisfactory 
answer  at  the  present  what  strength  or  what 
men  I  can  bring  forward  to  assist  me ;  but  I 
want  to  know,  in  the  next  place,  before  my 
going  round  to  the  men  I  intend  to  call  upon 
tills  afternoon,  whether  I  may  be  intrusted, 
from  the  committee,  to  communicate  to  them 
what  is  to  be  done,  and  then  I  shall  better 
know  how  to  act.  I  want  to  know,"  says  he, 
**  io  calling  npon  the  men^  whether  I  can  have 
the  liberty  to  tell  them  in  part,  if  not  in  full, 
what  is  to  be  done,  and  when  they  will  be 
waoted  V*    The  cbairmaoi  tunung  his  head  to 


Thistlewood  and  to  Brunt,  says,  ^  I  suppose 
Mr.  Palin  there  is  no  doubt  but  what  he  knows 
what  kind  of  men  he  will  have  to  depend  upon, 
he  will  know  of  course  whether  he  can  depend 
upon  the  men  in  case  he  states  what  the  plan 
is,  and  when  they  will  be  wanted.  If  Mr. 
Palin  gets  men  of  that  description  that  he  can 
depend  upon,  I  do  not  see  where  the  harm 
will  be  in  nis  communicating  to  them  what  is 
to  be  done/' 

That  was  the  answer  given  to  Palin  ? — ^Yes, 
it  was  agreed  to  by  Mr.  Thistlewood  and  Brunt 
too,  the  chaitman,  for  Mr.  Palin  to  have  that 
liberty.  Mr.  Palin,  finding  he  had  liberty  to 
act  in  that  kind  of  way,  sat  himself  down  and 
seemed  satisfied.  This  finished  the  business 
to  the  best  of  my  recollection;  there  was  no- 
thing transacted  regularly  in  the  chair  after 
that,  but  they  began  to  think  of  going  home 
to  get  their  dinner,  in  order  to  go  in  the  after- 
noon round  to  their  difierent  men.  On  this, 
Mr.  Thistlewood,  all  on  a  sudden,  turned  him- 
self round  to  Brunt,  and  said,  ''Oh,  Bnint, 
well  thought  of,  npw  Mr.  Palin  is  here,  I  would 
advise  you  to  take  him  to  the  spot  close  by, 
and  see  whether  it  is  practicable  or  not."  That 
was,  to  go  and  see  the  new  Fumivars*inn 
building  in  Holbom,  to  see  whether  it  was 
practicable  to  clap  fire  to  it. 

Fox-court  is  close  by  Fumival's-inn,  I  be- 
lieve ? — Yes,  it  is. 

In  consequence  of  that,  did  they  go  out  ?— 
In  consequence  of  that  Mr.  Thistlewood  said, 
**  as  it  is  not  far,  Mr.  Palin  and  you  go  up  to- 
gether, and  return  here,  and  give  a  report  in." 

Did  they  go? — ^They  went,  and  were  out  of 
the  room,  I  suppose,  for  the  space  of  ten 
minutes  to  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Palin  and  Brunt  ? — Yes. 

Were  you  there  when  they  returned?— I 
was ;  when  Palin  and  Brunt  came  back,  Mr. 
Palin  gave  it  in  that  it  was  a  very  easy  job, 
very  easily  done,  and  it  would  make  a  damned 
good  fire ;  on  this  they  began  to  depart.  I  do 
not  recollect  that  Mr.  Palin  continued  in  the 
room  after  that,  but  a  very  little  while ;  but 
before  they  left  the  room,  Mr.  Thistlewood 
said  he  thought  it  would  be  highly  necessary, 
eitherTuesday  or  Wednesday,  to  get  what  men 
they  could  together,  and  to  give  them  a  treat ; 
but  he  did  not  know  how  this  was  to  be  ac- 
complished, we  are  all  so  poor.  Brunt  turning 
himself  sharp  round  on  his  heels,  he  was 
standing  by  tne  fire,  walked  across  the  room, 
came  back  again—''  Damn  my  eyes,  I  have 
not  done  little  or  no  work  for  some  time,  but  I 
have  got  a  pound  note  for  that  purpose,  and  I 
will  be  damned  if  I  do  not  spend  it  upon  the 
men  we  have  got." 

Upon  that,  did  you.  separate  at  that  time  T 
»Not  just  directly  :  on  tuis  Thistlewood  aaidy 
^  Where  can  you  take  them  to,  I  should  sop- 
pose  we  might  have  the  room  below  stairs  at 
the  White  Hart'^  Brunt  replied,  <'  I  do  not 
know;  I  do  not  much  like  to  go  there  after 
what  has  been  said,  but  never  mind.  I  dom>t 
see  tiiat  we  have  no  cause,  as  time  gets  qb,  to 


7473 


1  GfiORCE  IV. 


Trial  qf-^iur  TUiUevtood 


[7#6 


be  afraid  of  the  bloody  traps;  for  if-  they 
come  into  the  room  they  should  not  go  out 
again."  On  this  he  bethought  himself  that  be 
tould  send  his  apprentice^  and  his  own  soQ| 
out  of  the  way  by  giving  them  a  holiday,  and 
that  then  he  could  have  bis  own  room ;  but 
he  thought  he  should  still  call  and  hear  what 
llobbs  should  say. 

Hobbs  is  the  landlord  of  the  White  Hart  ? 
— Ycsy  be  is.  Thistlewood  at  the  same  time 
said  he  would  take  them  up  to  his  room ;  but 
directly  after,  on  giving  it  a  second  thought, 
he  said  ''  No,  that  will  not  do,  as  there  is  an 
officer  that  lives  so  opposite  to  me,  that  if  that 
officer  should  perceive  men  oomiog  backwards 
and  forwards  to  my  place  it  will  be  a  means  of 
givine  some  suspicion  there  is  something  in 
it.**  1  believe,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection, 
that  finishes  the  Sunday  morning  business. 

AVhen  did  you  meet  again  ? — ^They  met  on 
the  Monday  rooming ;  but  I  beg  leave  to  state 
one  circumstance  that  occurred  in  the  interval 
of  that  time,  of  the  meeting  breaking  up  on 
the  Sundair  morning^  and  my  calling  on  the 
Monday  mominj^ :  on  the  Sunday  evening  t 
went  to  the  White  Hart — 

You  must  not  tell  us  what  passed  with 
any  body  else.  You  went  and  had  a  commu- 
nication with  Hobbs  at  the  White  Hart? — 
Yes. 

That  cannot  affect  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  ; 
therefore  you  must  uot  state  that« — ^Then  we 
must  drop  that;  but  the  principal  part  of  what 
took  place  on  the  Monaay  morning  arose  in 
oonsequeace  of  that 

Tell  Us  what  took  place  on  the  Monday 
morning,  and,  as  far  as  that  is  material,  it  will 
come  out  in  Ibat  narrative  ? — On  the  Monday 
morning,  I  went  into  the  room  about  ten 
o*clock. 

Was  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  Tliistlewood, 
there  ? — Yes. 

Who  else? — Brunt,  Harrison,  Hall,  and 
Ings ;  I  cannot  charge  my  memory  as  to  the 
others. 

What  took  place  ? — ^They  asked  me  how  I 
did.  I  told  them  rather  unwell,  I  seemed  to 
be  rather  down  in  the  mouth.  What  passed 
at  the  moment  I  cannot  precisely  say,  but  I 
said  to  them,  ''  Gentlemen  [  have  something 
to  communicate  to  you.'^  They  all  turned 
their  eyes  upon  me  directly,  they  wanted  to 
Icnow  what  1  had  to  say.  On  this,  I  commu- 
<  nicated  to  them  what  I  had  oommunicated  to 
«ne  the  evening  before. 

You  told  them  what  had  passed  between 
you  and  some  other  person  on  the  Sunday 
night  ? — ^Yes. 

Who  was  that  other  person  P — Mr*  Hobbs, 
of  the  White  Hart. 

Tell  us  what  you  told  them  > — ^I  told  them 
that  Hobbs  had  told  me  that  there  had  been  a 
couple  of  oflScers,  one  fromHatton-^garden  and 
another  from  Bow-street,  to  ask  him  wiiethet 
tiiere  was  not  a  radical  meeting  held  there. 
I  told  them,  as  Hobbs  told  me,  there  Was  in» 
formation  at  Bow-street  office,  and  Likewise 


at  Jord  Sidmouth'a-  o6ke,  that  there  was  f 
meeting  of  that  description  held  at  his  houseg 
the  White  Hart. 

This  you  told  to  the  meeting  ? — Yes. 

Upon  that^  what  was  saifl  or  done  f — Har* 
rison  turned  himself  round  to  me  like  a  bull  dog^ 
"  Adams  you  have  acted  damned  wrong.''  l 
said,  "  In  what  ?"  Brunt  turned  upon  die  like 
a  lion,  and  said,  '*  You  have  acted  wr^ng  ;*'  he 
said, ''  whatever  you  had  heard  it  b  your  duty 
to  come  and  communicate  it  to  me,  or  Mr. 
Thistlewood.''  I  said,  ''I  did  not  conceive 
that  I  had  any  ri^t  to  withhold  it  from  any 
one ;  that  I  thougtit  it  my  dutv  to  communicate 
it  to  all,  as  it  concerned  all. '  They  swore  at 
roe  again,  and  said  I  had  no  business  to  com- 
municate it  to  any  body  except  them  two. 

Mr.  SolicUor  i^ernl — Will  your  lordship 
permit  ray  learned  friend  Mr.  Gurney,  to  pro- 
ceed with  the  examination  f 

Lord  ChkfJutiice  Abhott.-^Ctnakn}y. 

Mr.  Gttm^w.— What  was  said  in  answer  to 
that  observauon  of  yours  1—tb.ey  said  I  had 
no  business  to  communicate  any  thing  I  heard 
out  of  the  room.  I  said,  '<  What  would  you 
have  thought  of  me  had  I  after  hearing  such  a 
communicalion  ad  this,  such  a  report  as  this 
Out  of  doors,  that  the  proceedings  were  report* 
ed  out  of  Bow-street  office  and  lord  Sidmouth's 
office,  kept  this  to  myself,  and  sufiered  you  to 
go  on^  Afler  you  were  taken  and  all  prir 
soners,  it  would  have  come  out  that  I  was  tho 
person  that  knew  of  that,  and  might  have  pre-» 
vented  it.'' 

Did  any  thing  particular  more  pass  at  that 
meeting  ? — ^There  was  nothing  particular. 

How  soon  did  you  meet  again  1 — ^Tbere  wer^ 
some  other  circumstances  on  this  morning  bo- 
fore  the  meetinz  broke  up.  After  I  had  met 
with  this  rebuff  from  them,  t&ey  directly  began 
to  propose  leaving,  saying  they  had  a^number 
of  men  to  call  upon,  and  they  must  wait  apoa 
them  ;  and  that  they  had  a  meeting  of  vnat 
they  called  the  Marylebone  Union. 

Was  any  thing  proposed  by  either  of  them 
to  be  done  respecting  the  Marylebone  tJnion  t 
— Brunt  said  he  must  wait  upon  the  Marylor 
bone  club,  and  that  there  were  Several  of  them 
said  they  should  attend  there  themselves ;  that 
they  would  all  be  there,  for  that  they  wanted 
some  money,  tt  was  asked  by  one  in  the 
room,  whether  he  thought  it  would  be  of  any 
use  calling  there  upon  that  speculation  I  He 
told  them  ^es,  it  would. 

Who  said  that  ? — I  cannot  charge  my  recol- 
lection who  it  was ;  it  was  one  of  the  party^ 
It  was  Brunt  that  said, ''  Yes,  it  would."  1 
cannot  recollect  who  it  was  that  put  the  que»« 
tion. 

Before  you  went,  was  any  arrangement 
made  about  where  you  were  to  be  in  the  even- 
infl?— Yes. 

Where  were  you  appointed  to  be  in  the 
evening  ?— I  was  appointed  to  be  in  the  same 
room  in  the  evening..  < 


74SG 


far  High  Treatan. 


A.  D.  182D. 


LIS^ 


.  Tlifltt  wa»  tlie  room  in'  Bront*s  heiisc  ?— Yes ; 
that  vff^  proposed  by  Thistlewood. 
'   Were  you  told  what  answer  you  were  to 
give  to  any  that  might  eone  1^1  had  no  orders 
to  that  effect. 

Was  there  to  be  any  meeting  there  that 
Bight  ?--*The^  was  not,  further  than  this,  I 
w«s  ordered  to  attend  in  case  any  oae  thoaki 
come  that  was  not  there  in  the  morning ;  as 
"those  that  were  there  in  the  morning  had  all 
of  them  pretty  weU  agreed  to  be  in  the  Mary, 
lebone  union  that  night. 

You  were  to  say  there  was  no  meeting  there 
that  night?— Yes. 

Did  yon  go  there  that  evening  T^-*!  went  to 
Brunt's  room. 

Did  any  of  the  persons  that  you  mentioned 
come  there  that  evening? — Potter  called,  i 
think. 

Any  body  else  ? — No  ;  I  had  not  been  there 
long  before  Potter,  being  wet,  called,  and  said 
he  would  go  and  have  a  pot  of  beer,  and  he 
vent  tQ  the  White  Hart. 
.   And  you  went  with  him  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  any  persons  come  to  you  there  ? — Yes. 

Who  were  they  ?*-*-Palin  and  Bradburn. 

The  next  morning  did  you  go  again  to  the 
room  ? — ^Yes,  I  did. 
.  That  was  Tuesday  morning,  the  28nd  ?«^Yes. 

Who  were  there  at  that  time,  or  in  the  course 
el  the  morning  P^There  were  Brunt,  Thistle- 
wood,  Ings,  Hall,  Davidson,  Hairiaon,  Wilson, 
Palin,  Potter,  and  Bradburn. 

While  you  were  there,  was  any  intelligence 
bf  ought  you  respecting  any  cabinet  dinner  ?*-^ 
Yes ;  Mr.  Edwards  came  in  and  went  to  Thu* 
lie  wood,  and  tells  him  there  was  a  cabinet 
dinner  to  be  on  the  Wednesday  night. 
-  That  was  the  next  day  P^Yes ;  Thistlewood 
seid^  '^  I  do  not  think  that  is  true." 

Upon  that,  was  any  thing  done  to  ascertain 
whether  it  was  or  not  true  ? — Yes ;  Thistlewood 
propeeed  to  send  for  a  paper  to  asoertain  it. 

Was  a  newspaper  sent  for  and  brought  f-^ 
It  was. 

.  Upon  that,  whet  passed  ?-— Upon  the  paper 
beings  bKragfat.into  the  room  wey  were  all 
satisfied,  from  the  statement  that  the  paper 


^  Was  the  paper  read  ?-^It  was  read  by  Mr. 
ThullnwQod,  he  read  it  out ;  that  the  cabinet 
were  to  dine  at  earl  Harrowby's,  in  6rosvenor« 
eqnave,  on  Wednesday  evening. 

What  was  said  upon  tins  being  anaonneed  > 
-r-Upon  this  Mr.  Brant  walked  towards  the 
wmdBfw^  <f  Now,''  saye  he, « I  wHI  be  damned, 
if  I  do  not  believe  there  is  a.  God ;  I  hai^ 
ttten  pnyed  that  tiioee  thieves  may  be  aolieci^ 
ed  all  together,  in  order  to  give  us  a  good  op^ 
flQininity^  to  destroy  tiiem,  and  nqw  God  has 
iMedLmgrpvayen.''  Upon  tins  Thiftlewood 
«m4  time  then  shonltf  be  a  committee  sit 


Bo  7Dt|.i)niiemiMt  ingneayiag  anjp  thing  J^ 
I  cannot  charge  mv  memoiy  at»  tlM  momeBt;   i 
Wte  wns  pat  into  the  chtt»lU-I  wa»  put 
te  ehair  mynli  .  .  


Upon  that,  did  any  person  make  any  propo- 
sition ?  —Mr.  Thistlewood  came  and  stood  by 
me,  after  1  was  in  the  ehair,  and  had  called  to 
order,  he  came  and  began  to  speak.  Now  I 
beg  you  to  hear  me  state  some  things  which, 
if  you  pay  attention,  I  will  tell  you,  what  ha» 
ttanspired. 

.  What  did  Thistlewood  propose  ?-*>He  pro- 
posed to  sit  directly,  to  form  a  fresh  plan 
regarding  the. assassination.  He  was  going  to 
proceed,  I  being  in  the  chair,  I  interrupted 
him. 

What  did  you  interrupt  him  to  say  ?— Isaid, 
^  Gentlemen,  after  what  fell  from  my  montfat 
yesterday  morning,  I  hope  you  have  ali  givea 
it  a  dne  consideration/' 

That  was  yoar  mention  of  what  Hobbs  had 
said  to  you P— Yes;  this  same  discourse  hvi 
passed  between  me,  Bradbiun,  and  Palin,  th» 
night  before. 

Had  vou  mentioned  to  Palin  what  had  pass* 
ed  the  day  before  ?~»*Ye6. 

What  did  the  meeting  say  or  do  upon  this? 
-I— Upon  this  Harrison,  wafted  backwaids  and 
forwards  in  the  room,  they  were  all  in  a  statai 
of  conAisioir,  more  Hke  a  set  of  madteea  tfaflcB 
men.  Harrison  looked  at  me,  and  said,  **^  Damn 
your  eyes  1  the  next  man  that  dropped  a  word 
to  cool  any  man,  and  to  prevent  their  goins 
forward  to  do  the  deed  they  had  determines 
on,  he  would  run  that  man  through  with  ai 
sword." 

In  the  result,  did  you'iemain  in  the  chair,  or 
were  you  put  ontr— I  remained  for  a  lew 
minutes. 
'  Were  you  put  out  then? — ^I  was. 

Who  was  put  in  ?-*Mr.  Tidd.  Thistlewood 
wanted  to  proceed  in  the  business,  Palin  sit* 
ting  down,  said,  *'  No,  stop;  what  has  dropped 
from  Mr.  Adams's  moudi,  respecting  what  was 
oomuHinicated  yesterday  morning,  I  want  ta 
be  satisfied  on,  before  the  business  prooeede 
further." 

Without  giving  me  all  the  discussioyi  that 
took  place,  did  it  end  in  Biiint  making  any' 
motion  to  do  any  thing?-— Yes,  Brunt  got  «p^ 
he  proposed,  in  order  to  do  away  any  suspicion 
from  what  had  passed ,  that  there  should  be  » 
watch  put  on  the  earl  Harrowby's  house  that 
night. 

What  was  that  watch  to  do  ? — ^There  were 
to  be  two  men  go  on  at  a  time. 
-  What  was  the  object  of  their  watching  ?•--« 
Hie  ol^ect  of  their  watching  was,  that  they 
riiould  watch  to  see  if  any  men  or  soldiers 
went  into  the  house  of  earl  Harrowby,  in  osder 
to  waylay  any  body  that  might  go  in. 

Was  that  motion  approvecT  of?-^It  was. 

At  what  hptti*  that  night  was  it  ordered  that 
any-  watch  should  be  set  ?«— At  six ;  vten  to  go. 
on  at  sill  stop  tiH  nine ;  at  nine  they  were* to  be 
nkieved  bv  two  more,  that  were  to  stop  titt 
twelve;  then  the  watcK  was  to  oommeace 
again  on  the  Wednes^  morniag,  at  four 
o^^loek. 

That  was  canted j  aaad  the  watph  ordered? 


Ydll        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  ThuUetoood 


[752 


What  did  Brant  say  after  Uiiit?--^I  cannot 
charge  my  memory. 

Did  Hall  make  any  motion  ? — ^Not  directly ; 
Thistlewood  then  came  forward,  when  Mr. 
Tidd  was  in  the  chair,  **  Now,"  says  he,  ^' after 
what  has  fallen  fiom  Mr.  Brunt's  mouth,  I 
hope  every  one  will  he  satisAed,  if  in  case 
there  is  nobody  found  to  go  into  the  house, 
audi  as  officers  or  soldiers.'' 

By  officers,  do  you  mean  notice  officers  ?— 
Tes ;  that  he  thought  it  would  be  best  to  enter 
into  a  ftesh  plan  ;  that  if  nobody  was  seen  to 
go  into  the  house,  they  were  determined  to  do 
what  they  talked  of  to-morrow  evening;  the 
plan  altogether  of  the  Sunday  morning  was 
altered,  so  far  as  respected  the  assassination. 
Mr.  Thistlewood  proposed  that  it  would  take 
from  forty  to  fifty  men ;  forty  men  ought  to  be 
allowed,  but  more  if  thev  could  get  them.  ^  It 
would  answer  our  end,  *  says  he,  *'  much  best 
their  dining  altogether,  than  to  run  the  risk  of 
taking  them  at  their  own  houses  separately. 
In  doing  that,''  says  he,  '*  we  could  not  com- 
mand more  than  three,  I  dare  say,  at  most. 
In  doing  this,"  says  he,  **  their  meeting  all  toge- 
ther, as  there  has  not  been  a  meeting  so  long, 
there  is  no  doubt  there  will  be  fourteen,  or  we 
will  say  sixteen,  which  will  be  a  rare  haul  to 
murder  them  all.  I  propose,"  says  he,  ^  going 
to  the  door  with  a  note  to  present  to  earl  Har* 
lowby ;  when  the  door  is  opened  for  the  men  to 
rash  in  directly,  seize  the  servants  what  are  in 
the  way,  present  a  pistol  to  them,  and  directly 
threateathem  with  death,  if  they  offer  to  make 
the  least  resistance  or  noise."  This  being  done, 
a  party  were  to  rash  forwards  to  take  the  com- 
mand of  the  stairs :  two  men  were  to  be  placed 
at  the  stairs,  leading  to-  the  upper  part  of  the 
house ;  one  was  to  nave  fire  arms,  to  be  pro- 
tected by  another  with  a  hand-grenade  in  his 
hand :  a  couple  of  men  were  to  take  the  head 
of  the  stairs  leading  to  the  lower  part  of  the 
house :  those  two  men  placed  at  the  stairs  lead- 
ing to  the  lower  part  of  the  house,  were  to  be 
armed  the  same  as  the  others  at  the  other  stairs. 
If  any  servants  attempted  to  make  any  retreat 
from  the  lower  part  of  the  house,  or  from  Uie 
upper  part  of  the  house,  these  men  with  the 
hand«ffrenades,  were  to  clap  fire  to  the  hand- 
grenades,  and  fling  it  in  amongst  them  altoge- 
mer.  Two  men  at  the  same  time  were  to  be 
placed  at  the  area,  one  with  a  blunderbuss  and 
another  with  a  hand-grenade :  if  any  body  at- 
tempted to  make  their  retreat  from  the  lower 
part  of  the  house  that  way,  they  were  to  have 
a  hand-grenade  thrown  in  amongst  them  there. 
At  the  same  time  all  these  objects  were  to  be 
accomplished  by  the  means  of  securing  the 
house;  those  men  who  were  to  go  in  for  the 
assaisination,  were  to  rash  in  directly  after. 

Into  what  part  of  the  house  did  he  propose 
they  should  go?— Where  their  lordships  were. 

And  what  to  do?— To  murder  all  they  found 
in  the  room,  good  or  bad;  he. said,  that  if 
there  were  an^  good  ones  they  would  murder, 
tiiem  for  ke^pmg  bad  company. 

Was  this  proposition  agreed  to  or  dissanted 


t 


from  ? — It  is  not  finished.    Ings  volnoteenid 
himself  to  enter  the  room  first — 

Did  he  say  wliat  with  ? — ^That  he  would  go 
in  with  a  brace  of  pistols,  a  cutlass,  and  bis 
knife  in  his  pocket,  with  a  determination,  after 
the  two  swordsmen  that  were  app<Hnted  to 
follow  him  had  despatched  them,  to  cut  every 
head  off  that  was  in  the  room,  and  the  head  of 
lord  Castlereagh  and  Sidmouth  he  would  bring 
away  in  a  bag;  he  would  provide  for  the  par-- 
pose  two  bags.  As  soon  as  he  got  into  the 
room  he  said  he  should  say,  **  Well,  my  lord% 
I  have  got  as  good  men  here  as  the  Manchester 
Yeomanry.  £nter  citizens  and  do  your  duty.** 
Upon  this  word  of  command  firom  logs,  as  I 
have  before  observed,  the  two  swordsmen  were 
to  enter,  to  be  followed  by  the  rest  of  the  men 
with  pikes,  pistols,  cutlasses,  or  whatever  it 
might  be,  and  to  fall  to  work  immediately  in 
murdering  as  fost  as  they  could. 

Whom  did  Thistlewood  propose  to  be  the 
two  swordsmen  ?— Harrison  was  one  that  he 
picked  out,  and  I,  myself,  for  another,  beieg 
the  only  men,  as  he  supposed  amongst  them, 
that  were  used  to  the  use  of  the  sword,  and  men 
of  the  greatest  strength  and  power. 

Had  Harrison  been  a  soldier  as  well  as  you  ? 
— ^Harrison  had  been  in  the  life-guards.  On 
Harrison  being  proposed  to  go  into  the  room, 
Thistlewood  turaea  his  head  to  me  and  said, 
**  Adams  will  not  you  be  one?'*  I  seeing  no 
chance  of  escape,  knowing  that  if  I  did  not 
assent  my  life  was  in  danger,  I  assented  to  it. 

Did  Thistlewood  propose  any  thing  to  be 
done  in  any  other  places  except  lord  Har- 
rowby's? — ^After  the  execution  was  done  in 
the  house  they  were  to  leare  the  house  as 
quickly  as  possible;  in  doing  this,  Harrison 
was  the  man  that  was  appointed  to  go  to  King- 
street  horse  barracks,  I  believe  it  is  in  King- 
street,  the  barracks  where  the  horses  were  at 
any  rate,  and  to  take  one  of  those  fire-balls  t<^ 
fliog  into  the  straw  shed  to  set  fire  to  the 
premises. 

Whither  was  the  party  to  go  from  Groa- 
venor-square? — Hamson  was  to  be  supported 
by  Wilson ;  after  they  bad  left  the  square  they 
were  to  proceed — 

Do  you  mean  Harrison  and  Wilson,  or  the 
rest  of  the  party  ? — ^The  rest  of  the  party :  they 
were  to  proceed  to  GrayVinn-lane  to  the  CSty 
Light-horse  barracks. 

For  what  purpose? — ^For  the  purpose  oC 
meeting  a  party  of  men  that  were  intended  to 
be  planted  there,  and  in  case  those  men  fowid- 
themselves  not  sufficiently  strong  to  take  the 
two  pieces  of  cannon  at  the  li^t-horse  ber- 
racks,  they  were  to  wait  their  arrival  and  they 
would  assist  them. 

To  what  place  were  they  to  go-then? — Th^ 
were  to  proceed  from  thence  to  the  Artillery- 
ground,  where  Mr.  Cook  was  to  be  appoiateidU 
in  order  to  lend  him  a  hand  in  case  he  had 
found  himself  not  sufficiently  strong  to  take 
the  six  cannon  there. 

To  .whs;t  place  were  they  to  go  then  ^-<-Mr. 
Cook  was  to  wairthere  fotr  die  aniTtl  of  Mr». 


7531 


fi/r  High  Trtatotr. 


A.  D.  1820. 


(754 


Tbiftlewood  ?  if  he  did  not  tike  to  proceed  he 
was  to  bring  the  cannon  from  the  ground  into 
the  street,  and  to  load  it,  in  order  to  be  ready 
to  fire  on  any  persons  that  might  interrupt 
them,  but  if  he  found  his  strength  sufficient  to 
enable  him  to  proceed,  he  was  to  advance  from 
tiiere  to  the  Mansion-house ;  if  he  found  him- 
self capable  of  advancing  to  ihe  Mansion-house 
he  was  to  divide  the  six  cannon  into  two  divi- 
sions, and  take  three  on  one  side  and  three 
on  the  otlier,  three  on  that  next  the  Royal 
Change,  three  next  Comhill ;  then  he  was  to 
demand  the  Mansion-bouse,  and,  on  a  refusal 
he  was  to  fire  at  it  on  both  sides  ;  it  was  thought, 
on  doing  that  they  would  soon  give  it  up. 

Did  he  say  what  use  was  to  be  made  of  the 
Mansion-house  ? — It  was  for  the  provisional 
government  to  sit  in. 

After  the  Mansion-house  was  taken  and 
made  a  seat  of  the  provisional  government, 
what  was  done  next  ? — ^This  underwent  a  little 
alteration  the  succeeding  day. 

Was  any  other  place  mentioned  near  the 
'Mansion-house?— Yes,  the  Bank  of  England: 
that  was  the  next  place  to  be  attacked. 

What  did  he  say  was  to  be  done  there  P 
— ^To  plunder  the  Bank  of  all  they  could  get, 
bat  not  to  destroy  the  books  if  they  could  any 
way  help  it,  for  they  thought  by  keeping  pos- 
session of  the  books  that  would  enable  them  to 
see  further  into  the  villainy  that  had,  he  said, 
been  practised  in  the  country  for  some  years 
past;  the  further  proceedings,  as  far  as  the  re- 
gulations of  it  altogether,  were  to  be  left  till 
the  Wednesday,  but  it  was  mentioned  particu- 
larly that  Palin's  plan  should  be  proceeded  in 
the  same  as  had  been  proposed ;  out  as  to  the 
time,  they  did  not  come  to  any  decisive  time, 
though  it  was  talked  of  between  eight  and 
nine  o*clock,  but  it  was  not  settled. 

Was  any  watch  set  on  lord  Harrowby's  house 
on  the  Tuesday  night  7 — Yes. 

Who  were  the  first  that  were  setP — ^I  wish 
to  state  something  before  that,  if  you  please. 

What  is  that? — ^After  the  chair  was  left, 
being  in  a  bnstle  about  the  room,  Harrison 
proposed  there  should  be  a  counteiwsign,  and 
the  men  that  were  to  go  about  that  day  to  in- 
iuta  men  that  were  4o  help  them  the  next 
evening  should  communicate  the  counter-sign, 
the  counter-sign  was  hUtan,  the  man  that  came 
up  was  to  say,  b,  «,  t,  the  man  that  was  in 
waiting  that  was  to  be  appointed  to  receive  him 
was  to  sav,  /,  o,  n,  these  put  together  were  to 
ptodnce  Mtfton,  this  being  done  was  a  token 
that  the  man  that  pronounced  this  was  one  of 
the  party ;  a  man  was  to  be  appointed  to  stand 
at  the  end  of  Oxford-road,  in  order  to  commu- 
nicate to  any  man  that  came  up  to  him  the 
xooiD  where  they  were  to  be  appointed  to  meet  ^ 
at  the  next  night. 

In  the  course  of  that  evening,  or  that  night, 
did  you  so  on  watch  at  lord  Harrowby's  ? — ^I 
did,  trat  tnere  is  something  I  wish  to  state  be- 
fore I  come  to  that. 

Mention  any  thing  I  have  omitted  ? — ^In 
tbe  afternoon,  if  you  will  allow 'me,  after  I  left 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


them  I  called  up  in  the  room  again  ;  in  going 
up  stairs  I  perceived  a  strange  smell  in  the 
house,  on  going,  in  I  found  Edwards,  Ings,  and 
Hall. 

What  were  they    doing? — Edwards  was 
making  fuses  to  put  to  the  hand-grenades. 

What  was  Ings  doing  ?— Ings  was  dipping 
some  rope  yam,  picked  for  the  purpose,  into 
stuff"  to  make  what  they  termed  the  illumina- 
tion balls  for  Mr.  Palin. 

What  was  Hall  doing  ? — ^Dipping  those  into 
an  Iron  pot. 

He  was  helping  Inffs  then  ? — Yes^  he  was^ 
Hall  was  putting  shreas  of  paper  on  the  floor 
to  receive  these  after  they  came  from  the  pot, 
to  prevent  their  sticking  to  the  hand,  they 
were  wrapped  up  in  it. 

While  you  were  there  did  any  other  persons 
come  in  ? — Not  then ;  I  did  not  stop  a  very  few 
minutes,  I  had  a  little  business  of  my  own ;  I 
called  up  again  the  same  evening. 

When  you  called  up  again,  what  was  that 
for  ? — ^When  I  called  up  again  in  the  evening 
I  found  a  couple  of  strange  men  I  had  never 
seen  before. 

Whom  did  you  find  them  to  be  T — ^I  found 
one  of  them  to  be  Harris ;  I  do  not  know  the 
name  of  the  other 

Were  Brunt  and  Tidd  there?— Brunt  was 
there,  Tidd  was  not,  Thistlewood  was  there  ; 
there  was  nothing  particular  transpired.  ^ 
Did  any  body  go  off  to  keep  watch  ? — Yes. 
Who  went  P — ^They  did  not  go  from  there^ 
to  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Did  any  body  come  as  from  the  watch  ?— 
No ;  Datidson  was  one  that  went  on  at  six 
o'clock. 

You  suppose  Davidson  was  to  have  gone 
at  six?— -He  was  there;  because  I  was  one 
that  relieved  him. 

When  did  you  go  ? — ^About  half  past  eight 
o'clock ;  Mr.  Tidd  came  into  the  room,  saying, 
that  he  was  disappointed  in  a  man  that  was  to 
have  met  him,  that  he  was  to  have  brought  up 
there :  on  this  Tidd  and  Brunt,  heva^  appointed 
in  the  mominff  to  go  and  watch  at  nme  o'clock, 
they  conceivea  it,  within  Uiemselves,  time  to 
start ;  they  started,  and  in  less  than  five  mi« 
nutes  afterwards  Brunt  came  back  again ;  they 
had,  in  the  interval  of  Brunt's  leaving  the 
room,  called  at  a  public  house  in  order  to  meet 
the  man,  and  found  him  there.  Brunt  came 
back,  saying,  that  Tidd  could  not  go;  that 
Tidd  had  met  the  man  that  was  to  go,  and 
that  he  was  a  man  likely  to  be  of  great  conse- 
quence ;  on  this,  looking  round  the  room,  he 
sLsked  me  to  go.  Just  as  I  was  going  ou4  ia 
came  Edwards  from  the  watch.  I  asked  Ed- 
wards if  there  had  been  any  thing  particular 
seen,  he  said,  **  Whatever  was  seen  I  shall 
communicate  to  Mr.  Thistlewood."  I  took 
that  for  a  slap  of  the  face  for  what  had  been 
said  by  me  on  the  Monday  evening. 
Did  yon  go  to  Grosvenor-square  ? — I  did. 
Who  went  with  you  ? — Brunt. 
When  you  got  to  the  square,  whom  did  you 
find  on  the  watch  ? — When  I  got  to  the  square 
3C 


7651 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  TkitOmood 


VlfHi 


I  stw  Davidson;  Bnmt  went  dp  to  him,  I 
walked  forwards,  there  was  another  man^  but 
to  say  who  he  was,  I  could  not. 

Did  Brunt  and  you  keep  watch  ?— Directly 
Bmnt  had  relieved  Davidson.  I  had,  prior  to 
ffoing^up  to  the  square,  hinted  to  Brunt  that  I 
felt  myself  rather  tired. 

Did  you  and  he  go  to  any  public  house  ? — 
Tes,  we  did  ;  we  had  some  bread  and  cheese 
and  porter;  we  took  some  bread  and  cheese 
with  us,  and  got  some  porter  there. 

^  Where  is  this  public  house  ? — Directly  be- 
hind lord  Harrowby*s  house,  at  the  corner  of 
the  mews  leading  up  to  lord  Harrowby's  house. 

Did  you  do  any  thing  there? — ^There  was  a 
jroung  man  that  was  sitting  there;  there  were^ 
in  &ct,  two  or  thrse  that  bad  been  playing  at 
dominos. 

Did  either  of  you  play  at  dominos  with  htm  ? 
—This  young  man  gave  Mr.  Brunt  a  challenge, 
and  he  played  at  dominos  with  him. 

Did  you  then  go  out  and  walk  in  the  square? 
^We  stopped  there  till  eleven  o'clock,  and 
Aen  we  went  out. 

Did  you  walk  in  the  square?— Yes.  T 
walked  some  time  till  I  got  ashamed  of  myself, 
and  I  walked  to  the  back  of  the  square,  and 
met  him  on  the  other  side  of  it. 

Who  relieved  you  ?— Nobody. 

At  twelve  o'clock,  did  you  and  he  go  home? 
—We  went  home. 

Mr.  Solicitor  GeneraL-^On  Wednesday,  the 
next  day,  did  you  go  again  to  Fox-court? — I 
went  in  the  afternoon,  not  before.  Mr.  Ed- 
wards called  on  me  before  I  was  up ;  my  wife 
was  not  dressed ;  she  asked  who  was  there. 

What  time  did  you  go  to  Fox-court  f  Were 
those  persons  assembled  ? — I  went  there  be- 
tween two  and  three  o'clock. 
^  Whom  did  you  find  at  Fox-court  at  that 
time  ? — I  found  nobody  there  but  Mr.  Brunt, 
in  his  own  room ;  his  wife  was  going  in  just  at 
the  time. 

That  was  in  the  front  room  ?— Yes. 

While  you  were  in  that  room,  did  any  body 
come  in  ?— -Strange  came  in. 

Did  Strange  come  in  alone,  or  was  any  per- 
son with  him  ?— He  came  in  by  himself. 

Did  any  others  come  in  ? — ^Two  more  came 
in,  in  five  minutes.  1  turned  my  head  and 
saw  two  pistols  lying  upon  the  arawer.  In 
eonsequence  of  these  two  ftesh  men  coming 
in.  Brunt  proposed  to  go  from'  tliat  room  to 
Ae  room  where  we  regularly  met. 

Had  any  thing  been  done  with  the  pistols 
before  that?  Had  they  been  touched?— No 
Aicther  than  handling  them. 

Was  any  thing  done  with  the  flints  P— Now 
I  recollect :  they  were  trying  the  flints  ii>  them. 

Who  was  trying  the  flinto  in  them  ?— Mr. 
Strange,  and  one  of  the  strangers  who  came  in. 

Brunt  proposed  going  into  the  Wk  room  ?— 
Yes. 

In  consequence  of  that,  did  they  go  into  the 
back  room  ?--They  unlocked  the  door,  and 
Went  into  the  bkck  room  directly^ 

Did  you  go  with  them  ?— I  did.    On  going 


into  the  room,  I  saw  a  number  of  cutlassesl 
I  saw  a  blunderbuss.  I  saw  several  pistols,, 
and  those  pistols  that  were  in  Mr.  Brunt  s  room 
as  well  were  brought  from  there  into  the  badt 
room,  lihey  placed  themselves,  the  twa 
strangers  in  particular,  and  began  to  put  th^ 
flints  into  the  pistols.  We  had  not  been  long 
in  the  room  before  Mr.  Thistlewood  came  in. 
Thistlewood  had  not  been  long  in  the  room 
before  Ings  and  Hall  came  in.  Thistlewood, 
on  coming  into  the  room,  looks  round*  him,. 
**  Well,  my  lads,  this  now  looks  something 
like  as  if  there  was  something  going  to  bS 
done."  He  comes  to  me,  claps  his  hand  upon 
my  shoulder,  and  says,  '*  Well,  Mr.  Adams,, 
how  do  you  do  ?"  I  told  him  I  was  very  tm- 
well,  and  was  very  low  in  spirits.  He  said^ 
"  What  is  the  matter  ?•*  «  Why,''  says  I,  "  on* 
thing,  I  have  not  had  any  thing  to  drink  to- 
day. I  feel  myself  very  fiiint."  He  said, 
**  you  shall  not  be  very  long  vnthout."  H^ 
said,  '^Brunt,  send  out  for  something,  Mr. 
Adams  is  low  in  h)s  spirits."  He  said,  ^  By 
God,  you  shall  not  be  long  without  something,^ 
and  he  sent  out  for  some  gin  and  some  beer.  - 

That  was  produced,  I  suppose  ? — ^Yes,  ia 
the  interval  of  this  time  of  the  beer  being 
fetched,  Thistlewood  said  he  wanted  some 
paper  in  order  to  write  some  bills  on. 

Upon  that,  what  was  done? — ^He  wanted  4 
kind  of  paper,  he  could  not  teU  what  to  call  ft 
but  the  paper  the  newspapers  were  printed  on. 
I  said  to  nim,  '^Cartridge  paper  will  answer 
your  purpose  equally  the  same  as  the  other,  as 
you  do  not  know  the  name  of  the  other ;  diat 
will  answer  your  purpose."  Thistlewood  said,. 
«  who  will  fetch  it  ?"  Brunt  says,  « Either 
my  boy  or  the  apprentice  shall  fetch  the  paper .^ 

He  had  both  a  son  and  an  apprentice?— 
Yes.  He  put  his  hand  into  his  pocket,  and  gave 
Brunt  a  shilling  to  fetch  half  a  dozen  sheets  of 
cartridge  paper:  the  paper  was  brought,  i 
table  fetched  out  of  Mr.  Brunt^s  room,  and  a 
chair,  in  order  for  Mr.  Thistlewood  to  sit  dowii 
and  write  upon  the  table.  Thistlewood  sits 
down  to  write  three  bills  to  stick  up  againin 
the  ditferent  buildings  that  might  be  set  fii^ 
to,  to  acquaint  the  public  what  deeds  had  beeti 
done.  The  bills,  to  the  best  of  iny  recolleo- 
tion,  I  will  not  pretend  to  say  that  I  can  teE 
every  word  that  was  written  on  them — 

Was  this  bill  afterwards  read  H  Thistle^ 
wood  f — It  was  read  by  Thistlewood. 

Will  you  tell  us  what  words  he  pronounciBd  f 
— **  Your  tyrants  are  destroyed.  The  frienSt 
of  liberty  are  called  upon  to  come  forwacrd. 
Hie  provisional  government  is  now  sittjtt^ 
James  Ings,  secretary,  23rd  February.  1^5^^ 
In  vnriting  the  last  bill,  I  perceived  Mr.  T%£|- 
tlewood  to  be  extremely  agitated,  so  )nu^  9^ 
that  he  could  hardly  write:  he  exprc^ed'Eidl^ 
self  to  be  extremely  fired ;  he  did  bbt'kMow 
what  was  the  tnatter  tnth  him,  bnat  Ke  tamt 
not  write  any  taore. 

After  thette  three  last  papers  were  written, 
was  any  thing  else  written  ?— There  were  tfatee 
other  bills  that  were  proposed  to  be  written; 


W73 


Jhr  High  Trtaton. 


A.  D.  1980. 


LT5B 


ooe  wa9  drawn  up  in  part.  These  otber  bilU 
were  to  make  an  offer  to  the  eoldiers. 

You  9ay  one  of  these  was  drawn  np  in  pftft?—- 
Yes. 

'  Was  it  drawn  np  by  Thistlewood,  or  by  any 
«ther  person  at  llustlewood's  desire  f'^By 
^noth^er  person  at  Thistlewood's  desire. 

Yon  have  told  us  that  Thistlewood  was  Tery 
much  agitated^  and  expressed  himself  extreme- 
iy  tired  :  In  consequence  of  that,  did  he  make 
any  droposal  to  any  other  person  that  was  pre- 
sent r — ^Ves ;  he  proposed  first  that  Hall  should 
take  the  pen.  Hall  refused  it :  another  man 
that  was  in  the  room,  whom  I  had  never  seen 
before,  was  proposed  to  sit  down  and  take  the 
pen,  he  objected^  but  afterwards  he  took  it. 

The  proposal  was  made  by  Thistlewood  to 
Hall  who  declined ;  in  consequence  of  which 
«  proposal  was  made  to  another  person  in  the 
room  whom  you  do  not  know,  but  though  he 
objected  at  first,  he  afterwards  sat  down  and 
took  the  pen  7— Yes. 

Did  this  person  who  took  the  pen  write  of 
Ms  own  head,  or  did  Mr.  Thistlewood  or  any 
.other  person,  dictate  to  him  what  he  was  to 
writer— Mr. Thistlewood  dictated  to  him  what 
fae  was  to  write. 

Will  you  tell  us  what  was  dictated,  as  well 
ae  you  can  recollect  f  I  do  not  ask  tlie  pre* 
twe  terms,  but  the  effect  and  the  substance  ? — 
I  will  give  you  what  I  saw  wrote-— « 

Mr.  Cunoood , — My  Lord,  I  object  to  that. 

Mr.  SolicUor  General. — ^Did  von  hear  the 
■Olds  expressed  by  Thistlewood? — Yes»  not 
only  then  but  several  times. 

These  are  certain  rules  of  law  by  which  we 
most  abide.  TeE  us  the  words  he  dictated  to 
that  other  man. 

Mr.  Adefyhu. — Tell  me  first,  have  yon  any 
memoty  or  it  but  from  having  seen  it  in 
writing  ?    Did  you  see  it  in  writing?—- Yes. 

Mr.  SolicUor  General, — Do  you  recollect 
what  Mr.  Thistlewood  said  at  the  time  ?  What 
were  the  words  that  he  uttered  ? — Yes,  I  can 
recollect  so  far  as  this. 

Mr.  Jdolphu.—l  shall  take  your  lordship's 
opinion  upon  this.  This  professedly  is  re- 
duced to  writing.  I  apprehend  when  any 
matter  is  put  down  in  writing  that  cannot  lie 
nor  alter^  it  is  not  to  depend  upon  the  recol- 
lection of  a  bystander,  but  having  assiflned  an. 
embodied  form,  the  writing  is  to  be  the  evidence 
of  vdiat  is  reduced  to  writing. 

Mf-SoUeUor  General, — ^To  avoid  all  argu- 
ment, let  us  ask  a  single  question.  What 
became  of  those  papers  ?  Were  they  left  with 
Ur.  Thistlewood  7 

Mr.  'Jdofphus.'''^Th9ii  is  not  the  vray  of  put- 
ting the  question. 

Mii  SoUcUor  G^nm^—What  bec^une  of 
those  p^>era  7 

Mr.  ^ifajnte.— 'Tlie  misehielis  done  now  by 
tfae  qnestioD. 


Lord  Chief  Juttice  Abbott,  —I  am  sorry  for  it ; 
but  I  am  not  sure  that,  strictly,  it  is  ndt  correct, 
to  ask  whether  they  remained  with  him,  or  were 
taken  away. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General, — What  became  of  those 
papers  ? — ^I  cannot  say ;  the  last  time  I  saw 
them  they  were  doubled  up.  I  saw  one  in  the 
hands  of  Mr.  Thistlewood,  doubled  np.; 
another  in  the  hands  of  logs,  as  he  was  equip- 

fed ;  I  naturally  supposed  be*  had  put  it  into 
Dgs*s  hands. 

-  Have  you  seen  any  of  them  since  ?— No, 
never. 

Mr.  SoUciior  General, — ^Then  now  we  havt 
given  notice  to  all  the  prisoners. 

Mr.  Adol^hut,—!  admit  tlie  notice,  but  you  do 
not  prove  the  possession. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — The  last  he  saw 
of  them  was  in  the  hands  of  Ings  and  Thistle- 
wood. This  is  the  last  account  we  hav6  of 
them :  therefore  you  must  trace  them  out  of 
your  possession. 

Mr.  Adolphm. — ^These  papers  are  a  joint  a^ 
written  by  another  person. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General, — ^What  became  of  the 

Saper  you  are  now  describing,  written  by  the 
ictation  of  Thistlewood? — ^I  do  not  know 
what  became  of  that  more  than  another.  I 
will  tell  you  what  I  can  swear  was  upon  the 
paper. 

Mr.  Adolphtts, — ^That  is  just  what  I  am 
objecting  to. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General — ^Was  that  paper  com- 
pleted ? — ^It  was  not  completed. 

What  was  the  reason  that  it  was  not  com- 
pleted ?  —The  reason  it  was  not  completed  was, 
the  man  that  was  writing  it  and  Thistlewood 
together  could  not  come  to  know  the  particular 
terms  respecting  the  wording  of  the  bill  alto* 
gather,  and  in  consequence  of  that  the  bill  was 
d rawn.  Mr.  Thistlewood^  at  the  same  time,  ex- 
pressed himself  very  mudi  dissati^ed,  saying, 
that  he  had  spoken  to  a  man  to  do  those  bilb 
for  him  as  much  as  a  fortnight  ago,  that  the 
bills  were  drawn  out,  and  he  had  not  seen  hia 
since. 

You  say  he  was  not  satisfied  as  to  the  whole 
of  it.  What  did  you  hear  Thistlewood  tell 
him  to  write  down. 

Mr.  Ajdo^fhuM,-^!  <Aject  to  that. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General,^-'!  did  not  ask  what 
was  written,  but  what  Thi&tlewood  told  hiiA 
to  write  down. 

Lord  Chief  Jvttiee  Al^ott. — ^Do  vou  mean  to 
argue  it  further,  or  do  you  rely  on  the  argument 
you  have  raised  ?  You  object  to  the  reception 
of  this  evidence  on  the  ground,  that  what  was 
said  by  Thistlewood  was  taken  down  in  writ- 
ing? 

Mr.  ilioiji&tcf.— Yes,  my  lord :  and  all  the 
evidence  which  has  sioce  oeen  added  is,  that 


7«D] 


1  GBORGE IV. 


Trial  qf  Arthur  ThuOemood 


[700 


«ll  th«t  he  dictated  was  writteoy  that  the  paper 
•was  left  nnfinished^  and  that  he  said  he  had 
given  instructions  to  another  man,  a  fortnight 
before,  but  that  it  was  not  done. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abboit—Whti  became  of 
this  paper  ? — I  do  not  know. 

In  whose  hands  did  you  last  see  it  ? — The 
■band  that  I  saw  the  writing  in  last,  was 
the  hand  of  the  man  that  last  wrote  it. 

And  who  he  was  you  do  not  know  ? — Who 
be  was  I  do  not  know. 

Lord  Chief  JvOice  Abbott.-^Mt.  SoHeitor 
jQ^neral,  we  entertain  some  doubt. 

Mr.  SoUciter  Oeneral.^lf  your  lordships 
entertain  any  doubt,  we  will  not  press  tne 
evidence. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott, — ^There  is  some 
doubt  entertained  in  some  part  of  the  court ; 
you  will  not  press  it  then  P 

Mr.  Soiicitor  General, — ^No,  my  lord.  Be- 
fore those  bills  were  written,  was  Ings  in  the 
jroom  f — ^Yes. 

Did  he  do  any  thing  for  the  purpose  of  pre^ 
paring  himself  in  any  way? — He  was  prepar- 
ing himself  in  the  manner  he  intended  to  en- 
ter the  room  where  their  lordships  were,  he 
puts  a  black  belt  round  his  waist,  m  order  to 
contain  a  brace  of  pistols ;  he  puts  another 
black  belt  on  to  hang  a  cutlass  to  bis  shoulder: 
after  this,  there  was  a  bag  hung  to  each 
^boulder,  a  large  bag  to  each  shoulder,  in  the 
toTjaa.  of  a  soldier's  haversack.  When  these 
bags  were  on,  he  placed  a  brace  of  pistols,  one 
of  each  side  ;  he  hung  a  cutlass ;  he  viewed 
himself  and  said,  ''  Damn  my  eyes  1  I  am  not 
complete  now.  I  have  forgot  my  steel  !" 
With  that  he  pulled  out  a  large  knife,  and  be- 
^n  to  brandish  it  about. 

Describe  that  knife? — I  will  mention  it  pre- 
sently. He  brandished  his  knife  about  as  if 
^e  were  in  the  act  of  cutting  the  beads  of  those 
•he  intended  to  cutoff;  he  would  bring  away  a 
Jiead  in  each  hand;  and  the  hand  of  lord  Cas- 
tlereagh  he  would  cut  off  and  procure  that 
•which  might  at  a  future  day  be  thou^t  a  great 
4eal  of;  and  these  expressions  of  bis  have 
been  repeatedly  used ;  it  would  be  impossible 
for  me  to  say  I  could  stand  here  and  recollect 
4he  times  be  had  said  this. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Dallas, — ^He  had  expressed 
liimself  in  tois  way  many  times  ? — Yes. 

Mr.  Solicitor  Gener4d.^}ie  described  the 
i^nife  ?-— Yes,  the  knife  is  a  large  broad-bladed 
knife,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection ;  it  is  from 
ten  to  twelve  inches  long,  according  to  the 
calculation  of  my  eye ;  the  handle  is  bound 
with  wax  end ;  this  was  bound  round  as  he 
declared,  in  doing  the  thing  that  his  hand 
should  not  slip;  and  the  breadth  of  the  blade 
of  the  knife  with  the  best  calculation  I  could 
make  with  my  eye,  I  never  measured  it- 
While  Ings  was  arming  what  were  the  others 
4oii^?_Ajming,  Mng  the  leathers  to  hold 


pistols  with,  and  placing  tbeni  in  the  belts. 
Another  man  was  bnsy  in  putting  thecutlaisea 
into  sbngs,  to  hang  by  the  wrists ;  it  wovld  be 
impossible  to  describe  all  the  transactions. 

At  what  hour  did  the  first  persons  leave  the 
room,  to  go  to  these  transactions  ? — ^As  near 
as  I  can  tell  about  half-past  ibor,  or  a  little 
before  five. 

About  half-past  four  or  a  little  before  five  ? 
— ^Yes,  or  from  that  to  five. 

Do  you  remember  Palin*s  coming  in?-— 
Yes. 

At  what  lime  do  you  suppose  he  came  in  ? 
— ^AboQt  half  an  hour  befoie  I  left. 

Tell  us  what  passed  when  he  came  in  ? — 
Thistlewood  and  Brunt  were  there  at  the  time, 
but  Palin  had  not  been  in  at  the  time  before; 
Thistlewood  and  Brunt  on  some  businesa  or 
other  left  the  room,  but  what  I  do  not  know : 
during  their  absence,  Palin  began  the  conoeni, 
to  speak  to  what  men  there  were  in  the  room. 
He  said,  '<  Gentlemen,  I  hope  all  that  have 
met  here  this  afternoon  are  well  acquainted 
what  you  have  met  upon ;  you  are  informed 
what  you  are  met  here  for ;  in  the  first  place, 
you  ought  to  think  within  yourselves,  whether 
you  are  going  to  do  your  country  a  service  or 
not :  if  you  are  in  possession  of  what  you  are 
going  to  do,  you  first  of  all  ought  to  examine 
yourselves  whether  you  think  the  assassination 
will  be  countenanced  by  your  country :  if  yoa 
conceive  that  the  assassination  will  be  counte- 
nanced by  your  country,  and  that  the  people 
of  the  country,  after  you  have  done  it,  will 
turn  of  your  side :  it  is  necessary,  I  say,  that 
every  man  that  is  here  going  to  turn  out  on 
this  piece  of  business,  will  come  to  an  expla- 
nation with  Yourselves,  that  every  man  that 
flinches  from  his  duty,  or  turns  out  a  cowaid, 
should  be  run  through  by  one  of  the  party 
directly  on  the  spot.'*    He  said,  **  unless  you 
come  to  this  determination,  it  will  be  impoa- 
sible  to  do  any  good.''    He  was  going  on  to 
say  a  few  woras  more,  but  a  tall  man  in  the 
room  interrupted  him. 

Where  were  Thistlewood  and  Brunt  then  ? — 
They  were  not  come  in. 

Do  yDu  know  who  that  tall  man  was? — 
No. 

Should  you  know  him  if  you  saw  him  ? — 
No. 

What  did  he  say  ?— He  said,  '^  you  seem  to 
speak  as  if  every  man  were  in  possession  of 
what  we  were  going  upon,  now  this  is  what  I 
should  like  to  Imow,  wnat  we  are  actually  going 
about." 

That  man  was  a  stranger ;  had  he  attended 
the  previous  meetings  ?— He  had  not. 

It  was  the  first  time  you.  had  ever  seen  him  ? 
— It  was  the  first  time  I  had  ever  seen  him. 
He  said  to  Palin,  '^  I  can  see  pretty  well  the 
meaning  of  your  speech,  as  for  myself,  if  wm 
come  to  any  determination  to  turn  out,  with 
a  view  to  serve  our  country,  I  am  a  man  tlmt 
is  not  afraid  of  himself,  and  that  man  that  is 
air«id4>f  himself  ought  not  to  bftve  any  thfaof 
to  do  with  a  concern  Tike  this." 


761] 


far  H^h  TnatoH^. 


A.  D..' 189a 


(709 


How  long  wu  this  before  Bmnt  and  Hii»- 
4lewood  cune  into  the  room  ? — I  do  not  re- 
coiiect  seeing  Thistlewood  after  that  on  that 
day. 

Do  yon  remember  Brunt  starting? — Yes. 

At  what  time  ?  and  who  went  with  him  ? — 
Bront  came  after  this^  and  peroeiting  an  alter- 
ation in  the  countenance  of  the.  meeting,  he 
wished  to  know  the  cause  of  it :  he  was  told 
there  were  some  in  the  room  who  wanted  to 
know  ftirther  of  the  plan,  and  what  they  were 
to  do. 

Upon  this  being  told  to  Brunt,  what  did  he 
say  or  do  ? — He  said,  this  was  not  the  room  for 
them  to  be  told  what  they  were  to  do,  but  go 
along  with  him  to  the  other  room  in  Edgeware- 
road,  there  eveiy  one  should  be  apprised  of 
what  they  were  going  about.  Brunt  directly 
began  to  wish  to  put  them  in  movement  in 
OToer  to  go,  he  said  he  would  take  good  care 
all  that  went  along  with  him  should  have  a 
drop  of  something  to  drink,  to  put  them  in 
spirits.  This  tall  man,  in  answer  to  that  said, 
^  I  hope  you  are  not  going  to  drunkenness,  be- 
cause drunkenness  in  a  thing  like  this  was  of  no 
good ;  because  a  man  drunk  the  only  service  he 
is  of  is  to  run  himself  into  the  hands  of  his 
enemies." 

That  was  the  same  stranger  you  mentioned 
before  P — ^Yes. 

After  this  did  Brunt  go  away  ? — ^He  began 
4o  be  on  the  movement  to  go  away. 

Who  went  with  him? — I  went  out  first,  and 
there  was£trange  at  that  time  and  this  tall 
man,  and  three  or  four  others,  that  I  do  not 
know,  that  went  with. him :  it  was  agreed  they 
•bould  go  along  the  street,  in  order  to  put  a 
•top  to  any  suspicion  from  going  along  in  a 
booy,  they  were  to  walk  two  and  two  in  the 
street,  and  not  to  walk  in  a  body  with  each 
other.  I  starts,  and  going,  along  Holborn  I 
had  a  tap  on  the  left  side,  calling  me  by  my 
name,  Mr.  Adams. 

Who  was  that  ? — I  cannot  swear  to  that,  it 
was  a  little  man. 

Was  he  one  of  the  persons  vrho  had  been  at 
4bis  meeting  ? — Yes. 

Yon  had  now  got  out  of  the  room  ? — Yes. 

Was  there  any  cupboard  in  the  room  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  nsually  kept  in  that  cupbcMLrd, 
dvEring  the  interval  from  tne  time  you  fiist  went 
into  the  room,  after  yovr  first  liberation  from 
prison  ? — ^That  cupboard  was  applied  to  keep 
the .  different  things  that  were  brought  to  ;he 
room,  such  as  swords,  the  first  thing  I  saw  in 
it;  the  next  thing  were  some  hand-grenades. 

Do  yon  remember  any  flannel  bags  ? — Yes. 

What  purpose  were  they  used  for,  and  how 
were  they  filled  ? — For  the  cartridges  for  the 


Were  they  filled  ? — ^I  saw  one  filled,  and  no 
other. 

You  have  said  before,  there  were  some  poles 
which  appeared  to  have  been  recently  cut  ? — 
a  ee. 

And  some  (ernles  fixed  on  them;  where  was 
that  done  7 — In  BnmCa  room. 


In  the  back  room  f — In  the  back  room.  > 

Were  all  the  arms  kept  in  the  room  ? — No, 
they  were  not. 

Where  were  the  rest  kept?— The  d^pdt  was 
at  Tidd's. 

Do  you  know  where  Tidd  lived  ? — ^Yes. 

Where  was  it  ? — In  the  next  room  adjoining 
to  myself. 

That   was   in  Hole-in-the*wall  passage? — 

Yes. 

Near  Baldwin's-gardens  ?— Yes. 

Was  that  the  place  where  the  greater  part 
was  kept,  or  how  ? — That  was  the  place :  I 
found  them  after  I  came  from  prison,  the  day 
or  night  afterwaids :  that  was  the  place  aj^ 
pointed  to  take  in  things.  Thistlewood  was 
always  in  a. hurry  when  there  was  any  thing  in 
readmess  to  be  taken  there;  he  called  it  the 
d^pdt. 

bid  he  give  any  reason  for  that  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  that  ? — In  case  any  body  should 
come  up,  such  as  any  officers  or  any  person, 
who  baa  no  knowledge  of  their  intention,  to 
see  these  things,  might  have  some  suspicion 
that  there  was  something  in  it  more  than  they 
were  aware  of,  that  these  things  should  be  put 
out  of  the  way,  in  order  for  a  blind. 

Yon  told  us  a  short  time  ago,  that  you  and 
several  persons  left  the  place  at  a  certain  time; 
what  had  you?  had  you  any  arms?— I  had  a 
blunderbuss ;  it  was  proposed  I  should  carry  it 
being  tall ;  that  I  should  with  the  sling  ^t 
was  attaclked  to  it,  cover  my  coat  over  it, 
without  its  been  seen,  and  Brunt  had  got  a 
broomstick  prepared  to  receive  a  bayonet,  it 
was  proposed  I  should  take  this,  which  would 
serve  as  a  walking  stick. 

Was  there  any  other  description  of  arms  but 
those  you  have  mentioned,  that  you  knew  of? 
— There  were  the  hand-grenades. 

You  have  talked  of  pike  handles,  were  there 
any  pikes  made  for  them  ?^Yes. 

What  were  they  made  from? — From  old 
files  pointed  up. 

Were  there  any  old  bayonets? — ^There  were 
some  old  bayonets. 

You  have  mentioned  a  kind  of  blunderbnas 
you  were  directed  to  carry ;  what  kind  of  bar« 
rel  was  it  ? — Brass. 

Did  Brunt  go  with  you  all  the  way  ? — When 
this  little  man  came  to  me,  in  Holborn,  and 
told  me  to  slacken  my  pace,  that  Brunt  was 
gone  back,  that  if  I  would  slacken  my  pace 
they  would  overtake  me,  before  I  got  to  the 
top  of  Oxford-road ;  in  consequence  of  this, 
I  slackened  my  pace ;  I  then  went  on  to  the 
top  of  Oxibrd-street,  this  side  where  Paik-lane 
leads  to,  I  crossed  over  to  see  who  was  be- 
hind me ;  seeing  no  one  behind  me  that  I  had 
no  knowledge  of,  I  turned  to  the  wall  to  make 
water. 

You  found  none  of  your  party  were  in  sight? 
— ^No. 

Did  vou  in  consequence  turn  back  ? — I  went 
forwards* 

Did  you  afterwards  turn  back  ?<— I  afterwaids 
turned  back  to  the  end  of  Park-lane. 
Did  you  meet  Brunt  ?— I  did  not  then. 


MB! 


I  GSORQE  IV. 


Trial  i^ Arthur  ThMenood 


Did  you  aftennurds  imel  BaiBl?-~I  taiet 
.lun  afterwirds. 

Where  did  yoa  meet  Brant?— -Some  eofi^ 
Mdemble  way  below  Paik-lane,  but  I  had  been 
walking  about  bo  long. 

Yo«  had  missed  yonr  associates,  and  re- 
^rnad  back  and  met  Brant? — I  met  Brant, 
and  he  said  where  are  you  going  ?  I  said,  I 
am  going  home :  then  there  was  another  man 
with  him :  I  said  I  do  not  no  where  to  go.  I 
did  not  know  where  to  go. 

I^  at  last  came  to  this,  that  you  returned 
Srith  him  ?*-I  returned  with  him. 

Did  you  ^  along  the  Edgware-road? — I 
4lid. 

Did  you  then  meet  Thtstlewood  ?— I  did. 

Did  you  then  with  Brant  and  Thiitlewoody 
fb  on  U)  Cato«atreet?— -Yes. 

Where  did  you  go  to  in  Cato^treet?  did 
you  go  to  a  8tiJ)le  ? — ^Yei. 

W^en  you  got  to  the  stable  whom  did  you 
Me  at  the  stable  door,  or  near  it  7 — ^As  I  got 
«•  the  avohw^  (I  walked  some  short  way  be- 
litnd  them)  &  saw  Brant  enter,  Thistlewood 
foUowad. 

Did  ai^  body  come  up  while  you  were 
staying  behind,  and  say  any  Uiing  to  you  ?<— 
Harrison  Came  np  and  said^  Adams,  come,  go 
in. 

Whom  did  ybu  see  in  the  stable  ? — ^I  saw 
Jon  the  ground-floor  Davidson,  sitting  down, 
ttftd  Wilson  standing,  it  appeared  to  me  as  if 
Sher  srere  doing  something  to  the  pikes. 

uid  you  go  up  the  ladder  ?— -Yes. 

XKd  you  find  Thistlewood  there  ?'— Yes. 

Whom  else?-^I  found  Thistlewood  and 
Brant,  Ings,  Hall,  Bradbura,  Strange,  Cooper, 
Wilson  (Wilson  was  below),  this  tall  man  I 
tiave  alluded  to,  and  several  others  that  I  did 
not  know  by  name. 

How  many  were  there  above  stairs,  in  the 
first  place? — ^There  were  above  stain  at  the 
concnision  of  it 

When  you  first  came  ? — I  cannot  say. 

flow  many  were  there  at  the  conclusion  of 
it  ?— At  the  conclusion  Thistlewood  made— «t 
the  conclusion  there  were  eighteen,  and  two 
below. 

When  you  went  in  did  you  see  any  carpen- 
ta^s  bench  ?--Yes. 

What  was  on  it  7— ArsM  of  different  de- 
•onptions. 

Lard  Chirfjtatice  Abbott, — There  were  can- 
dles then  ? — Yes,  one. 

Mr.  Solieitot  Chnerdl. — ^Was  there  any  chest 
«t  that  time  ? — ^Yes,  at  the  end  of  the  window 
where  I  placed  myself;  a  kind  of  a  trank. 

When  you  first  went  in  what  were  they 
<doiftg?--*I  found  them  all  handling  die  diAur- 
ent  things,  some  cutlasses. 

WasUiere  tny  refreshment  of  any  kind  ? — 
Hiere  was  some  beer  standing  on  a  table  or  a 
bench. 

Was  Tidd  there  at  that.time,  or  did  he  come 
4ftalUffw«idsf"^Id2d  tfot-see  him  for  twenty 
minutes  before  the  oftcert  eame  in. 


17U 

When  Tidd  came  in,  <whal  passed  ?--Tidd 
proposed  going  from  the  room  to  the  squaie, 
to  see  whether  there  was  any  noise  particular, 
or  whether  the  ministers  of  state  were  getting 
together  to  lovd  Harrowby's  house,  and  he 
was  gone  for  some  time. 

Who  was  ?— Thistlewood.  On  Thistlewood^ 
coming  back,  as  I  was  standing  up  in  the  loft 
I  heard  below  stairs  in  the  stable  a  deal  of 
talking,  in  consequence  of  that  I  went  down. 

Whom  did  you  se^  below  ?'•— I  found  Thistle- 
wood, Brant,  Davidson,  Harrison,  and  Wilson 
on  going  down  inta  the  stable ;  as  soon  as  they 
perceived  me,  before  they  perceived  me,  diqr 
were  talking  closing  together,  they  saw  me 
and  said  what  good  news  they  had  got,  and  all 
in  a  bustle ;  I  said,  what  good  news  ?  and  they 
said,  the  carriages  are  getting  there  as  fast  as 
they  can,  no  less  than  six  or  seven  carriage! 
are  already  arrived — Brant  turoed  round,  and 
said,  **  Damn  my  eyes !  what  a  haul  we  shall 
have  amongst  them  I" 

Did  you  go  up  stairs  after  this  ? — ^Yes. 

What  happened  ? — ^The  first  thing  was  seeing 
Thistlewood  and  Brant  in  this  forai  together, 
seeing  Thistlewood  much  agitated. 

Did  Tidd  afterwards  come  in? — ^Yes. 

How  soon  afterwards  ? — A  very  little  while. 

Before  Tidd  came  in  was  any  thing  said 
about  Tidd  ? — Yes,  that  was  what  Thistlewood 
and  Brant  were  talking  about ;  on  Thistlewood 
tuning  away,  it  was  perceived  there  was  some^ 
thing  the  matter.  Ings  tnraed  round  and 
said,  *'  Do  not  think  of  dropping  it  now ;  if  you 
do  I  shall  hang  n^yself,  I  shall  go  mad."  1^ 
turned  round  the  room,  that  Tidd  was  not 
like  to  come ;  Thistlewood  said,  he  would  for- 
feit his  existence  that  Tidd  would  come ;  after- 
wards I  saw  him  come  in. 

Without  going  through  the  detail  of  all  that 
passed  up  stairs,  was  any  thing  afterwards 
done  or  said  by  Thistlewood,  to  move  some  of 
them  on  one  side  to  ascertain  what  should  be 
done  ?— On  Thistlewood  making  an  observa- 
tion at  the  end  of  the  bench,  that  he  hoped 
thev  would  not  give  up  what  they  had  begun, 
if  they  did,  it  would  turaout  another  Despavd^ 
job. 

Was  that  after  Tidd  came  in  ? — ^Yes,  upon 
this  Thistlewood  began  to  count  the  number 
of  men  that  were  in  the  room,  **  Let  us  tee^ 
there  are  eighteen  in  the  room,  two  below 
stairs,  altogether  there  are  twenty ;  you  s^ 
there  are  not  sufficient  to  go  ;  I  say  Uiere  mit 
plen^." 

After  he  had  counted  those  above  stairs,  and 
those  below,  and  said  there  were  plenty,  what 
did  he  propose  ? — He  said,  fourteen  would  be 
sufficient  to  go  iato  the  room,  and  the  other 
six  would  be  sufficient  to  take  care  of  the  ser- 
vants, and  of  the  house ;  on  this  the  fourteen 
men  were  picked  out  on  that  side  of  the  room 
that  the  ladder  led  into:  on  the  men  being 
called  together  there,  Bruat  starts  the  gin 
bottle  round,  which  I  believe  he  produced  kmm 
his  pocket ;  **  Nbw  (says  iie)  Iconoeive  this 
number  of  men  is  quite  suffideq^^'  ■  ■  ^ 


76S1 


Jhr  tligh  Treaton. 


A.  D.  ISSO. 


17«« 


Brant  satdf— ThistleVrood.  '^Supposing 
lord  Harrowby  should  have  sixteen  ser?ants ; 
they  are  not  prepared,  we  are ;  tre  can  go  and 
do  what  we  have  to  do  and  off,  in  ten  minutes 
tine."  I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  particu- 
larly dropping  from  Thistlewood  after  that. 

Did  you  hear  any  disturbance  below  about 
that  time  or  shortly  afterwards  ?"— Almost  di- 
rectly afterwards. 

•  What  did  you  hear  or  see  ?-^ We  heard  a 
person  down  below,  and  all  of  a  sudden  there 
was  a  voice  at  the  bottom  of  the  ladder, 
"  Holloa  1  shew  a  light/' 

At  the  bottom  of  the  ladder  leading  up  to 
the  loft  ? — ^Yes ;  upon  this  signal  being  given 
at  the  bottom  or  the  ladder,  Thistlewood 
turned  round  to  the  candle  at  the  bottom  of 
the  bench,  and  turned  round  to  see  who  was 
coming ;  and  he  put  the  candle  at  the  bottom 
of  the  bench  quite  confused.  At  this  instant 
of  time  the  officers  ascended  the  ladder,  took 
the  command  of  the  room,  at  the  head  of  the 
ladder  in  the  room. 

What  do  you  mean-  by  the  command  of  the 
mom?  got  into  the  roomP—- Got  into  the 
foom. 

How  many? — ^Two  stood  in  the  room,  at 
the  top  of  the  ladder,  with  two  smaH  pistols, 
presenting  them  in  this  way, and  said,  **  Holloa, 
u  any  body  in  the  room  ?  here  is  a  pretty  nest 
of  you."  The  ofBcers  said,  ^'  Gentlemen,  we 
have  got  a  warrant  to  apprehend  yon  aR,  and 
as  ^ch  we  hope  yon  will  go  peaceably ;"  at 
Alls  instant  of  time  one  of  the- officers  that  was 
behind  upon  the  ladder, "  Make  way*'  (said 
he^  "  ana  let  me  come  forward.''  lliis  was 
the  man  that  was  murdered. 

A  man  that  was  behind  on  the  ladder,  said, 
"  Let  me  come  forward"  ? — ^Yes. 

The  two  officers  at  tl»  head  of  the  ladder 
made  wav  to  let  him  come  in ;  at  this  instant 
of  time  there  was  a  group  that  had  got  into  a 
little  room  ?— Yes. 

A  group  that  had  got  into  the  little  room 
before  the  officers  had  come  there  ?«— After  the 
officers  had  entered  the  room.  ' 

Was  it  a  group  of  persons  that  had  been  in 
die  room  before  the  officers  had  got  there,  who 
had  got  into  the  little  room? — Yes;  and 
on  this  the  man  that  was  murdered  came  into 
the  little  room  ;  this  group  in  the  little  room 
came  forward,  and  amongst  the  group!  saw 
vi  ^xm  rush  suddenly  forward,  at  the  same 
time  I  saw  a  pistol. 

When  the  officers  came  forward,  you  saw 
coe  arm  advance  forward,  with  a  sword  in  it  ? 
— ^I  did  not  perceive  what  weapon  he  had. 

BfiiJL  you  saw  an  arm  ? — Yes. 

And  another  arm  with  a  pistol  ? — Both  at 
dne'^time ;  the  hand  that  presented  the  pistol 
vras  rather  belov  the  arm  that  presentra  the 
dther  weapon. 

What  was  done  with  the  other  arm? — ^As 
«Ddn  as  ever  the  pistol  was  fired,  out  went  the 
candle,  that  ft  was  impossible  for  me  to  see 
'What  transpired. 

Did  you  get  away  Uien?-*On  this,  it  was 


given  out  that  one  of  the  officers  Was  mur- 
dered. 

Did  you  get  away  ? — ^Yes. 

How? — ^Afterthe  officers  got  out  and  called 
for  the  soldiers  to  assist  them,  I  went  into  th^ 
little  room,  to  see  who  was  there. 

Did  you  get  away  P — I  did. 

How? — I  went  down  the  ladder  and  thronth 
the  stable,  as  unquashed  as  if  nothing  had 
been  the  matter. 

Did  ycm  go  home? — Yes. 

This  was  on  the  Wednesday  night?*— Yes. 

How  soon  after  were  you  apprehended  f — 
On  the  Friday. 

Have  you  been  in  custody  ever  since  ?-^' 
Yes,  I  have. 

Look  at  the  piisonert  that  are  standing  sA 
the  bar,  and  tell  us  their  namea.  Who  is  thai 
below  ?— ^Thistlewood. 

Is  that  Thistlewood  ?— Yes. 

Who  is  that  behind  him,  the  tntta  of  ooloor  P 
— ^Davidson. 

Who  is  on  Davidson's  left  P — ^Wikon. 

Who  is  that  in  the  green  coat  P — Bruni. 

Who  is  that  who  has  moved  ?«^Ing6. 

The  butcher  ?^Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  other  man  en  the  right 
hand  of  Brant,  with  a  coloured  handkerchief  P 
—Cooper. 

Who  is  that  short  man  P  do  you  know  him  T 
[Sirangejy^l  cannot  say  that  I  cah  ftwear  to 
the  man,  I  have  seen  him. 

Now  the  other  man,  who  hthat!  [Bnd" 
bunk] — ^I  do  not  know  his  nsmoe. 

Now  the  tall  man  behind? — ^Thatis  Harrisotr. 

Who  is  that  standing  by  him  ?  [GUekriU.\ 
—I  do  not  know  him  by  name. 

Now  the  other  one,  the  stout  man? — ^Tkal 
is  Tidd. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General,^^Thete  are  two  or 
three  that  he  has  not  spoken  to,  I  Wish  they 
would  stand  forward. — I  cannot  say  thmt  i  caJb* 
swear  to  that  man.  [SirangeJ]  l  know  his 
ftiee  too,  but  there  is  a  difference  in  the  dress, 
or  something. 

Do  you  know  that  man?  [Bruftiifn.] — I 
have  some  recollection  of  him,  but  to  swear  to* 
him  I  canbot. 

Go  down  from  the  place  where  you  -are. 
[newUnearmoved*]  Who  is  that?  [StrmgtA 
— I  do  not  know  the  man  by  name,  to  iay  I 
can  command  his  iiame ;  but  I  know  hon  by 
sight. 

Did  you  see  tiiat  man  at  any  of  tbfi  InMt- 
ings  ? — Yes,  I  think  I  have. 

Robert  Adam  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Cunocxxf: 

You  went  with  a  ftdl  intention  of  assassi- 
nating his  majesty's  ministers  P-*-No,  I  did* 
not :  I  deny  that. 

What  carried  you  there  P*— My  legs. 

Look^t  the  Jury,  will  you.  ibut  leg*  o^N 
ried  vou  there ? — ^les. 

What  inteiMton  carried  you  there'V-What 
intention  P    I  certainly  cannot  tay,  but  I  w«nt 
there  under  that  pretension  to  ev^ry  oQ^frltftk'! 
appeaf^nces 


767J 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Triat  ^JMtwr  TUuUemood 


[768 


Wiiti  was  your  inward  intent  ? — Mj  inwud 
intent  was  entirely  against  them. 

Against  tbem  ?  which  did  yon  say,  against 
them,  or  against  it? — Against  the  plan  that 
was  pursued. 

According  to  -yoor  own  aoconnt,  yon  had 
attended  many  meetings  at  which  tins  plan 
was  debated  ? — I  had. 

One  night  yon  were  chairman,  yon  say  ? — 
One  morning. 

Then  if  your  intention  was  against  it,  how 
came  you  to  join  them  again  f — I  joined  upon 
them  in  this  way,  gentlemen  of  the  jury ; 
there  had  been  threatening  language  scTeral 
times  held  out  by  Brant,  if  any  man  that  be- 
longed to  the  party  concerned,  withdrew  him- 
self from  it,  he  would  take  care  that  that  man 
should  be  marked  out ;  what  could  I  do  then  f 

Then  it  was  fear  made  you  join  them  ? — It 
was  fear  that  kept  me  to  them. 

Your  original  friend,  I  think  you  say,  was 
Mr.  Brunt  r— Yes,  my  original  acquaintance. 

And  you  became  acquainted  with  him  in  the 
year  1816,  at  Cambmy,  you  say  ? — Yes. 

Were  you  then  a  soldier? — ^No. 

You  had  quitted  the  army  for  some  years 
then  7— Yes. 

What  line  of  life  had  you  been  in,  after  you 
quitted  the  army? — Principally  in  my  trade, 
as  a  shoemaker. 

Were  }rou  ever  a  treasurer  at  a  benefit  fund  ? 
-*-Ne?er  in  my  life. 

What  carried  you  to  France  at  that  time  ? — 
I  went  with  the  intention  to  follow  my  trade 
there. 

Had  you  no  other  motive  for  leaving  Eng- 
land?— Any  other  motive  ? 

Yes  ? — Not  in  particular. 

Did  you  carry  much  money  with  you? — I 
carried  some  with  me. 

How  much  might  it  be? — ^Between  thirty 
and  forty  pounds. 
.  Was  not  it  more  than  that  ? — No. 

Was  it  all  your  own  f — I  conceived  it  my 
own. 

Some  persons  conceived  it  belonged  to  other 
people  ? — What  other  persons  conceived  I  do 
not  know;  but  what  belongs  to  me  I  will  ac- 
knowledge to  the  truth  of. 

Were  not  you  charged  with  cariying  away 
money  belonging  to  other  people  ?— No. 

You  never  were  charged  before  a  magistrate 
with  it  ?— No. 

You  went  to  Fmnce  to  carry  on  your  trade 
as  a  shoemaker  ? — ^Yes. 
'  That  was  your  sole  motive  ?— Yes. 

Having  become  acquainted  with  Brunt, 
what  purpose  did  he  introduce  you  to  Mr. 
Thistlewood  for  P — For  the  purpose  of  assassi- 
nating the  ministers. 

That  was  the  purpose  of  the  first  visit  ? — 
Yes,  this  was  proposed  to  me  by  Brunt  before 
I  ever  saw  Thistlewood. 

•  And  that  being  proposed  to  you,  you  agreed 
to  be  introduoed  to  Thistlewood  for  that  pur- 
pose ? — ^Yes. 

And  yott  joined  every  meeting  where  that 


question  was  debated,  till  you  were  taken  into 
custody  ? — ^Nol  every  meeting. 

A  variety  of  meetings  ? — ^Yes. 

And  having  joined  for  that  purpose  ? — Yes^ 

And  having  joined  f^  thai  purpose,  and 
having  heard  it  debated,  you  still  continned  to 
go  to  those  meetings  ? — ^Yes* 

You  told  us  yon  were  selected  fyt  yoor 
adroitness  at  the  swoid  ?— Yes. 

Were  you  to  be  the  most  active  at  the  assassi- 
nating plot  ? — ^I  told  yon  before,  I  was  to  be 
one  to  be  appointed  as  a  swordsman  to  ga 
into  the  room  along  with  Harrison. 
j  How  long  is  it  since  you  have  been  an  evi- 
dence to  give  an  account  of  this  plot  ? — The 
first  account  I  ever  gave  in  was  on  the  Satur- 
day after. 

Did  you  give  it  then  under  any  understand- 
ing that  you  were  to  become  an  evidence? — 
I  did  not. 

It  was  from  pure  compunctious  visitings  of 
your  own  breast  that  you  then  disclosed  it? 
—It  was,  indeed. 

Not  out  of  any  regard  for  your  neck  ? — ^The 
motive  I  did  it  with  was  this :  my  conseience 
was  accused  I  had  acted  wrong,  and  I  leant  to 
heart ;  and  I  made  a  solemn  vow,  that  if  God 
Almighty  would  spare  me^  I  would  make  a 
disclosure  of  all  I  knew. 

You  did  not  like  to  be  hanged  ? — I  do  not 
know  who  would. 

And  you  had  rather  thirteen  others  would  be 
hanged  than  yourself  ?— I  only  came  here  to 
give  the  truth :  if  it  is  against  the  prisoner  I 
cannot  help  it. 

Had  not  you  rather  thirteen  men  should  be 
hanged  on  your  evidence  than  that  you  should 
be  hung  yourself?  however,  I  will  not  distress 
you  about  that;  but  you  had  none  of  those 
feelings  before  you  were  in  custody  ? — Yes,  I 
had  some  prior  to  that. 

How  long  before  you  found  yourself  in  cus- 
tody ?— I  had  them  before  I  entered  the  room  ; 
but  after  I  entered  the  room,  and  the  man  was 
murdered,  I  was  worse. 

Before  you  entered  the  room  that  day  ?•— 
Yes. 

Were  you  very  much  shocked  at  it? — ^I 
were. 

Because  just  now  vou  told  roe  you  went 
down  stairs  and  walked  away  as  if  nothing  had 
happened? 

Mr.  Sdidtot  Geftaral.-^He  did  not  say  that. 

WUnm.'-l  walked  down  to  give  myself  up 
to  the  officers,  but  I  saw  none,  and  I  did  not 
fiud  Uie  officers,  and  I  walked  off. 

Mr.  CWiPOorf.— You  found  no  officers  ?-«Mo. 

And  that  is  the  reason  you  did  not  surrender 
yourself  P— Certainlv. 

Did  you  think  of  surrendering  yourself  the 
next  day,  before  ^ou  were  taken  f—I  did  not 
think  of  surrendering  myself,  or  of  making  wom 
escape;  I  made  up  my  mind  to  ran  all 
chances. 

To  wait  the  event  ?«-Yes. 


709] 


far  High  Treatm, 


A.  D.  1890. 


[770 


YoU'  hate-  giten  us  a  veiy  circumst&ntiiti 
aeoount ;  how  maoy  were  the  most  that  at  any 
ttttie  yOa*  saw'  assembled 7 — ^Tfae  most  ^at  I 
saw  assembled  together  were  on  the  20th  of 
Vebmary,  in  the  morning ;  there  were  about 
fifteen,  I  think;  leaving  the  room  in  Cato- 
Street  out  of  the  question. 

Were  any  of  them  wealthy  men  that  you 
hare  not  nam^d?*— I  know  no  more  than  I 
know  here. 

All  poor  men  ?— All  poor  men  for  what  I 
know. 

You  sent  one  day  for  the  paper  1^  Mr.  This- 
tlewood  did. 

How  did  you  raise  money  to  pay  for  that 
pa'per  ?— I  am  not  to  tell  how  Mr.  Thistlewood 
came  by  his  money. 

Was  it  not  raised  by  a  halfpenny  and  penny 
laised  round  the  n>om  ^— No. 
.  How  was  it  raised  ? — Mr.  Thistlewood  gate 
the  money  out  of  his  pocket,  and  sent  Hide  to 
fttch  it. 

I  do  not  mean  the  cartridge  paper,  but  the 
newspaper?—!  mean  the  newspaper  too. 

The  utmost  you  saw,  before  the  meeting 
in  Cato-street,  was  6fteen  men  ?— Yes. 

What  was  the  largest  sum  of  money  you 
Ibund  among  them  f — ^The  largest  sum  was 
six  shillings,  which  I  saw  produced  by  Thistle- 
wood to  Brunt. 

Somebody  said  he  had  a  one  pound  note  in 
reserve  on  this  great  occasion  ?— That  was  Mr. 
Brunt. 

It  was  proposed,  you  say,  not  only  to  assas- 
tinate  the  ministers,  but  to  take  the  two  guns 
id  Gray's-inn-lane,  and  the  six  guns  at  the  Artil- 
lery ground,  and  to  seize  the  Mansion-house  ? 
—Yes. 

As  you  seem  to  have  been  deep  in  this, 
wlifere  were  the  forces  to  come  from  to  do  all 
this  ?^That  I  cannot  tell :  I  speak  no  more  than 
what  I  know. 

Then  yon  never  saw  any  return  of  the  men 
thai  could  be  brought  into  the  field  ? — ^Never. 

Where  was  the  d^pot  ?— At  Tidd's. 

Was  it  in  a  comer-cupboard  ?— They  were 
kept  in  a  box  under  his  window,  the  grenades; 
ma  as  to  the  pike  staves,  they  were  put  out  of 
right ;  where  I  do  not  know. 

Did  yon  see  any  cannon-ball  any  where  ?— -No. 

What  were  you  to  do  with  the  cannon  when 
you  got  them,  do  you  know? — Yes;  in  the 
first  place,  they  intended  to  put  a  cartridge 
into  toe  cannon,  and  in  the  next  place  it  was 
pr6posed  to  tabs  a  sledge  hammer  along  with 
them,  and  knock  off  the  iron  railing  to  charge 
the  cannon  with,  as  it  was  conceived  it  would 
do  gt«ater  damage  than  cannon  ball;  this 
was  thp  proposition  of  Mr.  Thistlewood. 

Ton  luive  not  told  ns  yet  where  the  men 
were  to  come  from? — I  do  not  know,  and 
what  I  do  not  know  I  will  not  answer  to. 
'  I  think  you  named  a  person  of  the  name  of 
Edwards  there  continually,  where  is  he  tiow  ? 
•— rdo  not  know. 

Have  not  you  seen  him  to-day  T— I  have 
sot  seen  Edwards  since  the  22nd. 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


He  was  a  very  active  man  there  generally  ? — 
I  have  seen  him  as  active  as  the  rest  of  them. 

More  active  than  the  rest  ? — He  seemed  to 
be  in  more  close  communication  with  Harrison, 
Brunt,  Thistlewood,  and  the  rest  of  them. 

You  do  not  know  where  he  is  now  ? — I  do 
not  know,  I  never  heard  of  him. 

What  pewspaper  was  it  you  received  the 
information  of  the  dinner  from? — The  New 
Times. 

Have  yon  since  learned  whether  Jt  was  true 
that  there  was  to  be  a  dinner  there  or  not  that 
day  ? — I  have  never  made  any  inquiry,  but  I 
saw  it  in  the  paper  myself. 

You  only  know  what  the  paper  informed 
yoo?— -No. 

You  have  given  a  confused  description  of 
what  passed  in  the  hay-loft  ? — I  do  not  know 
what  loft  it  was. 

It  was  over  a  stable  ?— Yes. 

The  unfortunate  accident  was  to  a  man  who 
said,  ^make  vray,  let  me  come  forward'*?— 
Yes. 

And  you  described  an  arm  came  forward 
with  a  sword  in  it  ? — I  did  not  say  a  sword. 

Were  you  pretty  near  at  that  time? — I  was 
at  the  end  of  the  room,  under  the  bench,  next 
to  Cato-street. 

How  near  was  that  firm  to  your  own  body  ^ 
— -I  suppose  it  could^not  be  above  four  or  five 
feet  off;  I  mean  the  arm  that  extended  from 
the  door. 

Was  not  your  own  arm  within  sufiicient 
reach  to  have  done  that  mischief  yourself? — 
It  could  not  be,  for  I  had  not  an  instrument  of 
any  description  in  my  hand. 

Answer  the  question : — was  not  your  own 
arm  within  sufficient  reach  to  have  done  that 
mischief  yourself  ? — I  might  have  done  it  with 
a  pistol,  but  not  with  a  sword. 

Then  you  were  not  sufficiently  near?— I  was 
not. 

Do  yotl  recollect  who  put  out  the  candle  ? — 
I  do  not  know  whether  it  was  put  out  by  the 
report  of  the  pistol,  or  blown  out  intentionally. 

I  ou  did  not  put  it  out  ?— I  did  not ;  at  the 
report  of  the  pistol  the  candle  was  out  in- 
stantly. 

Robert  Adami  re-examined  by  Mr.  SoUciiar 

General, 

You  were  at  Cambray? — Yes. 

Were  you  carrying  on  your  trade  there  ?— 
Yes. 

Were  the  English  soldiers  there  ? — Yes. 

Were  you  carrying  on  your  trade  among  the 
English  soldiers  and  officers  at  the  time? — 
Yes. 

Eleanor  Walker  called. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — It  is  quite  im- 
possible that  we  can  finish  to-night.  That 
must  be  felt  on  all  sides. 

Mr.  Attorney  Genera/.— Our  attention  has 
been  directed  to  that,  my  lord ;  but  then  it  be- 
comes proper  to  consider  the  most  convenient 

3D 


771] 


I  GEORGE  17. 


Trial  of  Arthur  Tkitthwood 


C77« 


time^  to  break  off  for  the  night,  to  that  we 
may  have  strength  for  another  day. 

Lord  Chkf  Jtatke  Abbott.^—WiXL  yon  con- 
clede  now  ? 

Mr.  Attorney  Gentral* — ^This  is  the  most  de« 
tailed  examination. 

Lord  Chief  Juftiee  Abbott.'-^li  is  quite  clear 
we  must  have  a  third  day,  and  therefore  we 
need  not  exhaust  ourselves  tine  first  day.  Is  there 
any  preparation  to  accommodate  the  gentle- 
men of  the  jury  ? 

Mr.  Sheriff  JRoMioetf.— There  is,  my  lord. 

Lord  Chief  Jtatke  ^66of^— Gentlemeo  of 
the  jury,  according  to  what  we  learn  from  the 
attorney-general,  and  the  counsel  for  the  de* 
fendant,  it  is  impossible  that  you,  or  I,  or  any 
person  concerned  in  this  trial,  should  have 
strength  to  go  through  it  without  adjournment. 
Probably  some  of  you  have  come  m>m  a  dis- 
tance ;  and  as  we  must  adjourn,  probably  you 
may  think  this  as  convenient  a  time  as  any 
•ther  r  proper  care  has  been  taken  to  provide 
for  you. 

Adjourned  to  to-morrow  morning  nine  o'clock. 


Tuesday,  18th  Apsil,  1820. 

The  Prisoner  was  set  to  the  bar,  the  other  per- 
sons indicted  with  him  being  placed  behind. 

Thittlewood.-—^f  lord,  will  you  have  the 
goodness  again  to-day  to  indulge  me  with  a 
seat? 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — Certainly. 

VavidMon. — If  your  lordship  will  be  pleased 
to  let  me  have  a  seat,  I  was  very  unwell  last 
night,  with  standing  so  long  ? 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — ^They  may  place 
two  or  three  chairs  there,  and  you  may  relieve 
one  another. 

Eleanor  Walker  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gwmey* 

Are  you  servant  to  Henry  Rogers  ? — ^Yes. 

Where  docs  he  live?— At  No.  4,  Fox-court. 

Is  that  in  Gray's-inn-lane  ? — ^Yes. 

Had  you  a  lodger  in  your  house  of  the  name 
of  Brunt?— Yes. 

What  rooms  did  he  occupy? — ^Two.  One 
was  a  large  one,  and  one  a  small  one. 

On  what  floor?— The  second  floor. 

Were  they  front  or  back  rooms  ? — Front. 

Both  front  ?— Yes. 

In  the  month  of  January  last  was  there  any 
two-pair  stairs  back  room  to  let  ? — No,  there 
was  not  to  let ;  there  was  one  occupied ;  a 
back  room  was  occupied  in  January. 

Did  the  person  come  in  in  January,  or  when 
did  he  come  in,  to  the  best  of  your  remem- 
brance ?— In  January. 

Who  introduced  him  to  you  ? — Mr.  Brunt. 

As  well  as  you  can  recollect,  how  long  be 


i 


fore  Bruot  vras  taken  up  ? — ^A  month  or  five 
weeks. 

Brunt  you  ^ay  introduced  him  to  you?— 
Yes. 

Did  Brunt  tell  you  what  he  was  ?— No,  he 
did  not  tell  me  what  he  was ;  he  said  he  waa 
lately  come  from  the  country,  and  he  wanted  a 
lodging,  and  he  knew  we  had  one  to  let,  and 
he  wished  us  to  take  him  in. 

Did  you  afterwards  find  out  the  name  of  that 
person? — No,  I  never  heard  the  name. 

At  what  was  the  lodging  taken,  how  mucb 
a  week  ? — ^Three  shillings* 

Was  it  furnished  or  unfiirnished? — ^Un- 
furnished. 

Did  the  person  tell  you  any  thing  about  fur« 
niture  ? — He  said,  pei haps  he  might  not  bring 
his  goods  in  for  a  week  or  better. 

Did  he  ever  bring  any  furniture  in? — No, 
not  to  my  knowledge. 

Should  you  know  him  again?  the  lodger? 
—-No,  I  do  not  think  I  should. 

And  you  do  not  recollect  hearing  him  called 
by  his  name  ? — No,  I  do  not. 

Lsrd  Chief  Justice  Abbott.-^yfhzi  room  was 
it  that  was  taken  ?— The  two-pair  back  room. 

Mr.  Giirmw.— While  this  person  occupied 
the  room,  did  you  see  any  persons  go  up  and 
down  stairs  ? — I  have  never  seen  them.  1  have 
heard  people  go  up  and  down  stairs,  but  not 
seen  them. 

May  Rogers  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey, 

We  understand  you  live  in  Fox-court? — ^Yes. 

And  that  Brunt  lodged  with  you  ? — ^Yes. 

Eleanor  Walker  is  your  niece  and  servant  ? 
—Yes. 

Do  you  remember  the  circumstance  of  her 
letting  the  two  pair  of  stairs  back  room?— 
While  I  was  absent  she  did. 

Did  you  ask  any  question  of  Brunt,  your 
lodger,  who  it  was  that  had  taken  your  room  ? 
— I  did,  after  he  had  been  in  my  bouse  about 
a  week. 

What  did  he  say  respecting  him  ? — I  said^ 
"  Mr.  Brunt,  you  have  brought  in  a  lodger,  I 
understand  ;  I  hope  he  is  a  good  one.*^  He 
says,  ^*  I  hope  be  is,  Mrs.  Rogers ;  I  have  no 
doubt  he  will  always  pay  you."  I  said,  ^I 
think  it  is  very  right  I  should  know.''  ^  I 
know  nothing  more  of  the  man,''  says  he, ''  than 
the  seeing  him  at  a  public-house,  and  that  he 
was  inquiring  for  a  lodging;  knowing  you  had 
one  to  let,  I  recommended  ihe  lodging.'' 

Did  he  say  what  he  was? — I  asked  him 
what  he  was ;  he  said  he  was  a  butcher  put  of 
work. 

Did  he  ever  sleep  there  ? — Not  to  my  know- 
ledge. 

Did  he  ever  bring  any  furniture  in? — ^Never. 

How  many  weeks  did  he  pay  you  for  ?— 
Four  or  five,  I  could  not  swear  which. 

While  he  was  there,  did  you  observe  any 
persons  going  up  and  down  stairs?  —  I  did 
once ;  one  evening. 


7731 


«  • 


for  High  Treason, 


A.  D.  1820. 


[774 


Was  that  when  yoa  were  going  to  put  your 
children  to  bed  ? — I  was  putting  my  children 
te  bed. 

How  many  did  you  observe  going  up? — 
Three;  the  middle  of  the  three  was  a  black 
man. 

Were  you  upon  the  stairs  as  they  went  up  ? 
—No,  I  had  a  little  room  up  the  one  pair;  and 
as  I  came  from  my  own  door^  the  kght  from 
my  room  shone  on  their  faces. 

You  were  on  the  landing-place  ? — I  was ;  I 
saw  tbem  go  up. 

At  other  times,  have  you  observed  whether 
any  persons  were  going  up  and  down  stairs  ?-— 
I  have  early  in  the  day  seen  a  strange  man, 
but  taken  no  notice  who  nor  what  they  were. 

Had  you,  in  any  parts  of  the  day,  observed 
persons  going  up  and  down  stairs  ?«-No : 
Deing  so  seldom  at  home,  I  had  no  opportunity. 

Joseph  Hale  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gvamey* 

Are  you  apprentice  to  Brunt? — ^Yes. 

How  long  have  you  served  of  your  time  ? — 
Two  years  the  3rd  of  last  February. 

Have  you  lived  with  him  in  Fox-court  ?— 
Yes. 

Do  you  remember  any  person  taking  the  back 
room  two  pair  of  stairs  in  Fox-court  in  January? 
— I  remember  a  person  coming  up  there,  but  I 
do  not  know  exactly  what  month  it  was. 

Who  was  that  person  ?— It  was  a  butcher. 

What  was  his  name? — Ings. 

Who  looked  at  the  room  with  him? — Brunt. 

Brunt  and  he  looked  at  the  room  together  ? 
—Yes,  they  did. 

,  After  they  had  looked  at  the  room,  or  while 
they  were  looking  at  it,  did  you  hear  Brunt 
ssiy  any  thing  to  Ings  ? — When  they  came  out 
of  the  room  I  heard  Brunt  say  to  Ings,  "  It 
will  do,  go  down  and  give  them  a  shilling.*' 

Brunt  said  that  to  Ings  ? — ^Yes,  he  did. 

After  that  time  did  Ings  use  to  come  to  the 
room? — Yes.  ■ 

Who  kept  the  key  of  the  room?— The  key 
of  the  room  was  mostly  left  in  Brunt*s  room. 

Then  when  Ings  wanted  to  go  into  the  room, 
what  did  he  do  ? — He  used  to  come  to  Brunt's 
room  for  the  key. 

From  that  time  till  your  master  was  taken 
up,  did  there  use  to  be  any  number  of  persons 
coming  to  that  room  ? — ^Yes. 

ViTas  that  seldom  or  frequent?  —  Every 
evening. 

Whom  have  you  seen  come  to  these  meet- 
ings every  evening  ? — ^DifTerent  persons. 

Can  you  give  me  an  enumeration  of  their 
names  ? — Yes. 

Wh^  were  thqr  ? — Ings,  Tidd,  Thistlewood, 
Brad1>um,  Edwards,  Hall,  Potter,  Strange. 

Do  you  remember  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Adams  ? — Yes. 

Did  he  come  ?-;- Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  any  black  man,  or  man 
of  colour  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  his  name  P — Davidson. 

Did  be  come  ? — Yes. 


Do  you  remember  whether  there  were  more 
than  those  you  have  named? — I  remember 
more  used  to  come,  but  I  do  not  know  their 
names." 

How  long  in  the  evening  did  they  use  ge* 
nerally  to  stay? — Nearly  about  two  hours  in 
general. 

Was  there  any  furniture  in  the  room  ?— 
None  that  ever  I  saw. 

What  did  they  do  for  seats  ?^They  used  to 
take  chairs  in,  out  of  Brunt's  room,  to  sit  on. 

Did  you  hear  them  talking,  occasionally,  and 
speaking  to  each  other?— No. 

Did  you  ever  hear  them  call  Thistlewood  by 
any  name  ? — ^Yes;  they  used  to  call  him  some- 
times T.  and  sometimes  Arthur. 

Do  you  remember  any  day  seeing  the  door 
open,  and  observing  any  thing  in  the  room? — 
Yes. 

What  did  you  see  ? — ^I  saw  some  long  poles. 

What  were  they  likef — ^Tbey  were  like 
branches  of  trees. 

Cut  rough  from  the  tree  ? — ^Yes. 

How  many  do  you  think  ? — I  suppose  about 
twenty. 

Did  you  at  any  time  hear  any  work  going 
on  in  the  room  ? — Yes. 

What  kind  of  work? — ^I  have  heard  ham« 
mering  and  sawing. 

Your  master  was  taken  up  on  Thursday,  the 
24th  of  February,  was  he  not  ? — Yes,  he  was. 

On  the  Sunday  morning  before  that  (that 
would  be  the  20tn)  was  there  any  meeting  in 
that  room  ? — In  the  morning. 

W*as  that  a  meeting  of  the  usual  number, 
or  a  smaller,  or  a  larger  number  than  usual  ?-— 
There  were  more  that  morning  than  ever  I  had 
seen  come  up  before. 

Were  the  persons  whom  you  have  named 
to  me  all  there? — Yes. 

After  the  meeting  had  broken  up,  did  you 
see  any  person  in  your  master's  room  with' 
him? — In  my  master's  own  room  there  was  one* 

Who  was  that? — Strange. 

He  had  been  at  the  meeting  you  have  told 
me  ? — Yes,  he  was. 

Was  there  any  meeting  on  the  Monday 
evening? — ^Yes. 

On  the  Tuesday  evening  was  there  any 
meeting  ? — Yes. 

On  the  Wednesday,  do  you  remember  any 
number  of  persons  coming  ?— There  were  se- 
veral persons  in  and  out  in  the  course  of  the 
day.  4 

Did  any  of  them  come  into  your  work-^hop  ? 
—Yes. 

That  was  one  of  the  front  rooms? — ^Yes. 

Did  they  do  any  thing  there  ? — ^Yes. 

What  .^'— They  had  got  some  pistols,  and 
were  putting  new  flints  into  them. 

How  many  pistols  do  you  think  you  saw  ?— 
Five  or  six. 

Did  they  finish  flinting  the  pistols  there  ?^ 
No. 

What  stopped  them  ?-— One  of  the  men  said 
that  tibere  were  people  overlooking  them,  and 
Brunt  told  them  to  go  into  the  back  room. 


775] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qf  Arthur  ThuUewood 


Overlooking  them  from  the  opposite  house  ? 
—Yes. 

Who  were  the  persons  who  were  so  patting 
in  the  flints  ? — Strange,  and  a  man  whom  I 
did  not  know. 

Did  they  then  go  ii\to  the  back  room  ? — Yes« 

In  the  course  of  that  afternoon,  how  many 
persons  do  you  remember  seeing  in  that  back 
room,  or  going  in  and  out  of  it  i^l  cannot 
say,  but  I  saw  several  in  the  course  of  that 
day. 

Did  you  see  Thistlewood  there  ? — ^Yes. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott, ^On  the  Wed- 
nesday ?— Vesi 

Mr.  Gumey, — In  the  course  of  the  after- 
noon»  did  he  ask  you  for  any  thing  ?^Yes. 

What  did  he  ask  you  for? — A  piece  of 
writing  paper. 

Did  you  give  him  a  sheet  of  writing  paper  ? 
—Yes,  I  did. 

To  what  place  did  he  take  itT^Ibelieye 
into  the  back  room. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — ^Vou  gave  it  him 
in  your  roaster's  room  ? — Yes. 

Mr.  Gumey, — After  that,  did  any  person 
come  out  of  the  back  room  and  give  you  any 
order  to  fetch  any  thing  ? — Yes, 

Who  was  that? — My  master,  Qrunt. 

What  did  he  desire  you  to  get  f — Six  sheets 
of  cartridge  paper. 

What  money  did  he  give  you  ? — Sixpence. 

Did  you  go  and  buy  it  ? — Yes. 

To  whom  did  you  give  it? — My  master. 

Where  did  he  take  it  to  ?— He  took  it  into 
the  back  room. 

About  what  time,  as  well  as  you  remember, 
ID  the  afternoon  was  that? — Between  four 
and  five. 

At  about  what  time  did  the  persons  who 
were  in  that  back-room  go  away  ? — The  last 
that  went  away,  about  eight  in  the  evening. 

•Did  any  of  them  go  away  about  five  or  six? 
— I  believe  they  did :  I  heard  people  go  down 
stairs. 

You  were  in  your  work-shop  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  your  master  go  out  ?— He  was  in  and 
out  several  times  in  the  course  of  the  day. 

What  time  did  he  go  away  finally  ?-»About 
six. 

Lord  Chief  Jmtice  Abbott.-r^oji  did  not  see 

him  after  six  ? — No. 

« 

Mr.  Gvmey. — He  went  away,  as  you 
thought,  about  six  ?— -Yes. 

Was  he  alone,  or  was  there  any  person  with 
him  ?•— ^Tbere  was  a  man  with  him. 

Do  you  know  that  man  ? — I  do  not  know 
whether  I  should  know  that  man  again. 

Was  that  one  of  the  men  you  had  been  used 
to  see  there  ? — No. 

Had  any  table  from  your  mistress's  room 
been  taken  into  the  back-room  ? — ^Yes. 

On  that  day  ?— Yes. 

When  your  mistress  was  going  to  drink  tea, 
did  you  want  that  table  ? — Yes. 


[7T^ 

What  did  you  do  to  get  it?— «I  went  to  the 
back  room  for  it. 

Did  you  go  in,  or  knock  at  the  door  ? — I 
knocked  at  the  door. . 

Who  opened  it  ? — A  man  by  the  name  of 
Potter. 

Did  you  ask  for  the  table  ?  and  did  he  |pve 
it  you  ? — Yes. 

Lord  Chief  Justke  AM)ott, — ^You  did  not  go 
in  ? — No. 

Mr.  Gume^.-^By  the  opening  of  the  door, 
were  you  enabled  to  see  whether  there  were 
any  persons  in  the  room  besides  Potter  ? — Yes. 

How  many  do  you  think  there  were? — 
About  four  or  five. 

After  your  master  was  gone,  did  you  see 
Tidd  ?— Yes. 

At  about  what  time  ? — ^Between  seven  and 
eight,  nearly  eight. 

Into  which  room  did  he  come?-:— Mrs. 
Brunt  called  him,  and  he  came  into  her  room. 

What  did  she  then  do  P — She  took  him  to 
the  cupboard,  and  shewed  him  a  pike  head 
and  a  sword. 

This  was  in  your  master*s  room  ? — ^Yes. 

What  passed  about  them?-— Mrs.  Brunt 
asked  him  what  she  could  do  with  them. 

What  did  he  do  with  themT-— ^Mrs.  Brunt 
gave  them  to  him,  and  he  took  them  out  of 
the  room,  I  believe,  into  the  back-room. 

After  that  time,  did  you  hear  any  persons 
go  down  stairs? — ^Yes. 

Did  any  person  come  into  Mrs.  Brunt's 
room  ? — Yes. 

Did  he  leave  any  message? — ^Yes. 

What  was  it?— He  said,  if  any  person  came 
up  after  any  one,  he  was  to  be  sent  to  the 
White  Hart. 

Mr.  Juitioe  Bkhardson. — Whose  dtrectioa 
was  that  ? 

Mr.  Gunu^.— He  does  not  know  the  peiaon, 
my  lord.  Did  any  persons  come  shortly  after, 
and  inquire  for  your  master? — ^Yes. 

Were  they  sent  to  the  White  Hart  ?— Yes. 

Did  you  go  and  show  them  the  way  ?— Yea^ 

Did  any  person  come  whose  name  you  have 
mentioned  f— In  the  course  of  the  evening. 

Did  Potter  come  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  send  him  to  the  White  Hart  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  go  and  show  him  tlie  way  ?— Ho^ 
he  knew  the  way. 

How  many  were  those  you  had  gone  to  sihow 
to  the  White  Hart  ?-— Three. 

Was  Potter  alone,  or  were  there  any  panons 
with  Potter?-— There  were  some  persona  wit^ 
him. 

Did  your  master  come  home  that  night  f-« 
Yes.  » 

At  about  what  time  f — ^At  about  nine  o'eJod;. 

Did  you  observe  any  difference  in  bis  drees 
from  what  it  was  when  he  went  out  ? — ^It  waa 
dirtier. 

Did  he  appear  composed  or  othATwiae? — 
No. 

In  what  state  did  he  appear  to  bef— He 
seemed  confused. 


f7T3 


Jkr  High  T^oicm. 


4-.X>.  18S0. 


irm 


Did  you  h«iff  him  ny  jMny  thiog  to  his  wife 
of  what  had  happened  7-^1  heard  him  say  to 
his  wife  it  was  all  up,  or  words  to  that  effect. 

What  else  did  he  say  P— He  said  that  where 
he  had  been  a  great  many  officers  had  come  in. 

Any  thing  elsef— Jast  as  he  spoke  these 
words  a  man  came  in. 

Did  he  ss^  anv  thing  about  himself  before 
the  man  oame  in?— He  faid  he  had  saved  his 
life,  and  that  was  all. 

You  say,  just  as  he  had  said  that,  anothear 
man  came  in  ?«— Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  name  of  that  man  ? — ^No. 

What  did  Brunt  say  lo  him  upon  his  oomin| 
in?*-He  shook  hands  with  him,  and  asked 
him,  when  he  came  in,  if  he'  knew  who  had 
informed. 

What  answer  did  the  man  give  ? — He  said^ 
*'  No." 

Did  the  man  say  whether  any  thing  had 
happened  to  him? — Yes;  he  said  he  had 
a  areadful  blow  on  the  side,  and  was  knocked 
down. 

Did  Brunt  say  any  thing  «ore?— Yes. 

What  did  he  say?— He  said,  *^  there  is  some- 
thing to  be  done  yet." 

After  that,  what  did  he  and  tiie  other  man 
do? — Thc^  went  away  together. 

After  they  were  gone,  did  you  and  Mrs. 
Brunt  do  any  thing  f — Yes. 

What  did  youdo? — ^Wewent  intolngs'sroom. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott.  —  That  was  the 
backroom? 

Mr.  Gum^w— What  did  you  see  there  T--I 
saw  sereral  mings  in  the  cupboard. 

Were  the  twentv  poles  there  which  you  had 
before  seen? — Only  one. 

In  the  cupboard  you  saw  what? — ^I  saw  se- 
vemt  roUs  of  brown  paper  with  tar  in  thesou 

Any  paper  twistea  up? — Yes. 

What  paper  was  that  ?«-A  piece  of  cartridge 
paper. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  with  strings  l-^Yes. 

How  were  the  strings  ? — ^They  were  rolled 
vonndthem. 

How  large  were  they  ? — ^Abool  as  big  as  two 
fisU. 

Whai  do  you  understand  them  to  be?-^I 
have  heard  since  they  are  hand-grenades. 

Did  you  see  any  iron  pot  ? — ^Yes. 

Had  you  seen  liaX  before  ?-^Yes. 

Who  had  it  ?— Brunt  had  ijU 

Had  he  bad  it  loiqp,  or  was  ii  a  new  pur- 
chase?— ^He  had  had  it  some  time. 

Weeks  or  months??— Some  time  before,  I 
canaot  say  Yvxm  long;  he  used  to  ase  it  himself 
m  his  own  room. 

At.  about  what  time  did  your  master  cesne 
lienm  again?— On  the  Wednesday  «YeDing 
about  .eleTQu  o^doek. 

Did  )k%  give  you  any  dioBCtions  before  he 
went  to  bed?— Yes. 

What? — ^He  told  me  io  fet  up  in  IIm  morn- 
ing as  soon  as  I  could,  and  to  clean  his  boots. 

In  whait  ooadfctioii  wbbs  they  l^Tkeif  were 
ueiy  dirty. 


Xhe  next  moning  did  you  get  tip  eatly  ?«- 
He  called  me  about  half  past  six. 

What  did  he  say  to  you  ? — He  asked  me  if  i 
knew  the  Borough,    I  told  him,  yes. 

Did  he  ask  you  as  to  any  panicuUr  nart  ttf 
the  Borough  ? — ^He  asked  me  if  X  knew  &o w's- 
fields,  X  told  him  no. 

After  this,  did  he  and  you  go  into  the  bMk 
room  ?— Yes. 

What  direotioBs  did  he  give  you  ?— He  told 
me  to  bring  a  basket  in  out  of  his  room  and 
put  in  the  things  out  of  the  oupboatd* 

Did  you  and  he  put  any  things  into  the 
basket?— Yes. 

Was  there  one  basket  or  two?^Two  baskets. 

Were  the  things  out  of  the  cupboard  pot 
into  those  baskets  ? — Yes,  they  were. 

Did  he  tell  you  who  lived  ai  Sbesr's4liDlds 
that  they  were  going  to?<— Yes. 

Who)— Potter. 

After  the  things  were  put  into  the  baskets, 
were  ether  of  the  baskets  put  iuto  any  thing 
else? — One  of  them  was. 

What  was  that  ?*-Oae  of  thwi  was  tied  in  a 
blue  apron. 

They  were  mdi  boskets  ?-~Yea. 

Whose  blue  spron  was  that  ?— Mm.  Brant's. 

What  use  haa  been  made  of  that  blue  apsoii 
before  ? — It  had  been  put  np  as  a  curtain  in 
Xngs's  room. 

Was  the  other  basket  tied  in  any  thing  ?«^ 
No. 

I>id  spy  thing  happen  directly  afWr  this  ? 
—Yes. 

What  ?— We  w«nt  into  Brunt's  ittom  to  look 
for  something  to  tie  the  other  basket  in,  and 
two  officers  cane  up. 

Did  they  take  your  master  into  euatody  ?*- 
Yes. 

Did  tihey  seareh  the  coom  and  take  the  bas- 
kets ?— Yes. 

Amonff  the  persons  you  have  spoken  of, 
where  did  Tidd  live?— In  the  Hole-in4he- 
WBlUpassage,  Biook's-market. 

Where  did  Adams  live  ?— Next  door  to 
Tidd. 

You  have  been  at  the  lodgings  of  both?-*- 
Yes, 

Jot^  Baie  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Adolphus. 

Brunt  was  your  master  ?^->-Yes. 

Was  be  a  master  shoo  maker  or  «  journey- 
man E«— A  joum^man. 

In  very  poor  circumstances  ? — ^No. 

Had  be  any  journeymen  with  him  or  under 
him  ? — No. 

Yon  and  he  did  afl  the  vodc  he  had  to  do? 
-.-Yes. 

What  wos  Tidd  ?-^A  shoe-asaker. 

living  very  near  you  ? — ^Yes. 

How  'many  cbilmm  bad  your  master?— 
One. 

Had  Tidd  a  wife  and  children?— Ho  bad  a 
wife ;  I  believe  he  had  children. 

Was  he  a  ppormaa?-^!  do  not  know. 

What  w«s  Ms.  Adams  ?-«^  tiio^^mtkv^ 


7TO1 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


TrM  tfArihur  TkitOmood 


[780 


He  was  a  shoe-maker  too  ? — ^Yes,  he  was. 

You  have  mentioDed  those  meetings  that 
took  place  from  night  to  night;  how  many 
nights  do-  you  think  they  came  there  ? — I  can- 
not say  how  many  Dights. 

I  do  not  mean  that  you  should  be  upon 
your  oath  to  the  number,  but  how  many,  as 
nearly  as  you  can  state  confidently  f — He  had 
oome  nearly  five  weeks. 

Ings  had  the  lodgings  neatly  five  weeks  f — 
Yes. 

Do  you  mean  that  there  were  meetings 
every  night  during  that  time  ? — I  believe  there 
were. 

What  numbttr  were  there  T — ^I  cannot  say, 
but  the  most  I  ever  knew  of  were  the  Sunday 
morning. 

Ibat  was  not  the  time  you  went  in  ? — ^No. 

How  many  were  there  then  ? — I  cannot  say 
bow  many  exactly,  I  think  there  were  about 
twenty. 

You  think  there  were  as  many  as  that?— 
Yes. 

Did  you  see  them  as  they  went  up  or  to- 
gether P — I  saw  them  as  they  went  up. 

Did  you  know  any  of  the  other  persons  you 
kave  named,  who,  uid  in  what  situations  they 
were  ?— «Yes,  I  knew  some  of  them. 

Who  were  they  t — Strange. 

What  was  he  ? — ^He  was  in  a  bootpmaker*s 
•bop. 

Making  or  selling?-* Selling  in  the  shop. 

What  were  the  others  ? — I  do  not  know  any 
of  Aierest* 

You  have  talked  of  one  Mr.  Edwards,  vras 
lie  there  pretty  often  ? — ^Yes,  he  was  very  often. 

What  was  he  ? — I  believe,  an  artist* 

MThat  do  you  mean  by  an  artist  ? — Makes 
figures. 

What,  in  the  Crown's  description  is  called  a 
modeller  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  know  any  thing  more  of  him  ?^-No. 

He  was  there  pretty  constantly  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  he  or  Adams  there  the  oftenest?— -Ed* 
wards  was  there  the  oftenest. 

How  often  do  you  think  Adams  was  there, 
lo  your  knowledge,  in  the  whole  ? — I  cannot 
say  how  often ;  he  used  very  often  to  come 
upon  business. 

But  to  that  room  of  Ings'sP — ^I  cannot  say 
how  often. 

-  Edwards  was  there  daily  almost,  I  suppose  ? 
•*He  used  to  come  almost  every  day. 

What  was  Hall^  do  you  know  f^-A  tailor.  I 
believe. 

Where  did  he  live  ? — I  do  not  know. 

A  journeyman  7—1  believe  he  was. 

All  persons  of  like  rank  in  life  ? — Yes. 

How  many  persons  do  you  think  were  there 
at  any  one  time  on  the  Wednesday  F-^I  can* 
not  say. 

You  spoke  of  nine  being  there,  do  you  know 
of  more  being  there  at  one  time  i — Not  that  I 
know  of. 

Were  the  rush  baskets  tou  have  spoken  of 
common  rush  baskets,  such  as  people  take  to 
buy  little  things  in  and  bring  them  back  ?— Yes. 


And  the  whole  materiills  you  found  there 
were  packed  into  those  rush  baskets  ? — ^Yes.  ' 

Did  they  fill  them,  or  did .  they  lap  over  f -^ 
They  filled  them. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott.^They  intend  to 
produce  them  I  understand. 

Mr.  Adoffkus, — ^Yes,  so  I  understand,  my 
lord.  However  these  two  rush  baskets  con- 
tained them  all,  and  one  of  them  was  covered 
with  a  lady's  apron  ? — Yes. 

You  spoke  of  twenty  branches  of  trees,  are 
you  sure  you  saw  as  many  as  twenty?  We 
say  currently  twenty,  might  not  there  be  only 
ten,  or  a  dozen,  or  fifteen  ?~-There  were  as 
nearly  as  I  can  guess  about  twenty. 

You  say  they  were  branches  of  trees  in  a 
green  raw  state  7 — Yes. 

You  do  not  know  how  they  came  there;  you 
did  not  see  them  brought  in  r-^No. 

There  was  only  one  left  on  the  morning  of 
the  Wednesday? — No. 

Did  they  keep  a  fire  in  the  room? — I  believe 
they  did. 

We  know  what  a  winter  we  have  had ;  you 
went  one  evening  to  get  out  the  table,  was 
there  a  fire  there  then  ?— Yes. 

There  was  a  pot  which  had  been  used  there^ 
—Yes. 

Whether  those  poles  were  used  to  light  the 
fire  or  not,  you  cannot  tell;  but  there  was  one 
left  ?— Yes,  there  was. 

Thomu  Smart  sworn. 

Mr.  AdoMtui, — That  is  your  only  name,  is 
it  P— Yes. 

Mr.  Adolphtt, — He  was  called  first  by  the 
name  of  John  by  my  learned  firiend. 

Lord  Chief  Jtuiiee  Abbotti-^Yout  question  is 
very  natural  after  that  certainly. 

Thomtu  Smart  examined  by  Mr.  LUtledale. 

You  are  watchman  in  the  parish  of  Saint 
George,  Hanover-^uare  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  being  on  the  watch  on  the 
22nd  of  February  last  ? — Yes. 

Where  do  you  watch  7 — On  the  south  side  dT 
Grosvenor-square ;  my  box  nearly  faces  lord 
Harrowby's. 

At  what  time  in  the  evening  did  you  go  on 
your  watch? — ^We  go  on  at  eight  o'clock  at 
that  time  of  the  year* 

Do  you  recollect,  soon  after  you  went  on 
the  watch,  any  thing  particular  attracting  your 
attention? — ^I  saw  four  very  suspicious  men 
walking  about  the  square ;  I  thought  they  were 
after  no  good;  two  tall  and  two  short,  one 
was  a  btadc  man  or  almost  black. 

Wltat  time  was  that  ? — Half  past  eight'; 
after  I  had  calM  half-past-  eight ;  I  thought 
they  were  very  suspicious  characters^  and  I 
looked  at  them. 

Should  you  kuow  them  i^n  ? — ^I  think  I 
should  not 

.    Did  you  watch  them  ?— I  did  take  particu* 
Ur  notice  of  them ;  &ey  walked  very  upright. 


7811 


Jitr  High  TrtttsoH. 


At  O.  1890i 


[783 


■wad  carried  a  stick ;  tbey  vrere  looking  down 
the  areas,  and  taking. notice  of  the  areas. 
.  Was  Charles  Bissix  a  watchman  on  the 
watch? — Bissix  is  a  watchman  at  the  other 
comer ;  we  join  every  half  hour  at  the  comer 
of  South  Audley-street. 

Thomas  Smart  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Ctertvood. 

It  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  you,  as  a  watch- 
man, to  see  people  whom  you  think  suspi- 
cious ? — Very  common. 

Henry  Gillan  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Bolland. 

Where  do  you  live? — ^At  15,  Mount-street, 
Orosvenor-square. 

What  are  you? — Servant  to  Mr.  Whittle, 
apothecary. 

Do  Tou  ever  use  tlie  Rising  Sun  public- 
bouse,  m  Charles-street? — ^Yes. 

Where  is  Charles-street  F  —  It  rans  into 
Grosvenor-square,  and  into  Mount*street. 

Is  it  in  the  street,  or  at  the  corner  of  the 
street? — ^At  the  comer  of  the  Mews.  - 

Do  you  remember  being  U»ere  on  Tuesday 
night?— Yes. 

What  night  was  that  ?— The  23nd  of  Feb- 
ruary. 

Did  you  see  either  of  the  prisoners  there  ? 
— ^Yes,  that  short  man  with  a  orown  coat  on. 

Mr.  Bo2/aiu2.-- That  is  Brant,  my  lord.  Was 
he  alone,  or  in  company  with  any  other  per- 
son ? — lliere  was  a  tall  man  along  with  him. 
.  Did  they  take  any  refreshment  f— Yes,  some 
bread  and  cheese,  and  some  porter. 

Did  you  play  with  them  at  any  game  ?— 
Yes,  the  dominos  lay  on  the  table,  and  that 
man  challenged  me  to  play  a  game  at  dominos 
with  him. 

Did  you  plav  with  him  ? — ^Yes,  two  games 
I  played  with  him. 

Did  you  leave  the  house  first  or  they  ? — I 
did. 

What  time  did  you  go  away  ? — ^A  little  be- 
fore ten. 

Leaving  them  there  f — ^Yes. 

John  Htctcr  MorUon  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Attorney  General, 

I  believe  you  are  a  journeyman  cutler  to  Mr. 
Underwood,  in  Drury-lane  i 

Lord  Chkf  Jtatke  Abbott. — Is  it  in  Dmry- 
lane,  or  in  some  court  there  ? — In  Drury- 
lane. 

Mr.  Attorney  General, — Do  vou  remember 
at  an^  time  about  Christmas  last,  any  man 
bringing  you  a  sword  ? — Yes,  on  Christmas* 
eve. 

He  brought  that  to  your  master's  shop  ?— 
Yes,  he  did ;  I  was  in  the  shop. 

What  was^  the  man's  appeanmce? — ^Hewas 
babited  like  a  butcher. 

For  what  purpose  did  he  bring  this  sword 
into  your  masters  shop  ?— He  inquired  of  me 


I 


if  I  sround  swords;  I  said  yes ;  he  produced 
one  from  undemeatlli  hiy  tmock  fiKX^,  wilhoal 
a  scabbard. 

Having  produced  it,  did  he  leave.it  with 
ou  for  the  purpose  of  being  ground? — ^Yes, 
e  left  it  for  the  purpose  of  being  ground  and 
set,  particularly  at  the  point. 

Did  you  ask  him,  or  did  he  give  yon  hk 
name,  at  that  time? — It  is  customary  for  us  to 
ask  the  name  of  the  person  who  leaves  an  ar- 
ticle, and  he  said,  put  the  name  of  Eames,  as  I 
understood,  but  I  am  rather  hard  of  hearing, 
and  it  might  be  the  name  of  Ings. 

Did  you  grind  it  ? — Yes. 

Did  he  call  for  it  again  ? — ^Yes,  in  about  three 
days. 

Did  you  see  that  person  again?— He  called 
about  a  fortnight  after,  with  another  sword. 

What  sort  of  a  sword  was  that? — A  veiy 
long  one,  much  longer  than  the  other,  a  sort  of 
cavalry  sword. 

What  did  he  brinj;  that  for  ?— He  said,  he 
wanted  that  ground  in  the  same  manner  as  the 
last.  I  did  not  inquire  his  name  at  that  time, 
knowing  him  again. 

Was  that  ground  for  him? — ^Yes. 

Should  you  know  that  man  again  ? — ^Yes. 

Look  and  see  whether  he  is  there  ? — ^Yet, 
he  is  the  person  at  the  bar  behind  the  first  one, 
at  the  left  hand  side  [pomimg  out  Ingt], 

Do  vou  think  you  should  know  the  swords 
again  r— -Yes ;  there  is  only  one  I  ^ve  seen^ 
that  is  the  same. 

Mr.  Attorn^  Oenerak — By  and  by,  my  lord, 
we  will  shew  it  to  the  witness ;  we  will  not  in- 
tenrupt  the  case  now.  Was  that  shewn  you  by 
one  of  the  Bow-street  officers  ? — ^Yea ;  that  was 
the  one  left  at  Christmas. 

Edward  Stmpton  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Attorney  General, 

Are  you  corporal  major  of  the  second  regi- 
ment of  Life-guards  ?-»Yes. 

Do  you  know  a  person  of  the  name  of 
Harrison  ? — ^YeSi 

Was  he  in  that  reffiment?-— Yes,  he  was. 

Is  Harrison  at  the  bar  ?— Yes,  John  Harrison 
\jpointing  km  on/]. 

When  was  he  discharged  from  the  Iiib« 
guards? — In  1815, 1  believe. 

Was  it  in  1815,  or  Uter?— In  1814,  I  be- 
live. 

That  is  six  years  ago  ? — ^Yes. 

At  that  time  he  was  in  the  regiment,  was  he 
in  the  King-street-barracks  with  you  ?— Yei^  he 
was. 

By  being  there,  had  he  the  opportunity  of 
knowing  the  barracks  ? — ^Yes. 

I  believe  one  side  of  the  barracks  looks 
into  Gloucester-mews,  or  did? — ^There  w^re  ' 
windows  on  that  side. 

Was  there  a  window  next  Gloucester-mews  * 
from  any  lofl  of  the  barracks  P— Yes,  there  were 
five  windows. 

In  thoee  lofts  what  waa  kept?— Hay  and 
straw. 


'  i 


Tas] 


1  GEORGB  IV. 


Trialrtf  Arthur  ThMemood 


C794 


Ltrd  Chitf  Juthce  JMoii.'^Ww  att  time 
fi»i  wind<ww  in  ibe  loft,  or  only  om  of  tiienif 
— >FiTO  windovvB  in  tbe  loft. 

Wt,  Attarmy  Ckntnd, — ^At  the  time  Har^ 
moo  was  in  the  barracks^  hare  you  over  seen 
him  in  those  lofts  ? — ^Yes,  frequently. 

Yon  say  the  windows  are  now  stopped  np ; 
when  were  they  stopped  upF — ^It  was  some 
days  after  the  affair  happened  at  Cato-street. 

At  the  time  of  the  affair  in  Cato-ttreet  those 
windows  were  in  the  loft  ? — ^Yes. 

EAoori  Simpmn  crom-esamined  by 
Mr.OupiRiotf. 

How  many  men  are  there  in  the  barracks  in 
King-street  ? — It  is  not  a  barrack  for  men,  it 
is  for  horses  only. 

How  many  men  are  there  in  the  barracks  at 
Kensington  ? — I  really  cannot  say  the  number. 

I  thought  yon  might*  know  as  a  soldier? — 
Nearly  300  I  should  suppose. 

How  many  foot  guaras  are  there  n/roally  in 
town  f — That  I  do  not  know* 

Are  there  a  thousand  ? — ^upon  my  word  I 
cannot  say. 

You  may  know  pretty  nearly  the  number ?«- 
To  say  that  exactly  I  cannot. 

Do  you  know  any  thing  of  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Adams  ? — '^o^  I  do  noL 

There  are  usually  300  men  in  the  Knights- 
bridge  barracks,  you  say  ?— Yes,  I  shonki  viasok 
afiout  tl^it. 

/omeiilZibiit  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Attorn^  GeneraL 

Yon  are  a  pawnbroker  in  Berwick-street  ?— 
Yes. 

Do  3rou  know  the  prisoner  Davidson,  the 
black  man  ?— Yes. 

Do  yon  know  Mm  from  his  having  pledged 
things  at  your  Bbop?-^Yes« 

Do  you  remember,  on  the  23Td  of  February 
last,  fau  coming  to  vour  shop  to  take  any  thing 
ont  of  pledge  ?•— I  ao. 

What  was  it  that  he  wanted  then  ont  of 
pled|^e  ? — ^A  blunderbuss. 

Dtd'he  bave  it  ont  ? — Yes»  he  did. 

'Was  that  in  the  forenoon  t— In  the  mom- 
ing. 

'What  Idnd  of  ablnndeibnss  was  iti— Brass- 
bmelled. 

Was  it  a  large  blundeibuss  or  a  small  one  t 
-*About  this  length  (eighteen  or  twenty  inches). 

Iftomos  Wden  sworn  ^—*£xttnuied  by. 
Mr»  Gimey. 

Are  yon  a  cow  keeper  ? — ^I  am  not  now. 
'  W  w^iyon  a  ODW  keeper  f — ^I  have  been. 

Mr.  Adolphm. — Howdo  you  spell  yourname  ? 
M^i,dfe,n. 

What  were  you  in  February  last  P — I  sold 
milk.    I  kept  a  cow  at  that  time. 

Mn  Gftsni«)ik-*-Wer»yeti  formerly  a  member 
of  a  shoe-maker's  club? — I  was. 

Atttlmi'.cluby.faave'yDa  mm  a  mmi'-of  tbe 
name  of  Wilson  ?— I  bave^ 


Mr.  GtrwMv.— Let  Wilson  stand  forward 
(WUmnetoodfitwntd.)  A  few  days  before  the 
3M  of  Febvnair  last*  did  you  see  WUson?^ 
Yes»  I  did. 

Do  yon  mean  Wilson  tike  man  at  the  bar  t^» 
I  do. 

Did  he  make  any  proposition  to  yon  P — ^He 
did. 

What  was  that  proposition  ? — ^He  met  me  in 
the  stieet  as  I  was  walking,  and  asked  me  if  I 
would  be  one  of  a  party  to  come  forward  to 
destroy  his  majesty's  ministers. 

Did  he  say  where  they  were  to  be  destroy- 
ed P — He  did  not :  he  said  at  a  cabinet  dinner;  ^ 
that  they  were  waiting  for  a  cabinet  dinner, 
and  all  things  were  ready. 

Did  he  say  what  sort  of  things  they  had  got 
ready  P— He  said,  they  had  some  such  things  as 
I  never  saw,  which  he  called  by  the  name  of 
hand-grenades. 

What  more  did  he  say? — ^He  said  they  de- 
pended upon  me  to  be  made  one. 

Did  he  mention  the  name  of  any  of  his  asso- 
ciates ? — He  said  Mr.  Thistlewood  would  be 
glad  to  see  me,  if  I  would  midLe  one. 

Did  he  say  what  use  was  to  be  made  of  the 
hand-grenades? — He  told  me  they  were  obliged 
to  be  lit  with  fuses,  and  to  be  put  in  under  the 
Uble. 

Wliat  thenP—- And  all  that  escaped  the  ex- 
plosion was  to  die  by  tbe  edge  of  the  sword,  or 
some  other  weapon. 

Did  b«  say  any  things  about  fires  ?— He  said 
tbey  meant  to  light  up  some  fires,  and  by  so 
doing  it  would  keep  the  town  in  a  state  oi 
oonfiision  for  some  days,  and  it  would  become 
a  general  thing. 

&d  he  explain  what  he  meant  by  Ushtihe 
fltes  P  What  was  to  be  *fired  ?~-He  nommatM 
some  booses. 

What  places  do  you  remember  that  he  men- 
tioned P — ^I  remember  lord  Harrowb/s  to  be 
one ;  lord  Castlereagh's  another ;  the  duke  of 
Wellington^ 

Mr.  Cunoood. — Do  yon  mean  bouses  or 
persons  ?— -I  mean  houses. 

Mr.  Gtrney. — ^Were  there  any  other  build- 
inn  mentioned  ?— Lord  Sidmonth's,  and  Uie 
bisnop  of  London's,  and  some  other  that  I  do 
not  remember.    I  heard  those  mentioned. 

Do  yon  remember  any  other  boildings  that 
he  mentioned  ? — I  do  not; 

Did  yon  acquiesce,  or  what  did  yovdo-?<*-I 
told  him  I  should  make  one. 

How  many  days,  to  the  best  of  your  recollee* 
tion,  was  this  before  the  discoveir  at  Cato- 
stient  f^I-  believe  four  or  flv«  days  before. 

B<6fore-that,  did  yon  go  to  lord  Hanowby^  ? 
-^res,  I  did. 

On  what  day  did  yon  go  ? — ^I  am  not  <|nite 
certain. 

Was  that  before  the  day  on  'wbicb  the  dia-* 
odfv^iT'was  made  at  Cato-street  ?— It  was. 

Did  yon  folloif  his  lordship  to  tho  paik?-^- 
didi 

Didyon  give  Mm  any  inforinatioti  of  vrtmt' 


785] 


Jhr  High  Tieoion, 


A.  D.  182a. 


[786 


had  beon  communicated  to  you?-*I  gave  him 
a  note  vith  infonnatioii. 

On  Wednesday  the  23rd  did  yon  see  Wilson 
again } — I  did. 

At  about  what  time  of  the  day  ?^I  believe 
it  was  between  four  and  five  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon. 

Where  did  you  meet  with  him  ? — In  Man- 
chester-street, as  I  was  going  home. 

By  Manchester-square  ? — Yes. 

You  were  going  with  some  milk  ? — No,  I 
.  was  going  home  with  one  of  my  little  girls  in 
my  hand. 

What  did  he  say?— He  called  me  by  the 
name  of  Hiden,  and  said  I  was  the  very  man 
he  wanted  to  see.  I  asked  him  what  there 
was  going  to  be,  and  he  said  there  was  going 
to  be  a  cabinet  dinner  that  night  at  lord 
Harrowby's,  in  Grosvenor-square. 

Did  he  tell  you  where  you  were  to  come  to  ? 
^— I  asked  him  where  1  was  to  meet  them,  and 
he  told  roe  I  was  to  go  up  to  Cato-street,  to 
the  public-house  by  the  sign  of  the  Horse  and 
Groom,  and  there  I  was  to  go  in ;  it  is  the 
comer  of  Cato-street;  or  otherwise  I  was  to 
stop  at  the  comer,  till  I  was  shored  into  a 
stable  close  by. 

Did  you  make  any  inquiries  of  him^  as  to 
their  numbers?— I  uked  him  what  time  I 
should  meet  them,  and  he  said  by  a  quarter 
before  six,  or  six,  I  was  to  be  there. 

Did  you  ask  him  as  to  how  many  there  were 
in  it  ? — I  asked  him  how  many  there  were  to 
be  there,  and  he  said  about  twenty  or  thirty. 

Did  he  tell  you  whether  there  were  to  be 
any  others  in  other  places? — I  asked  him 
whether  there  were  going  to  be  any  others 
in  other  places,  and  he  said  there  was  to 
be  another  party  in  the  Borough,  another  in 
Gray's-inn-lane,  one  in  Gee*s-court,  or  other- 
wise in  the  city^  I  cannot  be  certain  which. 

Did  he  %ay  any  thing  about  GeeVcourt, 
particularly  ?~He  said  that  all  Gee's-court 
were  in  it,  but  they  would  not  act  unless  the 
English  were  in  it. 

What  did  he  say  about  Gee's-coort  ?»He 
said  they  were  all  in  it,  but  would  not  act 
unless  the  Enelish  began  it,  for  they  had  been 
deceived  so  often. 

Did  he  inform  you  what  people  live  in  Gee's- 
eourt? — ^I  understood  they  were  Irish. 

Lord  CMef  Juttice  Abbott, — ^Do  you  know 
where  Gee's-court  is? — Yes,  it  goes  out  of 
Oxford-street,  one  end  of  it  goes  into  Oxford- 
street  and  another  end  of  it  into  Edward- 
street,  or  some  street  there :  I  know  the  part 
perfectly  well. 

.  Mr.  Gtcmey.— »Is  it  near  the  market  ? — Op-' 
posite  St.  George's  market,  the  other  side. 

What  did  he  say? — He  told  me  not  to  be 
long ;  he  said  to  me  the  first  time,  there  was 
a  gentleman's  servant  who  had  been  supports 
ing  some  of  the  party  with  some  quantity  of 
aoner,  and  if  they  would  act  upon  the  sub- 
ject, he  would  |;i?6  them  a  good  aeal  more. 

Did  he  mention  any  Uiing  about  any  arms, 

VOL.  xjrxm. 


any  fire  anns  ? — He  said  they  had  some 
arms ;  Jie  asked  me  whether  I  had  got  a  gun ; 
I  said  yes,  I  had,  but  it  was  a  mbbishing  one. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more  about  it  ? — I  told 
him  the  lock  of  my  gun  was  at  the  gunmakers 
to  repair ;  he  said  they  would  provide  me  with 
a  gtin  and  something  to  work  it  with.  ' 

Did  he  tell  you  any  thing  about  cannon  ?— * 
He  said  there  were  two  pieces  of  disumon  in 
Gray's-inn-lane,  that  they  could  get  at  very 
easily,  by  breaking  in  some  small  doors. 

Did  he  mention  any  place  in  the  city,  at 
which  they  were  to  meet  in  the  course  of  the 
night? — He  said  there  were  four  pieces  of 
cannon  at  some  artillery  ground,  which  thej 
could  easily  get  by  killing  a  centinel. 

After  getting  them,  did  he  say  where  they 
should  go  to  ? — He  said,  that  after  doing  the 
grand  thing  in  Grosvenor-square,  they  were  to 
retreat  and  meet  somewhere  in  the  neighbour- 
hood of  the  Mansion-house. 

Did  you  and  he  then  part  ? — He  told  me,  I 
was  to  be  sure  to  come  to  my  time,  or  else  if 
I  was  late,  the  grand  thing  would  be  done 
before  I  came. 

Did  you  go  to  John-street  that  evening  ?— 
I  did. 

At  what  time  ? — I  think  nearly  seven  o'clock, 

I  believe  the  entrance  to  Cato-street  firom 
John-street  is  under  a  little  gateway  at  the 
comer  of  the  Horse  and  Groom? — It  is;  the' 
Horse  and  Groom  is  the  comer  house  that 
joins  Cato-street  and  John-street. 

When  you  got  to  this  gateway  whom  did 
you  see  ? — I  saw  Wilson  and  Davidson. 

By  Davidson  do  you  mean  tlie  black  man  1 
—The  man  of  colour.     ^ 

Is  that  the  man  at  the  bar? — It  is. 

You  had  seen  him  before,  I  believe  f'^-'Re- 
peatedly. 

Did  Davidson  speak  to  you  ? — ^He  did. 

What  did  he  do .' — He  said,  I  was  behind 
my  time ;  I  said  yes,  we  served  a  family  with 
milk,  and  I  was  obligated  to  go  there  first. 

Did  he  ask  you  to  do  any  thmg  P — He  asked 
me  if  I  would  go  in ;  I  said  I  could  not  go  in, 
for  I  was  going  for  some  cream ;  he  said  if  I 
would  go  in  Mr.  Thistlewood  was  there. 

You  say  you  had  known  him  before  ?  — Yes, 
I  had. 

Had  he  ever  mentioned  Thistlewood's  name 
to  you  before  ? — ^He  had,  several  times,  as  he 
had  called  upon  me,  and  I  had  seen  him  with 
two  or  three  more  friends. 

You  say  Davidson  asked  you  to  go  in,  ai^d 
you  said  you  had  something  else  to  d6  j  did  he 
mention  any  thing  about  time  ? — I  told  him  I 
must  go  and  get  the  cream,  and  he  told  me  I 
must  take  care  to  come  to  my  time,  if  I  could. 
I  asked  him  what  time  they  should  leave  there;  . 
he  said  about  eight  o'clock. 

Did  he  tell  yon  what  to  do  if  you  should 
come  after  your  time  ? — He  told  roe  if  I  was 
not  there  at  Uie  time  they  left  Cato«street,  t 
was  to  follow  them  down  to  Grosvenor«square^ 
and  the  fourth  house  from  the  corner  of  Uros- 
venoiusqoare  .there  I  should  find  them. 

3  £ 


7S71 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial'  vf-Aifhir  t%iUkw>od 


Vt9S 


Did  he  mention  on  which  side  of  the  sqtiat^f 
— ^The  bottom  part  of  the  square,  the  faxther 
side  of  the  square,  the  bottom  side  next  Charles- 
street. 

Thomas  Itiden  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Ado^kus. 

How  many  days  before  the  23rd  of  February 
was  it  tiiat  you  first  saw  Wilson  ? — I  saw  him 
a 'long  time  before;  seven  or  eight  months. 

How  long  before  that  had  you  this  first  con- 
versation with  him  f — Four  or  five  days. 

VVas  t6at  before  the  Sunday  preceding  that 
Wednesday  on  whicii  this  happened? — I  am 
not  certain  of  that. 

Was  that  on  the  Snnday  ?— >I  cannot  say ;  I 
am  not  certain ;  it  was  fonr  or  five  dajrs  before- 

Nothing  depends  upon  it  more  man  ybur 
endeavouring  to  ^  the  time ;  do  you  think  it 
was  before  or  after  that? — I  am  notable  to 
think ;  I  am  not  certain. 

You  saw  nothing  furrier  of  him  before  the 
l&nday  ?  You  never  conversed  With  him  again 
till  the  23rd? -No. 

You  never  went  by  his  invitation,  nor  saw 
any  other  person  ? — No,  I  did  not. 

Yon  went  yety  properly,  very  commendably, 
and  gave  information,  such  as  you  had,  at  lord 
Hkrrowby's  house  ? — ^I  did. 

You  did  not  see  his  lordship  there,  but  fol* 
lowed  his  lordship,  and  communicated  it  to 
him? — ^Yes. 

What  day  was  that?— I  am  not  able  to  say. 

The  23rd  was  Wednesday ;  was  it  the  Satur- 
day>  Sunday,  or  Monday,  or  Tuesday  ?^I  do 
not  know  what  day  it  was;  I  cannot  state  that 
exactly. 

How  long  before  you  saw  Wilson  again  in 
Manchester-street,  MandhesteNsquare,had  you 
been  at  lord  Harrowby's  ? — I  had  been  at  his 
lordship's  house  after  the  time  that  I  saw  him 
and  haa  the  conversation ;  between  the  time  I 
saw  him  first,  and  the  day  I  saw  him  in  Man- 
chester-street. 

How  many  days  before  ?— A  day  or  two. 

It  might  be  as  early  as  the  Monday? — It 
might  be  a  day  or  two  before,  but  I  Catmot 
apeak  precisely  to  that. 

All  his  communication  was  made  to  you,  as 
you  stood  in  the  street? — ^Tbe  last  communica- 
tion was,  as  we  walked  up  and  down  Manches- 
ter-etreet,  and  towards  the  barracks  in  King- 
street. 

Uow  long  might  you  be  occnoied  in  that 
conversation  ? — Probably  from  half  an  hour  to 
duree  quarters  of  an  hour. 

Between  four  and  five  o'clock  were  you  cot 
with  your  milk  .'—No,  I  was  not 

Afterwtirds,  when  yon  got  to  Cato>«tfeet, 
you  told  them  you  must  go  and  get  cream, 
find  it  where  yon  could ;  and  they  let  700  Jgo  7 
—Yes. 

AuQ  you  wentP — Yes. 

Mr.  Ottrncy.— Will  your  Kirdship  permit  me 
tb  ask  a  t^tiestion  ?  Is  that  the  letter  you  gave 
tolord  Harrowby?  T$hewmgit  to  the  wUnetsJ] 
— Yed,itis. 

It  is  addresised  to  lofd  Castlere^ghP— Yes. 


Mr.  ilibi^Afltf.-^HbW  eiime  yw  toi!irect'ybti# 
attention  to  lord  Harrowby  ?^1  colild  net  tM 
lord  Castlereagb. 

You  had  called  ?~-I  had  not  MM,  bMMI 
walked  before  the  hbuse. 

And  not  seeing  him^  you  Webt  to  h»rd  iiai*^ 
rowby's  ? — ^Yes. 

Forenum  of  the  Jwry. — ^Is  that  your  own 
hand-writing  ? — ^Yes,  it  is. 

Mr.  uido/nAifr.— You  have  used  ^e  )>hmse 
his  mt^esty^s  ministers :  Was  that  the  phiaM 
that  was  used  by  Wilson  and'you  in  convena- 
tion  T— It  Wa^,  VCs  de&troy  his  majesty's  milaia- 
ters. 

That  was  the  teiy  W6rd  that  %aii  iMd  ?-^ 
Yes. 

The  'Earl  of  BJarrowby  sworn. — Examined  bj 
Mr.  Attorney  General, 

1  beiieve  your  lordship  resides  inGvesverior- 
square  ? — ^Yes. 

On  the  South  side  near  Charles-street  ^— A 
few  doors  from  Gharles-st^et,  next  door  to  the 
Archbishop  of  York. 

I  believe  you  are  a  privy  conncilloi^  and  one 
of  his  majesty's  ministers? — ^I  am. 

Your  l<Mship  is  President  of  the  Ce«neil, 
iukd  one  of  the  cabinet  ? — I  am. 

Do  you  remember  in  the  month  of  Febraaijr 
last  intending  to  give  a  cabinet  dinner  ? — ^Yes. 

On  what  day  was  that  dinner  intended  to 
have  been  given  ? — ^I  think  it  was  on  Wed- 
nesday, the  23rd  of  February. 

By  a  cid>inet  diniier,  it  is  meant  that  the 
cabinet  minister^  alone  mefct  at  dinner  f — 'At 
the  cabinet  dinners  no  persons  but  those  wh» 
compose  what  is  called  the  cabinet  are  invited^ 
consisting  of  the  principal  officers. 

Does  yoor  lordship  recollect  how  many  dayk 
before  the  23nl  of  Febniary,  the  cards  of  in^ 
vitation  were  issued  to  the  different  minislerst 
— My  servant  may  be  able  to  sti^  to  that 
more  correctly  than  I  can.  I  believe  the  ha- 
vitations  went  out  the  latter  end  of  the  pre^ 
ceding  week. 

Will  your  lordship  be  good  enough  to  ema* 
merate  the  names  of  those  noblemen  and  |re»- 
tiemen  who  composed  the  cabinet,  aind  whl» 
were  invited  upon  that  occasion?— My  lord 
chancellor,  the  earl  of  Liverpool  fiitt  lord  oC 
the  Treasury,  Mr.  Vansittart  diancellor  of  the 
Exchequer,  the  ^rl  Bathurst,  lord  Sidffl6Qthy 
lord  CasUereagh. 

Loftl  Chief  Justice  Abbott.-^'Wht  office  docb 
earl  Bathurst  hold  ?— Secretaiy  of  State  to  tlie 
Colonial  Department ;  lord  Castlereagh  secr^ 
tanr  of  state  for  the  Foreign  pepartmeht,  ]^nr^ 
STdmouth^cretaiy  of  state  for^hb  H<An^  *!>«-. 
partment,  the  earl  of  WeisttnoreTattdldid  M^ 
Seal,  lord  Melville  iRi^t'totti  of  «he  Adlfiftid^, 
the  duke  of  Wiellihgtbn  mai^ter  iettiM  of  wfe 
Qrdhance,  Mr.  Canning  first'commi^ibher  xiC 
the  India  Board,  Mr.  Robinisdn  ptesidliifat0f  tt^ 
Board  of  TnLde,  Mr.  6athufst  chanceHor ^offM 
duchy  of  Lancaster,  Mr.  WetlesteyPote^'IpaSttht 
of  the  Mint,  and  the  earl  x)f  Mul^iAiVe;  , 


rs#] 


f^  Hvk  TrfMon. 


Mr.  A^t^^fV^  QeairaL-rrl  WoM  ^  ypur 
lordBhip  whetheE  al}  thos^  i^obUmei)  anrf  gen« 
llenen  you  haro  euumerat^d  ^r^  priyjr  coun- 
cillors ?-rTbey  are. 

Ace  ibey  employ^  by  bis  iRsjf^fl^iji  tb? 

employed  in  ihe  different  o$c^  I  have  ppur 
meratedy  and  also  from  wh^i  i#  caUpd  tbe 
fiHwifit,  ooupcil. 

Are  they  calleA  )iU  ipfjesty's  minis^prs  )-7r 
Id  ooBBiD)on  pftflai^pe  they  ^r.e* 

Do  you  remember^  my  lord,  any  day  pf^ 
^Hdii^g  that  dinner,  yoyr  lordship  ri^Wg  to>f ^s 
thepark  ? — On  the  Tuesday. 

The  4inDei^  being  intended  for  the  Wednes- 
day?— Yes;  on  tbe  T^^esday  preceding  that,  ( 
vas  riding  in  tbe  par|^  widiout  a  servant ;  \ 
think  it  might  be  beforie  two  o'clock ;  I  wap 
afterwards  going  ^  a  council  tp  be  bfld  at 
CftfUoD-palace. 

Relate  what  occurr.ed?-~ Af  I  pame  ^ear 
pFosrenor-jg^atey  a  person  came  up  to  me,  ^nd 
a^ed  me  ifl  was  lord  Harrowby ;  1  said  I  w^ ; 
be  then  told  me  that  he  wished  much  that  f^ 
latter  should  be  communicated  to  lord  Castle- 
reagliy  which  was  of  considerable  importance 
bo,£  to  his  lordship  and  to  myself;  that  he 
himself  afraid  d  appearing—— 


Mr.  Adolpha, — I  beg  your  lordship's  pardon, 
I  apprehend  thi^  is  not  evidence. 

Mr.  Attorney  Oeneral. — Did  he  give  your 
lofdsbip  ^  letter  upon  that  occasion  ? — ^He  did. 

Is  that  the  letter  ?  [hantUng  it  to  his  lordship,] 
•— 'Thj^  is  the  letter  he  delivered  to  me,  I  havp 
fiffflcmb^Afit. 

Pid  you  aftpnjrards  giye  thfit  letter  to  my 
ted  C^tlereagby  or  send  it  to  him  P — When 
}  jGUm^  to  CarUop-palace,  I  found  lord  CastLer 
m^  W9$  opt  iberey  and  I  {nrwarded  it  to  him. 

^S»fi  mao  left  you  ^— After  some  further  con- 
ynifUlijttn  I  asked  the  man^  who  bad  expr^sed 
fais  wish  to  have  some  further  conyersatioi^ 
with  roe,  wbet^er  be  had  put  his  name  and  ad- 
^Uiess  ^  that  letter ;  he  told  me  he  had  not  j  I 
Itoof^d, 

Did  he  in  fact  giv<e  you  a  card  with  his  adr 
4niBs?— Hedid.    • 

fjord  Chief  Jugticfi  Abbott, — Do  you  produce 
(he  card  ?~^I  had  the  card ;  I  am  not  certain 
Uuit  I  bav/e  it  now ;  yes^  this  is  it^  fprodudng  it.'] 

Mr.  Attonuy  Generfd, — ^Your  Jp^dship  sa^ 
Ibe  J||#t  witness  before  he  r»Mrfid  l-r-^^j  that 
was  the  .man,  bis  pame  wj^s  fliden. 

jm  iwur  lordship  ^tenwaids  see  that  man 
m^^r-Yesi  I  did. 

W\u»AiAyw  ^«^hMn«gain?— Isaipfcm 
•gain,  by  appointment,  on^edjoesdaymonu^g, 
WiQiBig  tbB  ymng  jdap4^ops*  i^  tbe  liAg  in 
Hyde-park. 

I  jBwst  not  ask  your  lorddiip  wba^  .con- 
^TAimMMy?  took  place  between  yoii  .^nd  him 
upon  thuJ^iQcicasion,  tot  I  woold  9^  wb^tW 
the  dinner  really  topic  j^ace iaty our  lordship's 
houn^Ui^rfj^^sm^J^Tkt  dioAer.oid 
not  take  pbMei 


4.  a  1820.  j:?©^ 

Thai  is,  tN  po]>lemen  aod  gentlem^  di4 
not  come  to  your  house  to  dinner ;  but  wer^ 
the  preparations  postpone^,  or  did  they  go  on 
ih^  same  a^  if  the  dinner  wa^  to  take  place  ?--? 
All  the  preparations  went  on  as  if  the  dinner 
iprajk  t9  take  plac^y  until  I  wrote  a  note  froii^ 
the  earl  pf  J^iyerpoors  to  my  bead  servant,  tQ 
say  that  they  would  not  dine  there. 

At  what  hour  was  that?~I  thin)c  between 
seven  and  eight ;  but  my  servant  can  speak  19 
that  better  than  I  can. 

Then  the  preparations  went  on  till-  that 
time  ?~-Yes,  I  should  imagine  till  nearly  eight 
o'clock ;  tiH  that  note  was  received. 

At  about  what  hour  would  the  party  have 
assembled  if  the  dinner  had  taken  place  ?— ^ 
Between  seven  and  half  past  seven. 

The  Earl  of  Harrowby  Cross-examined  by 
Air.  Curwood* 

Will  your  lordship  permit  me.  to  ask  wh» 
Iher  yo^  had  any  knowledge  of  the  matter  pre- 
vious to  that  communicated  by  that  witness  I 
-rA  previous  general  knowledge. 

I  believe  there  was  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Edvirards  had  given  infoxmation;  does  your 
lordship  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Edwards? 
— ^No,  I  do  not. 

Yopir  lordship  had  never  sepn  him  ?— No, 
never. 

How  long  previous  to  that  had  your  lord- 
ship known  of  this? — I  cannot  say  precisely. 

A  fortnight  or  a  month  ?-— I  hardly  know  to 
what  the  question  points;  if  you  refer  to  f, 

Seneral  knowledge  of  some  plan  being  inten- 
ed,  we  had  had  for  some  tipi.e  ^ason  to  susr 
pect  such  an  intention,  the  precise  period  I 
cannot  fix. 

I  do  not  ask  to  precise  period,  but  as  nearly 
as  your  lordship  can  fix  it ;  a  fortnight,  or  tbref 
weeks  or  a  month  ? — I  should  say  lopger, 

Two  months?— I  capnot  say  whether  two 
monjths,  but  for  some  time  we  had  had  reasoq 
to  suspect  tb^  some  intention  of  a  similar 
nature  existed. 

John  BtJcer  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Attorney  General, 

I  believe  you  are  butler  to  lord  Harrowby  ? — 
I  am. 

Do  yoi|  remember  a  cabinet  dinner  being 
intended  to  be  had  at  his  house  in  the  mont^ 
xif  February  last  ?— Yes. 

On  the  23rd  I  believe  ?— It  was. 

Po  you  know  whether,  in  consequence  pf  the 
Jate  king's  djcatb^  those  dinners  liad  been 
.suspended  lor  some  time  ? — ^Ves,  they  had. 

Dp  you  jrecoU^pt  bo^  long  before  tbe  2dr4 
ft  February  curds  bad  been  issued  fox  th^ 
;;ninisters ?— -Cither  the  lath  or  the  19tb,  J. am 
jaot  quite  CQClain  >vhich ;  I,  think  iSatarday 
the  19th. 

On  the  Wednesday  when  t^e  dinner  was  t^ 
4)e  had,  were  the  prepajcation^  m^de  {or  thj^ 
jdijun^  jss  usual  ? — ^Yes* 

At  ivbat  time  did  yoii  first  receive  intimar 
tion  tbAt  bis  m^esty's  fojinis^rs  would  ^st 


7»l] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Tfud  of  Arthur  ThidUwood 


f7©a 


dine  there  that  day  7^ About  eight,  or  it  might 
be  ten  minutes  after  eight. 

Who  lives  next  to  lord  Harrowby?  does 
the  Archbishop  of  York? — The  Archbishop  of 
York  on  one  side. 

Do  you  know  whether  his  grace  had  a 
dinner  that  day  ?  did  you  observe  carriages 
there  ?— I  observed  carriages  there. 

About  what  hour? — ^About  six  or  seyen 
o'clock. 

John  Monument  sworn.— Examined  by 
Mr.  Solicitor  General. 

What  are  yoa  by  trade  ?— A  shoe-maker. 

Where  have  you  lately  lired  ? — In  Garden* 
court,  Baldwin's-gardens. 

Is  that  near  Brook Vmarket  ? — ^It  is. 

You  are  now,  I  believe,  a  prisoner  in  the 
Tower  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  This- 
tlewood  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  remember  meeting  him  at  a  person's 
of  the  same  of  Ford  ? — Yes. 

How  long  is  that  ago  ? — It  was  a  few  days 
before  the  meeting  in  Finsbury-market. 

Tell  roe,  as  nearly  as  you  can  tell,  how  far 
back? — From  this  time? 

How  long  back  before  the  23jpd  of  February  ? 

Mr.  Adolphm, — I  have  no  objection  to  your 
giving  the  date  of  the  Finsbury-meeting. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General. — I  do  not  know  it. 

Witness, — It  mi^ht  be  about  two  months 
before  the  23rd  of  February. 

Did  you  see  him  again  after  that? — ^Yes,  he 
called  in  about  a  fortnight  or  three  weeks  after 
that  meeting. 

Did  he  call  alone,  or  was  any  person  along 
with  him  ? — ^The  prisoner  Brunt  was  along  with 
iiim. 

Tell  us  what  Thistlewood  said  to  you, 
when  he  called  at  your  lodgings? — He  said 
directly  he  came  in  (he  had  not  been  there 
above  a  minute  or  two)  that  he  wished  to  speak 
to  me  privately,  and  I  went  outside  the  door 
with  him ;  I  am  not  certain  that  he  used  the 
word  privately,  but  he  wished  to  speak  to  me. 

Was  any  other  person  in  the  room  ? — My 
t)rother  and  my  mother. 

Did  you,  in  consequence  of  that  intimation 
from  Thisdewood,  go  out  of  the  room  with 
bim  ? — Yes. 

Did  Brunt  go  with  you  or  stay  behind  ?— 
He  staid  behind. 

Tell  us  what  Thistlewood  told  you  when  you 
were  out  of  the  room. — Yes,  as  nearly  as  I  can 
^recollect.  I  think  the  first  words  he  made  use 
of  were,  **  Great  events  are  at  hand,  the  people 
are  every  where  anxious  for  a  change.''  He 
aaid,  he  '  had  been  promised  support  by  a 
great  many  men  who  had  deceived  him,  but 
now  he  had  got  men  who  would  stand  by  him; 
lie  then  ask^  roe  whether  I  had  any  arms;  I 
taid  no,  I  had  not ;  he  said  every  one  ought  to 
be  armed  now ;  .he  sai i  all  of  them  had  got 
everyone  something;  some  had  ^t  a  sabre, 
tome  had  got  a  pike,  and  some  a  pistol. 


Who  were  all  of  them  ? — ^I  understood  those 
men  that  belonged  to  him. 

Those  men  to  whom  he  had  before  alluded 
as  standing  by  him  ? — Yes ;  he  said  I  might 
buy  a  pistol  for  four  or  five  shillings ;  I  told 
him  I  had  no  money  to  buy  pistols ;  I  was  too 
poor  to  do  any  thing  of  the  kind ;  he  then  said 
he  would  see  what  could  be  done. 

Was  that  all  that  passed  with  him  at  that 
interview  ?— Yes,  all  that  I  recollect. 

Did  Brunt  call  upon  you  again  after  that  ?— > 
Yes. 

How  soon  afterwards? — I  suppose  two  or 
three  days. 

Did  any  thing  material  pass  in  conversation 
between  you  and  Brunt  at  the  time  he  so  called 
the  second  time  ? — I  do  not  recollect  that  there 
was ;  he  said  he  was  rather  in  a  hurry ;  he  had 
got  several  more  people  in  our  trade  to  call 
upon,  and  he  had  got  two  or  three  men  vrait^ 
ittg  for  him  down  stairs. 

Do  you  remember  Brunt  calling  upon  yon 
on  Tuesday,  the  22nd  of  February  ? — ^Yes,  I 
do. 

Was  that  the  first  time  he  had  called  after 
the  last  interview  with  him,  to  which  you  have 
just  spoken  ? — Yes,  I  am  pretty  sure  it  was. 

You  do  not  recollect  any  previous  call  .^-— 
No,  it  was  a  long  while  between  the  two. 

Was  he  alone,  or  accompanied  by  any  per* 
son?~He  was  accompanied  by  the  prisoner 
Tidd. 

What  conversation  passed  between  you  and 
Brunt  at  that  meeting  ?  Was  any  thing  said 
why  he  had  not  called? — Yes,  that  was  the 
first  thing — I  said  I  thought  I  had  lost  biro^ 
and  asked  him  the  reason  that  he  staid  away 
so  long ;  and  he  said,  the  reason  was,  Uiat  tM 
king's  death  had  made  an  alteration  in  th«r 
plans  necessary :  then  I  asked  him  what  plans 
they  were ;  he  said  tliat  I  should  know  at  the 
meeting  that  was  to  be  the  night  after,  better 
than  he  could  tell  roe. 

This  was  on  the  Tuesday  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  as  to  where  that 
meeting  was  to  be  ? — ^Yes ;  I  asked  him  where, 
he  said  Tyburn-turnpike. 

Did  he  tell  yon  any  thing  about  what  was 
to  be  said  or  done  at  Tyburn-turnpike  ? — ^No; 
I  asked  him  how  I  was  to  know,  by  seeing  the 
people  about,  who  they  were ;  and  he  turned 
round  to  Tidd,  and  asked  him  whether  he 
should  tell  me  the  word. 

What  answer  did  Tidd  make?*- Yes,  he 
said  he  supposed  there  was  no  danger. 

Upon  that  what  did  Brunt  say  ?-»He  said  if 
I  saw  any  people  about,  I  was  to  go  to  theon 
and  say,  byU,t,  and  if  they  were  finends  they 
would  answer  tyOfn, 

Did  you  agree  to  go? — He  did  not  ask  me 
positively  whether  I  would  go. 

Was  any  thing  more  said  at  that  meeting  ? 
— No ;  he  said  he  should  call  on  the  ft^omig 
inoming,  and  tell  me  more  particulars. 

Did  they  then  leave  yon  .^— Yes. 

The  next  day  did  Brunt  call  9gun  %• 

That  was  the  Wednesday  ?— Yet . 


703]  Jw  High  Treoion. 

At  what  time?  — Between  four  and  fire 
•o'clock  in  the  afternoon. 

Was  he  alone  ?-— Yes. 

Tell  us  what  he  s^id  to  yon  when  he  called 
on  you  alone } — He  called  me  down  stairs,  and 
asked  me  whether  I  was  ready  to  go  with 
him;  I  said  no,  I  had  got  some  work  to 
finish,  that  must  be  done  before  I  could  go. 

When  he  called  you  down  stairs,  was 
any  body  in  the  room  out  of  which  he  called 
you  ?— Yes,  my  brother. 

When  you  said  you  were  not  ready,  what 
did  he  say  ? — He  said  I  ought  to  go  with  him ; 
I  told  him  that  I  could  not  go  till  the  work 
Was  done ;  he  asked  me  how  long  that  would 
-be ;  I  told  him  not  before  six  o'clock. 

Upon  your  telling  him  that,  what  did  he 
desire  you  to  do  ? — He  told  me  he  could  not 
wait  for  me,  but  I  most  go  to  the  person  whom 
lie  brought  with  him  the  day  before,  whose 
name  he  said  was  Tidd,  he  told  me  where  he 
lived  in  the  Hole-in-the-wall  passage,  Brook's 
Maiket. 

Did  he  at  that  time  teU  you  any  thing  more 
as  to  the  plan  ? — No,  nothing. 

Did  he  go  away  upon  having  told  you  this  ? 
—Yes;  after  telling  me  not  to  be  a  minute  after 
six  o'clock  when  I  went  to  Tidd's,  for  that 
Tidd  had  got  some  more  men  that  he  was  to 
take  with  him  to  the  meeting. 

In  consequence  of  this  did  you  go  toTidd's 
liouse  in  the  course  of  that  afternoon? — In 
tiie  course  of  the  erening,  about  half-past  six 
o'clock. 

Did  you  find  Tidd  at  home  ? — Yes. 

What  did  he  say  to  you  ? — He  said,  that 
several  men  that  had  promised,  to  come  had 
tiot  been  so  good  as  their  word,  and  that  he 
riiould  not  wait  longer  than  seven  o'clock. 

Did  you  wait  till  seven  o'clock  ?— Yes. 

Did  any  other  persons  arrive?— No. 

When  seven  o'clock  came,  what  did  Tidd 
do  ?  -^  He  went  to  a  comer  of  the  room 
where  there  was  a  trunk,  and  took  out  a  large 
pistol. 

What  did  he  do  with  it  ?— Put  it  into  a  belt 
that  he  had  got  round  his  body,  he  then  took 
•bout  six  or  eight  pikes,  about  a  foot  long. 

Iron  pikes,  or  pike  shafts  ? — Iron  pikes. 

Six  or  seven  did  you  say  ? — I  suppose  there 
might  be  about  as  many  as  that. 

What  did  he  do  with  them  ?— They  were 
wrapped  in  brown  paper ;  and  he  took  a  staff 
about  four  feet  long,  with  a  hole  at  one  end 
of  it. 

Was  ttiat  hole  calculated  to  receive  the  ends 
of  the  pikes  f — Yes. 

Did  he  take  the  pike  heads  with  him  ?— Yes, 
he  did. 

Yon  mentioned  that  a  pistol  was  in  a  belt 
ronnd  his  waist  ? — ^Yes 

Was  that  underneath  his  coat  or  over  it? — 
Underneath  his  great  coat. 

So  that  on  his  coat  being  buttoned  you 
eonld  not  perceive  it  ? — ^No. 

Tou  went  down  stairs  with  him  ? — ^Yes. 

Which  way  did  yoa  go  ?-rIhrottgh  Brook- 
street  into  Siolbom. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[794 


>^nd  from  Holbom  where  ?  —  Straight  on 
to  the  top  of  Holbom  up  Oxford-street. 

Did  you  at  that  time  know,  or  had  you 
previous  information  as  to  the  place  you  were 
going  to? — ^No;  I  believe  it  was  while  Ifwas  . 
in  the  room,  I  asked  him  where  we  were  going 
to,  and  he  said  to  a  mews  in 'John-street, 
Edg  ware-road. 

In  going  along,  did  he  tell  you  what  von 
were  to  do,  or  had  he  told  you  before  /—No. 
When  we  got  into  Holbom  be  gave  me  the 
pike  staff;  says  he,  ^  You  take  this." 

Tell  us  what  else  he  said  as  to  what  was  to 
be  done? — I  asked  him,  as  we  were  goinsr 
along,  where  it  was  we  were  going  to  ?  He  said 
I  should  know  more  about  it  when  we  got 
there;  I  still  pressed  him,  I  asked  him 
whether  we  were  going  to  the  House  of 
Commons. 

What  did  he  say  ? — He  said  no,  there  were 
too  many  soldiers  about  there :  I  then  asked 
him  where  it  was  we  were  going  to,  and  at 
last  he  said,  '' Grosvenor-square."  I  then 
asked  him  whether  any  body  particular  lived 
at  Grosvenor-square,  by  their  going  there  par« 
ticularly;  and  he  said  there  was  a  cabinet 
dinner  there  that  evening. 

Did  he  say  at'whose  house  it  was  to  be  ?-«- 
No,  he  did  not. 

Did  you  ask  him,  or  did  he  tell  you,  what 
was  to  be  done  there  ? — No,  I  did  not  ask  him 
any  more.  Upon  his  saying  that,  I  was  ftilly 
convinced  what  was  intended. 

From  Oxford-street,where  did  you  go  to  ? — 
We  wetat  to  the  top  of  Oxford»street,  and 
turned  to  the  £dgwaie-road. 

Do  you  know  Cato-street  ? — ^I  did  not  know 
it  before,  I  know  it  now. 

Did  you  go  there  P — ^Yes. 

When  you  got  to  Cato^street,  where  did 
you  go. 

When  we  got  there,  underneath  the  arch* 
wav  that  leads  to  it,  I  saw  two  men  whom 
Tidd  seemed  to  know.  He  was  a  step  or  two 
before  me,  and  spoke  to  them ;  we  went,  after 
stopping  a  few  moments  with  them  in  the 
street,  into  a  stable. 

Did  you  go  up  the  steps  in  the  stable  P— 
Yes. 

About  how  many  persons  did  you  find  in 
the  stable  and  in  the  loft  altogether  P  —  I 
should  suppose  about  four  or  five  and  twenty ; 
but  I  had  not  been  there  above  two  or  three 
minutes  when  some  person  asked  how  many 
there  were,  and  proposed  to  count  them ;  but 
Mr.  Thistlewood  said  there  was  no  occa^ 
sion  to  count,  for  there  were  ^vt  and 
twenty. 

When  you  got  into  the  loft,  and  while  you 
were  there,  was  any  thing  said  as  to  the  plan 
they  were  going  about? — ^There  was  a  man 
that  was  sitting  on  one  side  of  the  bench  (a 
carpenter's  bench)  a  tallish  thinish  man  with  a 
brown  great  coat,  with  two  belts  on,  and  I  think 
a  sword  by  his  side,  and  he  was  speaking  of 
the  impropriety  of  going  with  so  stnall  a  num- 
ber as  five  and  twenty  men  to  lord  Harrowby 's. 


7W 


1  GSOBOE IV. 


Trial  ^A*^^  T^H^pBood 


C790 


UpM  bw  making  tbat  obi^rvation  wliat  was 
said  or  doae  by  the  other  partknf  ? — ^Mr«  ThiyiUo 
wood  said  the  m^oib^r  wa^  quite  enough,  for 
be  only  wanted  fourteen  mep  to  go  iptp  the 
cOQm ;  and  supposing  lord  Harrowby  bad  six- 
Uen  men  servants,  still  that  number  was  quite 
sufficient.  Tbe  man  in  %  brown  great  coat 
saidy  *' After  the  business  is  done,  and  we 
cowo  oiU,  most  likely  there  will  be  a  crowd 
round  the  door,  how  are  we  to  make  oof 
es€f  pe/'  Upon  which  Mr.  Thistlewood  said, 
^  You  know  the  largest  body  is  already  gone 
firpm  beva,  \his  is  the  smallest  part/' 

« llie  largest  body  is  gon^  from  here  ?"— I 
4o  not  know  whether  he  said  ^  from  here," 
bttt  **  the  largest  body  is  gone."  Upon  which* 
tba  prieoner  Davidson  spoke  to  this  man^  and 
wd  it  wap  not  right  in  him  to  throw  cold  water 
upon  their  proceedings ;  if  he  was  afraid  of  his 
Um^  he  might  go,  aiMl  they  would  do  without 

iMm.   . 

Did  any  thinff  furtber  pass  in  the  way  pf 
QOnversation  ?••-*- xes^  the  prisoner  Brnnt  ifnme? 
dialfly  said  that  sooner  thap  they  should  give 
up  ilU  business  they  were  going  upon,  he 
would  go  into  the  hops^  by  hin^self  and  blow 
them  sdl  up,  if  he  perished  along  with  them, 
and  ha  saia  ^  for  you  know  we  h^ve  got  that 
which  can  do  it/'  I  am  not  certain  that  those 
w«ra  the  exaot  words,  but  that  was  the  paefin- 
ipg  of  it.  Upon  which  the  man  said,  \h%l 
(bough  be  did  not  think  it  altogether  right  to 
go  himself,  still  as  they  were  all  ifor  it,  he 
woul4  opt  b9  agaio^t  it; 

Loud  Ckkf  Jtatke  AbbotU—f^zX  was  ^he 
man  in  the  brown  great  coat  ? — ^Y es ;  upon 
which  he  proposed  that  all  the  persons, 

Mr.  Attorney  Gfneivd» — ^Wh9  proposed? — 
The  man  in  the  brown  great  coat ;  tbs^  all  ihe 
persons  in  the  room  should  put  theppelves 
vader  the  orders  of  Mr.  Thistlewood;  upon 
which  Mr.  Thistlewoofl  said  that  eveiy  /one 
engaged  in  that  business  would  have  the  same 
honour  as  himself,  pud  be  proposed  tbat  the 
fi>tirtp^n  men  to  go  ipio  the  room  should  yolunr 
ieer  from  among  the  persons  then  in  th^  rpopfi. 

UpoD  his  prop<>Bing  that  f^urte^o  persons 
should  volunteer  to  go  into  the  room,  wh%t 
did  be  say  then  1— lie  spid  tbaX  those  foprj^en 
libat  volunteered  should  range  themselves  on 
the  other. side  of  the  room»  towards  that  part 
wheie  the  £ring  ^terwprds  d^mp  frQpi,  when 
(be  ofiioers  oame. 

Therp  was  a  sipall  room  on  tbat  side  7— Yes, 
(hare  was. 

Did  they  do  so?--oYes.  I  do  not  know 
whether  the  whole  fourteen,  but  I  believe 
(wplva  or  tbjxtep*  opt  of  tbat  pimbor  did  so 
ip  the  cpune  of  a  £ew  p^ujt^. 

Wa^  any  thing  paid  ps  to  wba^  the  rest  wece 
tfi  4o  7-*No.  I  hspid  npibipg  bpt  the  pcisoper 
Tid4  was  ooming  ffai;  he  wps  qpp  Cjf  tbe 
ifiwtefu ;  be  was  pomiqg  out  tp  jaie  to  Apy, 
^  yon, may  choose  yoprsitimtipn,"  yvben  Mr, 

Tbistl4^pp4  p^  bj»  b^ki  ^  ^9  *'^iWi  mU 


What  tQp)(  plpop  vp9n  tbBA?-*rI  do  nqt  re- 
member whether  any  thing  particalar  did ;  bu^ 
afterwards  Mr.  Thistlewpod  was  gone  ior  a 
few  psomfpts*  ^fkd  he  pame  up  stpira  apd  said 
they  had  received  inteljigpapf  that  thp  duke  of 
Wejlipgtop  and  iprd  Sidpiqutb  wpre  piniTed  pi 
lord  Harrowby 's.  I  ^  not  rpooUaot  a^y  thisf 
else  passing  (iU  (be  officers  canve  pp. 

Yoi)  were  taken  into  pustody  in  the  momf  I 
belipve?— ITea^  I  ^as» 

John  Monument  cross-examined  by 
JVf  f  •  A4olpbut, 

You  say  yop  had  known  Tbistlepropd  :  bow 
long  bad  yott  known  him  ? — ^I  never  spoke  to 
him  befoipi  till  the  timp  I  f»m  bim  at  ^s, 
Ford*s  at  {^mbeth. 

That  was  whep  ?  bpw  long  before  ^  pi^fetr 
ing  7  dp  you  recollept  whep  |tboyt  tbe  p^etii^g 
in  Fipsbury-markel-pl^ce  was?~rNo,  I  do  not. 

Was  that  before  or  since  Cbnstn^t— | 
th^nk  it  was  before  Chris^na^. 

Did  you  attend  there  ? — Yes,  I  did  ;  because 
Mr.  Tbistlewopd  a^ked  roe  whether  I  fJvquld 
be  there,  when  I  was  at  Mr.  Ford's. 

Was  |dr.  Thistlewood  pt  tiie  Finpbuiy- 
market  qnee^g? — I  was  (oo  ^r  off  to  ;iep  the 
persons  that  wpre.  J,  ca^qot  say  vbethpr  hfi 
was  or  not. 

What  was  the  mpfttipg  there  pbout  7 — w:^  i^ 
about  the  transacUpos  at  Manchester,  pr  not  ? 
— I  thiuk  it  was.  I  was  tberp  abouf  pn  bopr 
pud  a  half.  )  wis  noi  near  e^opgh  to  heaf 
what  passed. 

Was  tbe  business  of  tbe  meeting  to  consider 
something  about  the  ir^psactions  at  Mancbes- 
ter  7-I-I  really  cannot  say. 

You  wpnt  to  the  Fin^ury-iyiark^t  meetlp|^ 
but  did  not  ^kp  n<Hice  pf  wliat  pps^d? — Vo^ 
I  did  pot  take  m,ucb  notice.  The  jl^y  yi^  v/bry 
dirty,  and  I  did  pojt  /^top  lopg. 

7)ierp  wps  no  very  particular  ppqu^^c^p^nce 
at  that  time  between  TbisjLlpwopd  aw}  yAuT-r-r 
No. 

How  long  had  you  known  Brunt  ? — I  ppr#r 
knew  him  t^l)  Mr.  Tbiatle^ood  brought  bw 
to  my  hppse. 

£)id  you  kupv^  a  geptlenian  of  tbp  lE^^V^e  of 
Edwards  at  all  ? — No. 

^  long  iimp  passed  betwe^  your  ^^i^K 
Brunt  at  one  time,  pod  bis  calling  agaip  oplj^ 
2(2nd  of  Fpbruary  ?:— Ypsy  ^  goo^  prhile. 

Ai^  all  ypur  foryppr  co^yersp|ip^  b^ 
ppfl^ed  for  pqthipg?  in  that  timp  yo^  4u)U|^ 
no  more  of  themP — I  thought,  not  seeing. Qp^ 

f  <tf  9'  M)  fi^low  their  plpns,  they  bM  1^  19^- 

So  you  said  when  they  .qadled  pgl^Pi  ^  |[ 
thopght  I  bad  lopt  you?"— Yes. 

On  the  22nd,  however,  you  were  to  be  tiua^ 
pd  witb  tbp  JejLtera  h^  M»  t,  a^  99m  9»^n, 
was  to  give  you  <,  o,  n  ?T-Yca* 

4lpd  tbat  wps  all  tbpt  yr^l/t  /60pfi4l#jtip]}y  re- 
posed in  you  ? — Ye^.  r 

Yop.b»d  m  oQpppiopio  i^  i\if»e  }ciVP!cp>  I 
think  ? — ^No ;  becaitfve  I  rao^  ¥^  TvMl- 

Wbep  yqu  wi^ut  .to  ilba  ; qp^  in  jC^^orptveet 

^iSMfiJV^m  iWlSBty^e  t^e.ir7rYp9^ 


T97] 


fw  High  TnktdH,, 


A.  D,  18S0. 


179S 


YottiAttsllm^  be«n  drcftdiWIf  crowdffd  in 
tbit  room  ?— 'There  were  Mte  er  four  in  tk* 
room  below. 

Evto  then  yott  must  bare  been  dreadfully 
crowded  ? — ^No^  th^  were  aloroit  all  standings 

How  bigtt  was  tbe  room  ?  you  are  a  short 
mail  r^"^  X  eSk 

Do  you  think  the  oeiling  wm  as  bnb  above 
your  headf  ss  that  board  over  yev  ?-^Ye8. 

lliere  was  a  carpenter's  bench  in  ttie  room^ 
was  uot  there  ? — ^Yes. 

That  cook  up  a  good  deal  of  space  ?-^Yes. 

A  mean  could  not  stand  upon  that  ? — ^No. 

Was  not  the  room  entirely  fitted  with  you 
twenty,  if  there  ^rere  twenty  f—-N«t  untitely 
filled. 

Do  y'oa  know  the  man  in  the  brawn  ooat, 
who  Im  was  ?-^N6y  I  do  not. 

Have  you  since  learnt  that  his  name  was 
Jkdams^NOy  I  know  it  was  not  him. 

■Some  man  in  a  brown  ooat,  wbdm  you  do 
not  know  ? — No. 

What  part  was  Adams  playing  there  ?^-I 
do  not  remember  faim. 

You  do  not  remember  his  being  there  at  afl  f 

You  knew  Adams  ? — ^No. 

Did  the  man  in  the  bfown  «oal  sqitint^  or 
nod  he  any  thiq^  pkrticular  idwut  his  eyes  T — 
No ;  but  I  hare  s^en  tiie  prfsooer  Adatas  at 
Hicks's  ball,  and  again  here^  and  I  know  ^lat 
it  4s  not  bim. 

Do  not  you  recollect  Adams  being  therh, 
and  saying  or  doing  any  thing,  for  he  is  a  very 
remaikabl6  person  f ---Wo. 

Did  you  g6  aboeft  >(he  tocym,  and  M«  yAtt 
were  there  ? — No ;  I  stood  by  the  side  of  the 
bench. 

Were  there  any  men  particularly  tall? — I 
do  not  know. 

Were  there  any  men  at  all  of  Adams's  «ze 
and  height  t — I  cannot  tell  that. 

Were  you  sitting  or  standing? — Standing 
generally ;  the  roan  in  the  brown  great  coat 
was  sitting  on  a  little  bench  on  the  other  side. 

They  were  a  good  many  of  them,  eating 
bread  and  cheese^  were  not  they  7 — Yes ;  some 
of  them  were. 

There  was  some  bread  and  cheese  produced, 
and  they  fiew  at  it  like  famished  men  ?-^I  did 
not  see  that. 

They  were  ealing  bread  and  dieese^  how* 
ever? — ^Yes. 

And  they  had  some  porter  too  F — ^Yes. 

-Cannot  you  recollect  Adams  being  ^ere  P — 
Ko,  I  cannot. 

Are  you  sure  be  ivas  not  there  t^-4  «m  sure 
I  cannot  l&k<e^pon  mjf«elf  to  aav  that. 

^iave  yovany  consciousnesswhateverrof  ever 
lMivfli{  9t^n  hfm,  until  you  stfw  him  at  Hicks^ 
Mil  ^--N6';  %tft  ^e  Umie  observation  may  bb 
nftd^  of  dteny  oAers. 

YV^  ob9^iMrtiii6ti'is  ing6nioas%nd  jm. ;  you 
any  'have  iecta  many  persons  BkA  not  have 
tCf^dfttiisea  ib^m  a|^in'?-^Jiuft  bo. 

fi^  is  a  man  of  retilaAa'ble  ttp^eaAirfce,  iMk 
llfci*ye«ridWlu-Yeste*.  .      . 


Do  yen  know  any  of  the  other  ptisoiMb? 
— I  know  the  prisoner  Davidson. 

He  is  a  man  of  colourt^-^Yes. 

Do  you  kadw  any  Other  P —^  Thistlewood^ 
Tidd,  Brunt. 

Those  you  kno#  out  of  doom  f-^Yes. 

And  Davidson  vrhom  you  know  by  his  ov^ 
lour?— Yes. 

The  others  made  no  impression  upoft  yen  f 
— ^No;  but  I  recollect  seeing  the  prisoneiv 
Stnnge»  in  the  room. 

Why  do  you  recollect  him  particulariy  f «^ 
Only  that  he  was  a  short  man,  Uie  same  as 
myself,  and  standing  by  the  side  of  me. 

Have  you  told  us  all  that  passed  there,  ac- 
cording to  your  hearing  and  obserration  of  itf 
— Yes,  I  have. 

You  can  tell  me  nothing  about  Adams  1-^ 
No. 

Did  you  heat  any  j>erson  make  any  observa* 
tion  except  the  man  m  the  brown  edit  T'^No. ' 

If  any  observajdon  had  been  addr^sed  Kka 
that  by  the  man  in  the  brown  coat,  shoiiki  yov^ 
have  heard  it  ?-^I  suppose  I  mi|^t. 

You  must  ? — ^Yes  -,  perhaps  I  might. 

How  targe  fs  the  room  ?-^I  cannot  say. 

It  was  a  very  small  room ;  the  twenty  neailj 
fffled  it  ?*-Not  t*y  small ;  I  shoaM  8«iy,  there 
wonM  not  have  been  roMn  Ibr  twenty  mott. 

Would  there  have  been  room  for  ten  more  ? 
— I  think  there  mrg^t. 

Was  it  as  long  as  that  box  those  gentlemMi 
are  silling  in?-^Longer  than  that. 

As  long  as  that  and  the  next^-^I  canned 
say. 

If  anv  person  had  spoken  wiih  an  andiM^ 
toiee  aodressmg  the  whole,  do  you  think  you 
should  have  hes^  it  ? — I  think  i  should. 

You  had  totally  lost  sight  of  those  peopile 
from  Ae  day  of  the  !Finsbury'4neeting,  to  the 
22nd  of  February? — ^Yes;  I  had,  exceptmg 
when  Mr.  Brunt  esdled  upon  me« 

W^  the  convetsation  you  had  spoken  df 
between  the  brown  coated  man  and  Mr.  Hu^ 
tie  wood,  and  the  others,  so  loud,  that  every 
person  might  have  heard  h?— I  cannot  say;  bift 
I  was  standing  as  near  to  that  person  with  the 
brown  coat  as  I  am  to  you. 

Was  it  so  loud  that  eveiy  person  within  fMt 
distance  must  have  heard  it? — Yes ;  I  suppoffS 
it  was. 

You  come  here  in  very  bonouralile  costodyv 
I  see,  with  greater  attendants  ftss  yon  «fi0r 
expected  to  have  t>^Yes. 

W«re  you  taken  upon  the  spoit  or  "how  t'— 
Yes,  I  was  taken  in  the  room; 

You  surrendered,  I  suppose,  wbeu'the^oAtr 
eers  oame  up  ?-^When  the  soldiers  cMie  19. 

You  made  no  resistance  t-^o. 

Had  you  any  armsf-^Ne;  I  'had  BOihing 
about  me ;  I  was  seaidhad  directly. 

JbAii  Motamufti  re-exammed  Vy 

Were  vou'tfnfe'dfHhetast  that  came  into  the 
f9om?>«-4  aanttcft  stfy^htftr  ttmiy^iiKe>ih«fter 
me. 


709J        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  tf  Arthur  7%Mtf«iMM(l 


rsoo 


Waa  the  room  nearly  fall  nvben  yoa  came  ? 
—Yes. 

How  long  had  you  been  there  before  the 
officers  came  ? — ^About  a  quarter  of  an  hour 
before  the  officers  came. 

Did  you  know  any  of  the  persons  in  the 
room  before  you  came  there  except  Tldd, 
Brunt,  and  Tnistlewood?  —  No;  except  the 
prisoner,  Davidson,  whom  I  had  seen  at  one 
or  two  of  the  meetings. 

The  persons  of  all  the  rest  in  the  room  you 
were  unacquaibted  with  f— Yes. 

Was  it  candle  light? — Yes ;  there  was  a 
candle  in  the  room. 

Juryman. — Only  one?— I  am  not  certain 
about  thai ;  I  know  there  was  one ;  I  cannot 
speak  to  others. 

Mr.  Solicitor  Oeneral, — What  was  there  upon 
the  carpenter's  bench? — ^There  was  a  great 
quantity  of  swords  and  pistols^  and  two  or 
uuree  blunderbusses. 

You  spoke  about  Strange,  that  Stranse  stood 
by  you;  was  Strange  apprehended  at  ihe  same 
time  with  you ? — ^les. 

You  were  both  taken  into  custody  together? 
—Yes. 

How  many  were  there  in  the  room  when 
the  soldiers  came  in  and  took  you  into  custody? 
— ^Four. 

The  soldiers  took  you  all  into  custody  P— > 
Yes. 

A  gentleman -has  asked  you  about  Edwards ; 
do  you  remember  when  you  were  brought  up 
at  Whitehall,  being  Imndcuffed  with  Mr. 
Tbistlewood  f — I  was. 

Did  Mr.  Tbistlewood  say  any  thing  to  you 
about  Edwards  ?-^Yes ;  he  said,  when  I  was 
examined  before  the  priyy  council,  if  I  was 
asked  who  brought  me  to  the  meetings  I  should 
state  Mr.  Edwards. 

What  did  you  reply  to  that  ?— I  asked  him 
how  I  could  tell  tbem  such  a  falsehood,  when 
he  knew  I  had  never  seen  the  man. 

What  did  he  say  in  answer  ? — He  laughed, 
and  said  that  was  of  no  consequence,  for  if  I 
was  asked  what  sort  of  a  person  he  was,  I  was 
to  say  he  was  a  man  not  much  taller  than  I 
was,  of  a  sallow  complexion,  and  dressed  in  a 
brown  great  coaL 

A  Juryman  (Mr,  OoodchUd). — My  lord,  I 
ibould  be  glad  to  ask  that  witness  one  question : 
whether,  since  his  apprehension,  he  has  had 
any  conversation  whatever  with  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Adams? — No,  I  have  not,  except 
speaking  a  word  or  two  to  him,  but  none  con- 
cerning this  business. 

Mr.  Soiieitor  Genera/.— Have  you  been  kept 
separately  confined  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  ever  see  him,  except  when  you  were 
taken  up  as  a  witness  to  Hicks  s-hall,  and  when 
you  were  brought  here  to-day?— Never. 

Tkomoi  MommaU  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  SoUdior  GeneraL 

I  believe  you  are  brother  to  the  last  witiiesi 
John  MonomentP— Yes,  I  aa. 


Do  you  remember  your  brother  meeting  Mr. 
Tbistlewood  at  the  bouse  of  a  person  of  the 
name  of  Ford  ? — ^Yes,  I  heard  him  speak  of  it. 

You  were  not  there  yourself,  but  heard  him 
speak  of  it  ? — I  was  not  there. 

Do  you  remember  Tbistlewood,  after  you 
had  had  that  conversation  with  your  brothei^ 
calling  upon  your  brother  ? — ^Yes,  be  did. 

Do  you  know  Brunt  ? — ^Yes,  Tbistlewood 
brought  Brunt  with  him. 

After  they  had  come  into  the  room,  did  thev 
stay  there  for  any  considerable  time  ? — ^No,  I 
suppose  not  above  five,  or  it  might  be  ten 
minutes ;  I  cannot  say  exactly  to  the  time. 

What  did  they  do?— They  did  nothing; 
there  was  some  conversation  passed. 

Did  they  go  out  of  the  room  f — ^Yes,  Thistle- 
wood  asked  my  brother  if  he  might  be  per- 
mitted to  speak  with  him. 

Upon  .  Tbistlewood  *s  saying  that  to  your 
brother,  did  they  go  out  of  the  room  together  ? 
— ^Yes,  they  did. 

How  long  did  they  remain  out  ? — ^Tbey  re- 
mained out,  I  suppose,  about  two  or  threes 
minutes. 

Did  they  then  return  into  the  room  ? — Yes. 

Did  Tbistlewood  and  Brunt  go  away  to- 
gether?— ^Yes,  they  did. 

Do  you  remember,  on  the  Tuesday  before 
the  Cato-street  business.  Brunt  calling  upoa 
your  brother  ?— Yes. 

Did  he  call  alone  ?— No,  he  brou^^  a  man 
of  the  name  of  Tidd  with  him. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  AbhoU.^J>id  he  mentioa 
his  name  at  the  time,  or  did  yojjt  know  him 
before  ?— No. 

Mr.  Solicitor  Genera/.— Was  his  name  men- 
tioned at  the  time? — Brunt  mentioned  his 
name. 

Tell  us  what  passed  ?— As  nearly  as  I  can 
recollect,  when  they  came  into  the  room  my 
brother  said  to  Brunt,  "  I  thought  I  bad  lost 
you  ;**  because  we  had  not  seen  him  for  some 
time. 

What  did  Brunt  say  upon  that  ^— He  said 
that  the  king's  death  had  made  some  little  al- 
teration in  their  plans.  My  brother  asked  what 
those  plans  were  ?  Brunt  said  they  had  di& 
ferent  objects  in  view. 

Lord  Chirf  JuMtice  JMfoti.-^Yaa  heard  this, 
did  you  ? — ^i es,  I  did. 


Mr.  Soiieitor  Genera/.— What  further 
said  ?— Brunt  asked  my  brother  to  meet  him  «p 
at  Tyburn-turnpike  on  the  next  evening,  and  he 
agreed  to  meet  him ;  and  Brunt  said  to  Tidd 
<<  suppose  we  give  them  an  outline  of  the  plan.** 
But  i  do  not  think  Tidd  made  any  answer  to 
it.  Brunt  then  told  us  we  were  to  meet  up  at 
Tybum-tumpike  at  six  o'clock  on  the  Wednes- 
day evening.  They  gave  us  the  pass  word,  whi^ 
consisted  of  the  letters  &,«,  t.  He  said  if  aayr 
one  of  their  party  was  Uiere,  they  would  aiw 
swer  f,  0,  m    They  then  went  away  after  ^lat. 

Did  you  promise  to  go  ?--Not  exactly;  thsy 


toll 


JiiY  High  Treason, 


A.  D.  18^ 


rsoft 


did  not  Indeed  preei  me  i  they  tpdlce  to  mf 
brother  chiefly  through  all  the  biMioeM« 

Did  yon  ill  Ihet  go  yottivdf  ? — No,  I  did  ivot. 

Wliat  time  did  your  brother  go  out  the  ficoR 
^emooD,  &e  Wednesday  P — ^It  was  near  seven 
o'clock  when  be  left  home;  Brunt  called  aboUt 
ite  or  nearly  five  for  him  to  go  with  htm, 
bet  we  wefe  busy  finishing  some  work  and 
he  could  not  go  with  him  at  that  time,  and 
he  then  told  him  to  call  upon  Tidd,  who  UVed 
in  HoIe-4n-the-waH  passage. 

About  seven  o'clock  you  say  yonv  hrollier 
went  ?— Yes,  within  every  trifle  of  seven. 

You  did  not  see  him  afterwards  2 — I  nevet 
taw  hiin  afterwards. 

Thtmuu  Monument  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Curwood, 

All  this  conversation  was  directed  to  your 
bvotier  Jolin  ?— Yes ;  I  was  in  the  room  when 
k  passed ;  when  he  came  first,  he  spoke  to  my 
brother. 

Had '  yon  been  long  acquainted  with  Brant 
before  ? — No ;  I  never  saw  farm  fiH  Thistle  wood 
brou^t  him  that  evening. 

Which  of  the  po^ea  had  you  knowivbefoie  t 
—None. 

Did  yon  make  any  further  queries  of  what 
^#88  io  be  dene? — No,  I  did  not. 

Yon  did  not  snspect  any  thing  wrong  ? — No, 
I  did  not. 

What  did  yon  think  they  were  going  about  i 
— ^That  I  cannot  tell. 

What  did  you  snspeet  ? — ^I  conld  not  tell ;  I 
supposed  it  was  a  meeting  for  some  purpose, 
bat  for  what  purpose  I  could  not  tell. 
'  Yon  had  not  the  curiosity  to  inquire  ? — No. 

A  club  dinner^perhaps  ? — ^No,  I  did  not  think 
that. 

A  supper  ?'- — ^I  did  not  know. 

And  you  were  determined  not  to  ask? — 
I  did  not  ask  further  than  he  mentioned. 

,nomai  Dwyet  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gtamey, 

• 

"  Where  do  you  live  ?— No.  15,  Gee*s-conrt, 
Olford-4treet. 

Some  time  before  the  23rd  of  February  had 
jrm  become  acquainted  with  Davidson,  the 
man  of  colour  ? — ^Yes. 

Had  yon  met  Irim  at  difl^r^nt  times? — I  had 
seen  him  twice  before  the  23rd. 
'  Upon  either  of  these  occasions  did  he  intro- 
dnce  yon  to  any  body  7— Yes-. 
To  whom  ?-~To  Mr,  Thistlewood. 
Did  Thistlewood  and  he  and  you  go  to- 
f;:ether  to  any  house  ^— ^Tes. 

'  Whit  house? — A  public-house  at  the  end 
of  Molineaux-street. 

That  is  very  near  Cato-street,  is  it  not  ? — 
TSbie  end  of  Cato«street 

How  long  was  that  before  the  23rd,  to  the 
tipcsl  of  yonr  recoUectien  ?  —  It  was  about  the 
9th,  10th,  of  llthy  either  Wednesday,  Thurs- 
^fanvorFsidev. " 

Did   Thisifwood   have   any  oohwnation^ 
•vrfth  vou  ? — No,  very  tiifling. 

VOL.  xxxin« 


TeH  ns  what  it  was  he  said  .^— He  said 
seeing  to  me  at  that  present  tinie  at  all ;  he 
said  he  was  in  five  or  six  different  revolutions^ 
that  was  all. 

What  else  did  he  say?— >No^ng  more  at 
that  present  time. 

Any  thing  about  Ireland^ — ^He  said  Ireland 
was  in  a  disturbed  state  at  fhat  time. 

Ave  you  an  Irishman  '^-^Yes. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  yonr  eountry- 
men  who  were  in  London  ? — He  said  he  had 
a  good  many  of  my  countrymen. 

Did  you  see  Davidson  the  day  before  the 
people  were  taken  up  in  Cato-street  ?--In  the 
afternoon  of  the  22nd« 

Did  he  make  any  appointment  with  yoa 
kft  the  next  morning?— No,  not  then,  not  for 
the  33rd^ 

The  next  morning,  however,  did  yon  go 
any  where?  —  No,  I  stopped  at'  my  own 
place. 

After  stopping,  did  any  person  caU  upon 
you  ? — ^Yes, 

To  ^bat  place  did  you  go  with  tliat  per* 
son?^-]^ox-coort,  Gray  s-inn4ane. 

At  what  time  of  the  day  ?  —  About  a  qnar^ 
tef  or  half-past  nine,  when  I  left  my  own 
place  in  the  morning. 

Who  cfldled  upon  yon  P— A  man  of  the 
name  of  Harrison. 

Did  Davidson  tell  you  the  night  before  any 
thing  he  was  going  to  do  t — He  tohl  me  he 
was  going  on  sentry  next  morning. 

A  person  caHed  upon  you  and  took  you  to 
Fax-court  ? — Yes. 

Had  that  person  any  thing  with  him  ? — ^A 
bundle  wrapped  up  in  some  paper. 

Who  was  the  person  that  took  you  to 
Fox-court?  —  A  tall  man  of  the*  name  of 
Harrison. 

When  you  got  to  Fox-court,  to  what 
part  of  the  house  did  you  go  .^— A  two-pair 
back  room. 

How  did  yon  get  into  tike  room  ? — I  turned 
round  a  short  passage  into  a  door. 

Was  the  room  door  locked  or  open?— I 
think  it  was  locked. 

How  did  you  get  the  key? — ^I  think  he 
knocked  at  the  door  of  the  two-pair  front,  and 
a  woman  gave  him  the  key. 

When  you  got  into  the  room,  did  you 
find  any  thing  there  ?— Nothieg  but  an  old 
chair. 

Was  there  any  cupboard  in  the  reoni'? — 
Yes. 

Did  you  see  any  thin^^  in  that  cupboard,  or 
anything  taken  put? — No,  I  sat  on  the  chair. 

Was  there  any  thing  afterwards  taken  out  ? 
—Yes. 

What  was  it?— A  ball  n^rapped  up  ^ith 
rope  yarn. 

Did  Harrison  tefl  yon  what  it  ww?— A 
grenade. 

Did  he  teU  yon  what  use  was  to  be  made  of 
it  i^ — ^No,  he  did  iK)t  tben% 

iMd  he  afterwards  vhile  you  were  there  ?— 
No. 

3F 


8oaj 


1  GBORGB  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  ThitHmood 


C804 


Did  any  oilier  penons  come  in  ?-— Yee. 

Wbocamein  ?*-TbJstlewood,  DaTidson^  and 
a  few  more. 

What  had  DaTidson  irith  him  ?— He  had  a 
blanderiniss  and  a  pair  of  pistols^  and  a  bay- 
onet in  his  side  pocket. 

Did  any  other  persona  come  in?  —  Yes, 
there  were  one  or  two  afterwards  came  in. 

Do  you  remember  the  names  of  any  more  ? 
"i-No,  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  name  any 
others. 

Will  you  look  at  the  bar,  and  see  whether 
you  can  name  any  other  persons  that  were 
there  ?— Yes. 

Which  did  you  see  there  f — ^This  gentleman 
next  me  [Btiot/.] 

After  Davidson  had  shewn  those  pistols,, 
what  did  vou  hear  him  say  ? — ^I  do  not  know 
that  he  said  any  thing  particular  at  that  time : 
be  said  he  bad  given  twelve  shillings  for  a 
pair  of  pistols. 

Brunt  said  this?«-.Np>  not  Brunt,  but 
Davidson. 

After  Davidson  had  spoken  of  his  pistols, 
and  shewn  them,  and  said  he  had  given 
twelve  shillings,  did  you  hear  Brunt  say  any 
thing  ? — ^He  said  he  would  go  out  and  buy  a 
pair. 

^Did  any  thing  pass  from  any  of  them  about 
the  use  to  be  made  of  that  hand-grenade  ? — 
Yefc 

Who  was  it,  do  you  remember?  —  Mr. 
Thistlewood. 

What  did  Thistlewood  say?— H^  spoke  to 
them  all  at  large,  and  said  sqme  of  them  mtfe 
to  be  thrown  into  the  hone*barracks. 

Some  of  those  hand-^nades  ? — Yes,  and 
some  were  to  be  thrown  mto  lord  Uarrowby's, 
to  set  fire  to  it,  to  blow  it  up.  . 

Did  Thistlewood  ask  you  any  question  ? — 
xes. 

What  did  he  ask  jrou?— He  asked  me 
how  many  of  my  countrymen  I  could  muster. 

Did  he  say  when  he  should  wantlliiMn? 
—Half-past  eiffht  the  evening  of  the  23rd. 
.  Did  you  tell  him  how  many  you   could 
muster  ?-^Yes. 

How  many  did  you  tell  him  ?  —  About  six 
or  seven  and  twenty,  or  five  or  six  and 
twenty. 

Did  he  tell  you  where  to  go  to  ?— Yes. 

Where K— He  told  me  they  were  to  assem- 
ble at  the  Horse  and  Groom,  but  I  was  to  be 
fU  six  o'clock  at  the  Pomfret-castle,  at  the  end 
of  Barrat's-court. 

Where  is  that?^It  leads  ^nto  Wigmore- 
street.  Cavendish-square. 

Is  that  a  house  ffeoyented  by  Irishmen  ? — 
¥e9,  it  is  on  Saturday  nights :  they  go  in 
to  have  a  pint  of  porter  or  any  thing  of  that 
kind. 

Did  he  tell^ou  to  what  place  yon  were  to  go 
to  do  any  thing  ? — ^Yes. 

Where  to  ?-— He  told  me  I  was  tb  take  a 
few,  the  best  of  them,  to  go  to  the  Foundlings 
hospital,  knock  at  the.  porter's  lodge,  put  a 
pistol  to  his  breast,  turn  rotmd  the  right  hand. 


and  there  were  five  or  six  and  twenty  stand  of 
arms  at  the  next  lodge. 
.  What  was  to  be  done  with  them  ? — ^I  was  to 
seise  them. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  was  to  be  done  at  any 
other  place  ?-«At  the  same  time  another  party 
would  seize  twa  pieces  of  cannon  that  were  at 
the  City  Volunteers'  riding-school  in  Gcay's- 
inn-lane. 

Did  be  say  what  was  to  be  done  at  any  other 
places  ? — ^He  said  there  were  more  that  would 
make  a  breach  in  Finsbury. 

MThat  more  did  he  say  ? — Nothing  particulav 
more. 

Did  he  mention  any  dinner  that  day  ?  whe* 
iher  there  was  to  be  any  dinner? — ^Yes,  at  lord 
Harrowby's. 

A  dinner  of  whom  ? — ^A  cabinet  dinner,  or  a 
cabinet  council. 

Did  he  say  whether  any  thing  was  to  be  done 
there  ? — ^Yes,  he  said  they  were  to  attack  at  lord 
Harrowby*s. 

After  this,  did  you  see  any  bundle  taken  out 
of  the  cupboard  ? — Yes. 

What  was  done  with  it  ? — It  was  planted  on 
the  floor,  and  a  pint  pot  produced ;  that  bundle 
contained  powder. 

Gunpowder  ?— Yea. 

What  was  done  with  it  ?— There  was  a  tia 
measure  produced,  and  it  was  measured  into 
some  woollen  bags. 

'  How  many  bags  do  you  think  were  filled!— 
I  cannot  say. 

Were  there  few  or  several? — ^There  were 
several  of  them. 

Who  did  that  ? — ^Harrison. 

After  that  did  you  hear  lliistlewood  talk  to 
the  short  man  in  front  ?  [^BnaU.^ — No,  he  spoke 
generally  to  them  all. 

Did  you  hear  any  thing  about  any  things 
being  to  be  sent  to  soy  different  places?— 
Yes. 

What  did  he  say  ? — ^He  said  there  were  m, 
dozen  pike  handles  to  be  taken  to  Mary^e* 
bone. 

Any  to  any  other  place? — The  remainder 
were  to  go,  some  to  Finsbury,  and  some  elee«% 
where. 

Were  you  asked  to  take  any  any  where  ?*— 
Yes. 

Did  you  agree  to  do  it  or  refuse?**!  re- 
fused. 

Was  any  pes»on  who  was  there  sent  out  ^pvith 
any  of  the  tilings  ?^-Thev  were  not  in  the 
I  had  not  seen  them,  only  what  they  nid 
cerning  them. 

Did  you  see  any  bag?— *Yes. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  put  in  it?— Tea,  tins 
powder  that  was  measured  and  the  grenades.  • 

Did  you  hear  any  direction  given  to  any 
person  to  take  those  things  to  any  plape?*— TJi^ 
pike  handles. 

Did  you  see  any  pike  handles  7-o»No,  I  d^ 
not  see  them. 

Were  any  directions  given  to  any  person 
carry  any  thing  to  any  place  ? — ^Yes. 

To  what  place  was  that  person  told  to  go 


8051 


Jbir  High  TreatoH. 


A.  D.  1820. 


t806 


■  1 


To  the  Hone  and  Groom  at  tbe  end  of  Cato- 
street. 

'  Who  gave  him  directions  ?— -Harrison. 
.  Did  Harrison  go  away  too  ?-~:He  went  with 
the  ba^  with  those  things. 
.  Having  before  sent  another  person  with  some 
things  ? — He  went  out  with  an  intention  to  get 
those  handles,  but  where  he  went  I  do  not 
know. 

V^hat  did  Harrison  take  with  him  ?— This 
powder  in  the  flannel. 

Did  he  take  the  grenades  away  as  well  as 
the  powder  ? — ^Yes,  I  think  he  did. 

What  were  they  put  into  ? — ^InU>  a  sack. 
•  At  about  what  time  did  you  leave  the  room, 
to  the  best  of  your  recollection  ?*-I  got  hom^ 
to  my  own  place  at  twelve  o'clock  exactly. 

Did  you  on  that  day  go  and  give  information 
of  what  you  bad  seen  and  heard  ? — I  told  a 
gentleman. 

Who  was  that  gentleman? — ^Major  James. 

In  consequence  of  what  he  said  to  you,  did 
you  go  to  the  Secretary  of  State's? — ^Yes,  I 
did.      •     * 

At  about  what  time  were  you  at  the  Secre- 
tary of  State's  that  day  ? — ^About  one  or  half  past. 

JTiomas  Dwyer  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Cunvood, 

What  has  been  your  situation  in  life  ? — A 
bricklayer  by  trade. 

How  long  have  you  been  acquainted  with 
.Davidson ?---Since  the  4th  of  February;  that 
was  the  first  time  I  ever  saw  him. 

You  say  it  vras  he  who  introduced  you  to 
Thistlewood  ?— Yes. 

What  day  did  he.  introduce  you  to  Thistle- 
wood  ? — ^About  the  9thy  I  think  in  the  foUovring 
week,  the  9th  or  ioth. 

Had  you  known  any  of  the  party  before? — 
Never  in  my  life. 

They  never  having  known  you  before^  nor 
you  them,  they  imm^iately  opened  these  plans 
to  you  ?-*No ;  they  did  not  speak  any  thing 
respecting  them ;  I  never  knew  anything  of 
them. till  that  present  morning  the  23rd. 

On  that  morning,  the  23rdy  they  let  you  into 
their  secrets  ?— Yes. 

•  None  of  them  having  known  you  before  ?— • 
No,  except  Davidson ;  I  saw  him  on  the  4th  of 
February.  . 

And  that  was  an  accidental  meeting  T — It 
was  indeed. 

Can  you  possibly  imi^ne  what  it  was  in 
your  character  that  should  have  induced,  them 
to  trust  you  so  suddenly i — ^I  cannot,  say,  in- 
deed ;  I  do  not  know'  what  their  meaning  was 
lot  it  I  was  well  known  in  that  neighbpur- 
Iftood,  being  in  the  habit  of  being  amongst  a 
^eal  of  my  countrymen,  i 

And  you  were  always  knovrn  as  a  very  honest, 

\ap^  mto  9-^1  should  think  so ;  I  have  .been 

^men  years  io'tbat  parish. 

'  With  a  good  character? — ^Yes,  I  believe  so. 

'  And 'yet;-  all  on.  a  sudden,  a  band  of  traitors 

tjusted  you  with^heir  traitorous  designs  ?-»oYes, 

they  did,  so  far  as  I  have  stated,. . 


That  did  not  Tery  much  astonish  you  P — ^In 
fact  I  did  not  know  the*  rights  of  it ;  I  had 
partly  an  idea  of  it. 

You  were  asked  how  many  men  you  could 
muster  ? — ^Yes. 

Give  us  an  idea  what  you  were  to  do  with 
them  ?-*It  would  be  Tery  serious  for  me  to 
inveigle  the  minds  of  a  parcel />f  innocent  nfien 
in  such  a  concern ;  and  it  would  be  more  than 
perhaps  I  could  do. 

But,  however,  you  agreed  to  do  it? — ^I  agreed 
on  that  morning. 

What  were  you  to  do  ? — I  agreed  to  hare 
five  or  six  and  twenty  men  there ;  they  asked 
me  how  many  I  could  muster :  I  was  rather 
friffhtened,  and  I  said  so  many. 

You  were  frightened? — ^Yes,  I  was  rather 
frightened  while  I  was  in  the  room. 

You  were  to  be  at  the  Foundling  hospital?— 
Yes. 

And  there  you  were  to  get  some  arms  ?— > 
Yes. 

What  did  you  expect  to  do  with  them  P — 
I  do  not  know  indeed. 

Yon  would  rob  any  body  you  were  set  to 
rob? — I  should  suppose  so,  if  I  should  take 
such  advice. 

You  did  agree  to  do  it?^ — ^Yes,>at  that  prelent 
time,  but  I  had  no  intention;  only  speaking  the 
word,  1  wanted  to  get  out  of  the  place.  I  had 
no  intention  of  being  an  accomplice  at  all  in 
their  designs,  only  I  wanted  to  get  out  of  the 
place. 

Do  you  happen  to  know  a  man  of  the  name 
of  Httckleston  P — No. 

Were  you  erer  examined  in  a  court  before  ? 
— I  was  here  once  on  the  trial  of  a  woman^hat 
robbed  a  man  of  7/.  - 

Was  that  the  only  occasion  ?— Yes. 

You  are  quite  sure  you  do  not  knojv  a  man' 
of  the  name  of  Huckleston  ? — No,  not  to  my 
knowledge.    I  am  sure  I  do  not  of  that  nime. 

Where  were  you  at  the  time  of  the  rebellion 
in  Ireland  P  in  England  or  Ireland  P— In  Ire- 
land.   I  was  quite  a  boy  at  the  time. 

What  sized  boy  ?'-Qoite  a  youth. 

How  old  were  you  ?— I  cannot  say,  indeed. 
I  can  just  remember  it. 

George  Coylock  sworn. — Examitaed  by 
^T.  IJttledak. 

Where  do  you  lire? — ^At  No.- 2,  Cato-street. 

Do  you  remember  on  the  afternoon  of  the 
23rd  of  Febcpary  last  seeipg  any  body  in  Cato- 
street  that  attracted  your  attention  7 — Yes. 

Whom  did  you  fee? — Mr.  Harrison. 

Look  round,  and  see  "whether  you  see  him  ? 
— ^Yes,  that  is  the  man  \pointmg  him  out]. 

Had  you  known  him  before ? — Yes,  I  had. 

Where  did  you  see  hinS  ? — ^I  saw  him  stand- 
ing near  the  stable  door  in  Cato-street  with  a 
candlestick  in  his  hand,  with  a  wooden  bottom 
and  an  iron  stick. 

'Did  you  speak  to  him  ?— Yes,  I  did. 

What  did  you  say  to  him  P — Only  aisked  him 
how  he  did,  as  I  knew  the  man  oefiTre.  He 
said  he  was  v^ry  well.    He  said  he  had  taken 


S071 


i  GEOKGB  IV. 


Trial  qf  Arthur  TkiUlmood 


C808 


two  chambers  there,  «nd  wee  going  to  do  tkem 
up,  la  clean  than  up. 

What  time  in  the  aflernoos  was  thie? — 
About  fife  o'clock. 

In  the  course  of  that  evening  did  yon  see 
any  other  people  going  in  and  out  of  the 
stable  P — ^Yes,  a  great  many. 

How  many  altogether? — I  suppose  from 
twenty  to  five  and  twenty-  that  I  saw  go  in  and 
out. 

Between  what  times  in  the  evefning? — Be- 
tween five  and  seven. 

Bkhard  Mundty  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Uttkdak. 

Where  do  yon  live?— No.  3,  Gato-««reet. 

Do 'you  recollect  on  the  afterDaon  of  the 
^rd  of  February  laet  seeing  any  people  in 
Cato-streetf— Yes. 

At  what  time  was  it  ?— Abovt  hal&fasi  four 
in  the  afternoon  I  came  from  work,  or  about 
twenty  minutes  past  four,  hardly  the  half  hour, 
I  saw  Davidson  walking  under  the  archway ; 
I  knew  him  by  seeing  hhn  along  with  Mr. 
Firth.  I  had  seep  him  along  with  Mr.  Firth 
two  or  three  times  before,  being  in  die  habit 
of  going  to  Mr.  Firth  to  doctor  his  cows. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  further? — ^I  saw 
Harrison  about  sis  o  dock  open  the  eow*house 
door,  and  he  shut  it  again ;  but  in  coming  from 
ny  work  I  passed  Davidson  in  the  archway, 
and  went  and  got  my  tea,  and  came  back  again, 
that  might  be  I  suppose  near  the  half  hour 
after  five,  it  was  not  quite  the  half  hour,  but 
about  twenty-five  minutes,  I  went  out  to  the 
chandler's  shop  to  get  some  coffee,  and  what 
I  wanted ;  and  in  coming  back  I  went  in  and 
got  my  pint  of  beer  at  the  publio-house,  and  I 
saw  Ua^idson  go  out  ana  get  a  light  from  a 
woman  at  the  publio-house,  and  he  had  an- 
other candle  in  his  hand,  and  opened  the  door 
to  go  ih ;  in  the  way  of  his  going  in  there  was 
a  kind  of  a  bundle  there,  I  supposed  it  to  be  a 
quartern  loaf,  but  I  eannot  say  whether  it  was 
or  not ;  he  had,  as  he  stooped,  two  belts  with 
two  pistols  in  them,  and  a  sword,  which  stuck 
out  in  this  way  (behind),  under  his  great  coat; 
I  went  in  and  mentioned  it  to  my  wife  imme- 
diately, « In  the  name  of  God*' 

Do  not  tell  us  what  you  said  to  your  wife. 
Besides  these  two  pefsods  Davidson  and  Har* 
risen,  did  you  see  any  other  persons  ? — There 
were  severed  people  two  and  three  going  out 
and  in  at  different  times;  but  there  was  a 
number  in  the  place,  I  dare  say  I  saw  seven  or 
eight  when  the  door  was  half  opened  in  the 
place  at  a  time. 

What  sort  of  n  place  was  it  I — ^It  is- a  atable 
belonging  to  the  general|  and  Firth  was  his 
servant. 

General  whom t —» General  Walton;  one 
part  of  it  is  a  chaise-house,  and  the  other  part 
a  stable,  where  the  hones  used  to  stand; 
but  Mr.  Firth  turned  it  into  a  oow-house,  and 
kept  five  cows  there. 

Is  thnre  any  loftf^Yea;  a  loft  with  two 


rooms  ont  of  it;  one  a  room  with  n  fire-plaee 
in  it,  and  the  other  a  dark  bed-room. 

This  place  bad  been  vacant  ibr  some  time 
before? — Yes  ;  Firth  had  taken  his  cows  oat, 
I  suppose  as  much  as  six  or  seven  weeks ;  he: 
had  purchased  a  place  in  Iron-foundery-lane, 
and  put  his  cows  there. 

Had  you  observed,  in  the  course  of  that  n^ 
temoon,  whether  any  thing -was  fastened  up. 
against  the  window?— There  was  a  kind  of 
hop-sacking  vras  fastened  a^nst  the  fffoot 
window,  going  by,  and  likewise  over  the  par- 
tition of  the  stable  door,  where  the  raiUng  wne,: 
a  kind  of  a  ooarse  matting. 

Did  you  see  that  matting  put  up  ?-<-Fart  of  it 
was  up,  I  saw  at  watering-time^  three  o'clock^ 
when  I  came  home  to  water. 

Lord  Chif  Justice  Abbott. -^Witett  was  the 
matting^— On  the  inside,  sacking  or  aoatting  V 
call  it  the  same ;  it  was  very  coarse  etuff. 

Mizabeth  Wegton  swom.<*-£xamined  by 
UuUukd4de, 

Where  do  you  live  ? — At  No.  1,  Cato-etreet, 
£d«rware-road. 

Do  you  recollect,  in  the  afternoon  of  the 
23rd  of  February  last,  seeing  any  people  in 
Cato-street  P — About  three  in  the  afternoon  I 
was  standing  at  the  door  looking  at  my  little 
boys  that  were  playing  in  the  street,  and  I  saw 
a  man  come  from  underneath  a  gateway  with  a 
bag  on  his  left  shoulder,  and  a  key  ••  his 
right  hand,  and  he  nnkieked  tiie  gates  and 
went  in  at  the  stable  doer. 

Did  yon  observe  some  time  afterwarda  any 
body  ? — About  six  o'clock  ia  the  evening  I  had 
oecasion  to  go  an  errand ;  I  took  my  litde  boy 
in  my  hand,  and  as  I  passed  I  saw  a  man  <^ 
colour;  I  was  frightened,  knowing  the  atablo 
to  have  been  unoocopied  for  some  time.  I 
said,  **  Oh  dear,"  and  passed  on.  I  have  been 
very  ill  ever  since  that  todc  place. 

How  soon  did  you  return  from  your  enand  ?- 
— ^Abont  ten  minutes.  I  was  going  to  the 
corner  of  Molineaux-street,  in  John-atveet. 

After  you  returned  from  your  errand,  did> 
any  body  knock  at  your  door  ? — I  saw  David- 
son standing  by  my  door  when  I  came  hmk^ 
standing  in  the  same  place  where  he  wan  when 
I  went. 

Should  you  know  him  again  ? — -Yee,  I  cei^ 
tainly  shonkl. 

Look  round  and  see  whether  you  knowi  hia 
again  V—Yes,  that  is  the  very  nuNt ;  after  1  had 
been  in  doors,  and  got  my  lights  and  by  then  I 
had  set  my  tea-things,  a  knock  came  loudly  al 
tiie  door,  I  went  to  the  door  saying  to  my  hfelle 
boy,  **  Your  fathet  ia  oeniingf"  bat  when  I 
opened  the  door^  this  man  came  and  asked  ase 
to  give  him  a  light  if  I  pleased ;  I  said  **  YeSf 
to  be  sure;"  he  had  two  candles  in  hia  right 
hand,  and  he  gave  me  one  of  them,  and  I  gafn 
him  a  light,  and  he  took  his  hat  off  his  head 
and  pot  over  it,  and  I  leant  ont  of  my  door 
and  saw  him  go  into  llin  stable  door ;  it  wm  a 
Uttle  way  open  and  he  went  in;  thai  ianll  t 
know  about  it. 


80»] 


Jvt  Higk  TmaoK, 


A.D.  ISSO. 


iBie 


GtOtgjS  xwffUtt  JOHph  ^MntltH  iWOfk.— 

Examined  by  Mr.  BdiantL 

You  are  a  coastable  of  the  pubUe-efltee, 
Bow<fltraet  ?«*->!  am» 

Did  you»  in  cooieqaMice  of  dwections  you 
bad  receivedi  go  ea  the  2drd  of  Febffiaiy  ibI^ 
Cato-streety  EdgwareHPood  ?— I  did* 

AUnm  or  acoompapied  ?-^  Aoooipaoied*. 

By  wham?— By  John  Wright;  thefa  weft 
tbrae  I  kaew  that  wookd  meet  me  tberec 

When  you  get  tberey  how  large  was  yoiit 
party  T-*-At  laat  it  aEmottOted»  I  belieTe^  to 
about  twieWe;  somewhere  about  that  number. 

Where  did  you  ^? — I  went  into  the  liable, 
and  saw  a  man  with  a  blunderboai  or  a  gun 
•n  hif  ihooideTy  and  a  sword  or  cutlass  by  his 
side. 

At  what  time  was  tikat?— About  half  past 
eight. 

Was  any  other  penon  in  the  stable  that  you 
observed  f — ^I  saw  onOy  and  I  ha^re  some  faint 
recollection,  but  I  am  not  sure,  that  there 
might  be  another* 

Did  the  whole  party  follow  ywi  into  the 
stable  t— I  believe  so. 

What  did  you  do  on  getting  into  the  stable  ? 
— ^When  I  saw  the  man  with  a  gun  on  his 
shoulder,  I  said  to  some  of  the  paKy  that  were 
following  me  toseeore  him* 

yfhm  did  you  yourself  do?— I  wont  up  a 
ladder  which  I  foaud  there. 

Was  any  thing  said  by  either  of  your  men 
m  the  stable^  or  any  of  the  panics  ?^-Not  that 
I  an  aware  of;  fori  think  it  eeuld  not  be  a 
second  before  I  was  up  stairs. 

Wheiudid  thai  ladder  lead  you  tor--To  a 
loft. 

What  did  you  ehnctve  on  getting  into  the 
loft?— I  obsenred  several  men,  and  hesord  (hc 
clattering  of  arms,  fwordh  and  pvrtol^  thai  I 


Had  any  of  your  party  got  up  with  yeu  h^ 
I  had  cidouialed  about  three  or  teiur. 

Who  were  they  ?-«£llis  and  SisitheM^  I  am 
aufsofk 

How  many  persons  might  there  be  ?  You 
faw  a  toamborf««-i  an  not  ^uiu  snre;  bnt  I 
thought,  fiom  the  transito^p  view  I  had»  nboul 
ipur  or  five  and  twenty. 

What  is  the  sise  <^  that  loft?— Fifteen  fisil 
five  one  way,  and  leu  feet  ten  the  other. 

li  thore  a^  o4hor  room  a^ioining  to  at? — 
Tliere  are  two. 

Comimaaiaalitog  tr  dQOril-*Y«a^ 

When  you  hadgmaed  the  loft  whaftdid  yeli 
«iQr?— ^  We  arooffieeft,  seifee  their  a^isr 

That  ydtt  said  ^*«I  mid  that  dQTself. 

**  We  are  ofieers,"  aad  tfma  tuninl^  t%y«ur 
^^  aeito  Hmtt  anusr^Yes^  jnsa  «>i. 
*  jwi  aee  nagppMioA  iaihoVaomiwhaB 
yoBi  knew  ?i-*l  dad« 

Who  yras  that  ?*-Thistlewood, 

How  long  hayfe  jou  been  acqukhitedf  with 
the  penon  of  TMtftfeweod?^ I  should  think 
fwt  or  ftua  jwm;  i  hMMr  lim*ftf«  ibvtitae 
ef  the  trials  befoiuw 


Whtou  wal  he?— ^e  was  eUading  eft  tSm 
right-hand  side  of  the  table^  as  we  entered 
near  to  the  door  of  a  littWt  room.     . 

Did  he  keep  that  position  or  move  ?-r«Imdie» 
diately  on  my  saying  that,  he  looked  no,  and 
seized  a  sword  that  vras  on  the  table,  and  drew 
back  iato  the  little  room. 

Was  the  sword  drawn  ?— It  was. 

What  description  of  sword  was  it?-^It  ap* 
peered  to  be  a  Tcry  long  one,  and  rather  bright. 

With  that  ho  retired  into  the  little  room  ?-(^ 
Yes,  he  did. 

•   What  lodt  pUee  ?-«He  stood  fencing  to  pre- 
vent any  body  coming  to  him. 
-   Did  any  body  ^^roach  hknT-^Sinilhers 
didk 

Upon  Snuth^rs.approaohing  hias,  what  hap* 
panel  ? — He  thrust  his  arm  forward  aid  staib* 
Dedhim. 

Did  Smithem  fett?— He  did. 

Did  you  hear  any  thing  said  in  the  left  upon 
tbatF— Smithen,  when  he  fell,  said  ''Oh  my 
God,  I  am  done  1''  or,  '<  Oh  my  God  I" 

What  passed  after  that?— The  lights  were 
put  out  almeet  imrnediately,  in  a  minute  o^ 
two.  Somebody  said,  from  the  corner  of  tho 
room  where  Thistlewood  stood,  ''Kill  the 
b— *rs,  throw  them  down  stairs  V 

How  many  lights  were  burning  when  yoQ 
went  in  ? — I  think  there  might  be  eight*. 

And  they  were  put  out  P^They  were. 

You  were  thenaUinthedarkf  — Quite  in 
the  dark. 

What  did  yon  do  ?— -I  heard  a  rush  at  the 
Maifs,  and  I  joined  in  the  rush  spring ''  Ah  kill 
them,"  and  got  down.  I  heard  it,  for  I  oonl4 
not  see  it 

You  joined  in  their  cry  and  mshed  down  f 
*^Idid. 

Udou  getting  down  what  did  you  observe  ? 
—I  did  not  obsenre  any  thing^  till  I  got  into 
John^treet,  and  there  I  met  with  the  soldiers, 
and  returned  with  them.  There  were  a  great 
many  shots  fired  before  I  got  down. 

Where  were  those  shots  fired  from  ?— Tlia^ 
I  cannot  tell;  it  appeared  to  me  that  they 
were  fired  in  the  diiection  towaids  tho  staim*  - 

FW>m  what  nait  of  tho  room  ?<«^Fiom  liM 
further  part  or  the  room. 

How  miay^shotaK^I  think  iA  tha  whole 
there  might  bo  betweon  twenty  and  thirty: 
but  some  el  llwee  shots  I  think  were  Mi 
from  the  tnsidoto  tho  atreeft,  not  aU  in  that 
direction. 

That  is  from  tho  wittdOwff.>^Yea;  from  the 
windows  into  the  street. 

Yott  lat  you  met  the  soidiemandaetafued  ? 
— 1  did. 

What  did  ysli  obstrveo^  yomrrotnm?— I 
observed  a  man  going  from  the  door.  I  catted 
out  to  seize  him,  imd  aa  I  ctf  ed  ^ut^  ha  BAed 
u^hiforditofiiuw 

Whioh  mm  ham  you  aaceataatted.  tlwtio 
bo  ?^tlidd;  that  k  tb»  man  fflsMfy  Mm 
m4.    I  ealohod  hold  of  his  righltatm^  «ilad 
wafeid^  mai  feH  witk  hiia  on  •  dringMpit 

Did  you  soceeed  in  disarming  htei-i*^ 


811] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ofAiihur  ThiOkwood 


[813 


toldien  came  up  iDStaotly,  tndhis  pistol  went 
off,  he  was  secured. 

Did  you  search  him  on  his  being  secured  ? 
—1  did. 

What  did  you  find  upon  him  P  —  Round  his 
waist  I  found  a  leathern  belt. 

Of  what  colour? — A  sort  of  buff  colour, 
such  as  they  use  for  ladies  shoes.  In  his 
pocket  I  found,  two  ball  cartridges. 

Where  was  this  that  you  searched  him  ? — 
In  the  publio-hous»  called  **  the  Horse  and 
Groom. 

Did  you  find  any  thing  else  upon  him  ?— - 
I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  else. 

While  you  were  in  the  public-house,  was 
any  other  prisoner  brought  m  ?— Yes ;  a  man 
of  the  name  of  Bradbum.  The  man  who 
ttaftds  last  there. 

Did  you  search  him  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  you  find? — Round  his  waist  a 
string  four  or  five  or  six  times  round. 
*   So  as  to  answer  for  a  belt  i  —  It  would 
do  so. 

Did  you  find  any  thing  else  upon  him  ? — 
Yes,  be  hs\4  six  ball .  cutridges,  and  three 
loose  balls. 

I/yrd  Cki^ Justice  Abbqtt-^Were  those  ball 
cartridges  tor  pistols  or  rousquets?-^!  am 
not  well  versed  enough  to  speak  to  that,  my 
lord. 

Mr.  BoUtmd.'^yfete  any  others  brou^t  in  ? 
—There  were. 

Who  were  they? — Davidson  and  Wilson. 

Did  you  search  Davidson  and  Wikon  ? — I 
did  not. 

Did  you  see  whether  they  were  accoutred  at 
lll?--ldidnot. 

Did  you  remain  there,  or  return  to  the  loft? 

Lord  ChkfJmUceAhhoU.—Vf^A  he  secured  } 
—I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  material,  but 
when  Davidson  was  brought  in,  he  damned 
and  swore  against  any  man  who  would  not 
die  in  liberty's  cause,  that  he  gloried  in  it. 

Mr.  BotfgiMJL—Did  he  do  any  thing  else  ? — 
He  sung  a  song,  ^  Scots  wha*  ha'  wi'  Wallace 
bled,"  part  of  it,  he  was  restrained  from  sing« 
ing  the  rest. 

Did  you  then  go  back  to  the  loft  F— I  did. 
-   Who  was  in  possession  of  it?-*  Some  sol- 
diers, and  some  of  the  people  of  the  office. 

Did  you  find  ,any  persons  there  who  were 
afterwajrds  taken  into  custody? — ^I  did. 

Who  were  they  ?-— There  vras  Shaw,  Strange, 
I  think  his  name  is.     • 

Were  there  any  others  there  F  -r  There  was 
Cooper  there. 

Was  Monument  there  ?  —  Monument  was 
there. 

GUchrist?— Yes,  and  Gilchrist. 

Upon  getting  into  the  room,  did  you  ob^ 
•erve  anv  thing  more  (Mrtioularly,  of  anjr  arms, 
or  any  thing  of  that  kind?~I  saw  aims  in  the 
loom,  and  I  told'  them  to  search  the  room, 
and  wliateiver  cadi  iiMud  to  keep  in  his  own 
possessiottf' 


Did  you  find  any  thing  ?— Yes,  two  twor^ ; 
a  bag  which  I  suterwards  found  to  contain 
ten  hand-grenades,  I  thitik  it  held  them. 

Were  they  all  of-  thfe  same  size  ? — All  those, 
in  the  bag  were  of  the  same  size,  and  there 
were  two  parcels  wrapped  up  in  brown  paper, 
nothing  but  tow  as  it  appeared  to  me,  and  tar 
or  something  of  that  kina. 

In  the  shape  of  balls,  or  what  sh^e?-* 
They  were  wrapped  up  close  together.    ' 

What  wis  done  with  the  other  arms';  did 
those  persons  so  keep  them,  or  deliver  them 
up  to  you  ?— They  kept  them  at  the  time ;  there 
was  one  much  larger  than  the  rest  I  have 
described. 

One  ball  f — One  grenade. 

Had  they  fuses  in  them  ?— They  had  all 
those ;  one  was  as  big  as  my  hat  nearly. 

Who  took  that  ? — ^Nixon  found  it,  and  gave 
it  to  me  at  the  time. 

What  vras  afterwards  done  with  '  those 
things;  were  they  taken  to  Bow-^treetf—they 
were. 

And  deposited  there? — ^They  were  taken 
away  again  from  Bow-street,  but  since  de- 
posited in  the  possession  of  an  ofiicer  of  Bow- 
street. 

They  are  all  here  to  day  f — ^They  are. 

Before  you  went  to  the  suble  were  yon  at 
the  Horse  and  Groom  ? — I  was. 

Did  uinr  thing  take  place  while  yon  were 
there? — ^Inere  were  three  or  four  men  came 
in,  four  I  believe  at  last  mustered. 

Do  you  know  any  of  those  men  ? — ^I'  did 
not  know  them  at  the  time,  but  I  reoogoised 
them  afterwards. 

Was  Cooper  one  of  those  men  ?— Yes,  he 
was,  Gilchrist,  behind,  was  another. 

Did  they  bring  any  tlung  with  them  ?— 
They  brought  a  stick. 

Which  of  them  ?-^ooper. 

What  sort  of  a  stick? — ^A  broom-stick  or 
mop^tick. 

What  did  he  do  vnth  it?— It  was  left  in  th« 
room  when  they  went  out. 

Did  he  or  any  of  the  narty  return  for'  that 
stick  ? — Gilchrist  retumeo. 

Did  he  succeed  in  getting  it?-— He  didF  not, 
it  had  been  removed. 

By  whom  ? — By  the  boy  of  the  house,  who 
observing  that  one  end  of  it  was  cut- 
Did  you  obeerve  that  ? — I  did. 
'  Did  yon  take  possession  of  that  stick  f — I 
did,  I  have  it  now. 

How  was  the  stick  *cut?-^Cut  at  the  end 
about  this  depth  down,  as  if  to  receive  a  socket 
of  any  thing.  I  likewise  had  a  tuck  8ti<^ 
brought  me  the  next  mohiing,  and  a  doaen 
pieces  of  stick  a  sort  of  pike  shaft. 

Who  brought  those7--X1iey  were  brongbt  by 
a  person  called  Flannagan,  and  another  person. 
I  nave  had  them  in  my  possesnoh  ever  aibce. . 

•  '         *         . 

George  Thonua  Jotah  BMo^  cross-, 
examined  by  Mr.  Adolpfim, 

You aay  you faaveknanvn  Thistlavpnod  ever 

since  the  former  trial?— Yes» 


8131 


Jhir  High  Trtuon- 


A.  D.  18«0. 


r814 


Do  you  mean  that  in  I8I79  when  doctor 
Watson  was  tried  f — Yes,  I  do. 

When  had  you  seen  him  last  before  this 
transaction  on  the  23rd  of  Februaiy  f  Stop  a 
moqient  before  you  look  to  yourbook,  had  he 
been  out  of  sight  for  some  time? — ^No,  not  a 
fortnight  certainly. 

Had  be  lately  been  imprisoned  to  your 
knowledge  P — No,  not  that  I  know  of. 

I  mean  at  Horsham  ? — I  have  heard  of  that. 

Do  you  know  how  long  he  had  been  come 
back  from  Horsham  ? — No,  I  do  not. 

Had  you  seen  him  sevend  times  before  the 
3drd  of  February  ? — I  had  seen  hite  more  than 
fiYe  or  six  times  within  two  or  three  weeks. 

Perhaps  you  had  soine  particular  modve 
for  looking  after  him  at  this  time  ?— I  had.    . 

A  motive  connected  with  this  event  that 
took  place  afterwards?— Not  that  I  am  aware  of. 
*  I  mean  watcbin|^  some  proceedings,  the 
end  of  which  was  this  meeting  in  Cato-street? 
—Not  that  I  am  aware  of,  I  was  watching  him 
for  another  purpose,  as  I  believe. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Ed- 
wards ? — I  do  not. 

Is  there  an  officer  in  your  office  that  has  a 
relation  of  that  name  ? — We  have  I  believe 
four,  or  five  EdiMfards's;  but  I  am  notaWare 
what  relations  they  have.  . 

You  have  four  or  five  Edwards's  in  your 
office,  do  I  underst^  you  rightly? — ^I  think 
there  are  four. 

I  am  not  pinning  you  down  to  the  number ; 
but  there  are  about  that  number,  there  are  three 
or  four  ? — I  remember  three  perfectly,  and  I 
think  there  are  four  or  five. 

You  were  employed  for  some  time  before 
that  to  look  after  Thistlewood  ?— Yes. 

Upon  whose  suffgestion  that  was,  except 
those  who  employed  you  at  the  office^  perh^>s 
you  do  not  kpow  ? — I  do  not. 

You  have  seen  this]  person  to  whom  I  al- 
Ipde,  named  Edwards,  since  the  22nd  of  Feb- 
ruaiy  P — I  do  not  knoifr  the  person  to  whom 
you  am»de.       * 

James  EUit  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Attomty  General, 

I  helieve  you  are  conductor  of  the  patrole 
at  the  iE\iblio«office,  Bow-street  P — ^I  am  a  con* 
4aetor. 

Did  you,  on  the  23rd  of  Februarr  last,  so 
with  the  other  officers  to  Cato-street  r — I  did. 
.  About  what  time  did  you  get  to  the  stable  t 
—I  think  about  hdf  past  eight,  as  nearly  as  I 
can  judge. 

Did  yon  go  in  after  Ruthven  ?-*Immediately 
after,  as  soon  after  as  I  could  walk  in. 

Upon  your  jgoing  into  the  stable,  did  you 
observe  any  man  in  the  stable  ?— I  did ;  I  ob« 
served  two  men. 

Did  yon  observe  whether  either  of  them  had 
any  belts  ?— The  first  man  nearest  to  mo  had 
twaidMte  belts,  that  aptparently  went  aofoss 
his  shoulders.    . 

The  one  hanging  over  one  shoulder  and  the 
other  over  the  other  ?-^Yes,  cross  belts. 


Old  you  bbeenre  whether  he  bad  any-  thin^^ 
in' his  hand? — Either  in  his  band,  or  by  his 
right  side>  he  had  a  carbine  or  short  soldier's 
piece,  something  of  that  kind  ;  and  in  his  left 
nand,  or  by  his  left  side,  I  cannot. say  exactly 
which,  a  long  sword.    •  . 

Did  you  observe  his  person? — I  did  on 
coming  close  to  him;  we  were  all  crowded 
close  at  the  time;  I  took  hold  of  his  collar  and 
turned  him  round,  and  I  observed  he  was  a 
man  of  colour. 

^  Where  was  the  other  person  whom  you  saw? 
— ^The  other  person  was  between  Uie  foot  of 
the  ladder  and  the  manger  in  the  fiirthest  stall ; 
there  were  three  stalls,  and  this  was  the  stall 
nearest  the  ladder. 

Did  you  follow  Ruthven  up  the  ladder  ?— I 
did,  as  close  as  I  could  venture. 

As  yon  were  going  up  tlie  ladder,  did  you 
hear  any  person  say  any  thing  from  the  stable  ? 
— I  think  it  was  before  I  got  to  the  step  of  the 
ladder,  I  heard  him  say  something  giving 
notice ;  the  last  word  was  **  men,"  but  what 
the  other  words  were  I  cannot  say,  bu(  it  was 
a  notice  to  those  above. 

When  you  got  into  the  room  above,  what  did 
vou  find  there  ? — Upon  gaining  the  top  of  the 
ladder,  I  observed  a  number  of  men  faUing 
back  behind  a  carpenter's  bench  that  stood 
across  the  room  close  to  the  wall. 

Did  you  hear  any  noise  as  you  went  into  the 
room  ? — ^As  I  entered  the  room,  I  heard  a  noise 
similar  to  the  rattling  of  swoids,  like  two  peo- 
ple fencing  almost.  . 

How  many  men  appeared  to  yon  to  be  in 
the  ^  room  ? — From  what  [  could  judffe,  there 
appeared  to  be  from  twenty  to  five  and  twenty, 
I  cannot  speak  with  more  certainty. 
'  DM  you  observe  Sroilhers  ? — On  gaining  the 
top  of  the  ladder,  there  were  four  orfiveof  ue 
men,  evidently,  endeavouring  to  back  into  the 
little  room  at  a  distance  of  four  or  five  ft%X 
from  the  ladder.. 

There  were  two  rooms  opening  into  the  loft  f 
^-Yes,  this  was  the  further  one.  • 

Consequently  the  one  looking  into  the  street? 
•^Yes  it  was.  At  the  moment  I  gained  the 
top  of  the  ladder,  Ruthven  who  was  before  me- 
cned  out  loud,  ^  we  are  officers,  seise  their 
arms,"  or ''  surrender  your  arms,"  I  cannot  be 
positive  which. 

This  man  backing  as  you  say  into  the  room» 
did  you  observe  Smithers  do  any  thing  7 — ^Not 
just  at  that  moment:  previous  to  that.  Thistle- 
wood— 

You  know  Thistlewood? — I  knew  liim  the 
moment  I  saw  him  again.  I  did  not  know 
him  before,  but  I  am  perfectly  satisfied  that  is 
the  man.  He  held  his  sword  in  his  hand,  and 
his  hand  shook  at  me :  he  stood  in  this  man- 
ner :  I  held  out  my  staff  in  my  left  hand,  in  this 
manner  [deacriking  ii^ :  I  might  be  then  about 
fiv^  or  six  feet  from  him,  fkv^  feet  perhaps. 

Upon  your  holding  out  your,  staff  m  thai 
way,  what  did  Thistlewood  do  ? — He  still  me* 
naeed  me  with  his  sword;  I  instantly  held < up 
my  pistol. with  my  right  hand,  and  desired  him 
to  desist|  or  I  would  instantly  fire* 


•1«] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  tfArikut  TkuOewood 


What  happened  upon  that  ?— At  that  mo- 
l^aDt  Sttitbeya  had  raided  the  top  ef  the 
ladder,  aAd  he  rushed  forward  to  the  little 
loom.  Thistlewood,  aad  the  other  bmb  that 
irere  with  him  at  that  tiaae,  got  bai^  iato  the 
little  room  some  feet,  and  upon  Softithen  just 

Citing  to  the  side  of  the  door,  as  I  may  be 
re^  Thistlewood  nuhed  forward,  aad  straek 
him  with  his  sword  near  to  the  right  breast. 

Did  Smithers  U\\  upon  that  ?— Upon  that  I 
saw  Smithers'  hands  go  up  in  thiswa/yfis- 
•cn^Mg  U\t  and  his  h^  went  back,  and  he 
said,**  Oh,  my  God,''  and  he  fell. 

I^  fell  into  your  anas  ? — ^No,  he  staneied 
against  me :  upon  seeinff  that,  I  immediately 
fired  my  pistol,  but  wiuout  effect ;  Smithers 
•taggered  agamst  me  at  the  moment  I  had 
fired,  and  fell  back  past  me,  more  to  my  left. 
'  He  fell  dead  ? — ^I  oelieve  he  fell  dead  :  whe^ 
Iher  he  staggered  against  RathTeft  or  not  I  do 
Bot  know:  the  last  light  I  saw  was  the 
fash  of  my  own  pistol;  the  candles  were  put 
•at  at  that  moment. 

Ton  were  forced  down  the  ladder,  I  believe? 
•^Yes,  we  were.  I  went  into  the  do<^-way, 
and  stood  in  the  door^way  for  a  second  or 


The  door  way,  in  Cato^treet  ?"— Yea. 

Were  any  shots  fired  during  that  time^ — 
Yes,  many  shots  were  fired ;  two  of  thiee  e# 
whieh  passed  ne  In  ^e  door-way. 

Were  any  shots  fifred  from  any  ether  part  aff 
tiiat  time  ? — ^I  saw  one  shot  fired  by  a  tall  mas, 
he  stood  under  the  ladder,  and  fired  ap  las 
wwds  the  manger. 

Were  any  aSota  fired  ftom  the  window  of 
>  the  little  room  f — Yes ;  while  I  was  standkif 
at  the  door  there  were. 

Goald  von  Judge  in  i^at  direction  they 
wwe  fired  N-'They  were  apparently  fired  io^ 
wardS'  llie  door. 

Towards  the  door  of  the  stable  7 — ^Yea. 

Upon  that  did  you  pursue  any  body  down- 
CatflNStreet,  towards  Queen-street  ? — I  heard  a 
ciy,  and  saw  a  man  running  with  his  belt  on. 

9a  the  direction  of  Queen-street  ?— Yea. 
'  Mii»-street  it  on  the  left  of  Cato-street,  and 
^een-street  on  the  right  7— Yes,  I  pursued' 
and'  took  him  about  sereqty  or  «!gh^  yards' 
ftoBB  the  stable  door. 

Who  was  that  man  you  so  pursued  md 
took  T— -DuTidson,  the  man  of  cofeur. 

When  you  secured  him  had  he  arma?-*-0e' 
had  a  ea^ne,  or  a  short  piece  of  that  kind, 
either  slung  to  him,^  or  in  his  hand,  and  in  hit 
Ifeft  hand  a  long  sword. 

Do  you  belieye  that  i»  the  man  whom  you- 
first  s^rw  when  you  went  into  the  stable  ?-*^ 
^  believe  that  is  the  man,  but  I  am  not 
positive  ;  I  have  very  little  doubt  in  my  own 
mind  that  it  is  the  same. 

I  believe  you  afterwards  asiisted  in  securing 
some*  of  the  persons  in  the  stable  ?— -^fter  de- 
li^pering'him  to  th^  custody  of  enothet  person, 
t  aaijfted  in-  secuHog  (bur  of  tem  in  the-  loll. 
'  Do  yottknow  who  the  four  person  were  h^ 
I  am  not  peiMta  ap  to  tflait  penqsw;  I  neol^ 


(816 

lect  MoaaMMUt  to  beeoe,  hot  I  an  not  posi- 
tive to  the  other  <haee« 


l^mim  Wk  cross-eiamined  by  Mr.  Cmnnoodm 

What  silaation  do  yeu  hold  f— I  am  a  eo»* 
doctor  and  a  constables 

You  had  the  conduct  I  aoppose?—* I  had 
the  conduct  of  a  part,  Mr.  Rnthven  was  the 
principal  officer. 

Who  had  the  warrant?— I  had  the  wamat. 

WtUiam   Watcotit  sworn. — Ezaauned  by 
Mr.  OHraey. 

Yoa,  J  believe,  are  one  of  the  eondnotoia  of 
the  patrole  of  Bow-etreet  T— -I  am. 

Did  you  go  with  the  other  oAoera  to  Cato- 
street,  Sdgware-raad,  on  thetSvdof  Fehniary! 
--Idid. 

Zofid  Chief  Jusiiu  Abbo^.'^^Yon  are  a  con- 
stable also  f—l  am. 

Mr.  Garnev. — ^I  believe  at  Bow-sireet  yov 
are  all  constables  t — Yes. 

ft 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Attott.'-'You  are  all 
sworn  in  as  such?— The  biggest  part  of  us 
arC' 

Mr.  eBnisy.-*AreBathven,  Sinthefs,  Elfisv 
and  yourself? — ^Yes. 

And  Niaon  ?— Yes. 

Did  Ruftwen,  and  Ettbs,  and  Smithers,  go 
up  the  ladder  into  the  loft?— They  did. 
'  D4d  ymx  hear'  any  diaUirhaiMe  going  on  in 
the  loft ;  any  filing  ^— Yes. 

Did  yoo  remain  in  the  stable  ?— I  did. 

While  tlie  others  were  going  up,  or  whe» 
they  wei«  up^  did  yo«  observe  aay  persobin 
the  suble  ?— I  did. 

Who  was   that?— Inga;. that  is  the  man 

What  did  you  do  f— I  took  him  by  tiie 
collar. 

You  aad  he  had  a  contest  I  believe  f — Yes^ 
we  had  against  the  wall. 

Whilst  you  and  he  were  in  the  contest,  did 
you  find  ihe  other  officers  coming  down  the 
ladder?— There  waa  a  terrible  oonfusion.  in 
the  loft ;  he  went  to  put  his  hand  to  the  right 
side,  as  I  thought,  to  get  something,  and  I  hit 
hiaa  a  blow  on  the  side  of  his  head ;  as  I  waa 
getting  out  my  handcufik,  they  came  down  a 
mmber  of  ilbem  flom  the  loftv 

fowhat  manner  ^— Some  of  tiiein  tambUng' 
cbwii^  and  otheia  oame  down  afterwttds 
gently- 

Did  you  observe  any  one  of  those  whaee  foea 
yo»  hffew*^>*I  did. 

Who  waa  that?— Thhtlewood. 

Lord  a^  Jmiioc  AJfhaU.-^ViM  there  any 
light  in  the  stable  at  that  time? — ^tberewas. 

Mr.  (TunM^:— Had  yon  ofilcevs*  taken  a 
light  ^— Nb^  not  at  that  time. 

Wheu'Thistlewood  came  down  the  laMer, 
what  did  he  do? — ^He  turned  round  and  pit^ 
seated  a  pistol  to'ttf  head ;  I  pst  up  s^lia^d 
in  this  kind  of  way  trdefend'myfslr. 


tin 


Jor  High  Tr$aion» 


A.  D.  182a 


tsis 


tVhat  did  he  do  ?-^He  fired  at  me. 

How  near  to  your  head  was  it  the  pistol  was 
(red  ? — Very  near;  there  were  three  holes 
inade  in  my  bat  fMoiomf  ihem\,  I  went  ta 
inake  a  rush^  and  receired  a  blow  on  the  right 
side  of  my  head,  and  I  fell  with  it. 

What  was  that  blow  from ;  was  it  given  you 
by  a  weapon  or  a  fist  ? — ^I  do  not  know  ;  but 
it  beat  the  hat  in. 

When  you  were  down,  did  you  observe 
Thistlewood  do  any  thing  ? — Yes,  he  made  a 
cat  at  me  with  something  like  a  sword|  and 
went  out  at  the  stable  door. 

Lord  Chief  Juttke  Abbott, — ^Leaving  you  iii 
the  stable  ? — ^Yes. 

.  Mr.  Gumev, — ^Did  you  attempt  to  follow 
him? — ^Yes ;  but  he  was  out  of  sight  before  I 
could  get  at  him. 

Were  you  wounded  at  all  ? — ^Yes,  in  the  hand 
with  a  ball,  when  I  put  up  mv  hand  to  shield 
myself,  the  ball  touched  my  hand  and  grazed 
it  in  this  way. 

jAdx  Nixon  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  mtkdaU. 

Are  you  one  of  the  Bow-street  ofiicers } — 
Yes. 

Did  you  go  to  Cato-street,  on  the  23rd  of 
Pebniary  last  f — ^Yes. 

When  you  first  got  into  the  stable,  what  did 
jou  see  ?— There  was  a  ladder  just  by  entering 
the  front  of  the  door,  and  I  saw  Ruthven,  Ellis, 
and  the  deceased,  and  Gibbs ;  they  went  up 
and  I  followed  them ;  against  I  got  to  the  top 
the  lights  were  all  out,  and  I  remained  about 
lialf  a  minute  or  scarcely  so  much.  Just  as  I 
|pDt  up,  I  saw  Ellis  fire  a  pistol,  but  I  thought 
It  was  they  had  fired  at  him ;  it  Iras  into  the 
little  room  he  fired  it. 

As  soon  as  the  fire  was  returned,  when  Ellis 
fired  the  pistol,  were  you  knocked  down  ?— 
Another  pistol  or  two  were  fired  from  this  little 
room,  but  I  could  not  see ;  I  was  only  just  at 
the  head  of  the  stairs,  then  there  was  a  rush 
and  I  fell  backwards,  hit  my  leg  against  some* 
thing,  cut  it  about  three  inches,  and  my  head 
^ent  against  the  wall,  and  cut  my  hat.  I  fell 
down  stairs,  and  then  there  came  a  rush  of 
people  down,  and  I  think  I  saw  one  about  two 
steps  from  the  bottofai.  I  saw  him  present  a 
pistol  towards  Westcoatt. 

'Who  presented  that  pistol  ? — ^I  really  believe 
It  was  Thistlewood :  I  really  believe  it  was 
that  man  that  sits  down  there,  he  presented  it 
Mgainst  Westcoatt ;  but  his  side  face  I  could 
Hot  distinctlv  see. 

At  that  time  had  Westcoatt  apprehended 
any  body  7 — ^He  had  got  Ings  in  custody  when 
I  went  up  stairs. 

'  Did  Ings  get  away  from  him  ?— He  got  away 
from  him  after  thev  shot  at  him. 

Did  you  pursue  Ings?— Westcoatt  said  ^'Stop 
Ihat  fellow,**  and  I  pursued  Ings. 

Was  he  brought  back  again  f— -Yes ;  he  was 
taS^en  blr  Wright  and  Chapman^  I  believe ; 
ihey  had  got  him  in  custody. 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


Soiba  time  afterwards,  did  you  find  any 
thing  in  the  stable  ?— I  went  into  the  stable 
afterwards,  and  found  a  sword. 

Any  thing  else? — Then  I  went  up  stairs 
again  into  the  loft,  and  I  found  a  bayonet ;  and 
then  I  saw  Ruthven  hunting  about,  and  I  fol- 
lowed him,  and  he  found  a  bag  and  opened  it, 
and  I  saw  some  balls  about  this  size  [jpni- 
ducing  one],  there  were  a  quantity  of  them^  I 
cannot  tell  how  many. 

Did  you  find  any  thing  besides  those  ?-— 
Afterwards,  when  I  was  going  down  stairs  with 
those  combustibles,  there  was  another  piece  of 
stuS'in  a  kind  of  a  tin  can  wrapped  round  with 
paper ;  I  shook  it ;  I  look  upon  it,  it  was  seven 
or  eight  pounds  or  more  than  that 

You  delivered  it  to  Ruthven  ? — I  did. 

John  Wright  swonid— Examined  by 

lAt.BoUtmd. 

You  are  a  patrole  at  Bow-street  f— Yes. 

Were  you  one  of  the  party  of  officers  that 
went  to  Cata4tieet  on  the  23rd  of  February  ? 
— I  was. 

Where  did  you  muster? — ^I  went  to  the 
Horse  and  Groom,  in  company  with  Mr. 
Ruthven. 

While  you  were  in  the  Horse  and  Groom, 
did  you  see  any  of  the  prisoners  come  in  ?^ 
Cooper  and  another  came  in,  and  had  a  pint 
of  porter. 

Had  Cooper  any  thing,  or  did  he  leave  any 
thing  ?— He  brought  in  a  stick,  and  left  it  b^ 
hind  him  on  the  seat. 

What  sort  of  a  sdck  was  it?— A  broomstidc 
or  mop  handle. 

Do  you  know  whether  Ruthven  has  it  in  his 
custody  T — I  saw  it  in  his  possession  after* 
wards. 

Did  you  accompany  the  party  to  the  stable 
after  that  ? — ^Yes, 

What  happened  when  you  got  into  the 
stable  ? — After  I  had  got  about  three  or  four 
stairs  we  were  knocked  back  again ;  we  were 
driven  back  again.  I  turned  round,  and  ob- 
served a  man  m  the  further  stall. 

What  soFt  of  a  man  was  he  in  person  ? — ^He 
had  a  great  coat  on  ;  but  I  should  not  be  able 
to  swear  to  him. 

What  sort  of  a  person  was  he  ?— A  stoutish 
person. 

Did  yoQ  observe  any  thing  on  that  man  ?— » 
I  observed  he  had  something  shining  under  hr» 
coat ;  I  took  it  from  him  and  found  it  to  be  a 
sword  on  one  side,  and  a  knife  from  the  other 
side,  a  butcher's  knife. 

Where  is  that  knife  ? — It  is  up  stairs.. 

What  sort  of  a  handle  had  it  r— A  butcher^ 
handle  tied  round  ^tb  wax  end. 

• 

Lord  Chief  Justice  JMeM.— -Do  you.  mean  to 
produce  the  knife  ? 

Mr.  "BoUand, — ^Yes,  my  tord*  Did  you  take 
that  man  into  custody,  or  did  he  escape  ? — 
At  that  moment  I  was  knocked  down  and  re* 
ceived  Ik  stab  in  my-right  side,  and  the  «»aa 
escaped. 

3G 


9}9V         1  GfiOftGS  ly.  Trial,iif4r(hwr  TkuU^Mod  l^i^ 

Did  that  d^abl0  you  froijd  ^oio|;  any  niQre,  |     When  yop  came  up  to  hi«i  yfAi^  did  higs 
or  did  you  recover  from  it  ? — ^I  sot  up  and  weut ;  a^  ?i— I  said^  *'  You  ^asc^  Why  didjou  ^  at 

~  shortly  after  toe  soldiers  '  me^  a  man  you  peyer  ^a^r  before  ?    he  s^ifoif 
^         .1^  -„   ^^  ^^^  ^^^  ^^^^  ^^  meant  to  kill  me,  and  he 

unshed  he  )kad  done  it,  as  be  knew  he  should 
be  hong. 


out  of  the  door,  aod 

came  down.  On  their  coming  down  they 
^topped  me ;  I  told  them  I  was  an  'o6Scer. 
Captain  FiUclarence  went  into  the  stable,  and 
there  were  two  persons  brought  out. 

Who  were  they? — ^Wibon  was  Q(ie.  and 
^radbom,  who  stands  on  l)is  rijght-hano  side; 
another. 

Did  yoo  searoh  the  person  of  Wijion?— I 
searched  Wilson,  and  round  some  ball  cart- 
ridges in  his  pocket,  an4  t  found  a  haversack 
on  nis  side,  suspended  across  his  shoulders, 
which  hung  on  the  right-hand  side  of  him. 

Did  you  find  any  thing  in  that  haversack  ? 
— Then  was  a  ball  cartridge  there,  and  a  pair 
of  scissors. 

How  maay  ball  cartridges  ?—IlMn  might 
be  about  two'  doxen. 

Did  yotv  fipd  any  tlung  else  ?— A  ^^  ^^t 
or  two. 

WUiiam  Charlu  Brodh  swom. — ^Examined 
by  Mr.  Soikitor  Qenend, 

I  believe  you  are  pne  of  the  Bow-street 
patrole? — ^Yes. 

Where  were  you  sutiosed  on  tl^e  23rd  of 
February,  in  the  evening  ? — t  just  turned  into 
John-street,  and  was  asking  a  coachman  whe* 
ther  he  had  seen  any  men ; 

Never  mind  that,  what  passed  at  that  ino- 
ment  ? — ^Mr.  Bimie  came  up  tp.  me  and  sai^ 
^  Run  Brooks,'*  and  pointed  over  the  way. 

What  did  you  see  over  the  way  ?— I  saw  the 
prisoner  logs  and  a  man  before  him  with  a 
Gutl|»s  drawn,  but  it  wa4.  so  dark  I  could  not 
distin^ish  whether  the  other  was  ope  of  our 
people  or  not ;  I  learnt  that  afterwards. 

In  coQseqi^encf  of  this  what  did  yo^i  do  F— 
I  saw  Inn  with  a  pistol  in  his  hana|  present- 
ing it  to  th^  other  man ;  I  said ''  vdu  scoundrel,'' 
be  turned  sharp  round,  and  s<ud,  '<  I  will  shoot 
you,*'  presenting  the  pbtol;  I 'made  a  snatch 
at  it,  and  he  fired  the  pistol. 

What  is  that  you  have  ii^  your  bandf — A 
fwat  coat ;  the  shot  pfuised  through  the  collar 
of  it,  through  this  coai  I  have  on  now,  and 
this  waistcoat ;  bruised  my  dioulder,  and  went 
Oft  at  the  back  of  mv  neck ;  ther^  is  a  mark  of 
it  here  [an  the  hack  rfhii  necU\, 

After  he  had  fired  the  pistol^  what  did  he 
d9  f — I  staggered  into  the  road  a  little  way, 
and  he  came  into  the  road  a  little  woy,  I  sup- 
pose, in  fear  of  my  partner,  and  then  ^ent  off 
towards  the  Edgware-road ;  he  was  not  above 
ten  yards;  I  pur^yed  V°^»  an^  just  as  he 
turned  the  corner,  a  very  little  way  fro^  the 
comer,  two  or  three  yards^  he  Hung  the  pistol 
from  hjm«  I  w^as  never  further  frohi  nim  than 
I  am  from  thatgentlua^ ;  I  c^ed  out  to  stop 
him,  because  I  thought  I  was  going  to  fall. 

Was  he  stopped  ?T-Yes,  he  was,  ^y  Moay 


fyp. — Prav  wpf  lord,  am  I  permitted  to  ask 
no  questions  r 

Xord  ChUtfJ^u^  wlMd(/.— You  ^xt  not  ippos 
your  trial  ^t  present* 

Mr-  Soikitor  GenmJ^^An  yoa  sate  those 
you  have  repeated,  are  the  ezpressioos  he  mad^ 
11^  of  ?— Yes,  I  am  quite  sure. 

hgf. — ^It  is  false. 

Mr.  SoikUor  6bier«l.— Alter  he  was  taken^ 
was  he  searched  ia  y owr  presence  T — ^We  took 
him  down  to  Marybone  watch-house*  I  said^ 
**  U  you  offer  to  put  your  haiid  into  one  of  your 
pockets,  I  will  knock  you  down,"  or  ^  knock 
your  brains  out;"  I  £d  not  know  but  that 
there  might  be  something  in  his  pocket ;  ho 
said  ^  You  may  as  well  as  at  another  tifie." 

Lord  Chief  Jmiiee  JMott.— This  does  not 
refer  to  the  general  matter ;  any  thing  ^l^ut 
him' is  evidence  in  confirmation  of  that. 

Mr.  SoUcUor  GeneraL — ^Did  you  search  him^ 
—Yes,  he  had  two  haversacks,  one  slun^  over 
his  shoulder,  and  another  over  his  arm. 

Had  he  a  great  coat  over  them  ? — Yes,  90  aa 
to  hide  them. 

What  ebe  did  ^ou  find  ?— I  found  a  belt 
buttoned  round  him,  appar^^itly  to  hold  two 
pistols  on  each  side. 

Two  brace  t — To  hold  two  pistols  on  eadi 
side ;  I  put  my  hand  into  his  rignt-hand  pocket 
and  pulled  out  a  tin  case  nearly  full  of  powder, 
and  a  letter  belonging  to  some  society :  I  thoi^t 
it  vras  the  Free-masons'  society. 

Did  you  find  anything  else? — ^No^  I  sair 
my  partner  take  three  slu^  out  qf  his  other 
pocket. 

Who  is  your  partner?— Ohafjup^oo;  ai^  m 
knife  case  about  that  long. 

Aboot  a  foot  long?— Nearly  that;  I  took 
nothing  else  but  a  knife  aqd  a  comb  firoqa 
him ;  he  was  confined,  and  I  went  back  to  ^A 
stable.  *  ' 

OUa  FraMm  Moay  MwtiaL — examined  iMr, 
Ut.SokatqrGeMraL 

I  believe  yo|i  are  a  ^tchman  l-^Yt^ 
Whs^  was  your  beat  on  Wednesday; 
the  23rd  of  February  ? — In  V^^  t^gwart. ,,  ^ 


kfti)  for  High  Tteason. 

%\A6tA«f  c^6  tni  caUM  otit  ^top  Met:  I  iook 
ore  h>ia  sdu  tilet  faitn. 

Did  ;oii  stop  him  ? — ^Yes ;  I  struck  at  Uiii, 
^M  lie  banght  iny  stick  in  his  h&tid,  and  then 
we  had  a  tussle ;  then  I  kept  him  till  Brooks 
Acam^  down,  and  #e  fotm  ^dtne  ^Idgs,  sii  or 
iseVedy  ana  ^omejpowd^r  in  a  tin  box,  at^d  a 
knife,  sheath,  andTa  bel^  oii  dach  side  td  bold 
apisto}. 

jfdti^  c%sMpibn  swdm.— £xatxlined  by 
]!ljfr.  Oahiey, 

You  are  o^e  of  the  Bow-street  officers  f — 
Yes. 

Did  foil  iecdrnikmy  (B^m  to  Crit6-s(ree^;  on 
the  night  of  the  23rf!  of  Febmaiy  ?— I  did. 

I  will  not  take  yoit  over  the  whol4  story; 
imt  did  ion  see  any  person  yoir  knew  get 
through  the  stable  and  getaway  ?-*No^  except 
Ingi- 

^  L^  Chirf  JuMtkt  AhbUt.-^lM  you  know 
bim  before  ? — No. 

Mr.  Gf«nury.-^Upoi^  th^  dtber  officers  going 
^  the  ladder,  did  yon  hear  Ings  say  any  thing  ? 
•^Yes. 

What  did  he  ittf  ?— He  said  ^  look  ont  above 
dkere,"  as  a  sfgnUi  to  I  thongfkt :  he  was  stand- 
ing with  his  back  against  the  wall,  just  facing 
ibe  ladder.  Itf^se  are  the  thiffg^  I  took  out 
df  tm  jacket  i^cief ;  this  is  ue  case  of  a 
knife,  four  pistol  balls,  and  a  key  and  a  pistol. 

Where  dra  yot^  tafie  those  frdm  him  r-— In 
Maiybone  watch-house. 

Au€r  Hk^  officers  w&rfe'  dtfven  down  ifhe 
l^defi  ditf  you  ^ee  aliy  person  escaping? — 
I  did  not  see  any  p^rsotat  in  the  stable ;  Siere 
was  a  person  got  aown  into  the  rack. 
,  Did  yott  see  liny  persotit  m^  hlw  efcape  } — 
I  saw  no  other  pets<m  but  lliiltlewoody  that 
Was  jn  Cato-street.  / 

.  Ited  he  any  ti^ng  in  his  hand  ?— A  sword, 
which  he  waved  once  or  twice  opposite  his 
person,  though  there  was  no  person  opposite 
to  him. 

Lieutenant  Frederick  FUxekaretiee  swoiVb-^ 
Bxaaued  by  Mr.  Atfnrt^  General. 

,  I  believe  vou  are  a  lieutenant  in  the  Cold- 
stream guards  T-^Yes. 

Do  yon  recollect,  on  the  23rd  of  February, 
gbfnjg  wHba  pitquet  to  John-Street! ?'^t  do. 

Yon  had  been  desired  to  attend  by  iSr. 
Bimie,  the  police  magistnfte?—!  had. 

About  what  hour  was  it  when  you  got'  to 
Jbfan-strsfet^  do  yotr  iweolfed  f — I  shotild  think 
near  eight,  between  eight  and  a  qnarCer  past. 

Softie  thbe  afltfr  yon  had  been  in'  John* 
eiVelet,  did  yon  hear  any  thing  that  attracted 
yoW  atteri<fori  tbwkrds  Cat6-slreet  ?— -Oirectly 
after  I  was  in  John-street,  I  heard  a  pistol  shot, 
wfkidi  appealed* to  coA^'from  Cato-street. 

Did  3^u  upon  that  gel  the  picquet  to  ad- 
vdlkrce  tbwftrdfs  Catd-street? — I  then  brought 
tl)e  i^qnet  forward  double  quick  towams 
Oito-streei 

We  ufldisntaiid*  t&ere  ii  an  arch  ovtr  &e 


A.  D.  ihm.  {sii 

entrance  inio  (l^dtb-stfe^t  out  of  Jotiii-sti^et  ? — 
Yei. 

On  entering  that,  a^hway,  what  occurred? 
-^I  m^t  an  officet-  who  halloed  out,  "  soldiers, 
soldiers,  the  door  way !  the  stable.'*  I  ran 
towards  the  stable,  and  I  was  met  on  ny  right 
hand  by  one  man,  aiid  on  my  left  by  another : 
the  man  at  the  stable  door  cut  at  me  with  a 
ifword,  and  the  ode  on  my  left  presented  some- 
thing at  me ;  the  one  in  the  door-way  seeing 
a  body  df  troop^  coining  on  (the  picqnet)  ran 
into  the  stable. 

Lord  Chief  Jmtke  Ahbott.^Wta  that  the 
man  that  cut  at  you  ? — ^Yes,  my  lord,  we  ex- 
changed several  cuts  before  he  went  in. 

Mr,  AUonie$  GenehoXr-^WhAt  did  tfie  oQier 
man  do  upon  that  7 — ^I  oould  not  see  after  he 
had  done  this,  but  the  moment  he  presented 
a  pistol,  the  other  man  cut  at  me;  there  was  a 
scuffle  at  my  right  hand :  I  ran  into  the  stable 
door. 

There  was  a  scuffle  between  Legg  and  the 
men  ? — ^I  believe  there  was.  I  folkrwed  the 
prisoners  in ;  I  ran  in,  and  came  against  some- 
body inside  the  stable :  he  gave  himself  up. 
saying,  <^  do  not  hurt  me,  do  not  kill  me,  and 
I  will  ten  you  aU.*' 

Do  you  know  who  thkt  Was? — I  do  not 
know,  it  was  in  the  dark. 

Was  it  one  of  the  men  that  was  secured  ? — 
Yes,  it  was ;  I  gave  him  to  some  of  my  men, 
and  ran  into  the  stable. 

I  believe  then  you  went  to  the  up-stairs 
room  ?— No.  I  then  ran  up  into  one  of  the 
stalls,  and  secured  another  man  :  the  soldiers 
took  him  away.  I  then  called  to  a  file  of 
grenadiers,  to  follow  me  lip  the  ladder:  tfpon 
my  ffoing  up  Stadrs,  there  was  a  light  appeared 

f'aaually  coming  up  from  the  bottom :  when 
got  up,*  I  sec\ired  fttnf  three  ro  Ave. 

You  do  not  know  the  number  ? — No  \  1  do 
not  knoW  whether  it  was  three,  four,  or  five : 
I  rather  think  it  was  four. 

It  was^foby,  Mt  ii  is  not  material  F-^T  went 
down  imme'diat^Ty  after  having  secured  them ; 
directly  after  I  got  up,  I  fell  agkinst  the  body 
of  poor  Smi&M. 

He  was  lying  dead  f — ^Yes,  dose  to  the  top 
of  ^he  ladder. 

I  believe,  abo,  you  saw  ami  in  the  loft 
above  P—Several; 

Mr.  Attomof  Qeneral. — ISily  lord,  I  will  not 
call  any  of  the  other  soldiers ;  I  do  not  feel 
it  necessary  to  tronble  your  loraship  with  their 
evidenOe. 

Samad  Btrauki  TmnUien  8woni.-^£iamiaed 
by  Mr.  SoUciior  Qmeral. 

I  belieVeybn  are  alfbw-street  officer?— Yes, 
lam. 

Did  you,  on  the  morning  of  the  24th,  go  to 
Brunt's  lodgings  with  a  warrant  ?— Yes,  I  did. 

When  you  went  up  stairs,  did  you  first  go 
into  the  ftoift  room,  or  into  the  back  room? — 
Into  the  front  room  two  pair  of  stairs. 


893] 


1  GEOBGB  IV. 


Trial  of  ArAurThiilkmood 


19H 


Did  ^ou  Much  tboM  looms  f— I  did. 

I  beliere  yoa  found  nothing  material  there  ? 
—-No,  nothing  material. 

After  Ton  had  searched  those  rooms,  did  you 
go  into  the  back  room  ? — Yes* 

What  did  you  find  there  f — I  found  two  rush 
baskets,  one  tied  up  in  an  apron,  aqd  the  other 
pot  tied  up* 

Where  was  Brunt?  had  j<m  any  conversa- 
tion  with  him? — He  was  in  the  front  room 
while  I  searched  the  back  room;  it  was  an 
empty  room. 

lyid  you  ask  him  about  those  baskets  ? — 
Yes,  be  said  he  knew  nothing  of  them ;  he  did 
not  belong  to  that  room ;  it  was  not  his  apart- 
ment. 

Lord  Chief  Jutke  AbboU.^Did  he  say  he 
knew  nothing  of  them  ?— That  the  room  did 
not  belong  to  him. 

Mr.  Solicitor  GrneroL — Did  you  ask  him  as 
to  the  baskets? — ^Yes,  I  brought  them  in;  he 
laid  he  knew  nothing  of  them« 

And  he  ajso  add^  that  the  room  did  not 
belong  to  him  ? — Yes,  he  did  :  there  was  a 
pike  shaft  found  in  the  room,  and  an  iron 
pot ;  that  was  all  besides  the  baskets. 

Were  there  any  marks  of  pitch  or  tar  09  the 
iron  pot  7— Tar,  I  beUeve,  there  was  at  the 
bottom  of  it. 

Did  any  convjersadon  take  place  in  his  pre- 
sence, as  to  whoi9  the  room  belonged  .to  f  did 
the  landlady  come  up?— W)ien  I  found  h.e 
denied  the  apartments^  I  sent  for  the  land- 
lady. 

Mrs.  Rdgers  f— Yes. 

Did  she  come  ?— She  did.  I  asked  her  who 
those  apartments  belonged  to. 

In  Brunt's  presence  ?— Yes ;  she  said  that 
bsr  niece  Eleanor  Parker  had  let  them  to  a 
man  she  did  xyoi  know  who,  but  in  the  presence 
of  Brunt. 

Wbaterer  she  saidt  she  said  in  the  presence 
of  Brunt  f — Yes. 

What  did  Brunt  say  as  to  his  knowing 
any  thing  of  the  man  who  had  taken  those 
apartmenuf— I  asked  Brunt  who  this  map 
was  f  He  said  he  had  met  him  in  a  public- 
house. 

Lord  Chief  Jutiice  JMoM.— When  yon  asked 
Mrs;  Rogen  to  mtom  the  teck  room  belonged, 
what  answer  did  she  make  ? — She  said  she  did 
not  know  the  man;  her  niece  had  let  it  tp  a 
man  when  Brunt  was  in  his  company. 

Mr.  Solicitor  GeaeroL-^yfW  did  Brunt  say 
<o  that? — He  did  not  say  any  more  than  I 
have  repeated :  that  it  was  a  man  at  a  public- 
house,  but  he  did  not  know  his  name,  for  I 
asked  him  his  name. 

What  did  he  say  about  a  man  at  a  public- 
house  ? — ^That  it  was  a  man  at  a  public-house 
who  was  along  with  him,  when  the  lodgings 
were  taken, 

Wa3  that  the  answer  he  gaTe  when  the 

?ueatio9  waff  put^  who  bad  takea  the  room  ?— 
es. 


After  Ton  had  searched  tfus  place  did  joa 
go  to  Tldd's  ?— -Yes;  I  did  immediatdy  aftev- 
waids. 

Where  was  that  P — In  Hole-in-the-wall  pas« 
Base,  No.  5,  near  GrayVinn-lane. 

When  you  went  to  Tidd's,  what  did  you  find 
at  Tidd's  ?— I  found  a  rery  large  box,  a  box 
full  of  ball  cartridges. 

Lord  Chief  Juttiet  Ahbott. — ^Do  you  mean  to 
say  a  box,  or  a  very  large  box  ? — ^About  two- 
feet  long,  and  a  foot  and  a  half  wide.  I 
counted  the  cartridges,  and  they  amounted  to 
965. 


Mr.  SoUdtor  Genera/.— Did  you  find  any 
thing  else  at  Tidd's  ?— Yes, 
.   What?— ^me  grenades. 

How  many  ? — ^Ten ;  and  a  great  quantity  of 
powder. 

Of  gunpowder? — Yes. 

Did  you,  besides  the  ball  cartridges  that  you 
found  in  the  box,  find  any  other  baU  cartridges 
there  7 — Yes,  in  a  haversack. 

How  many  ? — ^A  great  many. 

Can  you  tell  us  about  how  many  ?'-4d4  balls 
in  the  haversack;  171  ball  cartridges ;  69  ball 
cartridges '  without  powder,  that  is  a  ball  in 
each  cartridge;  and  about  three  pounds  o£ 
gunpowder  in  a  paper. 

Tnere  was  a  coarse  canvas  cloth.  Did  you. 
find  any  thine  in  thatP—Ten  grenades  and 
eleven  bags  of  powder. 

Are  those  the  same  grenades  you  have  just 
spoken  of  P — ^Yes. 

What  fretfi  the  ten  grenades  in  P — ^In  a 
brown  wrapper  whijch  was  tied  up  ;  ten  gre- 
nades and  eleven  bags  of  powder,  one  pound 
each. 

I^irtf  CilUef/wftceiMoir.---What  tort  of  bags 
were  those  r — ^Flannel  bags. 

Were  there  any  of  the  same  description  of 
bags  that  were  etiapty  P— -There  ware  ten  flan- 
nel bags  empty. 

Mr.  Solicitor  Genera/,— Were  there  any 
balls  ?— There  was  a  small  bag  with  a  powder 
flask  and  66  balls. 

Musket  balls  T— Yes  $  4  flints,  and  37  pike 
handles. 

Are  all  those  things  here?— They  are  ali 
here. 

You  told  us  you  took  the  two  baskets  yoo 
found  at  Brunt's  ?— Yes. 

You  afterwards,  I  presume,  seardied  the 
baskets  ? — Yes. 

TeU  us  what  were  the  contents  of  those 
baskets  ?<»Nine  papery,  I  believe  I  mentioned 
before,  with  rope  yam  and  tar,  and  some  steel 
filings.  In  another  basket  there  were  four 
grenades,  three  papers  with  rope  yam  and  tar» 
two  bags  of  powder  of  one  pound  each. 

The  same  description  of  bags  as  those  yon 
have  just  spoken  of? — Yes,  flannel  bags,  and 
five  flannel  bags  empty,  one  paper  with  some 
powder  in,  one  leather  bag  with  63  balls  in  it; 
that  is  all  that  was  in  the  basket ;  there  wera 
also  one  iron  pot  and  one  jtike  bandit^ 


«Ml 


Xof  Hi^^  TmucDu 


A.  D.  1890. 


[S96 


Thofe  yott  tMk  into  your  custody,  lad  &ey 
are  here  ?•— Hiey  are* 

Samuel  Hartules  TamUon  cross-examined 
by  Mr.  Adolpkut, 

When  was  it  you  found  all  those  things  ? — 
Hie  34th  of  February. 

Was  Brunt  present  when  you  Urand  those 
Ithings  ? — ^Yes,  be  was. 

As  to  those  found  at  Hdd's,  Tidd  had  been 
away  from  the  day  before? — ^Yes* 

Samud  HeraiUt  Taunton  re-examined 
by  Mr.  SoUeUor  GeneraL 

What  time  was  it  when  you  went  to  Tidd's  ? 
»— I  went  to  his  lodgings  after  I  had  been  to 
Brunt's,  I  beliere  it  was  about  half  after  eight 
o'clock. 

.Daniel Bishop  swom^ — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gtamey, 

You  are  an  officer  at  Bow-street  ?-"I  am. 

On  the  morning  of  Thursday,  the  34th  of 
February,  did  you,  with  other  officers,  go  to 
apprehend  Thtstlewood? — I  did,  to  No.  8^ 
White-street,  Little-Moorfields. 

About  what  time  ? — Between  ten  and  eleven 
in  the  morning. 

What  was  the  name  of  the  person  who  lived 
in  the  house? — Harris. 

After  searching  different  rooms  in  the  house, 
did  you  get  a  key  and  open  the  door  of  a  room 
on  the  ground-floor? — ^l  reoeived  a  key  from 
Mrs.  Harris. 

You  had  searched  the  up-stairs  rooms  first? 
r-Yes. 

Did  you  at  last  receive  a  key  from  Mrs. 
Harris,  and  open  the  door? — ^I  opened  the 
door  fiuung  Mis.  Haiiis*s  room  on  the  ground- 
floor. 

Upon  opening  the  door,  whom  did  you  see 
ia  the  room  ? — I  saw  ThisUewood  put  his  head 
from  under  the  clothes,  he  was  in  bed,  the 
shutters  were  shut,  but  Uiere  were  some  small 
holes  which  admitted  light  enough  for  me  to 
see  who  it  was. 

What  did  you  do? — I  had  a  pistol  in  one 
handy  and  a  staff  in  another ;  I  told  him  my 
name  was  Bishop,  of  Bow*street,  I  had  a 
warrant  against  him,  and  I  threw  myself  on  the 
bed. 

What  did  he  say?— Thistlewood  jaid,  ^I 
shall  make  no  resistance.'^ 

Did  you  afterwards  search  any  of  his  clothes  ? 
— With  the  assistance  of  my  brother  officer, 
we  secured  him ;  he  had  then  his  breeches  and 
stockings  on  in  bed. 

Were  his  coat  and  waistcoat  lyinjg  by  the 
bed  side  f — They  were. 

Did  yon  seardi  the  waistcoat  pocket  ? — ^Yes, 
I  did. 

What  did  you  find  in  It?— I  found  three 
leaden  imlb,  two  flints,  one  ball  cartridge,' 
and  one  blank  cartridge,  likewise  a  small  silk 
sash. 

Did  you  find  any  thing  in  his  coat  pocket  ? 
'—I  saw  Lavender  take  vjiOm  his  coat  pocket  a 


black  cloth  belt,  with  a  plac^  to  put  pistols  and 
a  sword  in,  in  conv^ng  the  prisoner  in  the 
coach, 

Mr,  Owmejf. — We  need  not  go  into  that. 

Daniel  Bi$hop  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  CuniwoA 

Did  Edwards  go  with  you? — ^I  do  not  think 
either  of  them  did;  we  have  several  of  that 
name  at  Bow-streeL 

I  do  not  mean  one  of  your  officers,  but 
another  man  of  the  name  of  Edwards  ? — I  do 
not  know  any  other. 

You  went  in  consequence  of  information  ?— 
Yes,  which  I  received  not  ten  minutes  before;^ 
I  did  not  know  of  it  ten  minutes  before. 

Did  your  informant  go  with  you?— No^  he 
did  not;  or  I  should  not  have  gone  to  the 
other  rooms  fint 

Stqphen-  Lanender  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey. 

Produce  the  belt  you  found  in  Thistle- 
wood's  pocket?  [T£>  wUneu  ptoAiced  the 
same.'] 

There  are  places  for  two  pistdt?^-Ye8^ 
there  are.  [^George  Thomoi  Jbteph  BtUhnenf 
produced  varunu  amckt^l 

Mr.  SoHdtor  Oenerali — ^First  produce  those 
found  at  Cato-street? — ^Thisisthe  mop-stick, 
that  was  left  at  the  public-house  Iproduang  itl, 
that  is  the  belt  taken  off  of  Tidd  jjtroducing  t/J, 
these  are  two  of  the  swords  lYound  in  tlie 
room. 

In  what  room?— The  loft  in  Cato-ctreet; 
this  is  the  large  grenade  found  in  Cato-stieet, 
which  was  given  to  me  by  Nixon.. 

Mr.  Solicitor  G«fisni2.— The  arms  till  within 
the  last  twentr-four  houri  were  loaded,  the 
greater  part  of  them  f-— They  were  unl<Nided 
yesterday. 

Were  they  loaded  with  ball  ?— They  were» 
and  this  is  one  of  the  hand-grenades;  there 
were  ten  of  them,  one  has  b^n  since  taken 
away  by  order  of  colonel  Congreve. 

AJmymm  fMr.  OamfeiU^|.— It  will  be  ne- 
cessaly,  perhaps,  my  lord,  to  have  one  of  those 
opened,  as  it  is  stated  they  contain  powder  ? 

Mr.  SoUciior  GeneraL — One  of  them  has  been 
opened^  gentlemen,  and  you  will  have  evi- 
dence before  you  of  what  it  contained. 

"Rnthven^ — This  is  the  string  Bradbum  had 
tied  round  him ; .  these  are  two  candlesticks ; 
these  are  the  six  ball  cartridges  Btadbum  had  in 
his  pocket. 

Lord  Chief  Jtatiee  Abbotts — If  you  could 
keep  by  themselves  the  things  found  in  Cato- 
street,  it  would  be  convenient.  [Hiewitneu 
handed  in  eeoeral  pultolSf  ewordi,  and  a  ib^.] 

Mr.  Solicitor  QeneraL'^Ttonk  whom  was  that 
knife  taken  ? 

ITrilgAf .— I  took  it  from  the  stout  man  in  tho 
stable. 


mni 


1  <SfeOR6£1V. 


Tritl«i 


f^aUemod 


t«fif% 


in  the  loft  in  Cato-street. 

JiwiMMi^llilM  M  «i  Mpe  t«M»  dial  Vas 
found  in  ike  loft. 

Mr.  SoUeUor  6kWf(d^ Were  there  any  more 
Ihitigi  in  Gafo.«trtet  ?-^Kel  lltal  1  Uk  hWiire 
•f  I  the  abldien  had  iome. 

Have  you  those  which  tfa*  teMWh  had  ?•«« 
4-»The  aoMieft  had  them  themsatfes^  tiey 
walked  ihmm,  Ifeid  tiill  pMd«<Sft  Hmm,  then^ 
aelrea. 

Ilr.  StXckfff'  Odm^.^h  is  Ikrt  n^dei^ 
lot  us  to  etaittine  tb<!  ^dl^ff ;  itf  teamed 
friends  dd  il6t  de^e  (htt ;  take  OkttA  frcM  did 

WUmft.'^Tbu  it  the  pistol  iM  st  nijonit 

Legg- 

Lord  Ckkf  JtolMs  Jttod^^Then  that  is  not 
found  Ml  the  loftN-No,  ngr  lord. 

Ut4  MMtor  CMIMliii^Was  any  tlfti|Mff 
found  in  the  loft  ? — ^Yea ;  these  pikes  itaid  * 

WbM  10m  ifis  MMd^rlMW  Mid  ? WA  m 

loft. 
Wheie  were  thoee  Dikes  found  ?-i-In  the  Mt 
ttare  you  Counted  tiew  many  tliere  are  of 

t&em  t-^l  have  not  in  thai  pareef  ^  theia  are 

sk  in  one  pattett 

Mtfi  Adiiilr  diNllMif .-u<fcM  0f  tffMti  «f(« 
bayonets,  and  some  are  sharpened  files ;  aMrC 
<«MMhlfd  ttrtf  flitoi  Mid  t&e  MI»Cfeinky6nah; 
tto  tajf"  Wii  MiUVAe^tMMW  f»iottl«<li^ 
handles;  theii#l9tf  sMiT  appMiftf/ nftid^  txt 
senw  into  poles!  , 

HM^.-^Tfiliir  is  th^  6aff  Kli<(  M#deV  lik€ti 
<mt  of  the  AfAs  r  tAii  Wflr  thir(lb  ifi  thV  loft 
{handing  m  anmdcet]^  these  were  tak'ctt  tt  the 
Tolef/bibh^ m  a  bi^Sm,  mMse^pikMid,  talfa 
daieft  nuttpkihiA^  tunffMdU  dM  HMHUA 

Was  flitt  swotrf  tak^t)  itf  th(t  loft?'— iTetf,  ii 
'wasy  and  here  h  a  fueft  fbrih^  for  tHe'biMose ; 
tha^smallr  pistol  WM  Ibwfd  «ider»lMMu(^in 
4haiialile* 

Was  tha*oirbine  found  » the  bft^-^I  «n 
aiot  quite  sure  as  to  that. 

JUrd  dijf  Juirjtf  JMoH^^n  ik^  nol  ¥c«ry 
inatmial  Im  thcT  pnodubtfon  df  fhem^  whefhef 
<they  were  found  in  the  left  er  taken  from  die 
persons  of  the  pfisoners,  in  the  loft^ 

l^iiMfc'^Thay  MM^  eU  MAmt  \tt  Cato^ 
street. 

Mr.  SdiuUft'  GeMNA^Y^  ha^  gh^  lie 
iwhai  were  found  in  thu  loft  >  wW  you  grvie  am 
^  thu  dungs' thtfl  wever  founds  im  Cato^wtiHwc^ 
whether  i«  the  Wft  w  e v  lh»  puisoHs*  of*  die^ 
prisoners  ? — ^Ihose  pike  staves- were  found>in 
theloftov^rthe  stalile;  &iitl^annagancanspei& 
to  them.  [One  of  the  pka  wu  terewedwio  a 
hmMe^y  I)m  {>  «IhmMim9<  1M  fovnd^  in 
the  suhe. 


PrMnee  ttBy^vunl  we^  fouin  Xm.  Ike  p^fsona 
of  the  prisoners  ? — ^A  smdl  hNdiaiES&iitftf  ihd  4 
sword  were  found  on  J>i?id*Hi. 

And  any  thing  more } — ^l^t  upon  him ;  these 
were  found  ana  brtraght  to  the  -ofiice.  having 
been  takei  ft  ihe  t)f^fx!iie3  df  a  p^j^tf  of  the 
name  of  George,  who  was  appi%netad§d  fAimd- 
M^  At «  MIM»  Ml  l^lb*  d^; 

We  hare  nothing  to  do  wftk  t&otr;  takd 

This  is  thd  due  diit  Addddia^  fxkH  ftoA 
Wilmv  that  he  fired  at  him  as  l^e  went  in. 
(Three  ar/jmr  mote  piU<^  handed  m.] 
Will  the  soidiersy  each,  recogniie  those  titer 

FMfh  Whoii  WM^  tBdM  b^lis  ^HMt  hi^  tKkiU  f 
'"^^HU^fMnbd  i  iboM^  td^6  duS'  i^ert'  tn#n  froin 
logs,  and  that  belt  and  the  case  coniahnng 
some  powder.  '  j    *  ^■ 

Now  give  us  the  kiiifo  r    [It  xoai  prodtieedJ] 

The  handle  of  tnat  is  covered  over  with  wax'« 
endr— Iti^  TUsMl|f[M«iiKl^«}#ii^  taken 
ftom  WilMA/ IM  «liU  s#0A  fiP5di  Wfliotf.  I 
Mf  ptflMtf,  the  kni^  ind  the'  iwdOl  #<<r« 
tftefi  ttfM  attHln  that  gdt  «Wiy  thalflft  (aiMoC 
identify,  the  baf  #il  tidt«n  tiotA  W!bdli. 

Y<MI  iM^tf  noV  tiMhiccfd  all  tMt  «ri»  tiAen 
in  Cato-street  f — Yes,  I  have. 

llu#  tfr(MHMf  frtlat*  WflV  tAdi/  df  Biudt's 
lodgingsf  [The  witne»  phtdkced  M»  tadteM 
tfid  &nihih^c9fidMth&t  witf  oftKt^  Out  i^&kt  of 
HiehddtM.]    ThiM  ]l9Me¥  IAl^  cotftaids  bidls. 

T^at  10  otd  of  th#  imkB  t^'  filled  #ia^ 
powder? — ^Yes. 

Thef  di^  ai  about  l^  MEM^  ihii^f—l^^ 
are  much  about ;  there  is  another  one  Mttf,' 
aftd  thU^  eikptf. 

Show  sottie^of  (he  firi  ballvT'^'hiis  ii  ^Sfy 
nwM^ Ov  foi^  dipped  in  tar  fpra&ncutf  wk 

Show  one  the  grenades  T— This  is  one  [  9^ 

TMy  aM  the  iM^m  tlitf  grtoid^  Med  tt 
Galo-sMet  f--Yes>  Heref  i9  another  basfctt 
notdOHto-dp  hi'  d  htddkerdier,  t^lch  seems  tor 
contaid  di^  sitM"  Mnf  of  dkSdge  ;  die^  we  an  of 
a  sort  [producing  thernl, 

FireballtfMreA. 

That  is  diO'^iroiir  pot-df^prtiich  you*madenete» 
tibnT^Yes. 

Is  thertf  any  amMai^libef  of  pitdi  and  ta^ 
having  been  boilea  in  it  ? — ^Yes,  there  is. 

Now  produ<!e  dioM  diat-  were  tiiken  atHdd's 
lodgings  ? 

TaMon  [ptdiAdiig  (9(dM].— Here  ire  965 
bun  cftiftridges. 

The  bot  IS  q\iitd^foAK-It  is;*  there  are  fife 
in  each  of  these  parcels. 

Hhtf  tttr  doie^  up  id  little  parcels  f— Yes  ; 
all  in  nves,  with  a  bsll  iu  ^Hrf  one. 

What  irib  that  Big  f 

Jlidftuen.-— Those  are  the  gRoades. 

Mlr<  Micibr'  Ommral'  (To  Tauakm.y^Yent 
enunideddiafr^^Yei^;  het»ai»tlte  bagSyCon«» 
taining  eadi  a  pound  of  gunpowder. 

jf  J^m%  (id¥.  €hadcmL)^Yfm  have 

URBlglieu  tlMflri^^X  MITe. 


Mr.  Stiwfyt  a^iiepvi^.--That  iai  all,  I  be- 
U^veT^Theice  are  tw9i  ^o^n  moirft  of  t)k^ 

^That  ^wro  Ukeo  ^  H^^'^  ?— Yes. 

Are  th^  of  ^e  sai^e  tjogrt  ^  tho^  «poo  ^. 
table  ?«^£xactly  tfie  f^Q^* 

Yes. 

Mfi  Actor  JMmwii  caHed  agcan^— Bxamined 

1>y  Mr.  J^omey  6<iMndL 

{fi|Q  ?— I  esy  the  u|9t  oae. 

Are  ypu  quite  sure  0(f  tkat? — ^Ye^;  th|»e  if 
^  ms^V  on  tn^  blade  bj;  iv]4(^  I  k^oi^  it 

Seijaaii  Ekoard  Smton  swont-TrBxamtnedby 

Mr*  Garn^. 

'  Are  jou^^iqei^in.theBoiral  AIt^ler]^7-rr 

Have  Yoi^  ea^quned  one  of  tbose  gieoadef 
produced  to  you  ^t  Boiy-^reet  ? — ^I  baye> 

How  }8  it  composed  ^-rTbe  bottpQC^  of  it  if 
^  tin  qase  about  thjree  in^:!^  long,  i^id  then, 
projecting  about  a  quarter  c^  an  incl^  there  is 
a  tin  tube  brazed  in.    You  see  the  outsi4a  ot 


What  is  the  priming  in  the  tube.?-TTlt  is  a 
composition  saltp^e,  as  &r  asl  caiqi,  a^cer^aifi^ 
powder  and  brimstone. 

Orer  the  tin  what  is  thf|^  I-r^t  is  patched 
just  at  the  end  of  the  tin. 

"What  is  wrapped  over  itTT—Jtoi^yani  e% 
ticely  round  it. 

Is  there  any  thing  (l^tiened  in  the  rope-yam  I 
— 7Nezt  to  the  tin  there  iis  a  body  of  oakum 
about  an  inch  thick,  and  it  is  cemented  then 
i^ith  tar  and  rosin  mixed  up  together  to  make 
it  fast    It  is  very  fast,  and  iifill  not  peel  otf. 

Do  you  then  find  any  pieces  of  iron?*- 
Tbere  were  twelve  pieces  of  iron  planted  round 
one  that  I  op(ened|  lii  difierept  directipus  regu- 
I^tlyround.  ' 

WiBX  tjyme  W9uhi  it  t^e  frpm  the.  Ughtine 
^  the  j^sfltbffof^  t^e  grenade  wofoild  axplodel 
-7^  Gfhi^t  eiifcOy  sfiy;  I  suppoae  alKfut  twenty 
ot  tbilty.  seconds ;   the,  tube  Fas  something 

If  one.of  tftflj^^ip^  to  WW^  i^,  ^.  ipom 

^55  ^ep9  ^.^.9  ^  aumber  tf  PWm  T**' 
w;ouId  Be  Jje  copij^^p^  1-^U  w>m  i%  % 

great  deal  of  damage ;  it  would  be  ▼eiy4^?^1)fh 

Y«[l 

'  'Jukfi  so.ma^y  buUeto  T-rrYw- 

"^H^v "^to.yvpi ha^^ :  ioef  iJLijpp€aato 
yi^u  to  be  n^xprnc  to  tj)e  one  y^u  opeufidT—. 
Yef,  the  yei^r .  mo^eL 

Take  your  kni|e,'  and  open  tl^at-^^t  ^^1 
t^l^e  a  long  whil^  to  opei^  if .  ' 


4  Jippien  (Mr.  4Aio^)»-^7V  Jm^  «i|fc 
(p  hay^  li  opieaed. 

Mr.  Attomm/  deneraZ-rr-B^r  all  means,  gea- 
demen.  TOne  wof  taken  te  pieces  in  ike  m'etence 
aftheJ^.J 

lift.  Qcvr9iaf.-v»What  i|xe  thosv  j^  tu^v« 
qoxne  to  n^wf-trTife  trails,  ^t  naiisp 

A  Jwymm  (Nh.Aiie^t^. )^li  is  what  ihstena 
OB  ^e  Ufe  ii^  the  can  wheels  r  some  appear  to 
be  old  and  some  new. 

Wiffm'-^^nap  ^  W»  old  VUt*  st09VPg« 

Mr.  Gmm^.r^Al\  that  tightness  lendem  i^ 
the  m^re  eflbotuall — Ye^  here  is  another 
Stpckingj  and  then  we  come  to  the  iam,  tk% 
caicais  i^fAe  vftnsts  opened  Ma  im  ctesl.  Hera 
is  the  powder  in  it,  and  it  is  very  good  too. 

A  Jufymqf^  (B^r.  Al4engy.)^'!p^  you  eonsider 
that  food  gunpowder  b^  \U,  |^r;ipi^siUP<^  tm 
Yes,  il  i^^  yery  poo4. 

Ms.  Gumcvr-rTak^  into  your,  hand  one  of 
thoaawa  eall  fiina-baUSr  bave  you  ewaininaA 
them  also 'J^— Yea,  i  have.  > 

What  appean  to  bathe  camposition  o^them  ? 
-^la  is  oakunu  lac,  ^ui  atoaa^bfiBiatpna 
ponnded;  may  W  there  is  rosia. 

A  ^wi/immi^  4i^ffiify).-rTherj  '^  m 
kilUcrankie  ^^4  r^fiis^  gf  th«  Ko^w*  if  .^bfi^  f-m 
Yes,  there  i^ 

Mr.  Gtamiy. — Ji  oaa  of  thaaa  wm  lighlad|^ 
and  t|)rowB  into  a  baoa^k  •»  m  buiMKngif 
would  it  set  it  on  fire  ^»Yes,  it  would  be  sur* 
to  set  it  on  ia%  i  nothing  oouU  pot  il  out  a* 
long  as  there  was  ai^  ol  if  left* 

How  long  wuiild  it  biK|if-*7hree>  orlaor 
minntaa. 

It  would  ae^  wood  €niae^-4)byes^;  ifia- 
feu  on  woo^  it  weadd  aet  it  on  iae. 

And  if  it  fell  ou  strata,  it  wouM  sat  thai  em- 
fire  more  easily  f r-OerlaiBly* 

Mr.  AWmn^  Q^wroi— Tha^ipy  Iprd,  y^  t)kt 
case  Qn  tha  pa;^  of  tl^  Cn>^* 

nsvMica. 

Ha4  It  l)^  peri^itted  to  ijoie^oonifist^fi^y  witfi 
my  01^  a«f^  pf  m^  ap^  prpfes^iona^  ^g^ 
tp  b^y^  dj^din^$)^e  ardnonsUf^  i4i(Ak»i«.|ipw 

upoin  tl^  pr^M^t  moni^Qtpn^  oocaaimf   Bulk 

pismai^.ijt  ufqneplthe  brigfxtfift  aUnbulief  oC 
our  pfofession,  anq.  w)iicb  yre  tl^e  men^)>eca  o( 
tl^i^t,  prpfession  t^ipk  redonni}^  to  our  greatestr 
csedit,  th^t  we  §^fjf  not  atliber^  to  retuse  our 
a^jsiat^ce  to  p^x^i^  in  the  siUu^tion  of  tha 
u^iiGirtuna,^  man  a^  the  bar.    Ko  man  cai^  feal$ 

mpre  dfl^'x  impjpw^  ^^  ^^  T»itb,«^  <5*nw»> 
of  t)ie,v^iy  gr/eaf  weight  of  thi)  aiyiuo«ia>  ta^ki  I 

hf^y^  to  pei^rm.    I  feel  ths^  the  uufprtunata^ 

Pftfon^x  h^  a  right  to  demand  from  me  to  do, 

my  duty,  boldlyapd  fearlessly,  unawe4  byanx« 

consideiatio^  of  the  power  of  government,  irhffi 

are  his  pro^ecu^^fi  an^  uiv^^M^  by  t^% 


Sdl]  1  GEbftG£  IV". 


Triat^ Arthur  TkittUtnod 


m^ 


ifiurement  of  hope  in  oonciliatiDg  Adr  favour* 
I  feel  also  that  I  hare  a  sacred  duty  to  dis- 
charge to  my  country,  which  is^  to  render  my 
best  assistance  to  the  prisoner  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  law,  as  relating  to  his  case, 
and  not — ^if  I  had  even  power  or  ingenuity 
enough  to  effect  it — to  attempt  to  penrert  that 
law,  or  to  defeat  the  purposes  or  justice.  I 
also  feel  that  I  owe  this  to  my  own  fair  fame, 
which  was  my  only  inheritance,  and  is  my  best 
possession. 

With  those  feelings  pressing  me  down  so  as 
almost  to  unnerre  me,  I  hope  I  may  eay  that  I 
look  for  assistance  with  humble  confidence  to 
that  Power,  which^  however  men  may  disre* 
gaid  in  the  times  of  prosperity  or  of  levity, 
yet,  in  distress  and  in  difficulty,  and  in  the 
moments  of  trial,  we  all  look  to  for  consola- 
tion and  support. 

It  is  fit  that  upon  an  occasion  of  this  sort, 
you  should  know  something  of  the  man  who 
addresses  you.  And  although  I  readily  admit 
that  for  a  man  to  speak  pubticly  of  himself  is 
«saally  an  arrogant  vanity,  yet,  as  I  am  anxious 
that  those  arguments  w4idi  I  may  address  to 
yoU|  ahould  at  least  have  all  the  weight  that 
diey  may  intrinsically  deserve,  I  am  desirous 
you  should  know  that  I  have  no  bias  on  mv 
mind  to  impel  me  aside  from  the  even  path 
6f  my  duty.  For  it  is  not  to  be  denied,  that 
Ais  unfbrtunate  transaction  arises  out  of  a  state 
of  things  in  our  country,  wludi  we  must  all 
lament  and  deplore;  and  it  is  equally  true, 
that  men  vrill  have  prejudices  on  certain  points 
connected  with  tins  prosecution,  it  having  re* 
lation  to  certain  political  transactions,  upon 
which  various  and  opposing  feelings  are  wide* 
If  difibsed.  For  myself,  though  I  cannot  deny 
as  an  Englishman  that  I  have  feelings  on 
eertain  points  of  government,  yet  I  never  en- 
rolled myself  with  any  political  party.  I  never 
aUended  public  politiMl  meetings  in  my  life, 
so  that  I  stand  unwarped  by  party  spirit.  I 
am  equally  as  free  horn  bias  on  the  other  hand, 
ioT,  with  respect  to  government,  I  never  re- 
ceived either  in  or  out  of  my  profession  the 
slightest  favour,  and  none  have  I  reason  to 
hope  for  or  eipect,  so  Uiat,  looking  into  my 
own  breast,  I  nave  no  motive  thereto  influence 
aie  but  that  of  doins  my  duty,  and  that  I  will 
endeavour  faiily  and  honestly  to  perform. 
*  The  weight  of  this  duty  both  to  my  learned 
ftiend  and  myself  is  not  a  little  increased  by 
the  lateness  of  Uie  moment  at  which  we  were 
called  upon  to  execute  it.  Not  until  Thursday 
nij^ht  was  it  that  I  received  instructions  in 
this  case,  or  knew  that  I  was  to  be  called  upon 
to  defend  the  prisoner.  In  that  short  interval, 
I  have  had  to  prepare  myself  to  meet  the  first 
talents  at  the  bar,  long  and  sedulously  employ- 
ed in  considering  and  maturely  adjusting 
every  debateable  point,  aided  with  all  the 
support  that  the  wealth,  the  power,  and  the 
influence  of  government  can  give  them:  while, 
on  the  contrary,  I  have  had  scarcely  a  day's 
notice  to  argue  before  you  whatever  might 
arise  out  of  this  vefy  important  case« 


With  the  attentive  ear  which  (as  it  was  my 
duty  to  do^  I  gave  to  Mr.  Attomey«general  in 
opening  this  case,  I  could  not  fail  to  observe^ 
with  some  degree  of  surprise,  that  he  did  not 
state  to  you  precisely  what  were  the  points 
you  were  called  upon  to  decide.  He  indeeif 
stated  to  you  that  this  was  a  prosecution  for 
high  treason ;  but  he  gave  you  no  precise  states 
ment  of  the  exact  issues  you  were  to  try.  He 
dwelt  much  on  th^  which  I  must  and  do  admit, 
constituted  great  moral  guilt  on  the  part  c!t 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar ;  but  he  did  not  state 
to  you  precisely  what  vras  the  guilt  he  iin« 
puted  to  him  by  the  present  indictment.  Now, 
there  is  unfortunately  mixed  up  with  thit 
transaction  a  great  dead  which  must  necessa* 
rily  make  a  deep  impression  on  your  minds  r 
— there  is  a  great  di»l  of  guilt,  but  take  this. 
with  you  at  the  same  time,  that  there  are  other 
indictments  upon  which  that  guilt  will  pro- 
bacy be  tried;  and  whatever  your  opinioa 
may  be  of  the  moral  guilt  of  tiie  prisoner  at 
the  bar,  if  you,  upon  a  review  of  the  evidence, 
shall  not  be  of  opinion  that  he  has  committed 
the  jineciM  q^ence  charged  in  this  indictment, 
whatever  your  feeling  of  his  moral  guilt  may 
be,  it  vriU  be  your  bounden  duty  upon  this 
indictment  to  pronounce  a  verdict  of  acquittalJ 
It  therefore  has  become  my  duty  to  state  tor 
you  the  precise  issues  which  you  have  to  try. 
it  is  not  merely  a  question  of  high  treason, 
but  it  is  a  question  of  a  particular  species 
of  treason.  And  although  the  indictment 
was  very  long,  and  contained  a  statement  of  s» 
great  many  facts,  which  in  the  language  of  the 
law  are  called  overt  acts,  you  are  to  understand^ 
they  are  only  set  forth  as  evidences  to  prove 
that  simple  fiict  in  which  the  treason  consists. 
They  are  given  to  you,  to  induce  you  to  be 
satisfied  of  that  short  statement  of  guilt  of 
which  the  substantive  treason  consists.  The 
treason  charged  in  this  indictment,  or  rather 
the  substantive  treasons,  are  four.  The  first 
and  third  are  upon  a  statute  of  the  36th  year 
of  the  late  king,  for  conspiring  to  depose  his 
majesty  from  his  imperial  style  and  dignity. 
I  do  not  know  whetner  I  use  the  precise  Ian- 
linage  of  the  act  of  parliament,  but  in  substance 
It  is  conspiring  to  depose  his  majesty.  Se* 
cond,  for  compassing  and  imagining  the  death 
of  the  king.  Third,  conspiring  to  levy  loor^ 
Fourth,  actual  levying  war.  Two  of  theae^ 
—  compassing  the  death  of  the  king,  and 
the  actual .  levying  war,  are  •  treasons  by 
the  statute  of  £d.  III.  The  other  two— con* 
spiring  to  levy  war,  and  depose  his  migesty,^ 
are  made  treason  by  the  act  of  his  late  maif^ 
jesty^s  reign. 

ror  now  about  four  hundred  years,  £nglish« 
men  have  always  held  in  veneration,  as  a  pro«- 
tection  of  their  dearest  rights,  the  statute  of 
treasons  of  Edward  the  Third.  There,  among 
other  treasons,  it  is  stated  that,  whoever  shall 
compass  and  imagine — to  use  ^e  language  o€ 
the  statute— that  is,  contrive  or  intend— ^the 
death  of  the  king,  and  by  any  overt  or  open  act 
shall  shew  he  had  such  intention,  s«cb  iiitra^ 


l) 


Ii6»^  pf9vtd  by  jwmft  mptm  d6i4,  tha^l  be  coik 
aidered  w  tveasoDs  ftirabjtlmt  statute  also, 
•otual  lavying  of  war  agaiiMt  his  m^^aaljr  i»de> 
darad  a  liMsoa.  Thara  have  at  times^  w  sub- 
aaquenianhappgr  or  turbttlant  raigDa,  atarted  up 
^  Tttria^  ol  atattttaa  avaativ^  of  aaw  tfeaaona, 
W faioh  hare  always  Withered  aiwi^  in  the  good 
Itoaa  of  oareoBttitution.  There  is,  however, 
•DO  other  statute  now  axiatiDg,  which  makes  not 
iMmly  the  oonnfMiasiaK.  of  the  dudh  of  the  king 
Uaaaottf  hut  the  oonsfiitfig  to  depoaahim  from 
hii  state  and  digBity»  and  th»eoaapiring  to  levy 
var  againal  his  majesty.  Thtse^  therefore*  are 
Ite  fovir  diatiaet  queationa  you  have  t6  try. — 
firal  I  H|»  the  penon  at  the  bar  compassed 
•r  inagined  the  deafth  of  the  king  ?  Secondly  i 
Sbaa  he  oo«apired  to  depeae  him  iram  bis  im- 
poiiai  alate  and  digDHy?  llwrdiy:  Has  he 
CQoapirad  to  lavy  war  against  the  king  P  Or, 
iombljf :  Has  he  actually  levied  war  against 
ther  king  ?  And  vfr  those  peinta  or  one  of  them, 
yon  must  he  satisfied  in  t^saffirsMlive,  before 
3^011  oan  find  a  verdkft  againal  the  pciaouer  at 
Ihehaf. 

'  Before  I  proeeed  to  comment  upon  the  pr^ 
habiltly  of  the  evidence)  and  the  credit  which 
you  will  giv»  to  it,  J  would  beg  leave  to  call 
yeiiv  atten^oB  to  Uie  couiae  which  has  been 
jMistted  by  the  learsad  counsel  ibr  the  Crowns 
The  great  maas  of  their  evidence^  if  taken  to  be 
pavfiKtly  tnae,  appears  to  me  to  go  to  the  £act  that 
ahete  waa  a  conspiracy  to  destroy  his  m^>eaty's 
nhoiatera.  And  it  seems  to  me  that  my  learned 
friend  the  Atiomey-general  relies  upon  that 
fcat»  as  sufficient  evSeaoe  to  prove  one  or 
•tev  of  theae  substantive  treaaoos.  It  strikes 
W^  hoowvat,  OB  the  oontraiy,  that  you  may 
htbevo  the  whole  of  thatatatenfent,  and  stiU 
diat  it  may  net-he  evidence  of  any  one  of  the 
Mihatantive  tseaaotts  charged  in  this  indict- 
Jttttit*  Jk  d«e8  not  iallow  aa  a  matter  of 
<dlNM,  thai  the  rem^viag  the  administration 
#f  the  king  is  te  be  feUowad  by  either  the 
4eath  or  the  depoaiti(m  of  the-  monarch.  Let 
tia  9»  by  staps^  These  ia  continnally  in  pai^ 
Jiamant  a  party,  I  may  ventmre  toafl^,  who 
thioli  that  the  existing  adaainiatraiion  of  the 
dair  ia  not  a  good  ont.  Whan  1  say  tha 
•tfasiniattation  of  the  day,  I  do  not  mahn  to 
apply  that  obsarvatmi  to  the  mteiaters  of  the 
^•aaaot  day  eseluatvelyyibr  I  will  do  iham  tha 

Ctioa  to  say»  that  every  adminiatraiioB  Uiat 
I  praooded  them  have  alwstya  found  a  party 
that  have  thought  them  a  had  one ;  and  every 
admiAistvatioa  which'  shall  ibUow  them,  will 
BO  doubt  field  a  party  to  Ihiafc  them  equally 
bad.  It  ia  clear,  howevaa,  that  there  is  con- 
tiaually  ia  the  paclianient  itself  a  mrly  en* 
daavpitHBC  to  reasove  the  existing  administra* 
taoa^ and  I  wiUgive  tham  fall  credit  for  be» 
Iteviai^  that  it  is  firom  a  oonvictton  that  if  th^ 
were  removed  anotbtr  would  he  foond  wheea 
aarvieei  wo«id  be  isara  banaAdal  to  the  conn* 
Ivy*  It  fioUowSy  thaiefi>i«,'  that  tha  mere  ra* 
Moval  of  tha  admimatsaiion  of  the  day  is  not 
aaaaiderad  as  seeaasar^y  involvang  either  the 
daaih  or  ^Ihe  depmition  of  the  monatoh :  and 
VOL,  XXXIIlT 


A.  D.  1820. 


[834 


tha  persons  so  deBtring  wttl  not  necessarily  1)6 
involved  in  tha  cnaie  of  high  treason.  If  tha 
mere  removal  of  the  administration  is  not 
attended  with  those  consequences  does  it  the 
more  follow,  because  that  removal  is  to  bo 
efiected  by  force  or  with  violence  ?  Men  who 
are  desperate,  if  they  cannot  accomplish  that 
which  they  desire  by  fair  means,  sometimes 
resort  to  foul :  I  do  not  meaa  for  a  moment 
to  palliate  the  gnilt  of  assassination,  but  I 
contend  that  you  are  not  to  take  it  aa  a  ne-i 
cessary  consequence,  that  the  lemiewal^  nay 
the  death  or  destruction  of  the  whole  administ 
tratioB,  involves  in  itself  neeessarily  ather 
the  death  or  the  deposition  of  the  king.  If 
you  should  be  of  opinion,  that  the  assassina^ 
tion  of  miniateiSy  horrid  as  it  is,  does  not 
neceasaiily  involve  that  oonaequenee,  then,  I 
contend,  the  evidence  given  upon  this  occasion 
does  not  support  fhe  two  fimtsuhstantivetrea* 
sons  laid  in  this  indictment 

There  are  two  other  treasons  alleged  in  this 
indictment :  the  one  is,  conspiring  to  levy  war 
against  his  BM^esty  in  his  realm,  and  the  other 
is  the  actually  levying  war.  Now  see  whether 
the  evidence  afibrda  you  satisfactory  proof 
either  that  there  was  a  conapiracy  to  levy  war, 
or  that  the  act  done  amounted  to  an  actual 
levying  of  war.  In  the  detail  which  has  been 
given  of  this  tmnaaction,  more  parlienlarly  tha 
very  long  detail  by  the  first  witness  Adams, 
and  who  in  fact  proved  the  whole  case,  my 
learned  friend  me  Attorney-general  found 
there  was  so  much  ridicule  in  his  statements, 
or  rather  so  much  to  be  ridiculed  in  the  trans* 
action  he  related,  that  he  feh  die  observations 
necessarily  artsiatg  ^pon  that  man's  tale  would 
throw  discredit  upon  the  whole  of  his  testi* 
mony,  particularly  when  coupled  with  the 
infamy  of  his  character.  To  obviate  this,  ha 
said,  I  am  obliged  to  call  an  accomplice,  and 
by  the  law  an  accomplice  is  a  competent  wit- 
ness ;  if  an  aecoasplice  could  not  be  called^ 
there  vrould  be  inspunity  for  conspiracies,  and 
all  secret  crimes;  I  never  meant  to  denv  that 
position  of  kw,  as  stated  by  the  learned  At* 
tome^genaral,  but  I  say^the  evidence  of  an 
aceompliee  alwra  has  been,  and  always 
most  M,  received  with  the  greatest  caution 
and  jaahnsy ;  and  if  that  caution  and  jealousy 
b  to  ha  applied  in  any  case,  it  is  more  par- 
ticulaily  to  ha  applied  in  a  case  of  high  treason, 
vrheve  the  law  itself  has  throvm  the  strongest 
g«iud  Toand  the  subject,  and  by  positive 
enaotmeat  declared  that  he  shall  never  be 
found  guilty  hot  on  the  oaths  of  two  credible 
witnesses. 

A  very  able  writer,  baron  Montesquieu,  has 
said,  that  where  the  laws  of  treason  are  undev 
fined,  there  can  be  no  liberty :  tyranny  must 
of  necessity  be  the  result  And  that  observa* 
tion  iaequallT  true,  if,  where  the  laws  of  treason 
are  wall  denned,  juries  do  not  moat  righte** 
OQsljp  and  strenuously  support  that  definition. 
You  canMK  do  that  if  you  suffer  any  feelings 
of  moral  guilt  to  infinence  your  minds,  to  pro* 
nounce  a  verdict  bei^ause  you  may  think:  ro cm 

3H 


939] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Tfklqf  Arthur  miHtmood 


esse 


guilty  of  very  eoormons  offencet,  unless  yoa 
cUo  think  them  guilty  of  that  precise  specific 
crime  with  which  they  are  cha^;ed. 

In  treasons  such  as  here  charged,  an  accom« 
plicey  says  the  learned  Attorney  General,  is  a 
necessary  witness.  It  may  be  so,  but  though 
he  is  a  necessary  witness,  he  is  not  of  necessity 
Id  be  believed  in  all  he  says.  The  more  atro- 
cious the  guiU  in  which  he  steeps  himself,  the 
less  worthy  is  he  of  credit ;  and  if  a  most  atro- 
ciously wicked  witness  were  to  come  forward 
to  tell  you  a  tale,  not  only  improbable,  but 
ridiculous  in  itself,  I  think  you  would  act  most 
unwisely,  indeed,  if,  upon  such  an  absurd  tale 
told  by  such  a  witness,  you  were  to  take  away 
the  life  of  man ;  nay,  you  would  be  hardly 
warranted  in  plucking  a  feather  from  a  spar- 
row's wing.  I  know  it  is  no  uncommon  thing, 
that  those  who  lend  themselves  to  crime  betray 
their  companions  in  guilt,  but  there  is  some- 
thing so  CMdious  in  all  treachery,  Uiat  he  who 
betrays  associates  even  in  guUt  is  regarded 
with  an  additional  degree  of  abhorrence,  and 
the  mind  recoils  from  him  as  a  being  unworthy 
of  any  credit,  as  one  who,  to  public  crime, 
adds  the  last  sacrifice  of  breach  of  private  con- 
fidence. And  you  will  invariably  find  that 
the  man  who  becomes  the  informer  is  the  most 
worthless  of  the  whole  band :  for  bad  as  his 
companions  may  be,  still  there  is  some  prin- 
ciple of  honour,  there  are  some  remains  of  social 
duty,  which  keeo  them  true  to  each  other;  but 
the  last  dregs  of  nonour  and  feeling  are  drained 
from  the  heart  of  that  man  who  adds  to  their 
common  crime  the  infarov  of  becoming  the 
seducer  and  betrayer  of  his  companions. 
Hence  it  is,  that,  anxious  to  gratify  his  em- 
ployers wit^  important  intelligence,  all  the 
design  that  he  represents  as  originating  from 
others,  he  himself  is  the  man  to  seduce  them 
i  nto ;  and  every  one  of  his  own  base  propo* 
sitions  he  carries  to  his  employers  as  the  set- 
tled resolves  of  his  companions.  Although  I 
am  sorry  to  say  I  have  not  ample  evidence,  in 
this  case,  of  the  conduct  of  tne  spy,  and  in- 
former, yet  I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  not  be 
able  to  prove  in  evidence  to  you,  that  the  man 
who  was  the  informer  of  government^  instead 
of  giving  information  of  that  which  the  other 
men  had  been  doing,  was  himself  the  man  to 
goad  and  incite  the  unhappy  prisoner  to  every 
act  of  violence  and  outrage:  that  when  he 
(the  witness)  made  a  wild  proposition  which 
was  rejected,  that  proposition  he  carried  to  his 
emplovers,  not  as  a  rejected  proposition  of  his 
own,  but  as  an  adopted  measure  of  his  com- 
rades, and  of  which  he  was  merely  the  in- 
formant. Gentlemen,  let  no  such  man's  evi- 
dence be  trusted. 

Now,  bearing  these  observations  in  your 
fnind,  view  the  evidence  as  given  by  Adams 
to  support  the  fact  of  a  conspiracy  to  levy  war : 
lay  out  of  your  consideration,  for  the  moment, 
all  that  which  relates  solely  to  the  assassination 
of  his  majesty*!s  ministers;  and  consider  the 
evidence  as  given  by  him,  in  support  of  the 
at^bstaotive  allegation  of  treason,  that  being  a 


conspiracy  to  levy  war  agtiiist  bis  m^esty  is 
his  realm.    You  have,  to  garnish  the  case  \yiag 
before  you,  an  aifected  display  of  msty  sabres^ 
broken  pistols,  and  a  |preat  many  other  things^ 
You  see  the  arms  which  lie  before  you,  but 
recollect  the  purpose  to  which  yoa  are  required 
to  believe  they  were  to  be  ap]^lied.    Here  is 
the  whole  arsenal  of  the  conspirators:  with 
this  they  were  to  do — ^hatf  to  overset  a 
mighty  empire.    You  have  here  all  the  pro- 
rations :  aU  the  materials  of  the  war  are  bemre 
you :  and  now,  what  is  the  statement  of  this 
man?    As  to  the  plan  of  operations  to  be 
pursued  by  these  formidable  conspirators,  be 
says,  that  he  attended  various  meetings  froni 
the  4th  of  February,  I  think,  once  axSl  twice 
a  day  down  to  the  23rd  of  that  month  (one  or 
two  meetings  more  or  less  will  not  be  mate* 
rial),  in  which  vras  fi«quently  debated  the  ae* 
sassinatioB  of  his  majesty's  ministen,  and  the 
destruction  of  the  gownment.    I  vras  led  to 
make  the  same  inquiry  upon  the  cross-exami- 
nation, which  was  made,  it  appears,  by  one 
of  their  own  body  (Palin),  and  mo  seeaaed  to 
me  to  speak  vrith  some  degree  of  sense.    He 
ia  represented  as  saying  to  them,  **  you  have 
many  great  objects  in  view,  but  where  are  the 
men  to  come  from  ?''— At  one  and  the  sane 
time,  his  majesty's  ministers  were  to  be  assas- 
sinated !-^a  detachment  vrere  to  go  and  take 
possession  of  two  cannon  in  Gray^inn-lane ! 
another  detachment  were  to  take  possession  of 
six  cannon  in  the  Artillery  ground  1— all  the 
out-ports  were   to  be   taken  possession  oft 
Brighton  was  more  particularly  to  be  secured 
by  a  force  1 — the  Mansion-house  vras  to  be  takea 
as  the  seat  of  provisional  government ! — ^Asd 
what  is  the  force  to  do  dl  this  ? — ^An  army 
that,  counted  to  the  utmost  expectation,  was 
forty  men  1 — an  arsenal  of  a  few  old  sabres^ 
pikes,  and  pistols ! — an  exchequer  of  six  shil- 
Ungs  and  a  reputed  one-pound  note!    Who 
were  the  men  to  manage  tnis  madiineiy  P  with 
the  exception  of  one  (Thistlewood)  a  pared 
of  mechanics  of  the  lowest  orders  in  society  I 
These  were  the  men,  and  these  were  the  means, 
to  ''twist  this  rooted  empire  from  its  base"—* 
To  depose  a  king  living  in  the  hearts,  and 
guarded  by  millions  of  fiutfafol  subjects — To 
destroy  a  government  protected  by  myriads  of 
bayonets^To  exhaust  a  treasury  into  wbicfa 
is  flowing,  not  only  the  wealth  of  Britain,,  bat 
the  treasures  of  the  £ast<— This  is  apian  vrhidk 
you  are  required  to  believe  was  deoated  and 
adopted  by  men  not  declared  lunatics.   When 
an  infamous  witness  tells  you  so  incredible  m 
stoiy,  can  you  or  dare  you  take  away  the  life 
of  a  man  upon  such  testimony?    If  it  were 
possible  for  you  to  do  so,  I  should  not  hesitate 
to  say,  that  I  must  believe  your  undeittand- 
ings  as  bewildered  as  is  imputed  to  the  pri* 
soner  at  the  bar  and  his  associates. 

Now,  as  to  the  other  point,  Aat  of  actual 
levying  of  war.  With  respect  to  levving  of 
vrar,  it  is  clear  that  every  resistance  of  Uie  civil 
power,  or  of  the  military  poww  of  the  Crowia 
is  not  a  levying  of  war:  what  should  be  siid 


837] 


Jw  High  Trenton, 


A.  D.  1820. 


t83S 


.to  be  a  war  or  not  I  hftidly  know  how  to  de- 
fine. I  had  rather  read  it  from  the  lan^^uage 
•of  a  very  eminent  writer :  he  says,  that  ''  it  is 
a  question  of  fact  to  be  determined  by  a  jury." 
L<mk1  Hale,  in  his  Pleas  of  the  Crown,  speak- 
ing of  this  particular  treason,  says,  ''What 
shall  be  said  to  be  a  levying  of  war  is  a  ques- 
tion of  fact ;  for  it  is  not  every  riotous  or  un- 
lawftil  assembly  of  many  persons  to  do  an 
milawlul  act,  though,  dc  facto j  they  commit  the 
act  they  intend,  that  makes  a  levying  of  war, 
for  then  every  riot  would  be  treason,  and  all 
the  acts  against  riotous  and  unlawful  assem- 
blies, as  13th  Henry  4th  cap.  7. :  2nd.  Henry 
5th  cap.  8. :  8th.  Henry  6th  cap.  14.,  and  many 
more  had  been  vain  and  needless,  but  it  must 
be  sudi  an  assembly  as  carries  with  it  ^eaem 
heiH,  tiie  appearance  of  war.**  Now,  did  this 
assembly  carry  with  it  tpedem  beUi,  or  the  ap- 
pearance of  war  t  He  ffoes  on,  *'  as  if  they 
ride  or  march  vexUMs  exfScaiis,  with  unfurled 
banners^  (is  this  marchmg  to  attack  the  king's 
troops  with  unfurled  banners?)  ''or  if  thev 
be  formed  into  companies  or  furnished  with 
military  officers,"  were  these  formed  into  com- 
panies, or  furnished  with  military  officers? 
jilie  only  militai^  man  among  them  appears 
to  have  been  a  disbanded  soldier,  and  the  only 
purpose  to  which  he  was  to  be  applied  was,  to 
-^  the  destruction  of  his  majesty's  ministers, 
which,  I  contend,  was  not  a  levying  of  war. 
Then  he  says,  *'  or  if  they  are  armed  with 
military  weapons,  as  swords,  guns,  bills',  hal- 
berds, pikes,  and  are  so  drcumstanced  that  it 
maybe  reasonably  concluded  diey  are  in  a 
posture  of  war,  which  circumstances  are  so 
rarions,  that  it  is  hard  to  define  them  all  par- 
ticularly.^ Then,  if  it  be  hard  to  define  all 
the  circumstances  of  levying  war,  particularly 
being  a  matter  of  fact,  can  vour  own  good 
.sound  uiuierstanding  infer  it  from  the  facts  in 
evidence  before  you  ?  If  you  had  been  told 
a  war  had  been  levied  against  his  majesty  in 
ibis  country,  and  the  transactions  in  Cato-street 
had  been  narrated,  would  not  you  have  treated 
the  thing  as  absurd  and  ridiculous  ?  Where 
is  the  war?  in  a  little  back  court !  Where  was 
the  battle  fought?  in  a  stable!  Where  were 
the  traitors  encamped  f  in  a  hay-loft !  How 
were  the  traitors  armed?  vrith  a  few  rusty 
jnrordsy  and  broken  implements  of  war.  Put- 
'  ting  it  to  your  own  common  sense  and  under- 
standing, can  you  upon  your  oaths  say,  that 
the  jprisoner  at  the  bar  is  guilty  of  actually 
levying  war  against  the  kins  ?  lou  find  that. 
In  many  of  their  meetings,  these  men  who  were 
levying  war,  as  it  is  called,  were  afraid  of  the 
approach  of  the  parish  constables ;  that  at  one 
jneetiag  in  particular  Thistlewood  looked  to- 
wards Uie  door,  and  spoke  low  when  he  spoke 
of  the  west  end  job,  as  dreading  the  presence 
of  the  civil  officer :  on  which  one  more  bold 
than  himself  said,  "  we  do  not  care  for  the 
traps,''  that  is,  for  the  parish  constables,  not 
for  the  king's  troops :  so  that  it  is  evident  that 
these  men  were  kept  in  awe  by  the  dread  of 
the  mere  dvU  foree  of  the  countiy. 


If  there  is  no  levying  of  war,  is  there  a  con- 
spiracy to  effect  that  purpose  ?  The  only  evi- 
dence you  have  of  any  such  conspiracy  comies 
out  of  the  mouths  of  those  three  witnesses  who 
are  all  implicated  in  guil^  and  who,  I  say,  are 
so  far  contaminated  that  they  are  not  to  "be 
credited,  because  they  all  confess  themselves 
guilty  of  a  participation  in  a  most  horrid  trans- 
action, namely,  a  projected  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers;  the  only  evidence  that 
relates  to  levying  war  comes  out  of  their 
mouths,  and  even  as  they  give  the  transaction, 
it  is  very  doubtful  whether  any  thing  can  be 
raised  that  might  be  considered  as  evincing 
an  intent  of  levying  war  against  the  king,  ex- 
cept indeed  theproclamation  which  one  of  the 
vritnesses  says Tnistlewood  had  penned.  Why, 
if  such  a  proclamation  had  been  existing— if  it 
had  been  to  be  found  any  where  but  in  the 
wicked  imagination  of  that  witness,  do  you 
think  it  would  not  have  been  produced? — 
Would  not  the  spy  of  government  have  secured 
a  copy  to  confirm  his  tale  ?  But  what  procla- 
mation is  it  P  Mark  the  absurdity  of  this  sup- 
posed proclamation  1  "  Your  tyrants  arc  de- 
stroyed ;  the  friends  of  liberty  are  called  upon 
to  come  forward ;  the  provisional  government 
is  now  sitting. — James  Ings,  secretary.'' — You 
are  to  take  it  upon  the  word  of  that  man 
(Adams)  that  such  a  proclamation  was  framed. 
Do  you  suppose  that  Thistlewood  is  a  man  so 
absurd,  that  if  he  had  entertained  the  designs 
they  impute  to  him,  he  could  have  penned  a 
proclamation  of  this  sort?  No,  gentlemen, 
this  witness  some  how  or  other  thought  it  ne- 
cessary to  have  a  piece  of  evidence  of  that 
sort  to  support  his  aosurd  tale  of  consultations 
to  levy  war  against  the  government ;  and  this 
was  the  best  piece  of  evidence  that  his  stulti- 
fied imagination  could  produce. — A  provisional 
government !— Who  was  at  the  head  of  it  ? — 
Nobody!  Who  are  the  officers  under  it? — 
Nobody !  How  is  it  to  be  managed  7 — No  one 
can  telll  Where  is  the  provisional  govern- 
ment sitting  ? — You  are  left  to  find  that  out. 
All  which  the  world  is  told  is— t^at  Mr.  Ings, 
the  pork-butcher,  is  the  secretary  of  the  new 
provisional  government.  Gentlemen,  common 
sense  must  guide  you  in  your  deliberations 
upon  these  matters.  You  will  not  lay  aside 
your  knowledge  of  mankind,  and  believe  a 
story  entirely  because  it  is  sworn — still  less 
will  you  believe  it  wheh  it  comes  from  such 
contaminated  sources.  You  will  apply  your 
knowledge  of  life  and  human  affairs,  and  if 
the  story  be  told  you,  nay  if  it  be  sworn  by  a 
credible  witness,  if  it  is  beyond  all  human 
credibility,  you  will  spurn  it  with  contempt, 
as  a  base  design  to  impose  upon  your  under- 
standinffSy  and  mislead  your  better  judgments. 
Does  this  absurd  tale  derive  any  additional 
credit  from  the  ostentatious  parade  and  display 
of  rusty  muskets,  and  broken  sabres,  and  pike 
heads,  and  gunpowder?  Why,  nolwilhstancl-- 
ing  this  formidable  materiel  of  war  thus  spread 
out  to  appal  you,  I  will  undertake  to  say,  that 
there  is  not  a  populous  alley  in  the  city  of 


839]        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  Thitttenood 


[840 


London,  that  would  not^  have  furnished  arms 
and  men,  that  would  have  defeated  the  whole 
^  this  gang  of  conspirators,  at  least  the  whole 
that  we  have  heard  of  in  evidence,  and  termi- 
nated this  dreaded  civil  war  in  less  than  half 
an  hour.  Then  can  you  seriously  believe  that 
it  was  intended  by  these  men  to  levy  war 
against  his  majesty's  government — whatever 
their  intentions  hiight  have  been  against  his 
majesty'^  ministers. 

The  subject  resolves  itself,  at  last,  into  these 
few  short  points.  You  wilt  consider  first,  even 
should  you  suppose  it  to  be  true,  that  the  assas- 
sination of  his  majesty's  ministers  was  in- 
tended, whether  that  event  of  necessity  im- 
plies that  his  majesty  was  also  to  be  deposed, 
or  put  to  death?    If  you  do  not  think  it  fol- 
lows of  necessity  (and  there  is  not  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  this  evidence  a  single 
word  which  points  distinctly  at  the  royalpeir- 
sonage  or  his  family,  except  I  think  that  Tnis- 
tlewood  is  stated  once  to  have  said,  that  the 
present  family   have  reigned  long  enough ; 
with  the  exception  of  this  short  piece  of  evi- 
dence, there  is  not  one  sibgle  word  that  has  a 
hostile  aspect  to  the  royal  family),  whatever 
may  be  your  feeling  with  respect  to  the  pro- 
jected assassination,  if  you  think  it  does  not 
necessarily  involve  the  other  point  of  the  de- 
position of  the  king — however  greatly  you  may 
abhor  the  men  who  could  cherish  so  horrid  a 
purpose  in  their  minds,  you  ought  not  to  find 
them  guilty  of  treason,  upon  those  two  first 
counts,  which  charge  their  intent  to  be  the 
death  and  deposition  of  the  king.    And  if  you 
think  the  story  of  the  accomplice  too  ridiculous 
to  be  believed,  or  himself  too  infamous  to  merit 
credit  at  your  hands,  when  he  relates  the  sup- 
posed conspiracy  to  levy  war,  you  must  also 
find  them  not  guilty  upon  the  count  which 
charges  them  with  that  substantive  treason- 
And.  if,  with  respect  to  the  remaining  charge 
of  actually  levying  war  itself,  you  think  that 
too  absurd  to  be  entertained  for  a  moment^ 
then  you  must  acquit  them  of  that  also. 

I  do  not  ^now  that  I  can  say  more,  and  I 
will  not  waste  your  time,  and  my  own  strength, 
already  sufficiently  exhausted,  by  two  long 
days  close  attendance  to  the  evidence  of  this 
unparalleled  case,  by  using  words  unnecessa- 
rily ;  but  let  me  implore  you  to  do  your  duty 
strfctlv,  according  to  the  rigid  rule  of  law: 
consider  what  is  the  law  of  the  land,  and  step 
not  aside  either  to  the  right  hand  or  to  the 
led ;  but  mark  only  the  issues  and  the  treason^ 
you  have  to  try.  I  implore  you  to  do  it,  not 
only  for  your  own  sakes,  but  for  the  sake  of 
our  common  Country  ;  for,  if  ever  juries  suffer 
feelings  of  indignation  to  warp  their  opinions, 
and  to  induce  them  to  find  men  giiilty  ot 
charges  which  are  not  proved,  because  they 
feel  or  think  them  guilty  of  other  charges  which 
are  not  before  them,  there  will  be  no  safety 
hereafter  for  the  life  of  man.  If  this  prisoner 
has  been  guilty  of  other  offence^,  there  are 
other  indictments  against  him  upon  which  he 
must  answer  for  those  offences,  and  should  the 


'  facts  be  there  proved  against  him,  the  conse- 
quence will  be,  that  he  must  suffer  the  penalty 
of  his  crime;  but  on  this  occasion  do  Aot  find 
him  guilty  of  high  treason,  because  you  nay 
tiiink  him  worthy  of  death  for  another  deed. 
No,  not  even  though  that  deed  may  be  a  plan 
of  murder  and  assassination. 

Mr.  Gttm^.^li  ia  usual  to  state  the  «Qci  if 
•vid^ce  wUdb  ti»  inttfidtd  lo  be  calla^  dn^t 
it  may  be  seen  vhetto  it  is  receivable. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbotts— T^bX  is  the  usual 
practice  certainly. 

Mr.  CurwQo^.rrQ«9Btlemei),  I  m^saxki  lo  sMe 
tbftt  I  skmi\d  call  »  wiM»eM  to  show  the  Utile 
cmdit  du0  to  thiwe  witnesses,  who  wiU  stal9 
that  8  gmu  many  otf  the  iostiuiiEi/SDts  and  we^ 
pons  now  lytni^  Moi^  you,  were  bro«giU  Ip 
the  d^pdt  bv  AdaiDS,  the  accomplice»  who  is 
called,  and  by  Edwards,  th»  «c«ompliee,  who 
is  mot  called :  that  on  the  2ard  of  Febiipary- 
they  were  taken  awajr  by  them»  and  aAerv^urds 
brought  back  again  by  a  b<^  Deobi  them,  a|i4 
plac^  where  lonnd.  lh.e  ip&rence  X  dra^vr 
trom  this  fact  is,  ttol  ii  is  a  confinnatioa  of 
what  I  stated  to  you  befofe^  that  these  ««& 
who  are  now  the  accnasrs^  were  themselvrw  xhtt 
fabricators  of  the  plot,  and  thes«  arms  were  so 
(>lBced  by  them  to  oontfinn  thair  inlendod  toi- 
tiflK>ay. 

EVIDEXVeS  FOR  TH£  PRXSOKfiH. 

Jlniy  BsHiEsr  swam.— EsaniMd  bf 
Mr.  JriojpAfff r 

Are  you  a  daughter  of  dither  of  thjS  prisoners 
at  the  bar  ?— Of  Richard  Tidd. 

Did  you  Kve  with  your  father  t — ^Yes. 

Do  you  remember  at  any  time  the  poliee 
officers  coming  and  finding  any  boxes  and 
thinp  there  t — Yes. 

What  day  was  that  ?— On  the  24t|i  of  Pe)»- 
ruary. 

At  what  time  in  th£  morning  did  the  officers 
come  ? — About  half-past  eight  I  suppose. 

How  long,  at  that  time,  had  those  things 
been  in  the  house  befbre  the  officers  came  ?^Tr 
About  a  quarter  of  an  hour. 

What  did  they  take  away? — ^I  am  sure  I 
capnoc  say  :  t  was  in  such  a  situation  I  cannol 
speak  to  it. 

Was  there  a  box? — ^Yes ;  ^here  was. 

What  was  in  it  ?^— I  cannot  say. 

Did  they  take  some  things  like  these?  [pdee 
staves.'] — Yes. 

How  long  had  they  been  in  the  house?-— They 
vrpr^  brought  there  that  morninG[. 

Do  you  kpow  who  U  was  that  broaffht  them  ? 
— No. 

Was  it  any  person  In  ypur  fiither^s  employ. 
or  that  you  knew  of  as  bejpg  employed  by  hxta  r 
— No. 

He  had  been  t^ken  into  custody,  we  tu^der- 
stand,  the  night  before  f -r-Yes. 

Had  you  seen  him  siQce  fie  wfnt  out  ike 
night  before? — No. 


641] 


jot  Higjk  IVwiow. 


A,  D.  1820. 


CMS 


Doyou  knom  a  person  of  Um«m(ic  of  Adams? 
—Yes. 

Had  yoa  Men  biA  at  any  time  before  at  ytmr 
fatlier*sr— Yes. 

Do  you  know  a  person  of  the  name  of  Ed- 
jgrards  f — ^Yes. 

Had  you  seen  him  t^ere  ? — Yes. 

Had  Edwards  been  there  before  your  iatfatf 
jvas  taken  up  P-r-Yeo. 

Had  he  been  there  seldom  or  often  }-^^OH6n- 

If  I  understand  you  rightly,  those  things  that 
we^  taken  «i?»y  1^  the  ofiioers,  had  not  been 
in  the  house  above  half  an  bouri  before  they 
came  and  took  them  ? — ^No. 

Had  you  seen  then  Iheie  before  Ihe  day 
when  the  officers  came? — ^Yes;  I  had  seen 
eimilar  things  before. 

To  the  best  observation  yo«  oonld  nakd 
upon  theni;  do  you  believe  them  to  be  the 
eame  things  or  different  ? — ^The  same^  I  thiafc. 

Who  took  those  things,  vhieh  you  say  yen 
think  were  the  aam^y  away  ? — Edwards  took  a 
part. 
'    Who  the  odier  part  ?— *!  do  not  knew. 

When  was  it  that  Edwards  tAok  that  part 
;iwa^  ? — On  the  Wednesday. 

Yon  say  some  other  person  took  the  ethe^ 
away  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  your  fother  take  any  ef  them  awi^r*^ 
Ho. 

Who  took  the  other  part  away  l^*— I  do  net 
know. 

What  part  did  Edwards  take,  the  bos  or  tbe 
staves  ? — ^He  did  not  take  away  any  box. 

The  box  was  not  taken  ?•-— No. 

What  was  taken  ?— Some  things  that  I  have 
understood  since  were  grenades^  and  likewise 
some  powder. 

Was  the  box  there  all  (he  time  ? — No  ^ ,  the 
%ox  was  brought  a  day  or  two  before  the  time 
my  father  was  taken. 

Do  you  know  who  brought  that  ? — No. 

Was  it  brought  in  the  state  in  which  it  aftei^ 
wards  remained  ? — Yes,  it  never  was  uncorded. 

You  jdo  not  know  who  brought  it  ?•— No, 

You  have  talked  of  things  called  grenades ; 
were  there  any  larger  than  ethers  ? — ^There  was 
one  buyer  than  the  othen. 

Who  brought  that  ? — ^Adams. 

What  was  Edwards,  do  you  know  ? — No ; 
I  did  not  know  at  the  time  he  used  to  come 
to  my  father's;  1  have  heard  since  h^  was  a 
modeller. 

Mr.  Att9rm^  QtneraL^^l  l^ve  nothing  to 
ask  you. 


Sdward  HucklesUm  sworn.— Examined  by* 
Mt.Curwood, 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Dwyes? 
—Yes. 

Have  yon  seen  him  here  te^ey  ?>«^No,  I  have 
not,  for  I  Jiave  not  long  oome. 

How  long  have  you  knpwn  Dwy^rJ — For 
some  years. 

Have  you  known  him  iptimately  ?— 7I  haye 
known  him  intimately,  by  using  the  ^aipf  t^ub- 
lic-house  as  he  does,  and  a  few  friends. 


•  ■  « 

t>o'  yon  Vnow  emm^  to' say,  wlieiher  hei 
is  fit  to  be  believed  nnoQ  his  oatii?— No;  I 
do  not  think  he  is  fit  to  be  taken  upon  his  oath. 

t4^ur4  gMrtfeiftwi<csoflS»eyamin»d  !y 
Mr.  Aiiomey  General,    ^    . 

Iton  have  known  him  by  meeting  fiim  at  the 

rablie-house  ?•— Yes,  at  the  public^honse  where 
have  supped.  \ 

That  is  your  only  knowledge  of  liimP— X 
have  seen  him  with  a  great  deal  of  money, 
knowing  that  he  seldom  or  ever  did  any  work; 
he  was  a  bricklayer^  labourer,  and  seeing  hiijpi 
always  hulking  about,  and  with  socb  a  quantity 
of  money^  I  wanted  to  know  bow  he  came  by 
it ;  i  said  J  was  poor,  and  he  asked  whetfier  J 
had  not  got  anv  money,  and  be  told  me  if  I 
would  go  wtlh  him  he  ^ould  nut  me  in  pos- 
session of  man^  a  bright  nound.  I  went  with 
him  to  Hyde-paik,  and  he  t<dd  me  to  keep 
within  hearing,  and  he  would  soon  shew  me 
how  he  cpuld  go  on,  that  he  would  watch  a 

Sentleinan  out,  and  to  catch  hold  of  him,  and 
iat  he  would  say  he  was  an  unnatund  gentle- 
man, and  that  then  I  w^  |o  come  up  as  an 
officer,  and  draw  him  towards  a  watcn-'housey 
but  not  to  take  him  to  a  watch-house  ;  I  was 
struck  with  the  idea,  and  shunned  his  com^ 
panv. 

When  was  thist — About  three  months  ago? 
and  he  has  said  he  got  seventy  pounds  at  a 
time,  by  doing  so,  and  lie  jawed  me  as  being 
a  coward :  the  next  night  I  met  with''  him,  bin 
I  did  not  wish  to  have  any  thing  to  do  with  it^ 
he  said  that  he  got  TOL  of  one  gentleman  Ih 
Saint  James's-street,  by  enly  catching  hold  of 
him  by  the  collar. 

Where  did  you  meet  with  him  the  next 
night  f — At  the  Rodney's-head,  in  Chandlep- 
street. 

Yon  have  met  him  frequently  since  at  the 
public-house  f— Yes ;  but  I  never  would  have 
no  more  goings  with  him,  for  I  told  him  of  the 
dangerous  cpnse^uence,  his  brother  was  trans^ 
ported  from  this  saiqe  place  for  die  same  ot- 
fence ;  and  he  said,  aye  his  brother  did  not 
)cnow  how  to  general  it  as  well  as  he  did,  his 
brother  was  transported  with  angther  jfoung 
man  for  fourteen  years,  but  he  got  away. 

When  did  you  mention  this  to  a  magi8-> 
trate  Pr— Why,  I  ought  to  have  done  it;  but  I 
was  afraid,  because  there  were  a  great  manv 
Irishmen  round  our  place,  and  t  was  afraia 
I  should  fall  a  viotia  to  them,  and  I  thought  I 
had  better  keep  oat  of  hia  way,  and  not  go 
into  his  company  any  mor^. 

But  yo\|  were  'm  hi?  vPQP^ny  afterwards? — 
No.  r    ^ 

Not  at  all?— No,  only  iftefting  him  Jn  the 
street,  ana  aikilig  hipfi  hPW  ho  did^  ^ii4  f^^p 
going  away. 

You  spoke  to  him?— Yei^  jyst  tjie  tiwf  of 
the  day,  and  sp  pn. 

What  are  you?— I  wa3  brought  Mp  ^  ^h<^r 
maimer,  bqt  I  am  articled  to  a  cow-doctor* 

Where  do  you  live  ?— No.  15,  LitlJ^  Port- 
land-street^ Oxford-street. 


8483 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qfjirt^  TUttUwood 


C844 


How  long  have  you  been  appientSot  to  the 
tow-doctOK? — ^Wby^  ever  since  last  Jone. 

Who  is  the  cow-doGtor? — Edward  Skillet. 

Where  does  he  live  P — ^At  No.  4,  Newman- 
mews,  he  keeps  that  as  an  hospital  for  cows 
and  horses. 

As  you  were  afraid  to  mention  this  to  a 
magistrate,  when  was  it  first  you  summoned 
up  courage  to  communicate  it  to  any  person  ? 
^— The  first  person  I  communicated  it  to  was 
myjbrother. 

'  when  was  that  ? — ^About  a  week  ago,  when 
the  list  was  in  the  paper,  and  I  said  that  man 
I  knew  was  a  bad  character,  and  with  that  they 
jubpcenaed  me  here. 

You  did  not  even  communicate  it  to  your 
1>iother  till  a  week  ago  ? — ^No ;  but  there  were 
a  great  many  of  them  in  company,  and  a  gre^ 
many  that  used  that  house,  and  I  was  afraid, 
as  my  bread  depends  upon  going  round  to  the 
cow-keepers,  doctoringi  that  I  should  get  ill- 
treated. 

So  much  afraid  that  you  would  not  even 
mention  it  to  your  own  brother,  till  a  week 
ago  ? — ^No. 

Are  the  same  Irishmen  living  in  the  neigb- 
lK>urhood,  as  were  at  that  time  ? — ^No,  some  of 
ihem  are  gone  away,  then  I  summoned  up 
courage  enough  to  mention  it. 

They  did  not  go  away,  I  siq|>pose,  till  abou^ 
A  week  ago  ? — They  have  gone  away  lately. 

And  that  induced  you  to  summon  up 
courage  to  mention  it  to  your  brother  f — ^Yes. 
.  How  long  ago  is  it  that  this  communication 
was  made  by  Dwyer  to  you? — I  may  say, 
about  two  months  ago,  I  cannot  say  within  a 
week  or  two. 

I  thought  you  said  three  months  ? — ^It  may 
be  between  two  and  three,  I  cannot  say  exact; 
^  have  other  business  to  mind,  instead  of  such 
.business  as  that 

You  have  other  business  to  attend  to  ? — ^To 
get  my  living. 

Ana  this  made  so  little  impression  upon  you 
jfou  cannot  say  whether  it  was  two  or  three 
months  a^  P — -No,  I  did  not  pen  it  down. 

You  did  go  with  him  to  the  park? — ^Yes; 
,but  when  he  told  me,  I  was  horror-struck,  and 
vot  back :  I  thought  the  best  way  was  to  get 
.back  as  soon  as  I  could,  lest  my  own  character 
flhould  be  izgured  by  it. 

Where  does  your  brother  live? — ^No.  2,  Bul- 
atiode-mews,  Mary-le-bone-lanei 

EAoatd  Hmckletionf  re-examined  by 
Mr.  Ado^fkm, 

MThile  the  matter  was  a  complaint  of  your- 
self, you  mentioned  it  neither  to  magistrate, 
nor  your  brother,  nor  anv  body  else  ? — No. 

Juord  Chitf  Juitice  Ahbott.^1  understood 
you  to  say,  that  he  mentioned  this  matter 
'to you  first  at  the  public-house  P — Yes,  he  did. 

Did  you  ^  with  him  that  same  day  that  he 
mentioned  it,  or  another  ?-— I  went  that  same 
night  with  him  up  there. 

Mr.  Gfttm^. — Do  not  leave  the  court  at 
pteseat. 


Jbtffh  Domie  swore.— Fiiamiwfd  by 

Mr.  Adolphm. 

Have  you  any  public  employment  or  situa- 
tion ?— I  am  called  court  reporter. 

Do  you  prepare  for  the  newspapers  the 
accounts  that  are  given  of  the  movements  and 
intended  morements  of  the  nobility  ? — Of  the 
court. 

Do  you  prepare  them  for  one  paper  in  par- 
ticular,' or  sena  them  to  all  the  papers  ? — ^To  six 
papen. 

Is  the  New  Times  one  of  the  six? — ^Yes. 

Tlie  Morning  Post,  Chronicle,  and  so  on  ?— » 
Yes. 

Do  '^ou  send  them  to  all  the  papers  at  the 
same  time  without  partiality? — All  alike. 

There  is  an  announcement  in  that  day's  New 
Times,  the  23nd  of  February  last,  under  the 
head  of  Court  Intelligence :  did  you  prepare 
that  or  how  much  of  it  ? — ^As  for  as  relates  t* 
the  Royal  Family,  I  did. 

What  is  the  next  article  to  that  P— '<  Tho 
Earl  of  Harrowby  gives  a  grand  cabinet  dinner 
to-morrow  at  his  house,  in  Grosvenor-square.'* 

Did  yon  prepare  and  send  that  P — I  cannot 
speak  to  that  at  this  great  distance  of  tim^ 
but  from  the  wording  of  it,  it  is  my  impression 
that  I  did  not. 

What  is  there  in  the  wording  of  it  that 
induces  you  to  think  you  did  not  send  it?^It 
says  **  grand." 

Did  you  ever  put  such  a  word  into  that 
announcement  at  all? — No;  becanse  I  know 
that  the  cabinet  dinners  are  always  the  same. 

There  is  no  particular  grandeur  attributable 
to  one  as  distinguished  fi^m  another  P — ^No. 

Andrew  MxUhdL  sworn.— Examined  by  Mr. 

Cunoood. 

Have  you  the  manuscript  of  this  artide^ 
**  The  Earl  of  Harrowby  gives  a  grand  cabinet 
dinner,"  and  so  on  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  bring  it  from  the  New  Times  ? — ^Yes, 
this  is  it.  [prodwing  it\. 

What  are  you  ?— I  print  for  the  New  Times. 

Is  that  the  original  r — ^It  is  the  original. 

Mr.  Cwwood^ — Let  Mr.  Doane  look  at  it. 
(To  Mx.  Doane.)  Is  that  your  hand-writing? 
—-No,  mine  is  done  by  a  manifold. 

Mr.  Cuaioood.  (To  MUcheU.y-UKm  do  you 
account  for  that? — This  is  the  original  manu- 
script we  had :  it  did  not  come  from  Mr. 
Doane. 

Had  you  any  other  manuscript  but  that  ?— 
I  do  not  know  whether  Mr.  Doane  might  send 
a  dnplioate,  but  that  is  what  we  printed  from. 

Mr.  Gtimey.-- It  is  a  series  of  fashionable 
annunciations.  .  ^  Mr.  Honeywood  is  arrived,** 
and  so  on. 

Mr.  CunomMl^*— Mr.  Doane,  can  yoo  aooonnt 
for  this  ?— No,  I  know  nothing  of  it 

Mr.  Cunoood,  (To  JWite^cfi.)— From  whom 
did  you  receive  itP — From  a  person  of  the 
name  of  Liwenu,  who  is  in  the  same  way  as 
Mr.  Doane. 


8451 


Jhft  High  TriaMOHi 


A.  D.  189a 


L846 


Mn,  Wkkdker  Mrora.-— EkamiMd  by 
Mr.  AdaiphM. 

Hare  you  searched  in  the  newspapers  jmb* 
lished  on  the  22nd  of  February^  for  theartide, 
**Lord  Harrowby^s  dinner."— Yes,  I  hare. 

How  many  ?— Eleven.  I  will  mention  them ; 
Ibe  Times ;  the  Brituh  Press ; 

Lord  Odef  Justice  Abbott — Was  not  Monday 
the  day  that  was  spoken  to  f 

Mr.  Gvrruy, — ^No,  my  lord,  Tuesday. 

Jfitneu, — ^I  seardiedfrom  the  17th  past  that 
time  all  those  days. 

Mr.  Ado^^hus, — ^Was  there  any  rack  an- 
nouncement in  any  of  them,  as  that  the  earl 
of  Harrowby  was  to  gi?e  a  grand  dinner  that 
day? 

Mr.  Attorney  General. — ^It  is  not  worth  while 
objecting  to  this,  but  the  proper  evidence  will 
be  the  papers  themselves. 

Mr,  .iio^iAtct.— Have  you  searched  inth  a 
view  to  find  this  article  f— I  went  to  Peel's 
coffee-house  for  the  purpose  of  seeing  all  the 
papers  :  the  New  Times  alone  had  an  account 
of  the  dinner  to  be  given  at  lord  Harrowb/s 
on  the  23rd9  and  l£at  was  in  a  paper  on  Uie 
22nd. 

Mr.  €hrfuy.—We  will  call  back  Dwyer  with 
your  lordship's  leave. 

Thomm  Dwyer  called  again. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gvrney. 

When  you  were  here  before,  you  were  asked 
whether  you  knew  any  man  of  the  name  of 
Hufkleston  ? — ^No,  I  do  not, 

Mr.  Gumey, — ^Let  that  man  stand  forward* 
Do  you  know  that  man  f — ^Yes,  I  have  seen 
bin,  but  I  did  not  know  his  name  was  Huckle- 
ston. 

Where  have  you  seen  him? — ^I  have  seen 
him  in  Oxford-road. 

In  a  house,  or  in  the  street  ? — ^In  the  street; 

Have  you  seen  him  in  any  house  ? — ^Not  that 
I  know  of.   ^ 

Did  you  ever  propose  to  him  to  go  out,  and 
lo  charge  a  person  with  an  Unnatural  crime, 
and  to  get  money?— Never. 

Do  you  swear  that  solemnly  ? — I  do. 

Did  he  ever  go  out  with  you  to  the  park  on 
aach  a  purpose  ? — ^No,  never  with  me  in  his 
life. 

In  January  or  February  last,  were  you  out 
of  work  ?    Out  of  your  regular  work  ? — ^Yes,  I 


Where  did  yon  go  to  work  when  you  were 
out  of  your  regular  woik? — ^I  went  to  work  at 
Mr.  Elmore's. 

Before  you  were  at  woik  at  Mr.  Fimore's, 
did  you  work  at  the  parish  mill  ?— Yes,  I  did. 

A  mill  in  your  parish  worked  by  men  who 
eome  to  claim  aasutance  from  the  parbh  ? — 
Yes. 

Did  yon  «teeivft  amiey  liom  the  parish 


while  yon  were  so  working  at  the  mill  T— I  re* 
ceived  3i.  a  day  while  I  was  at  the  mill. 

How  muiy  days  did  yon  work  at  the  mill  ?— 
Twice  in  diomnt  weeo. 

Have  you  a  wife  and  funily  ?— A  wife,  and 
three  children. 

Thonmt  Dwyer  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Adolphna* 

Upon  your  oath,  when  you  were  coming  into 
that  place  this  moment,  did  not  you  at  the  sight 
of  this  man  say  **  Oh,  Huckleston !''  before  you 
got  into  that  box  ?  What  I  am  asking  you  is 
before  mv  learned  friend  put  the  question  to 
von ;  did  you  not  say  directly  you  saw  him, 
before  any  question  had  been  put  to  you  ^  Ott^ 
Huckleston  r'— I  did  not. 

Mr.  Adolphm, — I  was  told  you  had* 

Mr.  Qwney* — ^I  can  vouch  for  it,  that  it  was 
on  my  putting  the  question,  he  echoed  my 
words. 

Mr.  Adolphui4 — You  say  that  now  you  see 
his  face,  you  know  him  ? — ^Yes. 

What  name  did  you  know  him  by  ?«*•!  did 
not  know  his  name  at  all. 

How  often  have  you  seen  him  ?-— Very  often. 
He  resorted  at  the  end  of  James-street,  and  I 
lived  in  Gee's-court.  There  were  a  parcel  of 
chaps  that  used  to  resort  about  that  place,  but 
he  was  never  an  associate  of  mine. 

Lord  Chief  Jmtiee  iiMol^.— James-street  is 
near  Gee's-court?— Yes,  the  next  turning. 

Mr.  Ado^hut,-^Did  you  ever  see  him  but 
in  the  street,  upon  your  oath  ? — ^I  have  aeen 
him  at  several  places. 

What  places  r— I  have  seen  him  in  several 
parts  ef  the  street.  I  have  seen  him  several 
times. 

That  is  any  thing  but  an  answer  to  my  ques- 
tion. Have  you  ever  seen  him  any  where  bat 
in  the  street  i>— Yes,  I  have. 

Where  ?— I  have  seen  him  in  Hyde-paik. 

Where  else  ?— No  where  else  that  I  know  of. 

In  what  public-house  have  you  drank  with 
him  ? — I  never  drank  with  him  in  a  public- 
house.  I  used  to  resort  to  the  RodneyVhead 
in  Chandler-street,  but  I  never  knew  him  to 
resort  there. 

Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  resorting  there 
lately  ?— No,  only  when  I  can  afford  a  pint  of 
beer  sometimes. 

That  is  the  house  you  go  to  ?— Not  particu- 
larly. 

Why  do  ^oa  fix  upon  the  Rodney  Vhead  ? — 
Because  it  is  a  place  that  my  countrymen  in 
general  resort  to. 

Were  you  in  court  when  that  man  Huckle»* 
ton  was  giving  his  evidence  ?— No,  not  that  I 
know  of. 

Where  were  you  fetched  from  now  ?  Were 
you  out  of  court,  or  in  court  ?— I  waa  out  of 
this  court  ?  I  was  in  the  witnesses  room. 

Then  did  you  not  hear  him  give  his  evidence  ? 
—No. 


847] 


1  GEORGE  iV. 


Trial  ^AHkur 


[84a 


.  WtU  tott  mjt  vpoft  your  eadh^  jpni  hcte  mM 
repeatedly  met  him  ina  poblit-Veoae  ?— I  will. 

ThttiyoiiheveootwhatWrhatI  have  not 
repeatedly  met  him  in  a  yhlie  kmn>  * 

How  wutfy  tihitfa  do  yen  oaE  ripeetedly  K^ 
I  do  not  remember  ever  to  have  aeea  him  in  a. 
publio-bouse. 

Will  jFov  spvf^flf  yrMi  hsve  not  sera  him 
in  a  public-house  f-*^!  know  I  have  not  for 
some  tiine% 

Tben  you  ha¥e  at  eoma  time?-*-I  wiU  not 
Bweaif  thiat  I  ever  have. 

Will  you  sweaf  you  hme  not  seen  him  in  a 
pobUohooM  ?-^Xt  ia  haid  in  me  to  do  that^ 

X  think  it  is.  Will  you  swev  you  never 
saw  bim  in  a  publioJiousey  as  you  swear  to 
having  seen  him  in  several  streets  ?— I  4o  oo^ 
know  how  I  can  do  that. 

Nor  I.  I  ask  yon,  v^l  yeo  swear  youlntve 
not  seen  bim  at  Ine  Rodney's-head  }•— Yee  }  I 
have  not  seen  bim  in  the  Rodney V>beadv 

That  you  never  were  with  him  at  the  Bod* 
ney's  head  ? — It  m^st  have  been  some  length  of 
tine  ago  if  I  ever  did  such  a  fithsg. 

Will  you  swear  you  have  not  been  with  him 
tlete  within  these  three  months  ?-^Ye8, 1  will. 

Within  four,  will  yon! — I  cannot  say;  T 
cttunot  leeoltect  that. 

Was  it  before  or  efter  Christmas  fliett? 
-^  eannet  say. 

Do  yea  mean  to  swear  it  wds  sinee  €htiM-« 
mas  or  before  Cfarbtmas,  or  three  or  fbur 
iOontbf>?— Sinee  CbrittiEias* 

Will  you  swear  that  before  Christmaa  you 
were  not  with  him  at  the  Rodney's-head  ? — I 
da  not  tecoUeot  flmtrl  wht. 

IK^ll  ymk  swear  you  wete  wst  f^-lio^  I  oan«- 
not  swear  that,  because  I  do  not  bring  my  nH 
oDlleetion  to  being  nt  the  Rodney's^hedd  vi>ith 
him  at  any  tine  belbre  Chriiiiia%  not  aftee 
neither. 

Yon  will  MH  gfnecr  ton  did  nol|^•~He  may 
hBM  been  tbere  and  I  aot  talM  nottoe  of  it. 
It  is  a  house  that  is  qoiSe  full  on  Sailanlay  and 
part  ol  Sunday. 

.  Yon  are  qnite  poiitiipe  yon  nevor  wnlked 
with,  him  fttem  thai  booio  to  any  other  plnoe  ? 
-«I  ans  positive* 

On  vrbal  oenniien  did  yoa  see  bim  there  ^-« 
Ona-anndaytf 

What  part  of  the  day  was  it?— The  fore* 
or  it  might  be  the  afternoon,  for  angfat  I 


How  came  you  to  fix  on  having  seen  him  in 
tke  paiiq  ^^He  was  a  men  I  nerer  aeiooiated 
with  at  all. 

How.  came  yon  to  iic  on  Hyde^paldi  F^I 
nagbt  miMCn  thousand  there* 

Therefore  the  more  unlikely  yon  skooUl  Ax 
on  anyt  one?  wbai  made  yon  foe  upon  kim } — 
Yon  asked  me  whether  I  ee^f  bios  ia  aiqr  otker 
place. 

And  theiefove  yon  iiked  immediately  on 
%aoiMek  f-^No,  I  did  not. 

Have  yon  any  porticnlar  reoson  for  remem- 
bering hoxring.  seeo  bim  in  Hyde-paik  ?— I 
have  no  particular  reason,  but  seeing  him  the 


same  as  any  other  specteiore  that,  might  be 
going  through. 
Did  you  ever  see  him  in  Saint  James's-paik  ? 

-^No. 
The  RegentVpark  ?-— No. 


But  you  did  in  Hyde-park? — ^Yes. 
r  lonR  aeo  was  this  ?-^I  caanc 
the  time. 


How  long  ago 


cannot  tell  yon 


I  do  not  ask  you  as  to  the  third  or  fourth  of 
any  particular  monibt  but  how  long  .ago? — 1% 
might  be  before  Christmas,  or  it  might  fe  after. 

It  maybe  before  the  flood,  or  it  may  be  after  7 

Lord  Chief  ^atkt  Ahbcti.^lt  cannot  be 
before  the  flood. 

Mr.  AA)l^fkm, — Mot  in  human  poeslbilitx* 

WUneu^^A  thousand  might  pass  by,  and  I 
take  no  notice  of  them. 

You  saw  him  at  some  time  or  other  in  Hyde^ 
paik  ?— 'Yes. 

He  is  a  man  you  do  not  associate  with,  and 
yet  you  remember  seeing  him  there  ? — Yes. 

On  what  occasion  was  it  you  saw  him  there  ? 
-^I  do  not  know  on  what  occasion.     . 

Nothing  passed  between  you  ?^--No. 

Was  it  in  winter  or  in  snnuner  ?-^I  do  not 
know;  yon  say  it  must  be  either  before  or  afier 
Christmas,  but  I  did  not  take  notiee  of  the 
time ;  it  is  impossible  for  me  to  tell  the  time. 

Was  it  in  winter  or  summer ?^It  must  have 
been  the  winter. 

A  Jttrymon.— Are  you  a  bricklayer,  or  abrick^ 
layer's  labourer  ? — ^A  brieklayer  by  tmdb ;  ibe 
man  I  worked  for»  I  have  worked  for  twelve 
or  thirteen  years,  Mr.  Smith  of  Mortimer- 
sUreet,  Cavendish-square;  T  have  worked  twelve 
or  fourteen  years  for  him,  22,  Mortimer-street 
Cavendish-square,  and  Mr.  Elmore  and  Other 
gentlemen^  in  Piceadily,  and  other  places  I 
oosdd  mention- 
Mr.  Ado^Hus, — My  lord,  I  hardly  know  how 
to  frame  toe  request  I  am  going  ,to  make  to 
your  lordship,  but  there  is  one  solemn  doty  I 
owe  to  the  unhappy  man  at  the  bar — if  it  be 
consistent  with  your  lordship's  duty  to  grant 
the  request,  I  know  I  shall  not  ask  it  in  vain, 
and  if  your  lordship  refuses  I  shall  willingt^ 
acquiesce—it  is  a  request  that  I  may  now  have 
till  to-morrow  tO  Consider  this  important  and 
multifarious  case  ? 

LoH  Qurf  Jmike  AUmtt.-^Yoji  wish  to 
postpone  your  addins  to  the  Jm^r  till  to- 
morrow ? 

Mr.  Adolphus.-^YeB,  my  lord;  T  have  no 
reason  to  ask  it  but  from  the  total*  %ant  (f 
preparation  in  point  of  time. 

Lofd'  Ckuf  JtaUee  Abbatt.-^li  mnet  be  tbs 
anxious  vrish  of  the  Court  that  every  assiitanee 
that  can  be  rendeiM  to  a  pcieom  standisig  in 
tbe  situation  in  wbioh  the  nnforUmnle  man  ai 
the  bat  now  stnndesbould  beaibnded;  wbe- 
^r  if  we  were  lo  hear  you  new  we^hould  fan 
able  to  go  through  the  whole  case  to-nnriiiy 
may  be  somwvter^dbidAfnl ;  Wf  fHfat  dlffi- 


1 


849J 


J^  High  Treason. 


A.D.  1820. 


185Q. 


faulty  is  at  it  raspects  the  convenience  of  the 
gentlemen  of  the  jury,  but  ^  ought  not  to 
proceed  with  haste,  where  the  life  of  an  indi- 
vidual is  concerned* 

A  Jwymm.  (Mr.  AUeney^.^Yfe  are  of  opi- 
nion that  our  convenience  is  not  to  be  consi- 
dered at  all  in  comparison  with  what  may  be 
the  issue  of  this  trial. 

Lord  ChitfJuttke  Abbott.— Youx  expression 
b  exactly  that  which  I  should  expect  from  vou. 
We  have  not  yet  arrived  at  the  time  at  which 
19  an  ordinary  case  we  ought  to  adjourn,  but  in 
the  very  peculiar  case  before  us,  and  adverting 
to  the  tact  mentioned  by  the  counsel  for  the 
defendant,  of  the  truth  of  which  I  cannot 
doubt,  that  it  was  not  until  a  very  late  hour 
before  this  trial  came  on,  that  they  received 
their  instructions,  perhaps  the  administration 
of  justice  may  be  better  consulted,  by  allowing, 
9X  the  request  of  Mr.  Adolphus,  that  he  may 
have  time  to  consider  his  client's  case. 

Mr.  JWcrwy.— My  lord,  it  is  the  wish  of 
flome  of  my  co-jnrors  to  have  it  ascertained 
whether  Dwyer,  whose  credibility  has  been 
called  in  question,  can  be  proved  in  any  way 
to  have  mentioned  it  to  major  James,  and  the 
Secretary  of  State,  what  he  states  himself  to 
have  mentioned,  bow  far  he  is  or  is  not  borne 
oat  in  that. 

Lord  Chkf  Justice  Abbott,— The  Attorney- 
general  will  have  no  opportunity  of  considering 
that. 

Mr.  Gumey. ^It  is  open  *to  the  prisoner' to 
give  any  contradiction. 

Lord  CWef  Jw/icc  JWo**.— Certainly,  the 
prisoner  may  contradict  that. 

Mr.  GoafcAiia.— Dwyer's  evidence  has  been 
endeavoured  to  be  shaken,  and  we  wished  to 
to  see  whether  there  was  any  thing  to  cor- 
roborate him. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  i4&fco«.— Perhaps  we  had 
better  forbear  mentioning  that  subject;  there 
will  be  an  opportunity  for  all  parties  to  ob- 
serve on  it,  and  for  you,  gentlemen,  ultimately 
to  decide. 
{ Adjonmed  to  to-morrow  morning  nine  o'clock.] 


Wednesday,  19th  April,  1820. 

Arthur  Tfutthwood  was  set  to  the  bar. 

Wstkwood.—TAy  lo«d,  I  should  be  glad  of 
the  indulgence  this  morning  which  yon  were 
so  kind  as  to  allow  me  yesterday? 

Lord  Chirf  Justice  Abbott.— Yea,  certainly. 

JAt.Attomeif  General — In  consequence  of 
t)ie  wish  expressed  by  the  jury  last  night,  that 
major  James  should  be  examined  as  a  witness, 
I  have  procured  the  attendance  of  that  gentle- 
nan  in  court,  and  he  is  now  here.  Your  lord- 
ships know  it  is  impossible  for  me  on  the  part 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


of  the  Crown  to  call  him  as  a  witness,  his  name 
not  1)eing  in  the  list ;  but  he  is  here  ready  to 
be  examined,  if  the  defendant's  counsel  wish  it. 

Mr.  Adofyhus, — ^It  is  certainly  no  part  of  my 
case  to  call  a  witness  who  is  in  the  knowledge 
of  the  Crown,  and  is  not  named  in  their  list. 
I  cannot  examine  a  vritness  unless  I  am  ap- 

Frised  of  his  knowing  something  of  importance ; 
therefore  feel  that  though  the  Attorney-ge* 
neral  does  not  mean  to  put  me  into  an  awkward 
situation,  yet,  as  lord  £llenborough  said,  if  you 
take  a  witness  in  that  way  you  must  abide  by 
his  evidence,  which  I  do  not  think  I  should  act 
right  in  doing  upon  this  occasion. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — ^It  cannot  be 
expected,  under  these  terms,  that  you  should 
call  the  witness :  whether  he  ought  to  be  called 
on  either  side  is  another  matter. 

Mr.  Attoma^  General. — Neither  my  learned 
firiend,  nor  the  defendant,  can  think  that  I 
mean  to  place  my  learned  friend  in  an  un- 
pleasant situation. 

Mr.  Adolphus. — Gentlemen  of  the  Jury ; — I 
have  to  request  your  attention  to  the  humble 
effort  it  is  my  duty  to  make  on  behalf  of  the 
unhappy  man  at  the  bar,  and  I  cannot  do  so 
without  first  expressing  my  thanks  to  his  lord- 
ship and  you,  for  the  kind  manner  in  which 
you  acceded  to  my  request,  to  allow  me  time 
to  make  such  preparation  as  was  necessary. 
Under  any  circumstances  the  situation  in  which 
I  am  is  distressing  enough,  but  that  distress 
would  have  been  infinitely  aggravated,  if  I  had 
had  to  address  you  with  a  body  fatigued,  and 
a  mind  jaded  by  the  mass  of  matter  Uiid  before 
you— with  thoughts  necessarily  wandering  to 
the  different  parts  of  the  case, — and  without 
time  to  arrange  and  simplify,  even  in  the  mo« 
derate  degree  I  have  in  the  few  hours  stolen 
from  sleep,  those  thoughts  which  it  will  be  my 
duty  to  lay  before  yon. 

It  has  been  said  that  this  is  an  anxious  and 
important  inquiry ;  truly,  if  ever  there  was  an 
occasion  in  which  the  mind  of  counsel  for  a 
prisoner  might  sink  almost  into  abjectness,  it 
IS  furnished  by  the  case  now  befiore  you  and 
the  situation  I  stand  in.  The  prisoner  is,  of  all 
the  men  I  remember  tried  before  a  jury  for  the 
crime  of  high  treason,  the  piost  unhappy,  and 
I  may  say,  without  meaning  to  alter  the  case 
of  guilt,  if  guilt  shall  appear  against  him,  the 
most  unfortunate!  I  have  known  many  trials 
in  the  course  of  my  life  on  these  subjects,  but 
never  saw  one  when  a  prisoner  was  so  abso- 
lutely denuded  of  aB  countenance  and  support 
—so  much  thrown  on  the  mercy  and  charity  of 
those  who  would  undertake  his  case,  as  the 
prisoner  on  the  present  occasion.  To  say  that 
the  prisoner  has  against  him  all  the  weightof 
office,  the  force  of  talent,  and  the  influence  of 
renown,  is  to  say  nothing  but  that  he  is  indict- 
ed for  high  treason  at  the  suit  of  the  Crown ; 
for  die  Crown  upon  such,  and  upon  every  other 
case,  has  a  right  to  the  best  services  of  its  best 
servants,  and  it  would  be  most  unjust  to  com« 

31 


Mil 


1  GEOHOt  IV, 


Triai  ofArthw  fhtstkwood 


tSftS 


hhth  of  tfaat  which  is  merely  mdifentftf^  ud 
Justly  ttnd  properly  so,  totfiesitttatiov  in  which  | 
he  stands.    Bat  upon  fenner  occasions  I  have  ; 
teen  advocates  of  the  highest  celebrity,  o#  the  { 
most  established  reputatjen,  entefiagvoluntarily  { 
into  the  cause  of  a  prisoner ;  taking  it  for  a  * 
long  time  beforehand,  and  methodjai^  and  i 
digesting  every  thing  to  be  done ;  they  have  \ 
eome  to  the  combat  prepared,  in  a  considerable 
degree,  to  meet  the  lalente,  and  to  grapple 
with  the  ease  againet  which  they  were  to  be 
i^pfDOsed. 

Far  different  ie  the  situation  of  this  unhappy 
■lan,  who,  on  the  very  eve  of  his  trial,  and 
then  alone,  obtained  the  feeble  assistance  I 
can  give  him.  I  never  beard  of  his  case  till 
Thursday  last ;  I  was  out  of  town  on  Friday, 
I  had  notray  instructions  till  Saturday  night,  and 
I  had  to  appear  before  yon  on  Monday,  f  do 
not  complain  of  this^  but  I  deplore  it*^it  is^an 
mnbappiaess  to  which,  his  deplorable  ease  hae 
[fubjected  him>  that  the  want  of  preparation 
and  ability  in  me  may-prejudiee  bun.  Other 
prisoners  in  the  same  situation  have  been  allied 
ny  party,  connexion,  or  other  means,  with  some 
Considerable  number  of  men  of  influence,  weight, 
and  reputation  in  the  state.  This  poor  man 
^nd  his  associates  are  deserted  by  every  one ; 
no  voice  is  raised  in  their  favour,  no  effort  is 
made  on  their  behalf ;  none  has  been  attempted 
with  my  knowledge.  I  have  not  had  the  ad- 
vice or  assistance  of  any  individual  upon  earth, 
ttive  the  solicitor,  who  has  gratuitousily  under- 
ttiken  his- case ;  and  so  ihr  from  receiving  any 
information  to  enable  me  to  ovoid  difflciSties, 
my  information  has  been  all  comprised  in  the 
4ight  instructions  diis  gentleman  has  collected^ 
and  thus  I  apjj^ear  before,  you. 

But  there  is  another  circumstance  which 
presses  still  more*  heavily  on  the  prisoner.  In 
all  the  trials  I  remember  on  cases  of  this  kind, 
and  particulariy  the  last  I  remember  in  this 
Court,  the  trials  in  1794  and  179Jt,  every  pri- 
soner who  obtained  his  discharge  from  the  ac- 
littsation  was  set  at  liberty,  and  the  inquiry 
ended  with  the  question  whidi  was  submitted' 
to  the  jury.  This  man  is  so  unhappily  beset 
by  the  circumstances  of  his  case  that,  if  at  your 
hands  he  receives  an  acquittal  on  this  indicts 
iheut,  other  indictments  still  await  him  ; — an 
indictment  fpr  murder,  an  indictment  for  ^ootr 
ihg  uh^er  lord  Ellenborough's  act;  and,  in 
flAiort,  he  is  surrounded,  by  all  the  perils  that 
can  'involve  any  individual :  indeed,  it  seems 
he  is  reduced  to  this  melancholy  choice,  whe« 
ther  the  office  of  the  executioner  shall  end  with 
tiie  execution,  or  whether  after  that,,  his  body 
ahall  be  hacked  to  pieces,  and  disposed  of  at 
iftie  meroy  of  the  Crown,  or  be  subjected  to  Ae 
l^nife  of  the  surgeon. 

If  he  be  guilty,  and  I  must  presume  there  is 
tfronnd  for  supposing  he  may  be  so,  by  the 
Dills-  of  indictment  being  found,  he  has  no 
right  to  complain  that  the  law  is  too  hard ;  he 
must  ascribe  his  desperate  situation  to  his  own 
fiSLuU ;  but,  in  the  first  place,  I  implore  a  total' 
«tclusion  horn  your  mind  of  every  thought 


aristlig  our  of  o^er  charges,  or  other  ciraom- 
stances,  that  can  affect  you  in  the  dedsfon  of 
this  case ;  and  f  entreat  that  you  will  consider  . 
him  as  if  he  were  like  any  other  prisoner  otk 
ttial,  toldly  sfiDonerated  ftom  other  impntatjons, 
and  subjected  onW  to  the  inquiry  which  brings 
you  to^Bther  to-day.  It  is  difficult  I  know, 
but  I  expect  it  from  your  conscience  &nd  your 
justice ;  the  Attorney-general  made  the  same 
request  of  von,  it  becomes  his  rank  in  life,  and 
in  the  proression  to  do  so ;  it  becomes  hi^  cha?- 
racter  as  a  man,  a  Christian,  and  a:  Briton^  to 
make  ^at  request,  because  it  is  not  in  his 
office,  or  his  disposition,  to  fun  down  as  cri>- 
minal  any  of  the  subjects  of  the  Crown,  but  to 
hold  them  op  fairly  to  their  country  answer^le 
for  their  crimes,  or  entitled  to  acquittal,  as  tfa^ 
are  guilty  or  not  guilty :  stHl  there  remains  this 
behind— a  matter  that  has  been  disclosed  to 
tiie  public  for  a  long  time,  which  has  fteea 
talked  of  with  unreserved  reprobation  and  d^ 
testation,  firt>m  every  mouth,  is  not  so  easily 
dismissed  from 'the  nlostj  corieot  nAnds,  but 
that  some  taint  of  prejudioe  may  still  remain^ 
some  opinion,  some  unconscious  whispering 
in  a  man*s  ear,,  from  the  internal  auggestloB^ 
that  this  is  the  man  about  whom  so  much  haa 
been  said',  and  it  cannot  be  said  without  hit 
being  guilty  of  something ;  in  short,  the  opii- 
nions  of  private  life  steal  into  our  baeaflta.;  «nd 
it  becomes  me,  therefore,  most  earnestly  to 
implore  you  to  resist  every  such  suggestion,  to 
refuse  your  ear -to  every  such  insinuation,  and 
to  view  this  case,  as  I  am  sure  you  are  dispbsed 
to  view  it--^o.make  a  great  effort  so  to-  view 
it — ^I  mean  as  if  you  had  never  heard  the 
name  of  this  man  before,  and  as  if  you  knew 
nothing  of  him,  but  that  which  has  been  dia- 
closed  in  this  cause,  and  on  which  you  musi 
decide  and  give  your  verdict. 

I  hive  olMerved  to  you,  that  this  ia  a  case  of 
infinite  importance.  I  say  of  infinite*  import- 
ance ;— to  the  prisoner — ^my  learned  friend  the 
Attorney-general  has  put  it  because  his  life  is 
at  stake,  but  under  his  particular  circutaistancea 
of  less  importance  in  that  view  than  ever  a 
trial  for  high  treason  was  to  a  man.  But  it  is 
important  to  the  state,  to  the  present  genera> 
tion,  and  to  their  posterity,  that  this  caae 
shdiiM'be  decided,  not  on  impressions  agninsft 
an  individual,  but  on  the  fair  results  of  die 
evidence  offered,  and  upon  a  fair  examination 
of  the  parts  of  that  evidence,  according  to  the 
.  most  sef ere  test  by  which  evidence  can  be 
tried.  It'  ia  of  hnportanoe  to  poaterH^ ;  for 
■assuming,  this  prisoner  to  be  a  bad  man,  if  as 
against  a  bad  man  certain  evidence  can  be 
received,  and  can  find  its  way  into  the  mindh 
of  juries,  so  as  to  procure  a  conviction,  no  man 
knows:  i^fsinst  whoaa  die  same  sort  of  eMtoce 
will  not  be  next  produced — no  man  knowa 
whose  life  may  not  be  sacrificed^ — no  idaa 
knows  whose  fame  may  not  be  destroyed, 
and  property  taken  away  by  evidence  which 
ought  never  to  have  had  the  credit  of  a  jurf^ 
or  pet>haps  the  sanction^  of  any  court.     Tins 

is  the  important  point,  oa  wbicb  it  |>ehoveft  v$ 


««3] 


Jqt  U^b  Tr^son* 


lo  he  particularly  circumspect,  mlteu  a  bad 
man -is  before  us.  Such  atiempts  are  never 
saade  at  £rst  ^mawt  those  «bo  have  good 
chaij^ei^  great  friends,  /ox  the  means  of 
deSending  themselves ;  they  aire  made  on  the 
poor  and  al)ject,  and  then  as  a  precedent,  it 
goes  elsewhere  to  destroy  others.  This  leads 
me  to  caution  you ;  for  it  is  not  the  value 
of  this  man's  life  (though  God  forbid  I  nhould 
undervalue  human  hfe),  that  stands  upon  this 
case,  it  is  the  value  of  the  lives  of  others,  and 
the  safety  of  their  posterity;  it  is  the  value  of 
a  precedent  in  a  case  of  hi^  treason,  which  if 
^ifmore  imp<M^ance  than  any  other  case,  it  is 
of  more  importance  for  this  reason,  from  the 
time  that  the  kingly  govenunent  began  to  be 
established  on  defined  principles  in  Uiis  conn* 
4iy,  and  to  be  curbed  by  regulations  for  the 
benefit  of  the  subject,  the  law  of  treason  hae 
been  guarded  with  particular  vigilance  .by  the 
k^lature,  and  by  the  execution  of  that  law 
vith  commendable  anxiety  by  every  jury  who 
has  sat  on  it;  there  never  was, any  law  so  free 
from  doubt  or  contradiction ;  these  never  wese 
aaet  of  iecords(taken  all  together  and  subject 
to  epcc^tioQS  only  isom  the  badness  of  certain 
timesX*so  perfectfy accordant;  there  nerer  waa 
a  aulpect  upon  which  so  much  rigilance,  cor^- 
cect  judgmeot,  and  -care  on  the  nart  of  juriei^ 
have  been  everted,  as  on  that  of  treason.  In 
tnUhf  it  is  an  awful  case  to  discuss ;  in  other 
cases  the  king  is  the  prosecutor  for  tne  benefit 
vt  the  public;  but  here  tlie  king  in  person,  by 
Vs  own  officers,  is  arrayed  against  the  subject ; 
and  it  is  therefore  upon  a  Jeaioua  vigilance,  lest 
itm  power  and  influence  of  the  Crown-»-lest 
the  natund  love  in  every  good  subject,  and  his 
saal  and  desire  to  preserve  untouched  the 
•afoty  and  the  right  prerogative  of  the  Crown 
should  be  brought  into  pU^,  to  work  opprea^i 
tion  upon  any  individual  so  enlarged  and  in* 
cnlpated;  therefore,  I  say,  this  case  is  nf  pe- 
culiar importance,  as  all  otber  trials  for  treason 
bare  becRQ.  It  u  necessary  to  observe  a  most 
ateady  and  exact  attention,  and  not  to  sufier 
prejudice  te  sway  your  nunds,  to  receive  one 
tittle  of  evidence  that  would  no^  be  admitted 
on  every  other  occasioo^  and  rather  to  lean  to 
the  side  of  the  accused,  if  it  comes  to  be  a 
doubtfol  or  measuring  cast  in  your  mind,  than 
lean  to  the  side  of  the  prosecution,  however 
you  niay  he  interested  for  the  preservation  of 
the  throne,  and  for  the  prevention  of  all  those 
attempts  by  which  its  authority  may  be  im- 
paired. 

I  ba^e  already  .stated  to  yon,  t)iat  this  task 
of  defending  these  prisoneis  has  come  to  me  as 
a  forced  duty  in  my  profession ;  I  have  not 
Mught  it;  1  havenot  avoided  it.  I  think  thatin  a 
qase  like  this,  when  an  advocate  is  called  on  to 
fijieacise  such  talents  as  he  lias  in  the  way  of  hiv- 
Qianity  towards  unhappy  persons  like  these— 
ap^.Iia^e  it  not  on  my  own  authoritv  alone, 
but  refer  to  that  of  others — ^I  think  it  is  his  duty 
sqt  to  refuse  the  asc^taace  required :  I  do  not 
^^w  that  jt  js  necessary,  or  always  decent  or 


opinioofl  «r  poV  tics  into  ^  jcase ;  but  as  I  an^ 
.  going  into  an  investigation  of  some  kngth,  It  is 
fit  I  should  say,  that  in  ^fae  course  qf  my  Ufe^I 
never  have  be^n  in  thought  or  act,  assenting  tp 
any  of  those  principles  or  combination^,  by 
which  the  established  constitution  iiMsbun^  and 
state  could  be  brought  into  danger.  I  was 
bom  a  subject  of  the  late  king,  I  lived  con* 
tented  with  n^  fortune  under  him,  I  am  a 
foitfafol  subject  of  his  successor,  I  do  not  see 
the  necessity  of  these  agitations,  aod  have 
never  lent  myself  to  any  of  them :  whether  { 
had  or  not,  in  another  case  would  not  be  of 
the  smallest  importance  ;  but  standing  here  as 
the  voluntary  advocate  of  4liese  prisoners,  it 
may  be  right  to  state,  what  I  am  not  extdllii^ 
in  myself f  but  describing  myself  coTreotly,  that 
it  nay  not  be  su{^K>8ed  diat  party  feeling  leads 
to  any  one  thing  I  am  to  say  on  the  preseni 
occasion,  but  that  it  is  in  the  {performance  of  my 
duty  only,  fiut  wh^le  I  say  that  I  foel  that  inr 
dependently  of  the  denial  of  any  such  political 
pnnciples,  I  have  a  high  principle  to  advance 
as  a  man  and  an  advocate ;  and  if  there  are 
one  or  two^  which  is  the  most  I  can  aupposs^ 
who  interest  themselves  for  this  unhappy  man» 
I  trust  St  will  appear  to  them  that  no  prejudice 
against  his  measures  will  relax  my  eiSbrts,  or 
cause  me  to  neglect  my  duty  in  the  smallest 
degree  i:  he  shall  have  a  fair  and  Legal  defence 
— that  it  will  be  defective  in  ability,  is  hi^ 
misfortune  in  thepresentcase,  mine  permanent- 
ly, and  through  my  life. 

The  line  of  defence  which  I  shall  have  te 
pusBue  on  behalf  '4»f  this  unhappy  man,  is  one 
more  difficult  than  av^  X  knew  to  fall  ta  the 
lot  of  an  advocate ;  and  I  think  I  should  be 
trifling  with  your  good  sense,  and  be  deficient 
in  the  respect  you  must  have  obtained  froo^ 
evaiy  one  in  court,  for  the  last  two  df^s  for 
your  attention,  if  i  could  suppose  that  it  is  in 
the  power  of  man  to  make  it  appear  that 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar  is  guiltless  of  all  manner" 
of  crime.  To  hav9  medttated  a^sassinatioi^ 
under  any  circumstances, — to  havte  caused,  or 
been  privy  to  causing  the  death  of  an  indi- 
vidual, coming  to  axeoute  bis  duty, — ^these  ar^ 
crimes  which  admit  of  no  palliation ;  they  are 
Climes  firom  which  the  blood  recoils  and  the 
judgment  vevoUs ;  they  are  crimes  that  would 
make  it  absurd  to  say,  the  individual  tainted 
with  them  can  be  held  up  to  you  as  innocent.- 
But  foeling  a  honor  and  detestation  of  suob 
crimes,  I  deprecate  the  ajpplication  of  those 
feelings  to  the  criminal,  •until  he  is  justly  taint- 
ed with  the  crimes  whidi  excite  them.  Our 
hortor  of  oiiae  must  never  extend  to  the  party 
accused ;  every  man  must  be  reputed  innocent 
till  he  is  found  guilty.  I  am  only  anxious,  and  - 
am  desirous  you  wiU  take  it  wi^h  you,  (hat  you 
will  not  come  to  this  conclusion,  **  bepause  f^ 
believe  a  man  in  heart  an  assassin,  and  in  ac^ 
a  murderer,  I  will  pronounce  him  atrai^rwhn 
meditated  the  dethroning  of  the  king,  the  sub- 
version of  his  government,  aod  the  levying  war 
against  him ;"  these  are  the  qhaiges  against  the 
priioner,  gjUd  unJ^esa  they  aie  pr<^v«4  by  «vji- 


655] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  Tkiilitvoood 


[856 


dencCi  which  weighs  beyond  a  doubt  in  your 
hiinds,  if  they  are  not  so  proved  that  you  can 
be  as  much  satisfied  as  upon  any  point  which 
is  the  subject  of  charge  and  of  proof,  then  I  say 
upon  this  indictment  the  prisoner  is  entitled  to 
an  acquittal^  and  in  acquitting  him  you  do 
honour  to  yourseWes,  and  render  an  essential 
service  to  all  posterity.  Do  cot  believe  I  want 
improperly  to  influence  your  minds,  for  I  say 
without  hesitation,  let  it  operate  against  my 
client  as  it  may,  that  if,  in  your  opinion,  the 
evidence  be  the  contrary  way,  you  would  dis- 
grace yourselves  and  injure  the  cause  of  pos- 
terity, if  you  refused  to  act  upon  it ;  but  I  must 
beg  you  will  not  suffer  any  tning  but  evidence 
to  influence  your  minds  in  any  degree ;  but . 
attend  to  that  and  that  alone,  and  give  the 
prisoner  all  the  benefit  of  an  accurate  sifting 
of  it. 

I  had  thought  to  make  some  observations  on 
the  law,  but  I  think  with  the  Attorney-general, 
that  the  law  is  so  clear,  that  it  wants  little 
elucidation,  and  perhaps  none  but  what  will  be 
safely  trusted  with,  and  will  clearly  and  with 
the  best  authority  come  from  the  Court ;  but 
the  indictment  has  been  read  to  you,  and  as 
well  as  its  length  would  permit,  you  have  at- 
tended to  it,  and  gone  through  the  different 
charges.  It  is  necessary  that  I  should  state  to 
you,  that  there  are  four  of  what  are  called  overt 
acts. 

Mr.  Attorn^  GeneraL — Four  substantive 
charges* 

Mr.  Adolphu$,^l  meant  so.  There  are  four 
counts :  there  are  to  each  of  the  first  three 
counts  ten  or  eleven  overt  acts,  all  of  which 
must  be  viewed  by  you  as  having  relation  to 
and  tending  to  prove  the  original  concep- 
tion alleged  to  exist  in  the  prisoner's  mind. 
For  example,  it  is  said  in  the  first  count,  that 
he  conspired  with  others  to  depose  the  king 
from  the  style,  honour,  and  kingly  name  of  the 
imperial  crown  of  this  realm.  Now,  in  sup* 
port  of  that  there  are  eleven  overt  acts^tatea : 
for  example :  that  he  did  conspire  with  others 
to  compose  and  prepare,  and  cause  to  be  com- 
posed and  prepared,  with  intent  to  publish  the 
same,  divers  proclamations;  and  that  he  did 
various  other  acts  in  furtherance  of  this  original 
intention  of  his :  but  you  must  be  persuaded 
of  one  of  the  four  original  intentions,  for  with- 
out that,  if  all  the  overt  acts  could  be  proved 
over  and  over  again,  you  cannot  infer  that  such 
an  intention  must  have  existed,  you  must  be 
satisfied  that  the  intention  previously  existed, 
and  that  the  acts  were  done  in  furtherance  of 
that.  If  you  should  be  convinced  that  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar  did  intend  with  a  certain 
force  to  go  to  the  house  of  the  earl  of  Har^ 
rowby,  to  murder  the  earl  of  Harrowby  and 
all  the  other  ministers  assembled  at  dinner 
with  him,  that  does  not  amount  by  itself  to 
high  treason,  nor  are  you  unless  satisfied  of  it 
by  the  evidence,  to  infer  that  the  former  trea- 
sonable intent  must  have  existed.  It  is  not 
what  you  will  suppose  he  meant  to  do,  it  is 


necessary  that  you  should  be  convinced  that, 
the  treasonable  intent  had  been  predetermined, 
and  was  existing  in  the  mind,  or  else  the  overt 
acts  prove  nothing  in  an  indictment  for  high 
treason,  because  they  are  separated  and  isolated 
facts,  capable  of  punishment  in  another  way. 
To  kill  a  privy  counsellor  is  not  in  itself  hi^ 
treason;  it  is  mere  felony  by  the  statute  of 
Henry  7th;  and  under  other  circumstances 
to  assault  them  vrith  intent  to  kill  them  is 
made  felony  by  the  statute  of  Anne ;  but  to 
kill  them  is  no  where  declared  high  treason, 
unless  coupled  with  other  intentions,  and  as 
an  overt  act  tending  to  demonstrate  such  an 
intention  existing  in  the  mind. 

I  think  it  extremely  necessary  to  put  that 
point  to  you,  because  nothing  is  more  difficult 
where  men  are  unpractised  in  the  separation 
of  the  different  parts  of  law  pleadings,  than  to 
bring  their  minus  to  the  mam  subject,  and  to 
discern  what  are  the  circumstances  which  alone 
are  to  guide  them  in  the  consideration  of  the 
case :  and,  gentlemen,  when  I  say  this,  I  say 
it  with  the  utmost  confidence,  that  you  have 
all  the  knowledge  and  understanding  that  are 
to  be  expected  io  your  situation,  and  that  could 
be  found  in  a  juiy  of  the  country :  but  the  law 
is  a  science  having  its  own  technicalities, 
which,  God  knows,  those  who  have  been  mauT 
years  devoted  to  it  do  not  always  understand, 
but  which  those  who  have  not  been  So  devoted 
must  have  explained  to  them,  before  they  can 
exercise  their  talents  on  the  consideration  of 
the  case.  With  that  caution,  I  leave  the  law 
upon  this  subject,  premising  that  yon  must  be 
satisfied  of  one  of  four  things,  either  that  the 

Srisoner  at  the  bar  with  others  ^  did  intend  to 
eprive  and  depose  the  king  of  and  from  the 
style,  honour,  and  kingly  name  of  the  imperial 
crown  of  this  realm,"  or  that  he  did  intend  to 
''  excite  insurrection,  rebellion,  and  war  against 
the  king,**  or,  as  it  is  stated  in  the  third  count, 
that  he  did '' compass,  imagine,  invent,  devise, 
and  intend  to  levy  war  asainst  the  king,"  or 
as  it  is  stated  in  the  fourw  count,  "  that  he 
did  levy  vrar  against  the  king."  Now,  I  do 
contend  that  there  never  was  evidence  tender* 
ed  to  make  out  so  great  a  charve  which  had 
less  application  to  that  charge  man  the  evi- 
dence submitted  to  you;  and  it  vrill  be  my 
duty  to  go  through  some  parts  of  the  evidence, 
to  examine  it  by  degrees  and  with  care,  and  I 
shall  endeavour  to  impress  on  your  minds  the 
difficulties  in  bringing  the  evidence  to  bear  on 
the  particular  subjects,  how  weak  and  defective 
it  is,  how  incredible,  let  it  be  related  by  whom 
it  may,  unless  well  supported,  and  how  par- 
ticularly incredible  coming  out  of  the  months 
that  it  does,  mouths  from  which  the  life  of  man 
ought  not  to  receive  danger,  and  to  which  sul^ 
fident  credit  ought  not  to  be  given  to  put  the 
meanest  subject  and  in  other  respects  the  most 
guilty,  into  one  moment's  jeopardy  of  his  life 
or  liberty. 

In  proposing  to  call  to  yon  an  accomplice 
as  a  vritness,  the  learned  Attorney-general 
made  some  observations  upon  the  oidit  to 


8571 


Jot  High  Treai&n. 


be  given  to  an  accomplice,  and  upon  the  maft- 
ner  iti  which  that  accom^ce  must  be  support* 
ed  in  his  testimony.  This  I  think  will  be 
quite  clear  to  youj  that  the  whole  case  of  the 
Crown  as  it  is  to  taint  or  aflTect  the  prisoner 
with  high  treason,  tests  entirely  upon  an  ac- 
complice ;  for  if  you  can  dismiss  from  your 
minas  the  evidence  of  Adams,  there  is  not  a 
shadow  of  proof  of  high  treason ;  there  is  not 
that  which  could  convict  him  of  any  such 
crime,  loosely  and  indefinitely  as  the  other 
evidence  has  been  pointed  in  support  of  the 
facts,' or  the  presumed  facts,  deposed  to  by  the 
first  vntness.  I  am  quite  sure  that,  in  the  time 
you  have  spent  upon  this  long  trial,  you  have 
Bifted  Adams's  evidence  in  your  minds,  and 
that  the  result  to  your  understandings  must 
be,  that  if  Adams  is  not  believed,  there  is  no 
case  against  the  prisoner,  and  I  think  it  can* 
not  have  escaped  the  observation  of  some  of 
yon,  that  if  Aaams  is  believed,  there  is  hardly 
a  man  who  can  present  himself  in  a  court  of 
justice  who  has  not  a  right  to  command  belief. 
If  a  man  under  such  circumstances,  telling  an 
incredible  story,  can  be  believed,  without  sup- 
port from  other  witnesses  to  set  him  up,  then 
no  witness  can  be  rejected  because  his  testi- 
mony is  incredible. 

It  has  been  said  on  this  trial,  and  said  so  too 
by  the  Attorney-general  (take  it  with  as  mnch 
qualification  as  is  necessary  on  such  a  subject) 
'&9t  an  accomplice  is  not  to  be  supported  in 
every  point ;  ror  if  he  were,  there  would  be  no 
necessity  for  his  testimony,  the  other  witnesses 
could  prove  the  case  without  him,  and  the 
accomplice  would  be  useless.  I  give  the  sense 
of  the  observation  in  an  inferior  mode  of  ex- 
pression. That  is  true,  as  far  as  the  necessity 
and  nature  of  the  case  supposes  it  to  be  true. 
It  is  true  that  on  some  occasions  such  con- 
finnation  as  vrill  support  the  credibility  of  a 
witness  as  to  loose  collateral  circumstances 
may  be  taken  :  but,  if  it  may  be  taken,  it  must 
be  taken  I  should*  say  when  all  the  support 
possible  is  given  him — ^when  no  one  is  kept 
nack  that  could  support  him — ^when  nothing 
is  omitted  that  mignt  be  done --and  when 
care  is  taken  to  nve  him  all  possible  credit, 
by  shewing  that  they  who  produce  him  are  not 
anaid  of  confronting  him  with  others,  for  fear 
discord  among  them  should  produce  disbelief. 
I  say  more,  that  those  who  expect  to  avail 
themselves  of  the  evidence  of  an  accomplice, 
are  bound  to  give  him  all  possible  support, 
and  subject  him  to  all  contradiction :  he  is  a 
sel£«ccusing  guilty  man ;  he  is  not  entitled  to 
confidence :  and  he  puts  himself  on  his  trial 
by  pointing  out  those  who  can  support  him. 
llio^e  others  are  a  sacred  gage  and  pledge  to 
his  truth;  or,  they  are  like  a  subscribing  wit- 
ness to  an  instrument  in  writing,  given  for  ihe 
benefit  of  all  parties  interested. 

This  point  has  been  anxiously  considered 
before,  and  I  am  going  to  read  an  observation 
of  an  eminent  lawyer  *  on  the  subject.    I  do 

•  Mr.  Sergeant  Copl^^  at  tha  time  of  this 
trial  SoUcitor-gentnl. 


A.  D«  1820.  [858 

not  name  him  for  reasons  which  will  occur  to 
some  who  are  present  j  but  he  expresses  this 
matter  so  much  better  than  I  can,  that  I  will 
put  it  to  you  as  to  the  confirmation  of  accom- 
plices— ^as  a  matter  beyond  all  doubt  for  its 
clearness,  ability,  and  justness.    It  was  said  on 
the  occasion  of  a  trial  of  a  man  for  high  treason 
at  no  very  distant  period,  and  I  subscribe  to  it 
entirely  :  observations  mo^e  philosophical  and 
just  could  not  be  made  as  applicable  to  the 
human  mind.    Said  that  learned  gentleman^ 
**  But  it  is  said  that  he"  (the  witness)  ^  is  con* 
firmed ;  and  because  he  is  confirmed  in  some 
facts,  you  are  therefore  to  believe  him  in  the 
rest. — ^This  is  a  position  which  lawyers  are  in 
the  habit  of  stating  in  a  very  unqualified  man- 
ner ;  but,  it  is  not  a  position  which  can  be 
maintained  to  this  extent,  according  to  any 
principle  of  common  sense.    There  is  no  man 
who  tells  a  long  and  complicated  story  who 
may  and  must  not  of  necessity  be  confirmed  in 
many  parts  of  it.    The  witness  was  a  long  tim^ 
in  giving  his  evidence,  and  of  course  stated 
many  facts  which  no  man  denies,  which  have 
been  in  all  the  newspapers  for  weeks  and  for 
months  past ;  and,  because  he  is  confirmed  in 
certain  particulars,  you  are  therefore  required 
to  believe  the  whole  of  his  story  to  be  true.   Is 
this  a  proposition  to  be  insisted  upon  ?   Can  it 
for  a  moment  be  maintained  to  this  extent,  and 
in  this  broad  and  unq^ualified  way  ?  But,  gentle- 
men, every  profession  and  science   has  its 
phrases;  the  necessary  qualifications  are  by 
degrees  lost  sieht  of,  and  the  worst  errors  are 
thus  introduced.    Let  us  then  look  at  the  mis- 
chief of  this  doctrine,  and  see  the  evils  and 
injustice  that  have  arisen  out  of  it. — The  noto- 
rious Titus  Oates,  the  witness  for  the  Crown  in 
the  trials  founded  upon  the  popish  plot  in  the 
reign  of  Charles  2nd ; — that  most  infamous  and 
perjured  wretch,  who  was  afterwards  convicted 
of  perjury  for  his  evidence  upon  those  trials, 
ana  sufi^ered  the  punishment  or  the  law  for  his 
crime,  was  confirmed  in  his  testimony  in  many 
most   important   particulars.    Unfortunately, 
the  juries,  misled  m  those  times  of  heat  and' 
party  animosity,  were  prevailed  npon  to  believe 
him,  and  many  unhappy  persons  suffered  in 
consequence  the  extreme  punishment  of  the 
law ;  and  murders  were  committed  under  the 
forms  of  justice,  in  consequence  of  the  reliance 
placed  upon  the  frail  and  fallacious  testimony 
of  a  man  of  that  description.    You  perceive, 
then,  the  danger  of  this  doctrine ;  and  that  it  is 
not  because  a  man  is  confirmed  in  certain  cir- 
cumstances that  you  can  safely  believe  him  as 
to  other  facts  where  that  confirmation  is  want- 
ing. What  is  the  character  of  falsehood  ?  Who 
has  Uved  in  the  world,  and  has  at  all  examined  > 
the  operations  of  the  human  heart  and  mind, 
who  does  not  know  that  this  is  the  usual  and 
proper  character  of  falsehood* — that  it  does  not 
wholly  invent.    Falsehood  engrafts  itself  upon 
truth,  and  b^  that  artifice  misleads  and  de- 
ceives;  truth  u  exaggerated;  things  that  exist 
are  dicoloured  or  distorted  :—4hese  are  the  i 
asual  operationi  of  falsehood^-dua  is  a  part  oC 


«5»3 


1  GEOAGE  IV. 


Trial  gf^rAttr  TAisUetoood 


[8§0 


its  nature^  its  address,  and  deztiirily.  It  atiaeiiy 
tbeieforet,  out  of  the  yer^nature'of  peijmiyy  that 
k  ^uat  be  confiimcd  xo  a  oerfeain  extent."  * 
On  Jthe  poresent  trial^  X  sa^^  that  if  I  had  desired 
the  beat  of  my  friends  to  assist  my  feeble 
powers,  and  enlarge  my  humble  understanding 
Dy  infusing  into  them  jnstphncifUes  appHcabli 
to  the  consideration  of  this  casi^  no  friend  that 
I  have  or  ever  had  could  hare  given  me  aen« 
tences  so  ^posite— ssentences  that  can  be  re- 
lied on  for  their  accuracy  of  expres^on  and 
justice  of  conceptioB,  so  much  as  these.  If 
you  can  letain  them  in  jf our  minds  from  fhe 
imperfect  manner  in  which  I  have  read  them 
to  you/  for  God'e  sake  do^  and  let  them  be  a 
shield  fof  this  man,  against  the  attack  made  on 
him  by  A  viiness  to  whose  testimony  I  say 
(not  merely  because  it  is  my  duty,  but  necause 
itiSTfiy  conviction)  not  one  moment's  credit 
oug^t  tp  be  given^  Aor  one  tittle  of  faith  added, 
except  in  those  particulars  where  he  is  ex- 
plicitly confirmed-  He  may  reeeive  confirma- 
tion in  many  particulars,  whsneb^,  the  jcommon 
voice  of  common  {sune,  every  thing  bas  been 
communicated  U>  the  public^,  and  has  given 
him  the  myeans  of  being  assured  of  some  co|i- 
ftrmation  so  as  to  leave  him  free  from 
hesitation  jn  advancing  those  things,  and  to 
enable  him  to  add  vwever  else  he  pleased, 
according  to  his  original  intention  whei^  he 
formed  acn^iaintanee  with  the  unhappy  o^aa  at 
the  bar,  xa  according  to  those  suggestions, 
inspired  in  ium  bj  ojbhers  under   whom  he 

acted* 

Befocel  enter  into  9.  closer  examination  of 
the  evidence^  it  is  necessary  to  give  an  outline 
of  the  defence  of  the  prisoner^  to  which  I  me^n 
to  apply  niy  observations.  I  may  not  meet  ail 
the  expectations  of  the  prisoner,  in  the  con- 
cessions I  am  going  to  make;  butatandin^ 
here  to  perform  a  duty,  I  can  only  perform  it 
as  my  own  heart  and  judgpient  dictate ;  I  ^all 
state  correctly  the  view  in  which  the  defence 
strikes  me,  and  you  will  see  whether  it  sup- 
ports a  more  rational  story,  or  whet|ier  tne 
incredible  evidence  you  have  heard  forces  you 
to  believe  (he  story  told  in  spite  of  all  the 
fK)i»tradictions  and  absurdities  which  it  con* 
^ains^  and  to  which  it  has  been  exposed.  I 
say,  I  have  no  doubt,  that  the  prisoner  ajt  the 
bar,  and  the  party  who  were  to  move  with  him 
on  the  night  of  the  23rd  of  February,  intended 
to  murder  all  his  majesty's  ministers,  at  the 
Uouse  of  lord  Harrowbv,  in  Grosvenor-square ; 
to  entertain  a  doubt  o/mat,  would  be,  as  if,  at 
this  moment,  looking  on  the  smiling  frice  of  hea- 
ven, I  were  to  endeavour  to  convince  you  that 
there  is  no  such  scene,  and  ^bat  there  are  no  such 
things  as  the  sun,  light,  or  heat.  I  mean  not  to 
deny^  that  that  party  being,  interrupted  in  the 
prop^s  of  that  crime,  a  miwoy  of  the  namp  of 
pmithersi  frvmi  some  hand  or  other,  met  his 
death  and  was  munlered-*vhen  I  use  the  miti- 
gated expression  fijnl,  I  mean  it  as  not  \)eing 
a^ti«fact(9r]ly  proved,  at  least  it  will  ba  for  you 


or  another  j^iy^  to  •consider  beroaftei^  or 
whether  it* is  proved  that  the  prisoner  com<« 
mitted  jt,  or  wbether,  under  all  the  circumr 
stances,  it  was'ipuiiaer;'but,takiDg  it  on  the 
narrative,  a^  it  stands  now  communicated  beca 
by  two  police  officers,  I  would  say,  Smithery 
met  his  death  there  and  was  murdered.  Mak- 
ing, however,  these  ooncessions,  and  admitting 
the  fiicts  axe  as  bad  as  an  advocate  can  con- 
cede, I  do  conteiid,  diat  this  case  do^  noi 
amount  to  high  treason :  and  that  the  charge 
of  that  crime  stands  untouched,  and  incapable 
of  receiving  light  in  the  investigation,  from  the 
evidence  onered  by  the  CrowiL  I  admit  th« 
prisoner  had  a  view  to  (he  extent  I  have  de- 
scribed in  the  first  part  of  my  address,  nameljjp 
that  ih>m  personal  motives  he  was  disposed  to 
kill  some  of  his  auagesty's  ministers^  aud  ba4 
no  objection  to  consent  to  kill  all  the  rest;  so 
^r  I  admit ;  but  this  will  be  evident  to  you,  in 
the  whole  course  of  this  transaction^  that  dur^ 
ing  the  whole  meditation  of  this  cnme^  he  vnis 
beset  by  a  spy,  and  accompanied  by  an  iur 
former;  and  it  is  upon  their  evidence  or  their 
disclosure  that  you  are  a^ked  to  convict  him 
of  high  treason^  that  is,  tW  the  machinations 
of  the  spy,  inciting  him  to  crimes  he  was  dis- 
posed to  cominit,  is  this  day  to  be  exhibited  to 
you  in  a  blended  form  by  the  informer  ^  and 
Qie  facts  which  prove  that  ne  concurred  in  one 
mode  of  crimi^  are  to  be  used  to  convince  yon 
that  he  meditated  another  which  never  entered 
hislieart,  and  of  which  there  is  not  any  evi^ 
4ence  upon  which  a  jury  can  rely,  to  pro- 
pounce  a  verdict  of  guilty.  And,  again  an^ 
again  (I  am  afraid  of  being  tedious,  but  I  can- 
not repeat  it  too  often),  I  say,  the  concession^ 
t  have  made  ought  not  to  affect  the  prisonei^ 
on  the  present  trial,  let  him  receive  judgment 
upon  them  in  other  cases  when  they  come  be- 
fore a  jury,  but  at  present  the  charge  of  hi^ 
treason  is  unsupported  by  the  fact  of  murder 
intended  or  committed,  it  must  be  an  intention 
to  do  one  of  the  four  things  chaiged  in  tbie 
indictment,  or  it  amounts  to  nothing. 

I  have  already  stated  that  if  the  evidence  o|r 
Adams  does  not  convict  the  prisoner,  there  is 
nothing  to  convict  him  t  I  say,  if  his  evidence 
does  not,  because  if  his  evidence  were  put  out 
of  the  question,  and  the  other  witnesses  stated 
that  which  they  have  stated,  it  wouhi  amount 
^o  little  or  nothing^  Adams's  evidence  is  re- 
ceived, and  i&xey  are  taken  to  support  his  evi^ 
dence,  and  set  it  up  as  a  whole^  that  the  cas^ 
may,  in  some  sorl^  be  taken  to  be  proved 
against  the  prisoner ;  but  if  the  evidence  given 
b/  Adams  is  utterly  unworthy  of  belief,  thei^ 
the  separated  parts  proved  b^  other  witnessea 
will  noL  in  tnemsel^es,  jointly  or  severally 
amount  to  a  fharge  of  hi|^  treason  against  the 
prisoner,  or  make  out  that  charge,  so  that  a 
verdict  of  goilty  ought  to  pass  upon  him ;  anf 
with  this  it  will  be  necessary  to  dixect  your 
attention  to  three  particular  points. 

tt  is  conceded  by  the  Attorney-general^  |1ia^ 
an  accomplice  ought  to  be  confirmed;  t  have 
t9i^^  the  Jibejiy  0  state  mgr  ofanion^  ^  ibat 


Mi] 


Jor  High'  2ihftw»?r. 


of  oncf  other  0er96ii^  fotrftitc  extent!  ^t  oa^bt 
to  go ;  and  I  AaXi  beg  yotr  to  examkie  m  the  first 
p^ace,  hxrt^  hf  is  Adanrs  confirmed!  in  tlbe  par- 
ticular propositions  relating  to  high  treason, 
tvhich  he  has  advanced*.  In  the  neitt  place,  H 
^ill  be  your  duty  (yon  know  your  duty,  but  I 
merely  ^ggest  it  as  a  thing  tbat  nmstbe  con- 
dirfered  by  you^eNes  to  be  your  duty^  ko  ob- 
serve bow  much  he  is  contrsSdicted,  and!  wbe- 
tfier  he  is  in  any  way  contradicted  by  bii  own 
Evidence,  or  the  evidence  of  those  who  are 
caHed'to  support  hiin ;  and  laslfy,  it  will  be  of 
importance  to  you  to  conisider  how  he  might 
ftave  been  connrmed,  if  there  hacf  not  been 
^ome  strong  reason  to  withhold  that  confirma- 
tion. This  is  a  most  particBlar  and  important 
feature  in  ttie  case,  and  to  which  I  shall,  in  its 
turn,  most  seriously  enure  and  direct  your  at- 
tention. 

Robert  Adietms  is^  introduced  to  you  air  the 
first  witness  in  this  cause.  He  states  to  you  that 
he  is  a  shoe-maker,  and  that  (which  he  ought 
not  to  have  stated  withopt  more  feeling  than 
tie  seemed  to  have),  he  once  had  the  honour  of 
serving  his  majesty,  as  a  soldier;  in  the  regi- 
ment of  blues — that  such  a  man  should  be 
found  in  the  situation  he  describes,  and  that 
he  should  have  gone  to  the  extent  he  has  with- 
out finding  it  necessary  to  repent,  or  to  feel 
any  compunctious  visitings  till  the  plot  had 
failed  for  four  days,  is  a  circumstance  credit- 
able neither  to  his  feelings  as  a  subject,  nor  to 
bis  courage  as  a  soldier ;  but,-  however,,  these 
are  the  circumstances  iU  which  he  presents 
bimself ;  he  ^tates  to  you  that  Bhint,  on^  of 
the  parties  indicted  here,  had  been  an  acquaint- 
snce  of  his-  of  three  years  standing ;  that  he 
made  that  acquaintance  at  Cstmbray,  when  he 
was  working  for  the  Ehritish  army,  in  his  trade 
of  a  shoe-maker ;  and  when  Brunt  was  there, 
merely  as  a  follower  of  the  aimy,  then  their 
acquaintance  began,  and  was  continued  with- 
out any  circtmistances  of  particularity  till  they 
came  togfetber  again,  in  the  month,  I  thiolk,  of 
January  last — and  then  the  witness  was  intro^ 
duced  by  Brunt,  to  the  prisoner  Thistlewood, 
and,  perhaps,  the  most  extraordinary  thing 
took  place  that  ever  was  heard  of  out  of  this 
cause ;  but  it  seems  to  have  been  the  ftishion 
In  this  ca!u^  that  the  conspirator,  at  the  Head 
of  the  conspiracy,  begins  without  reserve,  and 
tells  .every  one  on  the  first  meeting,  what  the 
nature  and  scope  of  his  conspiracy  is,  that  is, 
I  am  a  man  so  determined  on  evil,  and  so 
careless  of  life  and  liberty,  that  I  put  myself 
ii^to  your  hands ;  and  if  you  have  one  grain  of 
honesty  you  will  report,,  and  loyally  inform 
against  me.  I  condemn  myself  by  my  own 
words,  and  cannot  blame  you.  That  is  stated 
of  ^ma'n  of  Thistlewood*S  age,  who  has  had 
experience  fn  matters  of  this  kind.  Adams 
•ays  Brunt  and  Thistlewood  went  plump  into 
the  matter;. and  let  us  see  what  they  say,  and 
what  they  pu^  to  this  man ;  there  is  a  complaint 
of  the  times^  and  we  are  to  infer  from  the 
whole  of  the  conversation,  not  from  separated 
expressions  here  and  there,  what  may  have 


*  A.iD.  1820.  [(iQ2 

been  thetfe^^of tKos«whameditiitedto«imfr4 
der  nrinisters.  Suppose'  they  thou^hlf  thtf 
would  arm  themselves  tb  mtkt-  ^  good  seeue 
of  pliinder ;  that  enhances^  their  guift,  but  it 
does  not  make  them  guilty  Of  high  treiason. 
Brunt  introduced  Mm,  by  saying*  *  ^ii^  is  th^ 
man  1  was  speaking  to  you  about;*'  thett  there 
was  some  talk  about  the  witness* beingitt'  fhe 
life-guards,  and  a  good  swordsman;  Thistk* 
wood  said,  ''there  wses  hor  person  vAicf  w«i 
worth  ten  pound,  Who  trae  worth  anytliiiigfoir 
the  good  Of  his  country;**  the  siuiple  posses^ 
sion  of  fen  pounds  was^  Wealth  enough  to  eov^ 
mpt  them.  '''The  shopkeeper  of  LondiMi 
were'  a  set  of  aristocrats  sdtogethier,  and  aH 
worltrng  under  one  system*  of.  government,'* 
and  theti  fbllows  the  first  declaration  Of  his 
wisfi — a  dteclaration  towards*  them,  if  any  pert 
6f  this  man's  evidence  is-  to-  be  befieved,  1^ 
should  glorv  to  see  the  day  when*  all  the  shops 
should  be  shut  np,  and  well  pkmdered .  This 
is  as  unlike  deposing  the  King'  as  aaf  thing 
can  be,  but  it  does,  if  the  evidence  is  to  be  be- 
lieved, consort  widi  the  rest  of  the-  evidenee, 
and  with  another  part  of  it,  that  of  providioi^ 
the  mfserable  resource  of  arms ;  tfiey  had  a  re^ 
source  veiy  Useful  for'  the  plunder  of  shops^ 
but  absurd  for  the'  pnrpose  of  overtvrming- a 
state,  or  of  ruling  a  country^  sbAoient  for  the 
purpose  pointed  at,  but  quitie .  insufficient  ib^ 
any  other  purpose.  If  there  wtsre  ever  in  tH% 
pnsonei's  mind)  an  intentiOtt  to*  plunder  i9it 
shopSp  r  lament  that  such  ar  man  could  Be 
fbund ;  but  I  am-  not  here  lb  pass  sentence 

Xn  his  morab,  nor  are  jw,  but  to*  examine 
tther  her  is  guilty  of  the  ehiirger  of  nvosndu 
ing- to  overturn  the  govemtnent;  and  unless 
you  cair  be  l%d  fo  infer  that  murdering  men  we 
h^Lte,  and  plundering  shops,  is*  \&ryitig  war 
against  thv  kin^,  aAd  intending  to  overturn 
the  government,  diere  is  nothing  in  thircharge^ 
whatever  there  may  be  in  any  bther^  Wftieh  it 
may  be*  thought  fit;  td  bring;  / 

But  let  us  see  if  the  witnesses?  tcrB^bcSlend 
in  any  part ;  is  there  anything  that  enuouragee 
the  supposition  that  diis  was  not  afl,  bat  thatt 
there  really  was  something' ulterior  f  Why, 
you  cannot  have  fbrgotten  i^fit'ot  one  meeting 
it  was  said,  they  declared  they  vrere  so  boot 
they  could  not  wail!  any  l6Ugef  than  next  Wed^ 
nesd^.  If  poverty  was  the  cause  of  their 
inoving  hot  one  waiy  or  anotfaei^  poverty  had 
ho  allurement  to^  excite  them  to  aeddnon  that 
m6re  than  on  any  other  day,  because  the  day 
niost  convenient  to  overturn  a*  government  is 
the  day  when  it  nnst  Be  overturried,  but  the 
day  to  plunder  shops  is*  when  they  who  mdefs. 
take  it  cannot  find  a  dayV  meaT,  but  by  rob* 
bery,  tod  when  they  must  do  it  or*  sturve ;  that 
therefbre  gives  countenance  to  the  prc^biKty, 
that  some  ofthepar^^  bad  that  desivn:  whether 
they  had  or  notFdff  not  know,  but  there'  is 
some  evidence  pointing^  tb  it^  and*  if  that  was 
thewhole  design,  then  there  is  an  end  of' the 
charge  of  high  treason. 

The  conversation  afterwards  became  a  little 
sportive*;  two  public  men  wete  characterised 


863] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Triai  tfArtluar  Tiutltmood 


[864 


in  a  particular  way ;  with  that  howerar  I  hara 
nothing  to  do,  because  we  are  not  here  to 
assign  character  to  any  body  but  the  prisoner, 
and  the  witnesses  exankioed  against  him.  This 
conyersatxon,  if  I  remember  rightly,  took 
place  on  the  13th  of  Januaiy,  that  is  to  say, 
one  month  and  ten  days  before  that  was  done 
which  occasions  your  being  assembled  here  to 
day.  After  that  time,  was  the  situation  of  the 
witness  such  as  to  make  you  belieye,  that  he, 
a  poor  man,  was  applied  ,to,  not  to  overture 
/  the  state,  but  to  take  some  measures  to  put  a 
few  pounds  in  his  pocket? — He  says  three 
davs  after  that,  he  was  arrested  for  some  small 
debt,  and  taken  to  the  prison  in  White-cross- 
street,  where  he  remained  for  seven  days,  until 
the  30th  of  January,  and  never  came  out  Is 
this  a  man  who  is  to  OTertum  the  state,  who 
cannot  answer  for  his  liberty  a  moment,  or  is 
he  a  person  who  would  relieve  himself  from 
present  want  by  embarking  in  some  dangerous 
scheme  to  get  a  meal's  victuals  ? 

But,  on  the  3rd  of  February  they  met  again, 
and  Edwards*  was  of  the  party,  and  I  beg  you 
to  observe,  that  Edwards,  who  does  not  appear 
to  have  been  an  accomplice,  who  is  not  in 
prison  or  in  custody,  is  stated  to  have  been  of 
'  evenr  party — he  is  in  the  list  of  witnesses  for 
the  Crown,  but  he  has  never  been  in  the  wit- 
ness box  before  you ;  however,  upon  this  occa- 
sion the  3rd  of  February,  nothing  very  material 
seems  to  have  passed ;  but  ihey  began  then  to 
to  have  a  room  in  the  same  house  where  Brunt 
lived,  taken  for  the  apparent  residence  of  Ings, 
but  in  which  they  had  frequent  meetings ;  Uie 
witness  says,  that  these  meetings  ^ere  held 
twice  or  thrice  a  day,  he  is  present  at  those 
meetings,  and  we  shall  presently  ^see  what 
account  he  gives  of  his  own  presence ;  but  he 
having  been  a  soldier  of  the  king,  and  if  a 
good  soldier  now  enjoying  a  pension  from 
the  king,  or  some  alldwance,  never  thinks  it 
his  duty  to  disclose  any  one  of  all  these  coun- 
cils to  any  person  in  existence.    Why  not 
gentlemen  f  if  it  had  been  treason,  if  a  man 
with  the  understanding  of  a  soldier,  had  heard 
the  absurd  plot  which  I  shall  have  to  state  to 
you  hereafter,  he  would  have  recoiled  from  it 
vriih  fear  and  abhorrence,  and  have  given 
information  to  the  constituted  authorities ;  he 
must  have  known  no  part  of  the  plot  could  be 
accomplished,  but  that  those  who  engaged  in 
it  would  expose  themselves  to  certain  destruc- 
tion ;  but  he  knew  as  a  thief  that  it  was  plau- 
sible, or  that  if  he  should  afterwards  fail  of 
the  desired  plunder,  he  might  come  forward 
as  king's  evidence,  and  secure  at  least  his  own 
persoual  safety.    I  say  it  is  impossible  for  this 
man  to  have  believea  the  story  he  has  in- 
vented and  put  before  you ;  but  in  another 
way  it  is  possible  he  should  have  concurred  in 
such  a  plot  as  I  describe,  and  most  probably 
he  would  do  so  as  a  medium  between  him  and 
desperation,  as  a  resource  against  starving. 

*  Concerning  this  person.  See  the  Debates 
in  the  House  of  Commons^  1  Hans.  Pari.  Deb* 
N,  S;,  pp,  54, 342. 


Between  the  Srd  and  the  19th,  acoording  to 
the  witness  (and  it  must  have  been  near  the 
1 6th  for  this  reason,  that  the  funeral  of  the 
late  king  took  place  on  that  day)  they  hail 
another  conversation,  and  between  the  3rd  and 
the  19th  this  plot  assumes  a  shape,  in  this 
witness's  miserable  representation,  which  is 
to  bring  it  here  as  a  case  of  treason.    What 
passes  then  ? — "  I  went  op  to  the  room  "  says 
this  respectable  witness,  ^'the  prisoner  and 
Harrison  were  there  in  deep  discourse,  they 
told  me  the  subject.    Harrison  said  all  the 
life-guards,  and  foot-guards,  and  **  (let  it  not 
be  forgotten  all  the  Polioe  too)''  all  the  Police 
would  be  at  the  king's  funeral,  and  this  would 
be  a  £sivourable  opportunitjr"  to  do  what  ?  to 
overturn  the  State  ?  no,  it  is  not  in  the  first 
proposition  at  all  ^^it  would   be  a  favour- 
able opportunity  to  kick  up  armOy  and    see 
what  would  be  done."    Kick  up  a  row  f  the 
very  phrase  explains  the  whole  design !  that 
all  the  troops  should  be  at  the  funeral  was 
impossible,  but  all  the  police  officers  would ;  a 
few  troops  or  police  officers  would  put  down 
their  attempt,  but,  as  the  troops  would  not 
probably  act  without  the   presence   of  the 
police,  if  they  kicked  up  a  row,  they  could  see 
what  was  to  be  done,  that  is,  to  what  extent 
they  could   commit  depredation.    Thus  ftr 
the  evidence  has  been  consistent,  for  there  has 
not  been  a  word  about  overturning  tl\e  State, 
and  it  was  only  in  this  conversation  on  the 
Idth  of  February,  that  this  matter  began  to  be 
talked  of,  and  this  is  the  way  in  which  it  is 
first   mentioned.      '^  Thistle  wood    (says  the 
witness)  approved  of  the  plan,"  and  without 
any  introduction  of  the  matter,  by  any  thing 
said  in  the  course  of  the  conference,  bolts  upon 
this  subject,  **  if  they  could  take  the  two  pieces 
of  cannon  in  Gray's-inn-lane,  and' the  six  in 
the   Artillery-groundy  they  would  have  pos- 
session of  London."    The  possession  of  Lon- 
don 1    I  should  have  thought  that  any  man 
with  a  military  education  —  I   should   have 
thought  that  any  man  who  had  seen  the  march 
of  a  single  regiment,   would   have  said   at 
once,  there  is  nothing  less  probable,  than  that 
you  would  have  taken  possession  of  any  one 
parish  in  London— of  any  one  populous  street 
in  London — all  that  which  is  here  proposed » 
and  all  that   which  is  afterwards  proposed, 
would  not  give  secure  possession  of  Oxford- 
street.    Of  Oxford-street !  it  would  not  give 
the  possession  of  a  street  of  half  its  importance, 
because  there  are  avenues  that  would  require 
the  guard  of  four  or  five  hundred  men,  and 
much  more  artillery  than  these  conspirators 
prop<»ed  to  have,  but  **  if  they  could  get  the 
two  pieces  of  cannon  in .  Gray's-inn-lane,  and 
the  six  in  the  Artillery-ground,  they  would 
have  possession  of  London  before  the  morning, 
and  if  once  it  was  begun,  and  the  fact  was 
communicated  to  the  armjr" — what  woald 
happen  do  you  think  ? — poor  men  "  they  would 
be  at  his  majesty's  funeral,  and  they  would 
be  too  much  fatigued  to  do  any  thing,"  so  that 
twenty-five  men  were  to  hold  London  with  eight 


k 


sas] 


Jor  H^  t^maton. 


A.  D.  1890. 


IM6 


e 


i  come   to   moue   the   metropoUi 


titod  with  tittttg  up  a  MgW  ni|^  uid 


«iiA  the  kingioM  iroM  a  handfiit  of  detpemto 

Is  it  to  be  eodurtdt  that  a  man  shall  oeme 
^fith  these  crude  and  cash  inventions  to  swear 
away  the  lives  of  eleven  men,  upon  testisMBjr 
«tsch  wottld,  in  another  plaee^  wei^  nothing 
«n  proving  a  milL4Core  or  a  wasberwovian's 
Inllr  Can  such  idle  dieaaM  and  dotages  be 
foeeived  in  a  court  of  criminai  judicature^  or 
ahoald  they  not  rather  be  disanssed  with  the 
eoom  and  eontenq^tso  eminently  their  due? 
fiat  when  X  make  this  exdasaation,  I  am  oaiy 
•t  the  banning  of  the  aaUect ;  he  adds,  ^  1^ 
penevering  afl^  they  had  got  the  caimoii, 
ehey  aught  prevent  aay  oomnMinioation  irom 
London  to  Windsor ''-^^ey  were  to  poseess 
sdlLondoa,  and  idl  the  road  to  Windsor,  and  all 
the  avisnttes  by  thme  notable  twenty-five  aMn, 
and  eight  pieces  of  cannon — this  is  Thistle- 
afood's  plan,  and  against  it  the  soldier  did  not 
aay  a  word  in  the  way  of  remonstrance ;  but 
•t  aeems  that  lenonstrance  canm  fiom  a  man 
eiha  was  not  a  eoldier ;  he  used  a  little  ccsn- 
anon  s«nse»  and  stated  obvious  diffionUiea,  al- 
<hou|^  Haffison  and  Adamsi  with  all  their 
miliUify  ezpenenoe,  said  nothing  against  the 


The  eonipiratois  who  coidd  devise  snc^  a 
iploty  might  well  be  considered  as  mad ;  but 
mx  least  they  had  mediod  in  their  madness— 
eh^  were  to  do  a  great  deal,  they  were  to  se- 
«ni8  London  against  the  troops,  comsaand  the 
jead  between  London  and  Windsor,  and  to 
^aaae  a  diversion  and  take  possession  of  the 
telegnph  at  Woolwich,  for  fiuur  eoaae  informa- 
tioa  should  be  oenveyed  to  tim  P^*^*  "^^ 
w&m  roads  to  be  commanded  in  tms  direction ; 
important  ^venioas  operated  in  that;  tole- 
fraphs  secured  over  the  water ;  a  metropolis 
Aka  London  secured,  and  an  army  paralysed, 
by  a  band  of  five-and^twenty  paupers,  who,  in 
addition  to  their  other  wonder-working  &eul- 
<ies»  must  haan  posseesed  tlie  gift  of  ubiqui^. 
Most -we  not  wonder  howsndi  things  could 
«nter  into  any  human  mind  !  Is  it  possible 
40  suppose  that  a  man,  unless  he  were  too  in- 
sane to  come  befoe  a  jury  fiir  trial,  could 
lws«  been  the  father  of  toese  plansf  That  a 
^cbed  asan  may  hAve  invented  dmm,  I  can 
««U  undeistand ;  but  that  any  seven  or  eight 
sneo,  two  of  thmn  sdldjers,  should  have  met 
eo  net  on  so  ridiculous  a  proposal,  eiceeds  all 
baaaan  ereduMty.  If  lUs  oan  be  credited, 
there  ie  -nothing  in  orienml  ictien— nothing 
in  ancieat  or  modem  poetiy— ^Mthing  in  the 
legends  of  the  ^utheiB,  or  the  lives  of  the  saints, 
but  may  be  received  as  history  and 


B«lt  mstlewood  hasnot  yetdone :  insphod 
siitbiha  presumed  sueoess  of  his  fiist  operup 
tions,  be  observes,  that  « that  win  be  the  time 
OofsTmaprovisaonal  govemfflont."  Yon  see 
their  aajiitaiy  exploits  are  nothing  hi  oompaii- 
mm  iwith  lOieir  pioiMnid  politieal  adhemes: 

VOL^XXXIUT 


^en  fhey  steuld  kwre  gained  poisesaicm  of 
London,  these  obscure  be^ars,  these  wretched 
panpen,  who  had  not  a  man  of  any  cdosiderar 
tion,  fortune,  or  figpire,  to  support  them,  are 
to  foim  a  provisional  goveromeut.  That 
phrase  is  essentially  necessary;  that  consti- 
tutos  the  ehief  point  of  their  guilt.  If  you  dis- 
believe that,  gentlemen,  whatever  you  may 
think  of  them  in  other  respects,  the  present 
case  vanishes,  like  the  kbric  of  a  fairy  vision, 
into  thin  air.  The  forming  a  provisional  go- 
v«inment--4hat  pretty  phrase  which  has  been 
transposed  into  a.  hand  bill— is  to  make  out  the 
guilt  of  these  men.  A  little  before  the  late 
king  is  buried  a  thought  comes  up,  that  this 
would  be  the  time  to  form  a  provisional  go- 
vemmen^-*-to  form  it,  aad  out  of  what  mate- 
rialer  It  is  not  pretended  by  any  body  at 
present-^it  may  be  hereafter,  if  yon  believe 
Che  witaes»-^hat  any  man  of  rank,  wealth,  or 
oonsequenoe,  had  any  thing  to  do  with  this.  Be- 
lieve him  to^ay  and  you  vriU  not  want  that 
afterwards:  but  these  illiterate  beggarly 
wretches,  who  could  not  agree  with  each  other 
aboat  tfafoe  or  four  lines  to  be  written  on  a 
piece  of  cartridge  paper,  one  began  it,  then 
another,  and  at  last  disagreed  about  it,  were 
to  form  a  provisional  government.  ''The 
peovisioilal  fovemaaent"  then,  says  Thistle- 
wood,  ^  is  to  be  formed  when  we  have  got 
poaeession  of  these  cannon,  aad  when  we  have 
commanded  the  roed  to  Windsor,  and  im- 
paired or  pomesaed  the  telegmph  at  Wool- 
wich; and  there  is  every  chance  of  not  being 
interrupted  by  the  soldiers,  because  they  witt 
be  too  tired.''  Mr.  Adams  and  hlr.  Harrison 
in  their  military  education  never  heard  of  a 
bivooac  or  a  night  maioh;  they  believed  the 
soldiers  eonld  not  have  made  a  forced  march 
of  twenty  miles ;  that  no  means  could  have 
been  invented  to  bring  them  by  water  or  in 
icarriages  to  quell  a  revohitien,  undertaken  by 
twenty-ifive  bold  men,  who  had  possession  oS 
oidbt  cannon*  waUraut  a  horse  to  assist  them. 

What  was  next  to  be  done  ?  business  multi- 
plies upon  us  fast;  we  have  done  a  pretty 
good  stroke  of  work  already;  but  another 
thing  mast  be  efibcted,  we  must  get  posses- 
sion of  sevend  out-ports,  Dover,  Brighton, 
Ranugate,  md  Margate,  and  prevent  any 
persons  ftom  leaving  Bngland  vrithout  a 
licence.  Very  fine  indeed  1  I  wonder  they 
omitted  Harwich,  and  others,  which  might 
have  been  of  use;  but,  however,  Dover, 
Brighton,  Ramsgate,  and  Margate,  are  the 
ports  which  are  to  be  secured ;  and  all  this 
was  to  be  aceom^lisbed  on  the  night  of  the 
king's  fimerai.  I  do  not  know  how  many  men 
were  to  be  detached  on  this  exploit;  it  was, 
however,  to  be  done,  and  Brighton  in  particu- 
lar must  be  taken  possession  of,  because  it 
brings  the  mind  of  the  witness  happily,  and 
forms  his  tongne  most  naturally,  to  some  io- 
tenlion  about  the  present  possesaor  of  the 
down.  Long  may  he  continue  to  wear  it. 
Brighton  was  to  be  taken  possession  of,  whyl ' 
beeauae  tbe  king  wns  there ;  yo«iiio« 

3K 


8671 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  ThitUewood 


the  king  was  labouring  under  as  ••vera,  an  in- 
disposition as  nature  can  endure,  and  bulletins 
of  his  state  were  issued  every  day ;  and  there- 
fore  he  was  not  likely  to  be  at  Brighton  for 
some  time :  that  every  newspaper  would  shew. 
His  majesty  is  now  happily  recovered  from 
that  indisposition,  and,  in  common  with  every 
good  subject,  I  pray  to  God  that  it  may  be 
long,  very  long,  before  he  experiences  the  re* 
cniTence  of  that,  or  feels  any  other  calamity. 
I  pray  too  that  the  sceptre  of  these  realms  may 
ever  continue  in  his  illustrious  house.  But 
these  sapient  politicians  and  bold  conspirators, 
it  seems,  have  decreed  otherwise.  Tne  king 
was  not  likely  to  be  at  Brighton,  nor  at  the 
funeral ;  but  now  comes  the  real  aim :  all  be- 
fore has  been  shot  in  the  air — *^  He  could  not 
be  allowed  to  wear  the  crown."  These 
twenty-five  men,  with  the  eight  pieces  of 
cannon,  could  not  allow  him  to  wear  the 
crown,  ''the  present  family  had  inherited  it 
long  enough.  There  has  l>een  no  change  in 
the  succession  for  the  last  hundred  y^ars,  and 
we  think  they  have  inherited  it  long  enough, 
and  there  cannot  be  any  use  in  his  wearing 
the  crown : "  and  these  sage  politicians,  as  it 
is  represented  to  you,  decree  toe  deposition  of 
the  present  king,  and  fulfil  the  first  count  of 
the  indictment.  There,  gentlemen,  is  the  se- 
cret unravelled ;  these  are  the  words  of  the 
wise ;  these  the  edicts  of  the  powerful.  Here 
is  a  kingdom  to  be  overturned  in  an  instant ; 
the  soldiers  are  to  be  absent ;  and  these  men 
are  to  meet  with  others,  aod  agree  to  move 
eiffht  pieces  of  artillery,  without  a  horse  that 
would  grace  a  hackney  coach,  to  subdue  the 
greatest  metropolis  in  the  European .  world ; 
without  any  more  force  than  that  already  de- 
scribed, they  are  to  possess  the  greatest  public 
road  in  the  kingdom ;  they  are  to  incapacitate 
a  large  body  of  troops  from  marching  twenty 
miles,  secure  the  telegraphs  and  sea-ports, 
without  any  other  means  than  their  own  will. 
Such  is  the  plot  as  it  has  been  represented  to 
you  by  this  shameless  fabricator  of  incredible 
falsehoods,  and  by  him  alone  is  the  first  count 
of  the  indictment  supported,  lliere  is  not  a 
soldier  who  oould  have  lent  himself  to  it  for  a 
moment,  and  I  should  have  thought,  if  I  had 
not  seen  the  witness  in  the  box,  that  it  exceed- 
,ed  any  confidence  a  man  could  possess  to  have 
dared  to  state  it. 

But  it  was  also  stated  (because  now  the 
other'  parts  of  the  plot  begin  to  emerge)  that 
two  or  three  had  drawn  out  a  plan  to  assassi- 
nate the  cabinet  ministers  at  their  fiist  dinner. 
Now  that  is  a  curious  phrase ;  it  goes  through 
the  whole  of  this  narrative,  and  it  was  known 
the  cabinet  dinners  had  been  suspended  during 
the  period  which  followed  the  death  of  his  late 
majesty,  and  during  the  illness  of  his  present 
majesty ;  and  now,  mark  how  this  tale  of  this 
wretched  witness  breaks  itself  to  pieces  directly 
it  comes  to  be  touched.  The  ministers  were 
to  be  assassinated  at  a  cabinet  dinner,  tind  that 
/wa»to  be  before  the  16th  of  Februaij :  there 
5pras  no  talk  of  a  cabinet  dinner  before  that. 


and  yet  the  explosion  was  to  take  place  on  the 
16tb,  and  the  govemmeut  destroyed,  although 
there  was  to  be  neither  meeting  of  ministers 
nor  cabinet  dinner  at  the  time  tfa«y  were  plot- 
ting it :  these  fabehoods  astonish  one  by  their 
absurdity,  they  are  gross,  open,  and  palpable ; 
too  flagrant  for  detection,  too  gross  for  exag- 
geration. 

tt  seems  at  this  time  there  were  other  meet- 
ings at  Fox-court,  and  particulariy  on  Saturday 
the  19th,  and  on  Sunday  the  20th ;  and  at  the 
meeting  on  the  19th,  nothing  occurred  but 
this  remarkable  observation,  that  **  they  must 
do  something  on  the  following  Wednesday.'' 
His  late  majesty  bad  been  buried,  the  troops 
had  not  been  absent  or  so  conducted  themselves 
that  the  conspirators  could  surprise  and  over- 
turn the  government,  that  plot  had  gone  to 
nothing,  and  now  their  attention  .was  to  be 
called  to  something  else;  but  now  they 'are 
scattered  in  their  views,  and  fall  back  on  their 
original  scheme  of  plunder ;  the  announcement 
of  the  cabinet  dinner  in  the  New  Times  had 
not  come  to  their  knowledge,  but  something 
must  be  done  on  Wednesday  next  (and  Ed- 
wards was  there),  because  they  were  all  so 
poor  they  could  wait  no  longer.  If  there  is 
any  truth  in  this,  it  still  resolves  itself  into  my 
original  proposition,  that  poverty  was  their 
goad,  and  plunder  their*  aim,  but  nothing 
which  could  be  called  a  political  motive,  or  be 
put  in  question  as  endangering  the  govempaent 
at  all.  Then  it  is  said, ''  if  nothing  takes  place 
between  this  and  Wednesday,  we  will  go  to 
work ;  we  are  all  so  poor  that  we  can  vrait  no 
longer,'\  and  then  a  committee  was  proposed, 
and  we  shall  see  the  next  day  the  sittinss  of 
this  committee,  and  the  propositions  made  at 
it.  —  ''.On  Sunday  morning,  about  eleven 
o'clock,"  Adams  says,  '^  1  entered  the  room. 
Owing  to  the  thickness  of  the  snow  I  could 
hardly  see.  I  afterwards  saw  Thistlewood, 
Brunt,  Ings,  Harrison,  Hall,  Davidson,  Harris^ 
Cook,  Tidd,  Bradbum,  Edwards,  and  Wilson. 
I  found  the  business  had  not  been  entered 
into,  Tbistlewood  proposed  that  a  committee 
should  be  formed,  and  Tidd  should  take  the 
chair.''  Tidd,  therefore,  I  suppose,  -  as  a  re- 
hearsal of  some  intended  scene  in  the  provi- 
sional government,  is  duly  installed  with  a 
pike  in  his  hand  \  and  now  let  us  hear  what 
he  proceeds  to  do.  Thistlewood  was 'on  his 
left.  Brunt  was  on  his  right.  Thistlewood 
said  to  the  committee,  "  I  presume  " — for  cer- 
tainly they  had  had  no  time  to  talk  of  it  before 
all  (his  had  been  done,  without  the  least  know- 
ledge or  suggestion  on  any  one's  part :  you 
have  heard  the  plot  detailed  by  this  witness^ 
but  Thistlewood  says  this  according  to  his  fic- 
tion,— ''I  presume  you  know  what  we. meet 
here  for."  Upon  my  word,  it  was  no. small 
presumption,  lor  no  man  could  possibly  know^ 
"  be  turned  to  the  door,  and  said,  I  mean  the 
west-end  job."  Now  this  is  the  first  time  the 
west^end  job  comes  under  our  notice.  Brunt 
never  speaks  without  an.oath»  therefore,  to 
make  him  natural,  it  comes  out  thus..—- Bnmt 


809] 


Jbr  IBgh  Treaiott. 


A.  D.  182Q. 


[870 


laid)  **  Dama.  my  eyes,  mention  it  out ;  and 
Brunt  was  called  to  order  by  the  chair."  There 
is  regularity ;  there  is  decency  and  propriety ! 
Thistlewood  then  said,  ^'Gentlemen,  as  we 
find  there  is  no  probability  of  the  ministers 
dining  all  together,  we  will  come  to  a  determi- 
nation to  take  them  separately  at  their  own 
houses.    We  shall  not  have  so  good  an  oppor- 
tunity as  if  they  dined  all  together ;  so  that  we 
must  take  two  or  three  at  a  time,''  that  is  Mr. 
Thistlewood's  proposal,  as  the  witness  states 
it. — *'  I  suppose  we  can  have  forty  men  for  the 
west-end  job ;  so  I  propose,  that  the  two  pieces 
of  cannon  in  Gray  Vinn-lane,  and  six  cannon 
from  the  Artillery-ground  shall  be  taken,  and 
that  Cook  shall  command  them  f*  here  we  have 
the  old  plan  brought  forward  again  of  the  eight 
pieces  of  artillery. — ^The  main  body  being  gone 
to  the  west-end  job,  the  artillery  is  to  be  taken 
by  the  residue,  which  is  to  be  fermed  out  of  a 
number  which  never  has  exceeded  twenty-five. 
The  fint  witness  swears  he  never  saw  at  Fox- 
c^urt  more  than  fifteen;  the  doubt  between 
him  and  another  witness  at  Cato-street  is,  whe- 
ther there  were  twenty  or  twenty-five,  but 
these  were  to  be  manufactured, into  forty  men 
for  the  west-end  job,  and  the  others  were  to 
take  the  cannon  and  to  seize  the  Mansion- 
house.  ' —  The    Mansion-house !  -^  twenty-five 
men  would  have  been  completely  lost  in  the 
passages:  they  might  as  well  have  gone  to 
take  the  Tower  of  Babel.    But  the  Mansion- 
. house  is  not  all ;  they  are  to  proceed  to  the 
Bank,  and  make  an  attempt  upon  that ;  and 
Palin  by  himself,  uninterrupted,  and  carrying 
his  satchel  of  combustibles  at  his  back,  is  to 
set.  fire  to  buildings  in  different  parts  of  the 
town ;  the  provisional  government  is  to  be  in- 
stalled at  the  Mansion-house— nobody  to  instal 
it — the  Bank  is  to  be  attacked,  and  Palin,  in 
the  mean  time,  is  to  be  wandering  about. 
Betting  fire  to  houses  for  his  amusement,  and 
for  the  perfection  of  the  plan.    This  is  pro- 
posed :  what  becomes  of  it  in  debate  ?    This- 
tlewood said  ^  there  would  be  time  between 
that  and  Wednesday  to  improve  the  plan,*'  and 
he  dropped  the  subject  for  the  present,  as 
Brunt  had  a  proposition  to  make  about  assas- 
sinating tlie    ministers.     Thistlewood  after- 
wards says  **  he  will  not  drop  his  plan,"  and 
after  some  little  obstruction  and  difficulty,  he 
has  it  put  to  the  question,  and  it  is  carried 
without  opposition.    A  glorious  beginning  at 
least  in  the  provisional  government — there,  is 
DO  opposition — it  is  carried  nem.  con.    **  Brunt 
then  proposed,  that  they  should  divide  them- 
selves into  separate  lots,  and  go  forward  to  as- 
sassinate the  ministers,  separately,  unless  they 
had  a  cabinet  dinner.*'-*This  is  Sunday.— 
**  Gut  of  each  party  one  should  be  chosen  by 
lot  to  assassinate  the  person  designated,  and 
whoever  the  lot  fell  upon  was  to  do  it,  or  be 
nraidered  himself.''    now  how  was  that  to  be 
done,  or  who  was  to  be  the  spare  assassin,  who 
was  to  kill  his  accomplice  ? — I  cannot  tell,  but 
this  is  one  of  the  ipany  fictions  you  have  to 
sws^llow,  if  you  can  give  credit  to  this  man's 


testimony.  But  on  that,  the  witness  began  to 
fight  the  old  soldier;  he  saw  difficulty  in  it,  and, 
speaking  for  the  first  time,  he  said,  '*may  not 
a  man  fail,  and  is  he  to  be  run  through  if  he 
fails  from  unavoidable  circi^mstances  ?''  "  No,'' 
said  Thistlewood,  *'  not  unless  it  is  through 
cowardice."  To  what  court-martial  the  failing 
assassin  was  to  be  subjected  does  not  appear, 
but  the  whole  comes  over  you  like  the  dream 
of  delirium,  or  the  illusions  of  frenzy ;  and  you 
are  to  believe  it,  however  repugnant  to  credit 
bility,  because ;this  witness  states  it  on  his  oath. 
Then  Brunt's  motion  was  put  and  carried.  In 
a  few  minutes  in  came  Palin,  Potter,  and 
Strange ;  Thistlewood  communicated  to  them 
the  plans,  and  they  agreed  to  them ;  but  Palin 
seems  to  have  been  a  politician  of  a  higher 
class  than  the  real,  for  he,  in  a  very  parlia- 
mentary form,  "  rose  to  say  a  few  words,"  and 
he  said, ''  agreeing  as  I  do  in  the  plans  proposed, 
there  is  one  thing  I  want  to  know,  there  are  so 
many  things  vouhave  proposed  to  do  at  one  time, 
that  it  woula  be  of  the  greatest  benefit  to  us  if 
it  could  be  done ;  you  talk  of  taking  forty  or 
fifty  men  to  this  west-end  job,  you  doubUess 
know  better  than  I  do  what  force  you  are  able 
to  bring,  but  before  I  go  round  to  the  friends  I 
can  bring,  I  wish  to  know,  am  I  at  liberty  to 
tell  them  what  has  been  resolved  on  in  the 
whole,  or  in  part,  or  am  I  not  ?"  Then  This- 
tlewood gives  this  answer,  an  answer  which  is 
usually  given  somewhere  else,  importing  con- 
fidence in  ministers ;  Thistlewood  said,  "  Mr. 
Palin  undoubtedly  knows  what  men  he  has  to 
depend  upon,  and  he  will  know  how  far  he 
ought  to  trust  them."  An  answer  prodigiously 
wise  and  sententious,  for  it  tells  him  nothing 
one  way  or  the  other. 

Now  you  will  see  the  importance  of  what 
Palin  has  said;  it  is  demonstration  of  the 
weakness  of  their  resources,  and  the  impos- 
sibility of  their  having  entertained  the  design 
charged.  He  expressed  himself  doubtfully  of 
the  plan,  on  the  ground  of  their  weakness  and 
inabihty  to  execute  it ;  he  doubted  the  exist- 
epce  of  resources;  yet  no  satisfaction  was 
given  to  him ;  there  was  no  pretence  of  an 
ulterior  force ;  he  obtained  only  a  general  an- 
swer. "  Mr.  Palin,  undoubtedly,  knows  what 
men  he  has  to  depend  upon ;  and  he  will  know 
how  far  he  ought  to  trust  them."  On  their 
separation  on  the  Sunday,  what  was  to  be 
done?  Palin  the  engineer,  was  to  go  and  see 
what  could  be  effected ;  he  was  to  view  a 
building  in  the  neighbourhood,  which  appears 
to  be  FumivalVinn,  and  it  was  said,  "  it  that 
building  could  be  set  on  fire  it  would  be  a  good 
job."  Palin,  afterwards  said,  ''it  could  be 
easily  done  :"  if  the  test  of  fiction  is  to  be  in 
this  case  what  it  is  in  every  other,  some  re- 
mote pointing  to  possibility,  but  a  total  want 
of  rational  application  to  probability,  tliis 
would  be  sufficient  to  stamp  this  as  .a  gross 
and  flagrant  falsehood.  Of  all  the  buildings  in 
that  neighbourhood,  Furnival's-inn  is  the  one 
that  presents  the  least  facilities  for  being  Bred ; 
it  is  a  new  building  with  party  walls,  accord- 


9tt]         I  6BCMR6B  It: 


THa^AHM^nMkmood 


cai» 


higto  ^  BattAn^  AM  no  di»H  <^  ^^t 
«a  as  to  prerent  the  eommvnication  of  lire,  and 
to  make  it  fiir  from  easy  to  aet  the  whole  pile 
in  flames ;  if  they  had  pointed  to  other  places 
where  some  of  us  Irre,  the  buildings  are  older 
and  the  commonications  more  free;  but  For- 
niTal's-inn  is  the  least  probable  of  tdl  the  inns 
of  court  I  know.  If  they  had  gone  a  door  or 
two  on  either  side  nearest  to  Leather-lane^  the^ 
wonM  have  found  buildings  of  wood,  which  if 
they  had  applied  a  match  to,  would  hare  raised 
an  tnextingoishable  conflagration.  Peihaps 
eld  FumiyalVinn  was  in  his  mind,  and  this 
ftiTDured  his  fiction :  but  if  any  man  were  to 
say  the  new  building  is  easy  to  ftre,  he  must 
be  such  an  idiot  and  driTeller  as  hardly  exists 
on  the  fttce  of  the  earth.  A  man  in  prison 
inventing  something  he  is  to  tell  Die  Privy 
eonncil  and  a  Court,  may  strike  on  sndi  a 
•ubject  as  this ;  he  states  it  in  enunination 
before  the  Prirv  council,  and  he  must  be  taken 
as  he  is  found ;  for  those  employed  by  the 
Crown  would  not  suggest  what  would  make 
his  story  probable,  they  bring  him  before  the 
Jury,  with  all  the  credit  they  can  give  him,  but 
with  no  assistance  beyond  that — ^fbr  they  would 
disgrace  themsdves  if  they  did  give  it;  and 
from  the  Attomey-geDeral  to  the  deik  oif  the 
Solicitor  to  the  Treasury,  there  is  not  one  I 
am  sure  but  would  disdain  potting  his  hand  to 
such  a  thing.  Therefore,  having  once  said 
Aat  that  new  building  is  to  be  the  object  of 
attack,  and  that  PnKn  and  another  man  ap* 

5 roved  of  the  plan,  he  comes  to  teU  you  so  to 
ay,  that  is,  to  swear  to  a  fiction  he  has  fa- 
bricated, in  hopes  that  yon  will  believe  from 
him  that  which  is  impoasible.  Any  man 
opening  his  eyes,  and  seeing  the  inn  guarded 
by  a  gate,  protected  by  a  porter,  and  diiBcult 
of  access,  would  say,  that  never  could  be  the 
place  chosen ;  it  being  entire  within  itself,  with- 
out communication  with  any  thinff  else,  and 
leading  to  nothing  which  can  much  attract  or 
engage  the  attention  of  the  public.  I  appre- 
hend that  that  inn  being  on  nre  from  one  end 
to  the  other,  would  create  less  sensation  than  a 
chandler's  shop  wonld  at  Charing-cross,  be- 
cause the  streets  diverge  ttwn  that  neif^boui^ 
hood  in  so  many  directions,  and  the  popula- 
tion there  is  so  much  more  crowded  together 
than  in  the  part  of  tiie  metropolis  when  the 
supposed  fire  was  to  be  made.  In  the  analysis 
of  this  man^s  evidence,  you  see  the  grossness 
of  fiction,  and  the  fondness  of  delusion :  he 
hopes  to  gain  reward  or  save  his  life ;  and  he 
states  what  first  comes  forward,  to  prove  a 
plot,  which  (if  it  existed)  a  vrise  government 
might  have  overlooked>  a  strong  one  might 
iiave  despised. 

We  come  now  to  the  business  of  the 
Exchequer.  It  is  represented  by  some  one, 
^t  if  men  ar^  to  be  collected  to  do  aU  this  haid 
work  they  ihould  eat  a  little  bit,  upon  which 
Brunt  says,  ''Damn  my  eyes;"  and  I  most 
lequest  your  attention  to  the  expression,  from 
what  was  said  in  evidence,  ana  by  the  Attor- 
«»ey-geiietal,  in  his  opening.    I  beg  pardon  if 


I  4iocft  yonr  HUhf  ifen  rtpotHlnB  aT  tiMO* 
execratioos,  premising  H  is  not  a  needieii 
repetition;  bat  Brunt  introdnoes  faia-kpoechy 
as  usaal,  by  these  woids;  and  ho  says,  **lit 
has  been  oat  of  wotk  a  great  wMle;  bat  he  hii 
got  a  one  ponnd  note,  and  will  spend  it  all  !• 
treating  his  men  •  the  uMgnificent  Bur*  Brmil 
treating  his  men  with  a  one  pound  note.  Sop-^ 
posing  Bmnt  did  exeeuto  the  geoerMt  bUbtm^ 
tion,  that  woold  give  yon  an  insight  into  Ika 
secret;  for  if  Ke  gave  them  onljr  a  iriiea  «C 
cheese  and  bread,  and  porter,  or  gin,  the  find 
wonld  be  exhansled  on  forty  men,  and  Aeie  la 
an  end  of  the  Exchequer  and  the  lefolirtimiisna 
*--for  the  most  money  prodneed  was  on  ono 
occasion  six  shillings,  on  anodier  a  shiHtng,  «a 
another  seven-pence ;  this  was  all  the  treaaort 
that  astottisbea  the  eyes  of  the  gnwrs^  and  a 
one  ponnd  note  was  talked  of,  that  tey  isighl 
see  on  some  fbtare  occasion  if  he  possessed  it,, 
or  rather  if  this  man  is  to  be  beheved;  for  I 
ask  again,  is  it  credible,  that  twenty-five  men, 
firom  the  dregs  of  society,  could  be  aHored  by 
sharing  in  one  ponnd  to  overtoni  a  atata?  or 
whether  it  is  not  probable  they  had  some  oAoT 
view  ?  or  whether  it  vras  any  thing  more  thaoa 
the  hope  of  such  plunder  as  confbsion  and 
uncertainty  might  assist  Aem  in  obCainingL 
when  they  had  done  something  whidi  wooM 
create  a  very  considerable  alarm. 

I  have  endeavoured,  in  the  houfs  I  have 
stolen  from  my  rest,  to  direct  yonr  attention 
to  the  niaterial  parts  of  the  evidence.  I  do 
not  affect  to  go  through  all  parte  of  it ;  I  e»- 
deavonr  not  to  omit  any  thing  against  the 
prisoner,  and  I  make  such  observatioas  od  H, 
as  I  think  it  bears.  The  task  of  reciting  it  at 
large  belongs  to  my  lord ;  I  know  how  it  will 
be  done,  and  need  not  dwell  npon  Alio  aabgocl. 
There  was  a  meetinflr  on  the  Slst.  The  plot  in 
ripening,  and  somemingis  to  be  efiected.  On 
the  21st  something  is  said  that  might  throw  a 
litde  doubt  upon  the  proceedings  of  these 
gentlemen ;  nameW  n  comaranication  frona  the 
landlord  of  the  White-hart,  that  Bow-ctreet 
and  the  Secretary  of  Stete's  olBee  had  got 
notice  of  their  plans ;  but  it  frightened  them 
not  a  whit;  they  are  as  brave  as  ever.  Whether 
there  had  been  communications  to  Bow-atreet, 
and  the  Secretary  of  Stete's  office,  we  ought 
have  had  the  meaae  of  knowing ;  bat  we  have 
not ;  that  Aero  had  been  some  commonicatioos^ 
we  know,  from  lord  Haivowby,  but  to  what 
extent  we  do  not  know,  because  one  witnen 
has  not  appeared.  But  commuiucatioiia  had 
been  made  (as  I  have  no  doubt  this  witaeai 
well  knew,  at  the  time)  to  the  Secfelaryef 
State,  and  to  Bow-street,  and  therefore,  aosae- 
thttig  must  be  done  to  force  the  plan  forward 
a  little,  and  we  shall  see  what  it  is.— Upon  tlia 
next  day  after  the  papers  had  been  axaminedy 
and^  no  man  had  reason  to  believe  there  ^paa  a 
cabinet  diimer  fixed — ^who  do  jou  think  aa- 
nounces  that  there  is.  one?  Mr.  Edwards 
—who  produces  the  only  pnper  wttdi  eoo- 
tains  it  f  Mr.  Edwardfr--Ae  pointo  oat  tiM 
only  paper  whidi  contains  the  inteHifsnce 


sni 


J^  tSgk  t)mum» 


A.  IX  ItSO. 


1974 


ohI  U»  fM^Mr  li  boD^^  Mid  M  you  hav# 
hea^  in  the  evidmee  and  cannot  & balieve, 
tiMil  inteUigaBea<»*£^>ricatad  to  daeaiva  tha 
eoBdnetor  of  the  paper  and  te  baeooia  the 
atmnbling  block  or  theae  people— -Uiaft  ftdaa* 
hood  ia  put  into  tha  New  Timaa,  which  tha 
CouTt  reporter  did  not  know  of  or  eom- 
Mmdeata,  whioh  appeared  in  no  other  paper, 
hot  which  Boet  ttiraenkniely  crept  into  the 
New  Tunea*  and  that  nnder  eircnmitancae  to 
aaaka  it  quite  dear  that  the  Conn  reporter 
bad  not  given  it,  becanee  he  aayi  the  term 
grtmd  covdd  not  be  applied  by  him,  that  one 
cabinet  dinner  ie  not  more  grand  than  tnother, 
and  therefore  it  woold  mean  iiolAiing.  Then 
yov  aee  hmw  the  matter  had  been  fkbricatedy 
and  for  what  pnipoee  :-*then  oomee  thii 
gloriont  new8|  as  it  maybe  deemed,  to  these 
men,  announoed  bjr  Edwards,  and  prored  by 
the  pioduetion  of  the  New  Times.  What  is 
Ae  fiiet  thing  that  passes  npon  it  f  and  from 
thu  time  I  shall  disdiarge  Brunt's  imputed 
execrations  from  your  attention.  The  At- 
torney-general, belienng  his  instmctions,  made 
an  animated  obeenration  upon  the  impiety  as 
wcO  as  the  obduracy  of  a  man,  who  could 
state  his  belief  m  God,  in  consequence  of  his 
prayer  haTing  been  granted*  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  this  dinner.  To  be  sure  if  the  thing 
were  true,  it  stamps  an  iniquity  uid  infomy 
beyond  example;  but  you  will  see  it  is  im- 
poesible.  Brunt  ie  reported  to  hare  said 
**  Now  I  will  be  damned  if  I  do  not  beliere  in 
God ;"  in  the  mouth  of  this  fiction-making 
witness,  Brunt  said  this,  ^  I  have  often  prayed 
that  there  maT  be  an  opportunity  when  these 
thieves  may  all  be  got  together,  and  now  God 
has  answered  my  pnycr."*  What  is  this  f  I 
did  not  believe  in  God  when  I  prayed  to  him, 
but  now  I  do  believe  in  him.  I  blaspheme 
his  holy  name,  and  the  best  of  his  attributes. 
I,  Brunt,  had  never  believed  in  God  till  this 
■KMoent,  but  now  I  will  begin  to  believe  in 
God ;  but  I  have  prayed  to  a  God  in  whom  I 
did  not  believe,  to  grant  me  an  opportunity  of 
awrdering  a  certain  number  of  his  creatures, 
most  fovoured,  in  point  of  wealth,  fortune, 
talents,  and  dronmstances,  and  now  that  prayer 
is  granted,  I  shall  begin  to  believe— and  I,  who 
prayed  when  I  did  not  believe,  confirm  my 
mith,  by  blasphemies  and  execrations.  These 
ere  the  fictions  of  a  gross,  rank,  ignorant  con- 
e^rator,  who  thinks  that  everything  he  swears 
will  be  believed ;  but  his  inventions  are  bdow 
human  ingenuity,  and  almost  defy  the  grasp  of 
human  investigation;  if  we  examine  them 
w«  are  almost  prompted  to  believe  them,  bo- 
oause  they  are  impossible;  es  a  person  once 
^d, « I  betteve  because  it  is  impossible,''  that 
ie,  because  no  man  would  invent  that  which  is 
eo  incredible.  Now,  I  put  it  to  you,  that  un- 
less, uponatridoflilhanddeath,  you  would 
«dopt  what  WM  sportively  said,  in  anhikieo- 
phieal  argument,  you  cannot  believe  this;  for 
if  this  witnew  is  contradicted  out  of  his  own 
aaoutfa,  and  states  that  which  is  incredible, 
«m  that  moaett,  hisevidcBoeis  tainted  with 


the  d(sbett¥fai  your  mfaid,  his  credit  ia  per- 

forated  by  his  own  act,  the  tide  rushes  in,  it 
sinks  to  the  bottom,  and  can  no  longer  fora 
either  a  vessel  or  a  bqoy ;  it  is  gone  for  ever. 

But  I  must  proceed  with  my  observations  on 
this  statement,  now  we  have  got  tiifough  M^ 
Brunt's  exclamation  on  whidi  the  Attorn^ 
general  made  his  observations  i  then  a  commit^ 
tee  was  to  sit  directly,  <<  and  V*  says  the  miu 
mm-^ynm  put  into  the  chair;  ThisUewood 
wanted  to  propose  a  fresh  plan  respecting  thm 
assassination,  oecsnse  now  the  mndsters  are 
caught  in  a  purs»-net— fourteen  or  sixteen  of 
them— a  good  hauW-ond  therefore,  it  is  necea* 
sary  to  form  a  new  plan,  but''  says  the  Chaiiu 
man  (the  witness),  **  I  interrapted  Mr.  Thia* 
tlewood  in  this,  referring  to  what  I  said  yester* 
day,''  that  is,  to  what  luul  been  said  about  in* 
formation  being  siven  at  Bow-street  and  the 
Secretary  of  Sutrs.  Upon  that  there  vras  a 
confusion  and  violence,  and  I  l>eg  you  to  carry 
your  attention  to  that,  because  I  shall  have  to 
advert  to  it  hereafter.  Harrison  said,  **  If  any 
man  should  do  any  thinr  to  throw  cold  water 
on  the  busincM,  he  wouM  run  him  through  the 
body."  What,  after  such  threats  as  this,  could 
attach  this  man  to  his  assodatesf  he  had  tioM, 
he  had  means,  and  yet  he  mentioned  this  to  no 
one,  and  the  next  day  he  was  baited  like  ahull 
or  a  bea^,  but  he  remains  firm,  he  does  not  do^ 
sort  them,  bnt  however  he  was  deposed  ham 
his  kingly  dignity,  and  Tidd  vras  put  in  the 
chair;  then  Thisiklewood  vranted  to  proceed, 
Palin  slopped  him  from  ftirther  explanation, 
and  they  moved,  that  a  watch  shoula  be  set  at 
lord  mrrowby's  house,  and  accordingly  n 
watch  was  set.  Now,  tfiis  is  the  truth  not  to 
be  doubted,  and  this  is  one  of  the  extraneoui 
tiuths  proved,  to  which  I  shaU  direct  your  at- 
tention*-Hi  watch  vras  set  at  lord  Harrowby'e 
house,  as  part  of  dM  plan  which  I  sajr  moil 
undoubtedly  did  exist,  of  assassinating  his  m»- 
Jestyli  ministers ;  vrhetber  there  would  be  ssy 
material  impediment  or  obstruction  to  thoC» 
thai  vratch  was  set  to  asoertain,  and  Davidsoa 
was  the  man  who  occasionally  watched ;  this 
is  confirmed  to  an  extent  I  cannot  deny,  and  I 
shall  observe  upon  dmt  by  and  by,  because  it 
never  shall  be  my  vrish  to  press  any  obeervnM 
tions  on  the  jury,  vrithout  treating  that  which 
could  be  sud  on  die  other  side  as  fidrly  as  I 
can.  Una  meeting  is  on  the  S2nd,  and  the 
vratbh  was  then  proposed ;  it  was  to  be  set  at 
six  o'dodc,  and  to  be  relieved  every  three 
hours,  up  to  twelve;  there  was  no  grsat  sagn* 
city  in  tne  measure,  but  such  as  it  vras  it  vms 
pursued. 

Then  they  go  on  to  the  proposal  of  the  plan, 
by  which  the  mfaristera  were  to  be  assassinated  ; 
I  shall  oi^y  refer  to  it  brieiy,  because,  though 
I  do  not  widi  to  urge  newspaper  knovrledgo 
more  Ihan  »  necessary,  stiU  it  is  imposdbU 
you  should  not  have  miimtely  informed  ye«i^ 
sdree  of  the  means  by  which  it  wis  proposad 
to  carry  the  anurder  into  esecution,  and  tho 
narrative  of  the  witnem  in  the  box  agrees  vrUli 
it,  to  the  nlBUtesl  paiticulors.   IbisOewood 


875]         1  GBOftGE  IV. 


TfMi  ^Atihtr  TkMmood 


[876 


was  to  kiUM^  at  the  door,  and'obtain  admit- 
Cknce,  on  the  pretence. of  havkig^  a  letter — ^the 
servants  were  then  to  be  secured — the  ooo- 
spirators  were  to  rush  up  stain,  and  the  par- 
ties were  to  be  murdered — ^these  (with  a  little 
additional  figuring  which  comes  out  then,  or  a 
little  after,  about  the  butcher  who  was  to  take 
off  heads  and  hands,  as  his  share  of  the  plun- 
der) are  all  the  particulars  of  the  plan,  and  all 
which  he  has  stated  without  a  variance  from 
what  was  given  in  the  newspapers  deriyed 
from  his  own  information  and  that  of  others. 
'  After  having  murdered  so  many  of  the  min- 
isters, what  are  they  to  do  next? — they  fall 
back,  so  barren  is  their  invention, "upon  their 
old  plan :  Gra/s-inn-lane  and  the  Artillery- 
ground  are  to  occupy  them  all,  they  are  to  get 
eight  cannon  without  horses,  bv  merely  touch- 
ing them  with  their  fingers  I  suppose ;  and 
ap^ain  the  unseen,  unknown,  unnamed,  pro- 
visional government  is.  to  be  installed  at  the 
Mansiou'^iouse ;  what  is  to  be  its  operation  no 
man  has  said,  what  it  is  to  govern  oir  whom, 
whether  it  is  to  depose  the  lord  mayor,  or  any 
other  king,  is  not  disclosed;  but  the  whole  plan 
is  a  provisional  goyemment.  Unless  there  is 
magic  in  words — ^unless  you  suppose  that  the 
pronouncing  of  them  will  <'  raise  spirits  from 
the  vasty  deep** — I  am  as  ignorant  what  is 
meant  by  them  as  I  was'when  the  Attorney- 
general  began.  I  did  not  know  ^hat  they 
were  aiming  at ;  nor  has  a^y  one  person  yet 
thrown  the  least  light  on  the  subject..  These 
men  were  to  be  engaged  in  feats  of  arms,  or 
scenes  of  pluqder,  and  that  there, was  any 
other  person  connected  with  them  you  have 
not  heard  as  yet.  I&all  I  say  why  ? — ^if  they 
had  said  so,  as  was  done  upon  a  former.occa* 
sion,  upon  a  trial  where  the  name*  of  Thistle* 
wood  was  mentioned,  some  of  these  persons 
might  come  here  as  witnesses,  and  say,  we 
never  knew  nor  heard  of,  nor. consented,  to 
any  such  thing ;  nor  do  we  believe  there  was  a 
plan  to  make  us  a  provisional  government. 
And  then  the. credit  of  the  witness  would  be 
broken  to  pieces  on  another  point,  in  addition 
to  the  many  I  have  already  mentioned. 

Butlet  us  see,  furtherywbatthese  redoubtable 
inspirators  are  .about,  according  to  this  man. 
One  generally  supposes  that  a  printing-press 
is  one  of  the  engines  without  wtiich  a  revolur 
tlon  cannot  move  for  a  momenL  Have  they 
any  press  ? — No ;  not  the  means  of  printing  a 
solitary  placard;  but-Thistlewood  is  to  write 
in  such  a  hand  as  he  can  (and  I  wish  you  could 
have  seen  his  writing)  on  .three  pieces  of  car- 
tridge paper,  certain  magical  words  sure  to 
effect  a  revolution  in  the  country :  **  Your  ty- 
rants are  destroyed-— the  friends  of  liberty  are 
called -upon  to  come  forward — the  provisional 

Sovemment  is  now  sitting.^  Your  tyrants  are 
estroyed  ?  surely  they  do  not:  mean  that  his 
■majesty^s  ministers  are  the  tyrants  of  the  coun- 
try ;  if  they  do,  with  all  my  heart  they  are  de- 
stroyed, and  there  is  no  view  to  any  other,  ty- 
rant to  be  destroyed.  If  they  say  it  means  the 
ninisteiSi  there  is  an  end  of  the  treason ;  be- 


cause, in  point  of  fiut,  there  is  nothing  done, 
but  to  muider  those  worthy  persons.  It  is  a 
wicked  murder,  but  not  high  treason.  If  the 
meaning  of  the  words  is  his  majesty's  ministers 
are  destroyed,  there  is  an  end  of  the  under- 
taking ;  and  it  is  only  required  that  the  friends 
of  liboty  should  come .  forward,  not  stating^ 
what  they  are  to  do ;  and  that  a  provision^ 
government  is  sitting,  not  stating  where. — ^The 
gross  folly  of  this  would  exceed  all  human  be- 
lief, if  stated  by  the  most  respectable  person. 
If  a  dying  martyr  said  it  with  his  last  breath, 
it  would  stagger  credulity;  but  how  much  more, 
when  it  comes  from  a  man  tainted  with  ftdse- 
hood  in.eveiy  part  of  his  evidence. 
.  Upon  the  walls  of  the  buildings  in  flames 
were  these  papers  to  be  placed,  to  the  end  that 
the  people  might  see  them  by  the  light. 
These  invitations  are  to  be  put  on  the  walls  of 
the  houses  on  fire,  to  be  consumed  or  crushed, 
and  .this  is  to  be  the  miffhty  engine  to  levy  the 
whole  mass  of  the  friends  of  liberty.  The  con- 
spirators having  no  communication  with  any 
body, — being  incapable  of  disclosing  their  in- 
tentions beyond  the  spot  where  they  instituted 
them, — the  friends  of  liberty,  whoever  they 
may  be,  were,  as  they  passed  the  fire,  to  be 
called  on<by  this  paper  to  come  forward— for 
a  provisional  government  (we  do  not  know  how 
composed)  is  sitting,  we  do  not  know  where. 
Is  it  possible  to  sacrifice  the  life  of  men  upon 
such  fictions  as  these  ?  Is  it  possible  that  a 
jury  of  the  country  can  take  the  lives  of  eleven 
men,  on  the  deposition  of  such  a  witness, 
swearing  to  such  egregious  falsehoods  as  no 
man  can  believe? — ^fictions  which. are  incapa- 
ble of  being  brought  into  contact  with  common 
sense ;  and  which  no  man  who  can  count  five, 
can  be  supposed  to  have  suggested  or  have 
countenanced?  We  get  rid  then  of  those 
three  phicards  which  are  to  be  the  means  of 
raising  the  friends  of  liberty ;  and  all  this  is  to 
be  done  before  there  is  time  to  go  to  the  Mao« 
sion-house,  because,  if  you  set  a  house  on  fire 
in  Holbom,  and  go  to  GrayVinn-lane  to  fetch 
cannon,  the  placard  will  be  gone,  and  there 
will  be  no  finger-post  to  point  out  where  the 
provisional  government  is  sitting ;  whether  in 
a  garret  in  Crown-stieet,  of  at  the  Mansion- 
house,  no  m.an  could  see  from  this  bill ;  'and 
yet  you  are  to  believe  this  was  a  plan  for 
overturning  his  majesty's  government  —  for 
levying  war  against  the  king — and  for  deposing 
him  fiom  his  regal  Crown  and  dignity  as  tbe 
sovereign  of  these  realms. 
;  I ;  am  tired  of  repeating  the  incredibility  of 
this  story,  and  I  proceed  reluctantly  to  a  further 
statement;  I  do  not  intend  to  pursue  this  man*s 
evidence,  in  his  walk  from  the  room  in  Fox«- 
court^  to  Cato-street ;  but  before  we  go  let  me 
.remark  on  one  thing  stated  by  In^,  the  butcher. 
I  .wish  some  part  of  the  exhibition,  made.here 
yesterday,  were  here  to  day.  I  have  foipied  a 
conception, — beggine,  that  if  it  is  .unfounded, 
.you  will  dismiss  it  from  your  minds,«  apd  not 
,let  my  client  be  .prejudiced  by^^  q4.sia]^en  im- 
pression of  min^'-Tbut  Ing^  ii^.repf^nted  to 


877] 


Jbr  High  Trwton* 


have  equipptd  himsdf  ivith  a  belt  and  ti^o 
bags^  the  oelt  containing  sereral  pistols ;  lie 
having  a  sword,  and  the  two  bags  being  also 
about  him.  And  you  are  taught  to. believe  by 
this  witness,  that  a  human  head  was  to  be  put 
into  each  of  them.  If  there  is  in  the  mind  of 
man,  any  thing  sufficiently  atrocious,  to  have 
crowned  and  confirmed  assaasinaition  and  mur- 
der, by  a  display  so  barbarous,  I  lament,  and 
am  truly  heart-stricken  by  it.  When  I  have 
heard  and  read,  as  I  did  many  years  ,ago,  of 
those  exhibitions  in< France,  to  which  the  At- 
torney-general adverted,  I  was  then  at  the  age 
of  twenty  or  thereabouts,  and  even  in  that 
gay  inconsiderate  period  of  life,  every  nerve 
in  my  frame  thrilled,  every  drop  of  my  blood 
ran  cold  with  horror,  when  I  read  of  human 
heads  paraded  about  the  streets  of  Paris,  and 
of  the  cruel  insults  ofiered  the  royal  family,  hj^ 
exposing  to  them,  through  the  grates  of  their 
prison,  the  bleeding  remains, of  those  whom 
they  had  most  loved.  •  God  'knows  I  felt  com- 
forted by  an  honest  assurance,  that  while  Bri- 
tish •  sentiment  remained,  such  scenes  -  never 
could  take  place  here.  No  man  would  dare 
to  publish  himself  as  the  perpetrator  of  such 
acts ;  but  to  day,  to  grace  llus  cause,  and  to 
make  additional  impressions  to  the  disadvantage 
of  the  prisoners,  it  is  to  be  imputed  to  Ings, 
that  he  had  this  unnatural.and  ^acnedible  atro» 
city  in  his  thoughts. 

Now,  I  come  to  the  observation  I  meant  to 
make ;  it  may  be  unimportant  and  unfounded 
— but  if  I  remember  rightly,  the  bags  brought 
before  the  Court,  taJcen  from  the  person  of  Ings, 
were  such,  as  no  man  who  haa  exercised  tha 
trade  of  a  butcher,  could  have  proposed  to  put 
a  human  head  into— they  were  not  lan;e  enoyigh 
to  contain  it.  I  am  told  I  am  mibtaken ;  I 
thought  it  was  so,  and  I  am  onlv  convinced  of 
the  contraiy,  because  one  of  my  learned  friends 
obligingly  corrects  me,  wishing  that  I  should 
not  persist  in  an  error.  But  be  the  possibility 
as  it  mav,  do  not  for  God's  sake  let  us  be  de- 
'ceived  oy  these  ignorant  fictions— fictions, 
abusive  of  the  nature  and  quality  of  English- 
men— fictions,  which  unless  we«>give  up  all 
sense  of  nfttibnal  character,  to  favour  the  tale 
of  such  a  witness  as  Adams,  cannot  gain  belief 
in  our  minds.  But  examine  your  own  thoughts, 
gentlemen,  take  the  declarations  of  all  these 
men,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  their 
eupposed  plot — their  dedantions  of  poverty-r- 
their  expressions,  that  they  were  so  poor,  that 
they  coul<l  not  stav  beyond  Wednesday — that 
they -shall  not  fear  the  tropty  those  are  the  police 
officersy-rand  then  see  whether  it  was  the  lood 
chancellor's^  head,  or  lord  Harrowby's  plate, 
that  was  to  go  into  those  bags,*-that  a  needy 
man,  in  the  perilous  situation  in  wl^ch  Ings 
was  placed,  should  encumber  himself  with  two 
unprofitable  heads,  is  altogether  incredible. 
The  intention  was,  to  strike  Sie  ministns  from 
the  face  of  the  earth ;  but  Ings  vrould  not  haye 
loaded  himself  vrith  their  heads,  when  salvers 
and  goblets,  and  beakers  and  spoons,  were 
within  his  reacfai  and  would  hav«  enriched  him: 


,% 


A.  D.  1820.    ^  [«78 

plunder  was  his  bbject ;  ,for  Ings  is  the  most 
clamorous  about  poverty ;-  and  Ings,  therefore, 
is  much  more  to  be  supposed  to  intend  to  stead 
the  plate  he  should  find,  than  to  encumber  him- 
self with  human  heads,  of  no  use,^  but  to  raise 
all  mankind  against  him,  and  with  a  hand,  the 
hand  of  lord  Castlereagh,  which  was  to  be  put 
in  pickle,  and  shewn  on  some  future  occasion, 
whether  for  money,  or  as  a  trophy,  does  not 
appear. 

*  I  have  said  I  will  not  accompany  this  maa 
in  his  walk  from  Fox-court  to  Cfatp-streiet,  the 
circumstances .  he  discloses  there  are  of.  little 
value  in  this  cause;  but^when  you  come  to 
Cato-street  every  moment,  assumes  some  .'im- 
portance. •  He  goes  in,  and  tells  you  that  there 
were  numerically  (he  does  not  say  as  he  com- 
putes or  believes),  but  numeriqally  .there  were 
twenty  people  in  the  house  besides  himself 
and  he  separates  them  exactly,  eighteen  in  the 
room,  and  two  below  stairs.  -  He  tells  you  there 
was  one  candle,-  and  one  candle  alone ;  that 
that  candle  (for  he  mentioned  it  in  the  singular 
number  always)  was  put  out  on  one  occasion, 
and  he  cannot  tell  who  did  it  That  when  the 
Bow-street  officers  came  up,  they  used  these 
exprese&ons,  which  I  took,  down : — Two  stood 
at  the  door  and  said,  ''  Here's  a  pretty  nest  of 
-you. ;  Gentlen^en, .  we  have  got  a  warrant  to 
apprehend  you,  and  we  hope  you  willgo  peace- 
aoly.''  To  these  ireryiplnrases  and .  sentences 
he  swears  most  distinctly...  It  will  be  my  duty 
hereafter, 'When  I- state  where  he  is  confirmed 
and  where  contradicted,  to  beg  your,  attention 
to  these  ciroumstances,  -because,  they  are  preg- 
nant .with  strong  contradictions,vand::aad>to 
my  belief  that  he  was  not  present  at  the  place. 
;What  was  the  whole  exploit 'as  to -him? — a 
thrust  with  a  sword  vras' made,,  and  •he  was 
very- near  the  officer,  but  he  escaped  imme- 
diately, and  .walked,  away  as  uncoqoerned  as 
if  nothing  had  happened :  those  were  his  very 
words. '  If  he:  was  present  then  he  was  known 
to  the  officers  who  -came  there,  and, who  fa- 
voured his  escape.  If  he  was  not  present,  he 
is  stating  from  public  report  what  he  has  sworn 
to,  helping. it  out  \ff  such  additional  cirbum- 
stances  as  at  his  leisure  he  could  devisie. . 
'  With  your  experience,  in  courts,  some  of  yoa 
may  have  been  astonished  that  my  learned  friend 
cross-examined  this  witness  so  shortly ;  that 
he  did  not  go  more  into  the  circumstances; 
and  that  he  did  not  endeavour  to  get  from  him 
contradictions  upon  particular  points,  where  it 
might  be  expected  ne  should  betray  himself 
into  contradictions.'  Genti^men,  I  had  the 
honour  to  submit*  to  you  that  every  science  has 
its  own  particular  technical. points,  and  my 
learned  friend  never  shewed  himself  a  more 
consummate  master  of  his  profession  than  in 
the  brief  examination  of  that  man.  To  have 
examined  him.  again  and!  again,  would  only 
have  produced  the  repetition  of  the  fiction  you 
saw  so  much  of,  under  tl^e  examination  of  my 
two  learned  friends  the  Solicitor-general  and 
Mr,  Gumey.  You  saw  l|pw  accurately  he  had 
Gonoedhisetory;  bow  ready  he  was  to  prevent 


879] 


I  GBOmOE  IV. 


Trial  cfArikwr  TUttigwaad 


rsso 


fbririuimingttJkeid,  iHran  tbqf  wm  pro|M» 

'ttf  %i  «tid  ngukr  questieBs  acondiBg  to  cktir 

•ai^rieaee  woA  judgmea^— ha   dwckpd  tbt 

mmtiflal :  ^  1 101  w>t  cdint  to  tfan  part  of  th« 

otorjr  yety"  or,  ^  I  haT«  MMnethiag  ebe  to  ny  i  before  I  proceed  furtlier  in  this  moA  arduouft 

befote  I  come  to  that;''  and  not  once  bat  re*    case,  let  ue  aet  myielf  right  in  one  particalar. 

|iealedly)--«ofldact  Terynatond  in  a  man  «dio>  ;  Hare  any  of  my  cxpraaiionB  induced  yoa  to 


olty  lo  atatid  up  bolece  yoa,  a  diaaemiag  jury 
of  the  couBtfy,  and  state  that  frhidi  the  childian 
of  a  nuteery  would  reject  a%  unfit  for  beUef. 
I  haire  now  done  1^  his  examination ;  bnt^ 


duiing  tbe  term  of  his  impriaonnent,  had 
pianaed  aad  .chalked  down«  and  drHsed^  and 
designed,  every  thing  that  he  could  say;  who 
cosdd  not  be  put  out  ef  fait  way  ae  to  a  single 
word  by  any  pfopoutioB,  and  wbo  would  not 
aoArlus  itofy  to  be  mutilated,  wbatarfir  dm 
■eternity  and  oesiie  lo  do  eomighit  have  been, 
«Bd  bowever  fit  it  might  have  been  to  put  hit 
ttaiiative  odierwiie«  ^No-^I  have  not  come 
to  that  part  of  ^  story  vet ;"  aad  then  be 

ri  OB  witb  words  and  phraees  pracoooeived 
the  purpoaoy  and  gives  you  hu  lesson  as  if 
ke  had  leanit  it  lirom  a  book^  Then,  if  my 
learned  ooadjutor  bad  wasted  his  eaoallent 
talents  ia  crose-examiaatioa,  what  woold  have 
been  the  result  }«-4ie  would  have  aaid  twice 
Ibat  which  be  bad  said  oaoe.  Witnesaas  like 
Hm  are  oot  oveicome  by  ereet«eiaminatioo, 
but  by  an  ezaminalion  of  their  maaaer  in  gi^ 
bag  tbair  evideooe,  by  tavestigating  tbe  impn>- 
bmlity  of  tbeir  slory^  and  bj  seeing  bow  much 
«f  it  must  be  mei%  matter  of  iavention  \  ther^ 
lore  nothing  came  out  ia  eroi»«tamtnatioa 
cacept  tfaia*^aad  moat  important  it  is — ^tbait 
when  pressed  ijpon  that  pan  of  the  subjeel, 
Imd  wiih  aUusioB  to  a  pbnee  which  the 
Attomey-geneful  had  impeited  into  his  speech 
Irom  te  graatest  poet  in  our  laaguage,  whether 
be  bad  any  <*  compunctious  visitings,'*  be 
awote'*-«beUeva  it  if  vou  oaa<— that  oouaoieice 
aloue  I^BO  fear  for  bis  aalsty-'-ao  hope  of  a 
better  state  ia  this  world,  by  reward  orpuniahk 
ment  bat  his  heart«trickeiMXMMoieaee  deae 
•«-indnoad  him  to  be  quiet  Irom  the  murder  of 
fimithersoB  Wedaesdaynigfat,  tiD  his  owa  being 
taken  quite  qfietlyaii  liiday;  and  then  on 
Sataiday  he  plumes  his  winos  and  goes  before 
the  pii^  council  to  disburmea  his  soul,  and 
■nke  atonement  for  hie  offeaoe.  I  bava  heea 
much  ^in  courts  where  ^nfoimers  have  been 
called  oa  to  disclose  what  tey  knew  ef  a  ma^ 
ier;  aad  I  renwmber  a  very  wise  and  able 
anaistrale  of  Middleeex,  who  filled  tbeohair 
af  that  sessions  for  tweaty-eia  yearn,  who,  vrhea 
an  infiirmer  answered  that  he  biooght  the 
ftoseoutioa  ferward  for  the  love  of  public  jue- 
tiee,  alwayi  said,  ^Sir,  the  momeat  youaay 
thai,  you  beoonm  ioeredible;  and  there  is  ao 
bebesiog  a  word  ftam  your  mouth/'  Now, 
oau  yoa  b^eve  thie  man's  siwy?  He  has 
been  attacked  as  by  a  boa  aad  a  butt  dog,  pot 
oat  of  tbe  chair,  treated  with  mdigaity.  He 
aeca  a  maider  cmamitted,  walks  away  as 
WBBOBoemed  as  if  aothh)g  had  happened,  ifis 
eMMcioBce'  stidces  him,  tboagb  nis  piMa  was 
ant  hurt.  Heiasisonthestingeof  coaacteiiee 
four  days,  and  then  he  vabuithwa  himself. 
Oae  woahl  eupposo  that  yea  had  aot  hearts, 
Ihat  9nm  wave  not  tMnaeious  of  yanrown  foslU 
tegt,  «r«hft  «  Mb  fMid  not  Mve 


think  I  have  treatsd  the  case  with  levi^  ? — if 
Ihey  have,  abaolve  me  from  such  an  impatatioa. 
I  never  meant  to  do  it,  Mea  of  right  nuunds 
canaot  treat  lightly  matters  of  this  grave  im» 
portaace.  I  cannot  hear  without  shuddering 
•^I  oannot  believe  without  amaaemeat — ^with* 
out  i&digaatioa<^without  all  the  foelinge  of 
abborrenoe  that  can  enter  the  miad-  ■that  the 
person  who  has  for  so  away  ^ears  preshled 
with  unexampled  iadastiy,  ability,  and  ime* 
grity  in  the  highest  aad  most  important  ooait 
of  this  eeuntry  for  the  decision  of  questions  of 
property,  was  ia  one  aioment  to  be  a  seaselea 
corpse ;  that  the  victor  of  Waterioo,  the  prid^ 
and  glory  of  the  British  name— 4m  vriio  exalted 
to  its  bluest  pitch  the  reoowa  of  our  natioaal 
valoar,  and  oeoame  at  the  same  tisae  the 
avenger  and  liberator  of  Europe,  was  to  have 
fallen  under  the  hands  of  vulgar  assassins,  aad 
to  have  perished  in  aa  inglorious  broil. 

Oentiemen,  I  omit  lo  name  other  intended 
victims  for  other  reasons.  I  do  not  brag  of 
my  private  or  oeeasioikai  acqoaintaaoe  with 
any  body,  but  I  may  have  a  slight  acquaittU 
ance  witn  some  of  diem :  take  your  measure 
60m  these  two  individuab  aloae,  and  say  that 
they  are  connected  with  all  the  wealth  and 
wisdom  and  learning  and  talenta  which  ware 
ta  be  present  at  that  cabinet  dinner,  aad  I  aa 
lure  Uat  the  atoutest  heart  mast  reooil  with 
imr  aad  melt  with  oompassioa,  at  the  mare 
tneatioit  Hi  sodi  a  borriMe  butchery.  And  if 
you  ean  suppose  that  I  have  tieaied  it  ia  aay 
degtae  widi  levity,  it  has  been  from  the  inad*> 
verteace  of  the  league,  «id  not  the  ootrupiioei 
of  the  heart*  I  ae^r  intended  it  ^  aad  if  I 
have  doae  it,  I  entreat  you  to  replace  me  ia 
^ur  aMxleraile  aad  fhvoatable  lagaid,  to  view 
It  with  the  kindacas  which  I  aught  t»  claim  as 
aa  Englishmen. 

I  proceed  to  the  task  of  namiaing  in  what 
degree  the  witness  is  aapported;  and  for  that 
purpcee  I  beg  to  briag  back  jfteur  sainda  to  the 
passage  I  read  foem  tbe  book,  aad  beg  yoa  to 
see  how  for  this  witoess,  teHing  a  tale  stigiaa^ 
tiled  vrith  appearaaoes  of  folsehood  from  tin 
be^aniag  to  the  ead,  is  eucportad  so  as  to 
gam  your  aaliaitted  cradit*  He  is  auppoited 
ia  propositiona  of  very  little  importaaoe  m  tfaia 
way  by  Mary  Regeia,  nistresB  off  the  bomw  ia 
Foa-coun^I  da  oot  go  through  all  thetnaames  : 
— 4bere  was  aeemat  ftom  theboaee  wbopreeed 
nothing,  but  that  riie  had  ebewn  tbe  lodgiaga 
to  somebody  in  Jaauary;  but  Mit.  Riogam 
proved  that  the  fodginga  wem  taken  for  iapa 
-Hw  fomitttve  eeat  hi,  and  eometimes  cbsua 
were  tricen  ftom  another  roonu  and  oace  a 
table:  so  Ikr  be  is  conAitnod-^tne  «|[^»SBBtieay 
JoatphHaie,  cottfiimabim  tomieKisntiieerfy 
ibnilir*  I  sUl  abeseaa  admre  tbar  eonemdiot 


6613 


Jiir  ttigh  Treamt. 


A.  D.  1 82a 


[882 


bim.  NoWy  with  respect  to  this  Uiere  is  no 
dispute.  Joseph  Hale  supports  him  in  saying, 
that  during  the  latter  days  of  the  occupation 
of  that  room,  heifore  the  explosion  in  Cato- 
atreety  numbers  of.  persons  used  to  resort 
there  ;  that  is  the  confirmation  he  has  generally 
given  with  respect  to  that  matter.  Lord  Har- 
fowby  and  his  servant  confirm  the  intention  of 
having  this  cabinet  dinner  on  Wednesday^  the 
S3rd  of  February;  of  that  there  cannot  be  a 
doubt,  nor  is  it  part  of  my  case  that  that  was 
not  intended  to  oe  the  day  of  the  murder — it 
is  unimportant  as  it  relates  to  the  treason ;  but 
lord  Harrowby  confirms  another  witness, 
Hiden,  who  did  communicate  to  his  lordship, 
in  the  Park,  in  the  manner  afterwards  disclosed 
to  the  public,  the  danger  to  which  he  was  ex- 
posed, and  stated  the  reasons  for  doing  so. 
There  are  three  witnesses  called  (I  do  not 
cavil  at  the  wisdom  which  presides  on  this  oc* 
easion)to  prove  what  would  not  have  been 
disputed,  namely,  that  the  room  in  Cato-street 
was  taken,  and  that  Davidson  was  seen  about 
it  from  time  to  time,  that  serves  for  a  parade 
to  support  the  witness,  it  seems  to  say,  you 
must  oelieve  this  man — here  are  our  three  wit- 
nesses who  swear  they  saw  these  persons  at 
Ihe  room  before  the  explosion,  and  that  they 
were  carrying  things  m.  But  this  does  not 
weigh  one  feather  in  the  cause,  it  is  utterly 
vnimportant,  and  these  are  all  the  confirma- 
tions in  direct  terms.  How  is  there  collateral 
confirmation  ?  I  put  out  of  the  question  here 
that  which  affords  no  confirmation  of  the  wit- 
ness, because  the  witness  has  stated  none  of 
the  fiiets ;  I  do  not  mean  that  you  should  for- 
get Mr.  Underwood's  man,  who  sharpened  the 
sword  fi>r  Ings,  or  the  pawn-broker  from  whom 
the  blunderbuss  was  redeemed-^no  doubt,  if 
ministers  were  to  be  murdered,  it  uas  conve* 
aient  the  persons  who  did  it  should  be  armed, 
and  therefore,  it  is  not  necessary  to  observe 
upon  that :  that  the  sword  must  be  ground, 
and  tliat  the  blunderbuss  must  be  redeemed, 
15  consistent  with  the  plan  of  murder,  without 
adding  any  thing  beyond— and  it  does  not 
confirm  that  witness,  because  he  stated  no  one 
of  the  facts,  except  that  Harrison,  like  every 
otiier  cavalry  soldier,  knew  how  die  barracl^ 
in  Portman-street  were  situated. 

Now,  what  other  confirmation  arises  from 
the  evidence  of  other  men  who  have  been 
brought  forward,  as  connected  with  the  cause  ? 
The  Attorney-general  has  most  justly  said, 
^  Although  I  dwell  so  much  on  the  evidence  of 
accomplices,''  applying  that  to  the  witness 
Adams,  and  to  another  of  the  name  of  Monu- 
ment,''yet  there  are  witnesses  whom  I  shall 
call,  namely,  Hiden,  and  an  Irishman,  Dwyer, 
trho  are  not  accomplices,  and  require  no  con- 
firmation ;"  Uiat  is  true ;  and  if  their  evidence 
eollaterally  and  independently  could  be  im- 
,  Illicitly  believed,  it  goes  to  saprport  the  facts, 
tbiMigb  it  is  not  directly  ffiveu  in  confinmition 
of  the  &et#  advanced  bv  the  pxiacipal  witness ; 
Imt  trndottbCedly  they  io  aid  your  b^^of  that 
wUeh  tiie  principal  tfitoisf  in  stited. 

V0L.;exxiiL 


Let  us  examine  Hiden's  statement;  He  saysy 
that  *'  a  long  time  ago,  d urine  the  life  of  his 
late  majesty,  he  met  with  Wilson,  One  of  the 
eonspirators  upon  this  indictment,  and  that  h6 
had  no  acquaintance  with  any  of  them  but  him,*^ 
and  I  believe  never  saw  any  one  of  them  but 
him.  He  says,  **  I  was  formerly  a  member  of 
a  shoemaker's  club ;  I  knew  Wilson.  A  few 
'  days  before  the  23rd  of  February,  I  saw  him. 
He  proposed,  if  I  would  be  one  of  a  party  to 
destroy  his  majesty's  ministers,"  and,  most 
curiously,  he  says  he  used  these  very  words  ^  at 
a  cabinet  dinner, — they  were  waiting  for  one, 
and  all  things  were  ready ;  they  had  such  things 
as  I  never  saw,  and  ^hich  they  called  hand- 
grenades.  They  depended  on  me  to  be  one,  and 
he  said,  Mr.  Ihistlewood  would  be  glad  to  see 
me  : — ^they  were  to  be  put  under  the  table,  and 
they  who  escaped  the  explosion  were  to  die  by 
the  edge  of  the  sword,  or  some  other  weapon : — 
they  were  to  light  up  some  fires,  which  were  to 
keep  the  town  in  coniiision  several  days,  and 
then  it  would  become  a  general  thing."  That 
was  his  conversation  with  Wilson :— then  he 
says  a  thing  which  does  him  great  honour,  that 
he  stated  to  lord  Harrowby  the  danger  in  which 
he  was,  but  he  did  not  state  any  general  revolu* 
tion,  or  any  ulterior  design.  He  went  first  to 
lord  Castlereagh,  who  seems  to  have  been  aik 
object  of  particular  spleen,  and  then  he  went 
to  the  most  obvious  of  the  cabinet  ministers, 
and  made  a  communication  to  him,  which 
was  to  have  the  effect  of  preventing  this  plot 
taking  place.  On  the  23rd  he  says  he  saw 
Wilson  again,  between  four  and  five  in  the 
afternoon;  he  had  never  been  at  the<*place, 
he  had  taken  no  measures,  but  he  saw  Wilson 
again  on  the  23rd,  between  four  and  five  in 
the  afternoon,  he  met  him  in  Manchester-street; 
Wilson  said  *'  I  was  the  very  man  he  wanted 
to  see,  there  was  to  be  that  night  a.  cabinet 
dinner  at  Grosvenor-square ;  I  was  to  go  to 
the  Horse  and  Groom  in  Cato-street,  or  to  stop 
at  the  comer  till  I  should  be  shewn  into  a 
stable  close  by."  It  was  to  be  by  six,  or  a 
quarter  before;  he  said  there  would  be  be- 
tween twenty  and  thirty;  this  then  was  the 
whole  force  to  murder  the  ministers,  and  this 
is  the  force  by  means  of  which  it  is  to  be  im- 
puted that  they  were  to  effect  a  revolution  in 
the  country ;  this  is  matter  of  mere  speculation 
in  the  mind  of  this  person,  and  of  him  alone^for 
no  man  else  concurred  in  it,  or  supported  it.  He 
said  ''  there  were  to  be  a  party  in  the  Borough^ 
aiother  in  Gray's-inn-lane,  another  in  GeeV 
court,  or  the  city,"  that  is  somewhere  at  the 
further  end  of  Oxford-road,  or  somewhere  be- 
yond Temple-bar.  He  said  **  all  Gee's-court 
were  in  it,  but  would  not  act  till  the  English 
began,  because  they  had  been  deceived  so 
often.  I  understood  the  inhabitants  to' be 
chiefly  Irish.''  This  is  the  conversation  which 
he  represents  to  have  taken  place  with  Wilson» 
only  not  acted  or  concurred  in  by  others ;  uid 
ti^ether  Wilson  was  the  deceiver  or  the  de* 
ceiifedy  that  was  his  conversation;  but  liow 
traly  itcoald  be  the  intention  of  a  man's  mind 

8L 


883] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Tritl  qf Arthur 


C884 


to  cany  Uiis  plan  into  effect,  it  is  for  you  to 
■ay. 

Hiden  says,  ^  I  told  him  I  cannot  go  with 
you  now,  because  I  am  ordered  to  carry  some 
eream  to  a  customer  of  mine  ;*'  and  supposing 
it  might  put  six-pence  in  the  pocket  of  this 
maoy  or  one  sbillins  or  half  a  crown,  the  whole 
of  the  plot  vanished  before  him,  and  he  goes  to 
buy  his  cream,  and  leaves  the  plot  to  succeed 
or  fail  as  it  may,  giving  himself  no  further 
trouble  about  it,  for  he  is  unconnected  and  un- 
concerned with  it,  not  going  again  to  lord 
Harrowby,  and  saying,  "  My  lord,  be  on  your 
guard,  the  peril  I  announced  is  imminent ;  I 
know  it,  for  I  have  met  the  man  who  commu- 
nicated it  to  me."  Not  a  word  of  all  this,  he  is 
so  fearless  of  danger  that  he  goes  to  buy  his 
cream — he  vrill  not  sacrifice  a  six-pence ;  he 
knows  no  such  thing  is  intended  as  a  revolu- 
tion, and  therefore  he  pursues  his  quiet  occu- 
pation of  purchasing  cream,  and  gives  bimself 
no  further  trouble  about  it.  This  is  not  the 
way  a  plot  to  overturn  government  should  be 
proved — a  talk  with  another  man  in  the  street, 
who  is  too  idle  to  ffive  up  six-pence ;  that  is 
not  the  manner  in  which  revolutions  are  effect- 
ed, and  states  brought  into  danger.  That  is 
all  that  is  material  in  this  roan*s  conversation. 
I  do  not  say  (and  I  will  not  lay  myself  open  to 
observation,  by  seeming  to  suppress  what  I 
shall  be  supposed  to  rear),  that  this  is  not 
matter  to  enter  into  your  consideration :  but 
so  far  from  proving  the  case  or  supporting  the 
witness  Adams — ^unless  you  believe  Adams- 
it  does  not  weigh  a  feather  in  the  scale ;  and 
that  you  cannot  believe  him,  I  hvre  laboured 
for  a  long  time  to  shew,  for  which  I  ought  to 

fray  your  patience ;  but  it  has  been  in  vain,  if 
have  not  made  some  impression  on  your 
minds  tending  to  convince  you  his  evidence  is 
Dot  to  be  relied  on,  but  that  be  must  be  dis- 
missed Arom  your  consideration. 

Then  we  get  another  witness  of  the  name  of 
Monument,  a  person  present  at  the  time  of  the 
final  explosion  in  Cato-street.  He,  it  seems, 
^mes  newly  into  the  affair;  he  has  never 
been  at  any  of  the  consultations ;  therefore, 
with  respect  to  them,  which  are  the  material 
points  where  confirmation  b  wanted,  the  wit- 
ness Adams  is  not  confirmed  in  the  slightest 
degree,  'fhey  call  the  man.  Monument,  who 
was  not  present  at  any  former  meeting,  to 
state  what  happened  at  Cato-street ;  and  he 
declares  most  positively  that  he  has  no  recol- 
lection or  consciousness  of  having  seen  so  re- 
markable a  man  as  Adams  there:  he  does 
not  remember,  nor  has  he  any  belief  in  it;  he 
tells  you  something  most  important  to  notice 
hereafter,  but  I  think  he  does  not  say  any  one 
word  tending  to  shew  that  any  thing  entered 
into  the  contemplation  of  the  parties  beyond 
the  murder  of  the  ministers  at  their  cabinet 
dinner ;  and  perhaps  creating  some  confusion 
afterwards,  of  which  they  might  take  advantage 
in  the  way  of  a  general,  scramble,  reckless  of 
fife,  so  that  they  got  softie  share  of  property. 

That  is  the  evidence  of  Monument;  and 


I 


there  the  case  would  be  left,-  but  for  the  veiy 
extraordinary  and  very  incredible  testimony  (» 
Dwyer,  given  as  it  is,  and  under  all  its  cir* 
cumstances.  This  Mr.  Dwyer  is  a  very  honest 
bricklayer,  who  has  worked  (according  to  his 
own  account,  and  we  cannot  contradict  him  at 
present)  for  one  master  for  thirteen  years,  who 
lives  in  Gee*s-court,  and  is  supposed  to  have 
some  influence  there ;  he  says  he  was  invited  to 
engage  them  to  rise  in  insurrection,  and  he  pro- 
mised to  do  it  from  fear,  but  at  the  same  time 
his  conscience  told  him  that  it  was  a  bad  thing, 
and  he  told  the  person  he  was  speaking  to  (I 
believe  Thistlewood)  that  it  was  a  very  ham 
thing  for  him  to  inveigle  the  minds  of  inno- 
cent men.  Why,  if  it  was  a  hard  thing  to 
inveigle  the  minds  of  innocent  men,  the  man 
whose  perceptions  of  right  and  wrong  went 
that  extent  would  see  it  was  of  vast  importance 
to  prevent  the  consequence,  and  he  should 
have  been  one  of  those  who  gave  information 
on  the  subject,  but  he  does  not  in  any  degree 
state  himself  to  have  given  sudi  information 
till  after  ^the  23rd  of  February— on  the  2Srd 
February — 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — ^Within  an  hour. 

Mr.  Adolpkus. — I  thank  your  lordship  for 
suggesting  it ; — he  disclosed  it  to  major  James- 
within  an  hour  after  the  communication  was- 
made  to  him,  namely,  on  the  33rd  of  February, 
and  major  James  advised  bim  to  go  to  the  Se- 
cretary of  State.  I  forget  whether  he  went  or 
not.  If  there  were  no  persons  behind  in  this— 
if  there  were  no  emissaries  to  give  accounts  that 
would  serve  certain  purposes,  and  swear  to 
them  afterwards — thia  man's  evidence  would 
be  of  more  importance  than  it  is ;  but  as  it  is,. 
I  submit  to  you,  that  impeached  as  bis  credit 
is  by  the  evidence  brought  forward  with  respect 
to  him ;  impeached  as  it  is  by  all  the  circum- 
stances of  incredibility  attending  him,  it  does 
not  deserve  belief  in  support  of  the  proposition, 
of  a  plot  to  overturn  the  government. 

Let  us  see  what  the  evidence  is  as  it  is  taken 
down  for  me.  ''I  became  acquainted  vritb 
Davidson  some  time  before  the  23rd  of  Feb- 
ruary. I  had  seen  him  twice ;  he  introduced 
me  to  Thistlewood  about  the  9(tx  of  F;ebruary» 
Thistlewood  said  nothing  to  me  particular — 
that  he  had  been  in  five  or  six  revolutions  "  (I 
do  not  know  what  they  call  revolutions  now-a- 
days,  gentlemen,  nor  where  he  found' them) 
*'  but  however  he  said  '  that  Ireland  was  in  a 
disturbed  state.'  '^  Now  I  should  have  thought 
Dwyer  with  his  Gee-court  acquaintance  must 
bave  )[nown  that  as  well  as  himself,  ''  that  he 
had  a  good  many  of  my  countrymen.  In  the 
afternoon  of  the  22nd,  I  saw  Davidson,,  who 
said  he  was  going  on  sentry.*'— These  com* 
municationahad  been  going  on  from  the  9th 
till  the  23rd. — **  On  the  morning  of  the  23id9 
Harrison  called  on  me,  and  took  me  to  Fox- 
court,"  there,  he  says,  he  had  a  bundle  wrap* 
ped  up  in  a  paper.  "  We  went  to  a  two-pur 
oack  room,  in  which  there  vras  nothing  but  an 
old  chair.    Tbistlewood|  Davidson,  and  a  few 


J 


e85i 


fir  High  Treatdn. 


A.  O.  1820. 


tsso 


ttiore  came  in ;  Davidson  had  a  blunderbass,  a 
|ttir  of  pistols,  and  a  bayonet  in  bis  side 
pocket ;  there  were  one  or  two  others  came  in, 
Bmnt  is  one  of  (hem.  When  Davidson  pro- 
duced the  pistols,  he  said  he  had  given  twelve 
shillings  for  them,  and  Brui\t  said  he  would  go 
and  buy  a  pair.  Thistlewood  spoke  to  them 
all  at  large,  and  said  some  of  the  hand-grenades 
were  to  be  thrown  into  the  horse-barracks :" 
there  we  come  to  something  of  a  contradiction, 
upon  which  I  shall  observe  by-and-by.  ^  This- 
tlewood asked  me,  how  many  of  my  country- 
men i  could  muster  for  half  past  eight  o'clock 
that  evening,  and  I  said  about  twenty-six  or 
twenty-seven.  I  was  to  be  at  the  Pomfret- 
castle,  at  half  past  six,  in  Wigmore-street,  and 
I  was  to  take  a  few  of  the  best  of  them  to  the 
Foundling,  and  knock  at  the PorterVlodge,  and 
put  a  pistol  to  his  breast,  and  to  turn  round  on 
the  right  hand,  and  there  were  twenty-five  or 
twenty-six  stand  of  arms/'  Now  that  is  a  new 
plot  which  Dwyer  imports  into  the  case,  and 
not  one  tittle  of  this  has  been  communicated 
to  any  of  the  parties  on  any  former  occa- 
sion. They  were  to  make  -a  breach,  to  get  can- 
non in  Gray*8-inn-lane  andFinsbury.  '' This- 
tlewood mentioned  the  cabinet  dinner  at  lord 
tiarrowby's.  I  saw  a  bundle  taken  out  of  the 
•cupboard,  it  contained  gunpowder;  a  tin  mea- 
sure was  taken  out,  and  it  was  measured  out 
in  bags  by  Harrison ;  •  it  was  said  a  dosen 
pike-handles  were  to  be.  taken  toMary-le-bone, 
the  remainder  were  to.go  some  to  Finsbury, 
and  some  elsewhere. " 

In  all  this,  there  is  an  appearance  of  riot,  and 
an  intention  to  do  something  or  other  beyond 
the  murder  of  ministers ;  but  I  deny  that  there 
is  any  one  disclosure  of  any  intention  to  carry 
the  matter  further  than  the  assassination  and 
plunder  of  the  moment— of  any  intention  to 
overset  the  government  and  effect  a  revolution, 
and  there  is  not  a  little  of  mention  of  a  provi- 
sional government* 

With  respect  to  other  circumstances,  which 
cannet  tie  or  deceive  you,  namely,  the  arms  and 
ammunition  found— this,  I  believe,  as  far  as 
jny  judgment  informs  me,  is  all  the  confirma- 
tion the  first  witness  has^ received.  Unimpor- 
tant as  this  confirmation  is  to  the  proof  of  a  de- 
sign and  intention  to  depose  the  kin^,  let  us 
see  whether  in  any  part  Adams's  evidence  is 
supported,  and  I  think  you  will  find  it  falls  to  the 
ground  like  the  card-house  of  a  baby,  directly 
the  finger  of  a  human  being  is  applied  to  it; — 
there  is  not  a  thing  that  can  stand  on  this  tes- 
timony, and  there  is  this  curious  circumstance 
attending  it,  which  would  alone  destroy  that 
^hich  is  much  better  combined  than  this, 
which  is,  that  no  two  of  the  witnesses  ever  saw 
one  another.  Hiden  .never  saw  Adams,  never 
saw  Monument,  never  saw  Dwyer;  so  with  the 
others,  th^  never  saw  one  another;  and  which 
is  most  curious  and  most  extraordinary,  the 
maa  of  a^  work,  Mr.  Adams,  never  states  he 
saw  any  of  the  other  three ;  they  avoided 
-each  other  in  order  to. support  each  other ;  and 
^on  are  to  take  it,  that  they  support  each  other 


because  no  two  of  them  speak  to  the  same  facts. 
Dwyer  says,  on  the  morning  while  the  pikes 
were  in  agitation  and  the  cartridges  about, 
he  was  in  the  room  at  Fox-court.  Adams  says 
the  same  thing,  and  yet  they  did  not  see  one 
another.  Adams  says,  that  upon  that  morning, 
and  during  the  same  transaction,  fiinting  the 
pistols,  I  think,  preparing  the  ammunition, 
and  so  on,  he  was  there,  and  most  extraordi- 
nary it  would  be  that  these  two  should  never 
meet.  Hiden  is  never  met  with  or  seen,  nor 
his  existence  known  of  by  Adams;  and  no  man 
ever  sees  Dwyer,  or  knows  of  him,  except  a 
single  individual  person.  Monument  is  never 
seen  by  either  witness :  and  Monument,  like 
Wilson,  is  so  cold  about  the  plot,  that  when 
he  has  a  pair  of  shoes  to  mend  for  a  customer, 
he  savs,  1  shall  get  a  shilling  by  the  job,  and  I 
will  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  plot,  and  he 
declines  the  interview  on  that  ground ;  and 
these  are  the  mighty  plotters  who  support  each 
other  on  this  formidable  conspiracy,  and  on 
whose  united  credit  you  are  to  betieve  this 
story. 

I  say,  upon  this  mean  and  empty  plot,  so 
void  of  judgment  and  common  sense,  so  inca- 
pable of  effecting  any  danger  to  the  state,  so 
certain  to  effect  that  which  was  just  meditated 
— the  murder  of  the  party  of  persons  intended, 
tliat  it  is  a  plot  beneath  the  attention  of  govern* 
ment ;  and  instead  of  an  indictment  for  high 
treason,  a  common  process  to  convict  them  of 
murder  would  have  been  sufficient.  I  submit 
that  it  is  a  plot  not  worth  mentioning — that  a 
wise  government  might  well  have  overlooked, 
and  a  strong  government  have  despised,  even 
if  they  believed  it  to  the  extent  they  have  been 
able  to  state.  An  act  of  assassination,  which 
wonld  plunge  the  whole  nation  in  tears  and 
misery,  is  the  operation  of  a  single  individual, 
however  incapable  of  good,  however  unimpor- 
tant in  the  ranks  of  society,  and  nothing  can  be 
done  too  effectually  to  guard  against  such  an 
operation,  by  any  means  that  can  be  devised 
or  applied ;  but  in  comparison  with  an  act  of 
high  treason,  it  is,  to  use  the  words  of  a  late 
inestimable  writer,  '<  the  chirping  of  the  grass* 
hopper  in  the  field,  while  the  stately  ox  feeds 
on,  regardless  or  unconscious  of  the  noise  "«— 
so  might  a  wise  and  strong  government, — I  do 
not  mean  to  impeach  either  quality  in  our 
government,— so  might  they  have  treated  this 
miserable  plot,  and  not  have  brought  forward 
this  apparatus,  to  convict  as  traitors,  a  dozen 
miserable  beggars,  irritated  by  hopeless  misery, 
and  impatient  through  extreme  poverty.  Such 
are  the  elements  upon  which  artful  wickedness 
can  work ;  and  such  are  the  victims  which  re- 
solute villainy  can  expect  to  sacrifice.  But,  I 
beseech  you  to  remember,  that  if  you  find  these 
men  guilty  on  the  evidence  of  Adams,  there  is 
a  premium  for  perjury,  aod  an  end  of  all  se- 
curity. 

But  referring  to  Adams,  I  have  explained  in 
what  points  I  consider  him  to  have  been  con- 
firmea  and  supported  Now,  let  us  see  in  what 
he  is  inaterialiy  contradicted,  and  when  I  say 


8S7] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ofAftkur  ThuUnoaod 


[888 


materially  coDtfadicted,  do  not  let  me  be  taken 
to  oTecstate  the  matter.  Witnesses  have  been 
called  to^proye,  from  small  circnrastancesv 
that  this  man  must  be  telling  the  truth ;  if, 
from  any  of  these  small  circumstances^  yon 
conclude  he  is  telling  the  truth,  then  I  submit 
with  confidence,  that  the  value  of  one  con- 
tradiction by  his  associated  witnesses,  sur« 
passes  ten  thousand  such  confirmations.  When 
1  say  associated  witnesses,  I  do  not  mean  as- 
sociated in  the  crime,  but  in  the  cause ;  I  say 
that  the  evidence  of  all  these  to  a  hundred 
points,  does  not  weigh  so  much  as  their  con* 
tradiction  as  to  one. 

Now  he  describes  that  two  or  three  meetings 
a  day,  of  considerable  numbers  —  the  greatest 
fifteen,  and  in  many  instances  eight,  nine,  or 
ten — took  place  in  the  lodgings ;  is  he  coo- 
iirmed  in  that?  the  buildings  in  town  will 
tell  you  how  frail  the  buildings  are  in  Fox- 
court,  but  the  landlady  knows  and  hears 
Slothing  of  these  frequent,  meetings  except  one 
«n  a  Sunday.  There  are  meetings  to  which  I  beg 
your  attention,  at  one  of  which  all  was  tumult 
and  confiision ;  at  another  men  flew  at  him,  one 
like  a  bull-dog  and  the  other  like  a  lion,  yet 
the  landlady  and  the  apprentice  were  in  a 
«tate  of  unconsciousness  of  such  tumult  and 
confusion.  The  landlady  and  her  niece,  one 
1>eing  at  home  attending  to  the  concerns  of 
her  family,  and  the  other  occasionally  out  on 
business,  so  that  she  knew  less  of  the  matter ; 
iHit  the  landlady  who  was  almost  always  at 
liome,  and  the  apprentice  were  called,  not  one 
of  them  giving  the  least  countenance  to  these 
weetings,  at  which  alone,  if  you  believe  Adams, 
the  plot  was  disclosed,  and  if  you  do  not  be- 
lieve him,  the  plot  flies  into  the  air  with  the 
mere  eflusion  of  your  disbelief. 

I  beg  your  attention  particularly  to  his  state- 
snent  as  to  Cato-street,  and  I  hope  it  exists  in 
your  memory.  At  Cato-street  he  sUtes  there 
were  twenty  persons  exactly,  and  divides  them 
by  eighteen  and  two :  Monument  says  with 
«qual  positiveness,  that  there  were  twenty- 
live,  and  he  says  Thistlewood  being  called 
upon  to  enumerate  the  strength  and  dispose  of 
it,  distinctly  stated,  we  are  twenty-one  here, 
and  tliose  below  four.  A  witness  who  pro- 
tends to  be  confirmed,  should  be  confirmea  in 
all  his  circumstances :  now  in  these  two  he  is 
father  contradicted  than  confirmed.  But  he 
«ays,  at  Cato-street  there  was  one  candle  only, 
mnd  it  is  important  to  say  so.  Now  here  are 
the  two  officers,  and  one  of  them,  Ellis,  de« 
dares  he  saw  eight  candles  all  alight,  and  that 
they  were  put  out  at  the  time  the  pistol  flashed : 
this  is  a  point  of  contradiction,  upon  which 
there  cannot  be  a  mistake  ;  because  if  there 
'Were  but  one  or  two,  that  is  a  fact  easy  to  be 
ascertained;  if  the  witness  had  said  theje 
were  foor  or  five  candles,  or  more  or  less,  I 
should  not  have  addressed  you  upon  that  part 
•of  the  testimony  as  being  contradicted,  but  I 
do  say  that  here  it  is  materially,  efiectually, 
grossly  contradicted. 

Bat  we  advance  to  another.  oontradicttoD, 


much  higher ;  he  s«rs  (wmA  he  makes  a  speech 
for  him),  that  the  first  officer  who  mane  bis 
^^earance,  that  is,  Buthven,  said,  **  Here  is 
a  pretty  nest  of  you  I  Gentlemen  (for  he  used 
Uiat  expression  I  remember  very  well),  gentle* 
men,  we  have  a  warrant  affainst  you,  and  so 
surrender  your  arms."  What  do  Ellis  and 
Ruthven  say,  was  their  expression  when  they 
came  into  the  room  ? — Did  he  sayj  here  is  a 
pretty  nest  of  you  ?  no,  no  such  expression  ; 
that,  like  all  the  rest  of  the  garnish  and  orna- 
ment of  this  story,  is  a  pleasant  fiction  of  the 
witness  Adams. — Did  he  say,  gentlemen,  we 
have  a  warrant  against  you,  therefore  sur- 
render your  arms  ?  no,  the  words  which  both 
the  officers  stated,  and  they  agree  in  them 
exactly,  are  these, — ^*<We  are  officers,  seise 
their  arms!"  Now,  the  distinction  I  take 
is  this,  with  respect  to  this  contradictioo; 
he  would  know  in  prison,  that  the  officers  had 
said  something,  and  he  would  invent  thai 
which  would  do  nu>st  service  to  the  cause; 
therefore  he  invents  the  circumstance  of  their 
declaring  they  had  a  warrant — ;  therefore  he 
invents  the  expression,  here  is  a  pretty  nest  of 
you,  therefore  he  invents  that — ^which  both  the 
officers  knew  to  be  false,  and  contradict  it 
accordingly.  If  the  officers  had  said,  we  used 
a  great  number  of  expressions,  we  said  there 
is  a  pretty  nest  of  you,  and  so  on,  and  he  only 
repeated  part  of  the  words,  it  would  not  have 
been  an  impeachment  of  his  testimony ;  but  if 
a  man  adds  the  whole  matter,  the  whole 
pungent  matter,  you  may  be  sure  it  is  a  &bri- 
cation ;  and  if  tftie  witness  who  stands  before 
you,  lays  his  hand  upon  the  Gospel,  and  ia- 
vokes  God  to  help  him  as  he  speaks  the  truth, 
does  not  respect  the  Gospel  or  God,  and  does 
not  speak  to  the  truth,  it  is  impossible  yov 
should  give  him  credit  in  any  degree,  much 
more  that  yon  should  on  his  testimony  deprive 
such  a  number  of  your  fellow-creatures  of 
their  lives. 

But  besides  beinr  contradicted  by  others,  he 
contradicts  himself.  Always  bear  in  mud, 
gentlemen,  that  he  has  been  in  prison.  Mod 
therefore  he  cannot  have  assisted  nis  memory, 
however  he  may  have  exercised  his  invention  : 
He  stated  that  upon  two  occasions  of  long 
continued  meetings  in  Fox-court,  Strange  was 
present — Strange  is  put  to  the  bar,  and  the 
witness  is  asked  does  he  know  him,  and  he 
says  no.  He  is  put  to  the  bar  with  two  othen^ 
with  whom  he  is  not  acquainted;  this  man, 
who  was  twice  with  him  in  Fox-court,  in  the 
day  time,  he  does  not  know  I  If  he  had  re* 
membered  ten  out  of  the  eleven,  there  would 
be  no  danger  in  saying  this  man  was  Stmnges 
but  being  one  in  three,  he  could  not  inveok 
This  is  a  trying,  a  strong,  circumstance.  If  he 
has  deposed  the  truth  as  to  the  meetings,  he 
must  have  known  Strange  as  trell  as  he  knew 
the  others ;  but  he  does  not  know  Strange,  and 
unless  some  better  reason  cfm  be  given  for 
that  than  I  can  devise,  a  witness,  whoee  whcrie 
evidence  is  composed  of  sudi  absurd  impco^ 
babilities,  and  jrhocomm  tq  diadose  hie  ovf 


S80l  fi^  ^*g^  TmuQiu 

want  of  MTtMily y^nuiot  h%  believed  by  y<m  is 
any  particiiUr. 

I  have  stated  to  yoii,  and  I  hx9^  made  it  my 
tlieme  all  through  this  address,  that  Adams 
has  not  been  confirmed  to  the  extent  he  might 
iiave  been,  with  respect  to  that  whidi  is  alone 
material  for  you  to  inquire  into,  namely,  the 
treasonable  combination  of  these  parties.    I 
■have  looked,  according  to  my  iostnictions,  to 
the  list  of  witnesses  for  tlie  Crown,  I  find  the 
iiame  of  one  Edwards,  living  at  166,  Fleet- 
street,  lately  abiding  in  Banela{^h-place,  not  a 
prisoner— not  taken  op  upon  this  charge— not 
tainted  as  an  accomplice  by  government  —  no 
treason  that  we  have  known  of  against  him— a 
man  cognizant  of  all  the  fiicts — a  man  present 
at  all  the  conversations — a  man  who  pointed 
«at  the  New-Times  news  paper,  and  saw  and 
knew  and  guided  every  thing,  and  yet  that 
man  is  not  called  —  the  spy  is  not  called  to 
support  the  informer,  because  the  contrivance 
would  have  been  made  evident  by  his  cross- 
examination,  and  therefore    that  man,   like 
anodMr  spy,  is  kept  back  from  examination ; 
because  one  spy,  who  in  another  case,  where 
Thietlewood  was  a  party,  and  had  been  pie- 
Tioualy  examined,  was,  by  the  eloquence  and 
abili^  of  oouosd,  and  by  his  own  infamy^ 
blown  out  of  oonrt  f  when  such  a  man  as 
that,  who  could  have  told  you  all  the  facts, 
who    made   tiie    fnsei   himself    who    vras 
80  adave,  so  ministerial   in  every  part   of 
the  transactioDs,  is  made  to  abstain   from 
givinf^the  support  of  his  testimony  to  these 
plots,  said  to  have  been  agitated,  matured, 
and  contrived  in  his  presence,  what  are  we  to 
say,  but  that  the  plot  has  no  foundation  in 
Kiility?  — and  if  all  the  dramstances  could 
be  inveatigaled,  it  vrould  prow  that  the  tce»- 
sonable  past  is  idtogether  the  brewing  of  a 
spy  and  an  informer,  to  implicate  in  a  charge 
of  Udi  treason,  a  man  who  had  gone  nr 
enoa{^  toward  losing  his  own  life,  b«Et  not  to 
tiie  length  of  that  greatest  of  crimes.     The 
manifest  aim  and  contrivance  had   been  to 
fiomeBt,  and  afterwards  disclose   to   public 
view,  a  secret  conspiracy,  to  vi^iich  they  had 
aAerwaids    added    fictxtions    circumstances 
amounting  to  high  treason,  for  purposes  to 
which   {^eroMenl,    if  rightly  constituted, 
would  not  l«id  itself  but  whscfa  bad  men  are 
wicked  enough  to  mature  and  to  perfect,  by 
apoealing  to  the  fears  fhey   have    excited, 
ana  giving  the  best  appearance  they  can  to 
theb  fiilse  information. 

The  Attorney-general  addressed  himself  to 
3f0tt  in  this  vray;  what  is  to  be  said  in  answer 
to  this  case?  Is  it  to  be  said,  that  because  the 
plot  which  viill  be  described  to  you  is  an  im^ 
probable  one  as  to  its  success,  therefore,  you 
are  to  believe  such  a  plot  did  not  exist  ?    Will 

rm  dnbelieve  it  cm  thnt  groundl   Gentlemen, 
think  very  humbly  of  myself,  and  I  should 
thiidc  that  the  most  inexperienced  advocate  at 

*The  witness  Caslle^  on  the  trial  of  James 
W«t|aii4h0  JBIdo^in  the  pwwiwg  VfdwBji. 


A«  D.  isao. 


t«00 


te  bar  would  not  have  the  rashnaas  to  advance 
such  an  argument.    It  is  not  because  it  is  im- 
probable that  the  plot  is  to  be  disbelieved ;  if 
so,  history  would  be  at  an  end.    Need  I  illua«  - 
trate  this  statement,  bf  adverting  to  a  asost 
familiar  instance,  the  earl  of  Essex's  *  plot,  in 
the  reign  of  queen  Elizabeth,  a  nobleman  of 
his  rank,  in  a  moment  of  moody  displeasure 
against  his  gracious  sovereign,  whose  power 
and  wisdom  he  well  knew,  and  to  whom  he 
had  been  infinitely  obliged,  suddenly  and  furi- 
ously rushed  into  the  streets  of  London,  and 
excited  the  citizens  to  follow  him  and  take  the 
state  by  storm ;  the  madness  that  inspired  him, 
if  it  vras  stated  as  a  reason  for  not  believing  it, 
would  blot  from  history  one  of  its  indisputable 
authentic  pages.    The  earl  entertained  vain 
expectations ;  he  put  them  in  action  by  a  very 
foolish  course  of  proceeding,  and  he  met  the 
fate  which  such  circumstances  always  must 
lead  to.    He  was  tried  and  executed  for  high 
treason  I  I  do  not  disbelieve  his  plot;  nor 
should  I  disbelieve  the  plot  stated  to  day,  if  it 
was  disclosed  on  certain  testimony,  and  had 
been  so  communicated  as  to  encounge  belief 
in  the  foets.    It  would  be  in  vain  to  reason 
against  the  facts,  beeanse  ihey  are  improbable ; 
if  we  admit  them  as  facts,  all  reasoning  aboat 
their  probability  is  at  an  end,  and  we  can  only 
laiaent  that  men  should  form  bad  hopes  upon 
such  miserable  foundations.    I  do  not  ask  Toa 
to  disbelieve  this  plot  because  it  is  improbable, 
but  I  ask  you  to  disbelieve  the  witness  because 
he  has  sworn  to  an  improbable  plot,  unsup* 
ported  by  facts,  and  himself  not  corroborated 
oy  witnesses  who  might  have  been  adduced. 
It  is  therefore  that  I  bring  to  the  test  the  pos- 
sibility of  this  plot,  and  think  I  do  not  go  too 
for  when  I  say  it  is  impossible  you  shonld  be* 
lieve  it.    Eadi  nan,  and  every  indtvidnal  foels 
for  himself  the  particular  emotionf  of  foar  and 
anger,  vrhkh  particular  circumstances  exdte. 
I  am  not  imputing  to  any  man  a  base  and  in- 
manly  fear— but  when  the  table  was  screwed 
vrith  pikes  and  fife-arms,  and  a  thousand  ball- 
cartridges,  as  the  word  escaped  from  persons 
near  me,  so  it  might  have  come  to  you,  how 
should  I  lUm  one  of  these  pikes  thrust  at  me ; 
but  who  is  there  among  us,  inept  and  fooMi 
enough  to  believe,  that  such  an  arsenal,  backed 
by  such  a  park  of  artillerv,  without  a  single 
pair  of  horses  which  wooM  grace  a  hackney- 
coach  to  move  it,  could  have  been  used  for  tho 
purpose  charged  in  the  indictment?     Snch 
weapons  and  contrivances  are  the  natural  ad- 
juncts of  men  who  mean  to  begin  in  murder 
and  end  in  phinder;  but  it  is  absurd  to  suppose 
Iheyoould  contribute  to  the  down6dl  of  the 
state  uid  the  subirenion  of  the  empire.    On4 
of  the  party,  when  be  vras  taken,  had  two  dosea 
cartridges  upon  him:  now,  divide  1,2(K>  by 
34^  and  I  think  you  have  arms  finr  exactly  fif^ 
men.    These  are  the  means  to  overturn  tha 
state ;  but  where  are  the  fifty  men,  and  where 

are  the  guns  for  these  fMty  mem  ! — two  or  three 

■■  ■ ■  -» I II I  ■   II....* 

•  Fi*  1  How.  StftU  Trials^  p.  1139. 


son 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ^ArAur  Tki$tknood 


[893 


vnetched  swords,  and  two  or  thrae  miserable 
BMuketSy  less  than  would  be  fit  to  protect  a 
band  of  street  robbers.  In  times  when  geotle- 
men  carried  swords  and  pistols  with  them,  they 
would  not  have  enabled  a  gang  of  highwaymen 
to  execute  one  night*s  adventure. 
'  This  is  the  test  of  improbability  and  of  im* 
possibility,  to  which  I  bring  the  evidence  of 
tiie  wretched  witness,  on  whom  this  whole  case 
rests ;  and  when  I  come  to  state  my  defence, 
see  whether  that  does  not,  in  every  particular, 
and  in  every  part  of  it,  range  itself  under  the 
evidence,  and  prove  most  distinctly  what 
I  have  stated  to  you.  With  respect  to  a  great 
part  of  this  ammunition,  let  it  not  be  forgotten, 
that  the  night  before  the  transaction  at  Cato- 
ftreet  it  was  taken  away;  and  that  a  very 
short  time  indeed  before  the  officers  came  to 
search  the  box  which  contained  it,  it  was,  by 
some  ingenious  person,  not  friendly  to  the 
prisoners,  placed  in  Tidd's  lodgings,  as  the 
means  of  conviction  and  the  source  of  con* 
demnation.  There  is  no  doubt  these  unhappy 
men  have  been  most  malignantly  tampered 
Mvith  ;  they  were  first  exasperated  to  a  design 
of  limited  evil,  it  was  afterwards  aggravated 
so  as  to  favour  the  plans  of  those  who  wished 
to  give  it  the  character  of  high  treason,  and 
then  they  were  betrayed. 

You  have  been  told,  that  the  name  of  This* 
tlewood  cannot  be  unknown  to  you.  You 
know  perfectly  well,  that  the  unhappy  man  at 
the  bar  was  only  three  years  ago  a  supposed 
culprit  in  the  same  degree  as  now,  and  vras 
tried  and  acquitted ;  he  afterwards  sufiered  an 
imprisonment;  and  only  in  June  last  was  li- 
berated from  Horsham  gaol,  where  he  had 
been  confined  for  sending  a  challenge  to  lord 
Sidmottth,  one  of  bis  majesty's  ministers,  the 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home  Department. 
This  man,  coming  with  a  rancorous  mind  and 
a  bad  temper  out  ot^  prison,  to  which  he  had 
been  sent  on  the  prosecution  of  that  noble 
yiscount,  is  the  veiy  element  which  an  artful 
man  would  work  upon,  in  suggesting  a  plan 
for  murdering  his  majesty's  ministers.  Im- 
mediately after,  on  the  16th  of  August,  comes 
the  fatal  narrative  of  that  transaction  at  Man- 
chester, to  which  I  do  not  mean  to  give  a 
name ;  but  you  all  know,  who  have  read  or 
conTersed  on  the  subject,  how  much  that 
transaction  i^tated  every  mind,  and  how  free 
and  strong  were  the  opinions  which  many  men 
expressed  upon  it:  here  came  the  means  by 
which  to  bring  together  every  feeling  and 
motive  of  a  dissatisfied*  person  to  point  out 
(and  it  was  done  in  many  dieap  papers)  the 
ministers  as  the  cause  of  all  the  evil,  and  as 
men  placed  above  the  law,  and  therefore  de- 
voted to  vindictive  punishment,  without  re- 
coutie  to  the  law ;  and  can  we  suppose  this 
was  all  written  and  said  in  vain,  that  no  minds 
would  be  found  weak  enough  to  believe  in  it, 
no.  tempers  anfficiently  inflammable  to  act 
upon  it?  This  is  the  real  origin  of  the  trans- 
action ;  here  you  have  the  proposition  of  the 
plot  .exactly  9M  detsaled-rt  rash  set  .of  men 


who  areicaiUed  radicals,  and  who  tbomrfat  good 
would  result  from  it,  meditated  to  eroct  that 
horrible  design  (which  was  less  extensively 
attempted  in  the  assassination  of  Mr.  PercivaQi 
to  massacre  all  the  ministers.  Now,  Gentle- 
men, take  this  with  yon ;  does  it  or  does  it 
not  agree  with  every  thing  that  you  have 
heard? — ^here  is  Mr.  Thistlewood  inflamed 
with  personal  anger  against  one  of  his  ma- 
jesty's ministers,  but  most  probably  against 
more ; — ^here  are  othen  swayed  br  &e  hopes 
of  undefined  good,  if  they  could  get  rid  of 
^ese  persons,  and  imbued  with  an  qpinion, 
that  in  their  instance,  assassination  is  only  an 
irregular  act  of  national  justice :  I  say,  these 
men  so  instigated,  were  likely  to  be  allured 
by  a  proposal  to  kill  as  many  of  the  ministers 
as  th^  could  at  one  blow: — first,  they  hope 
for  a  cabinet  dinner  ~  that  does  not  take  place, 
then  do  they  devise  means  for  an  insurrectioa  ! 
no,  nothing  like  it — but  to  separate  themselves 
into  small  divisions,  and  muraer  each  minister 
at  his  private  house :  then  comes  the  conve- 
nient and  never  to  be  forgotten  announce- 
ment in  the  New  Times,  placed  there  to  be- 
trav  them,  and  to  that  they  addict  themselves, 
and  by  that  they  are  to  be  sacrificed. — logs  is 
represented  to  be  the  foremost  man,  in  the 
project  of  murder ;  but  let  us  see  whether  to 
the  very  last  the  revenge  of  the  Manchester 
transaction  was  not  chiefly,  if  not  alone,  in  the 
minds  of  those  people  ?  you  will  see,  that  by 
a  speech  imputed  to'  Ings,  he  said  at  one  of 
the  meetings,  ^I  shall  go  forward  into  the 
room,  and  say.  Well,  my  lords,<we  have,  men 
as  good  as  the  Manchester  Yeomanry ;  enter 
citizens  and  do  your  duty;"  in  all  this  i^ 
there  any  declaration  that  the  king  has  reigne4 
long  enough,  we  are  tired  of  his  fomily  f  is 
there  the  least  talk  of  an  attack  on  Caritcm- 
house,  or  of  besetting  his  majesty,  in  his  walks 
or  rides,  in  going  to  parliament,  -or  in  coming 
from  it? — ^no  not  a  word  of  it — ^no  talk  en 
making  away  with  any  one  of  the  royal  family, 
from  the  eldest  to  the  youngest,  from  the 
highest  to  the  lowest — no,  but  the  propositioii 
is,  that  the  matter  was  to  begin  with  the  mas- 
sacre of  ministers,  whom  they  hated,  and 
whom,  instigated  by  the  vilest  *of  men,  they 
thought  they  had  a  right  to  hate.  Having,  e£- 
fectMi  that  which  they  considered  an  important 
public  service,  by  that  massacre,  it  became 
necessary  to  consider,  what  they  should  do 
next;  except  the  private  enrichment  that 
miffht  follow  from  the  conflagration  of  houses, 
^na  the  plunder,  there  is  nothing  in  the  plot 
to  which  the  least  probability  can  be  ascribed. 
When  I  sp4»ak  of  the  baming  of  houses  to 
effect  robberies,  some  of  you  can  perhaps  re- 
member when  that  plan  was  carried  to  a  oon« 
siderable  extent;  it  was  in  the  days  of  my 
youth,  when  a  timber  yard  in  Long«>lane,  was 
burnt,  for  the.  sake  of  plundering  a  pawn- 
broker's close  by ;  the  same  means  might  pie- 
sent  themselves  to  those  who  are  clamorous 
about  their  poverty,  who  begin  by  saying  the 
shopkeepers,  of  Ijoodc^  Jure  fil  arislociats^iaad 


803] 


fwt  High  Tr€a$on\ 


A.  D.  18S0* 


[894 


tm  lAl  workSng  under  one  system  of  govern* 
nenty  and  there  is  not  a  man  worth  ten 
pounds,  who  is  of  any  service  to  the  state ; 
mnd  that  they  themselves  are  so  poor,  that  in 
three  days  crime  must  be  perpetrated,  or  they 
must  be  starved.  These  are  the  men  upon 
whom,  from  these  circumstances,  some  spy, 
jetting  on  some  informer,  collects  facts  and 
declarations  out  of  which  he  may  fabricate  the 
•tory  brought  before  you  to-day. 

I  shall  not  take  up  your  time  by  adverting 
to  the  contradiction  or  the  explanation  afford- 
ed by  the  witnesses  I  was  instructed  to  exa- 
mine. The  credit  of  Dwyer  is  in  your  hands ; 
you  have  heard  what  a  man  whom  £  called 
has  said  about  him.  My  clients  are  too  poor 
to  get  together  the  necessary  witnesses — they 
are  too  poor  to  support  their  wives  and  chil- 
. dren  while  they  are  in  prison;  they  come 
tiierefore  naked  amidst  all  tliese  perils.  If 
you  betieve  Dwyer,  I  am  far  from  thinking  he 
makes  out  a  conclusive  case ;  but  I  think,  con« 
sidering  the  improbability  of  his  story,  and 
the  nature  of  his  character,  it  is  for  you  to  re- 
ject his  evidence,  more  particularly  from  his 
never  being  congregatedwith  any  persons  who 
have  given  evidence. 

One  person  has  been  tendered  to  me  as  a 
witness  whom  you  inquired  after,  and  I  might 
examine.  I  have  already  had  to  advert  to 
what  there  is  of  technicality  in  our  profession, 
and  if  there  is  one  mle  more  inviolable  than 
another,  it  is  this,  that  we  ne? er  do  call  or  ex- 
amine a  witness,  who  has  not  previously  dis- 
dosed  what  he  can  state ;  because  if  we  were 
to  do  so,  no  man  knows  to  what  purpose  he 
might  be  calling  witnesses — no  man  knows  to 
what  effect  they  might  be  examined.  I  do 
not  fear  calling  the  witness,  but  anoint  of 
honest  prudence,  by  which  I  am  obliged  to 
square  and  govern  myself,  makes  me  observe 
those  rules,  from  which  I  could  not  depart 
without  incurring  more  censure  than  any  man 
could  wish. 

I  believe  I  have  gone  through  &11  that  is  ne- 
cessary to  be  said  on  the  present  occasion; 
perhaps  I  have  taken  up  an  unwarrantable  por- 
tion of  your  time.  I  feel  in  my  own  breast 
much  reason  to  lament  that  I  cannot  have  done 
justice  to  the  subject :  I  am  not  guilty  of  a  vain 
expression  of  mock  modesty,  nor  do  I  pretend 
«  diffidence  which  I  do  not  feel ;  but  when  I 
observe  to  you,  that  one  of  the  best  scholars 
and  lawyers  at  the  bar,  a  man  of  eminent  rank 
and  in  great  practice,  thought  it  necessary  to 
declare  on  a  former  occasion,  that  he  had  spent 
a  whole  month  in  anxious  reading,  to  qualify 
himself  for  the  discussion  of  one  day,  you  will 
hardly  think  I  am  guilty  of  any  direliction  of 
proper  firmness  whSi  I  say,  I  fear  and  tremble 
^t  what  I  have  done,  in  my  endeavours  to  save 
tlie  life  of  this  unfortunate  man  and  his  asso« 
oiates.  I  have  had  but  a  few  hours  to  consider 
^e  case  at  all ;  and  it  was  only  after  four  o'clock 
tfiis  moming  that  I  could  qualify  myself  to 
come  before  you^  imperfectipr  as  I 'have  done 
to*day.  •  But  on  this  occasion^  where  I  feel 


doubt  and  tmxiety,  and  tremulous  apprehen- 
sion,  I  throw  myself  on  you, — the  orotector» 
of  the  public,  the  shield  of  the  accused,-«if  you 
can  have  such  implicit  confidence  in  the  wit- 
nesses on  the  part  of  the  Crown,  as  to  give 
credit  to  all  they  have  said,  pronounce  vour 
judgment;  as  it  becomes  me,  I  shall  submit 
with  perfect  and  unrepining  acquiescence. 
But  if,  from  the  observations  I  have  made,  or 
those,  which  your  own  minds  have  supplied, 
you  doubt  the  evidence,  then,  fearless  of  the 
consequences,  and  in  the  proud  disdiarge  of 
your  own  dignified  duties,  act  according  to 
your  conscience,  and  acquit  your  souls  be» 
tween  God  and  your  country,  by  declaring 
that  the  man  at  the  bar  is  not  guilty— -or  to 
use  a  better  phrase,  that  the  charge  is  not 
proved  to  your  satisfection. 

I  am  aware  that  with  all  mv  labour,  I  must 
have  left  many  things  imperfect  through  my 
own  feebleness ;  I  therefore  betake  myself  to 
the  refuge  of  the  feeble,  to  pn^er ;  and  I  pray 
the  God  of  our  ancestors,  the  God  '^  by  wnom 
kings  reign,  and  princes  decree  judgment,**. to 
amplify  your  minds,  and  to  tou(£  your  hearts, 
to  enable  you  to  arrive  at  that  decision  which 
justice  requires;  always  remembering,  that 
justice  is  most  lovely  and  most  venerable, 
when  tempered  with  mercy.  I  know  that  if 
the  impression  of  the  present  case  call  for. the 
exercise  of  the^more  stern  and  manly  qualities, 
you  will  do  what  justice  requires ;  but  if  topics 
of  compassion,  of  doubt,  and-  of  hesitation, 
suggest  themselves,  let  the  prisoner  have  the 
benefit  of  them ; — and  whether  the  prisoner's 
life  shall  be  lengthened  to  the  term  originally 
assigned  by  Providence,  or  terminated  on  any 
odier  charge  with  the  expiration  of  the  coming 
week,  he  will-have  to  bless  you,  and  posterity 
also  will  bless  you,  for  they  will  feel  that  they 
may  rely  with  security  on  the  justice .  of .  a 
British  jury. 

Lord  Chief  Jtatke  ^IMoff.— Arthur  Thistle- 
wood,  if  you  wish  to  offer  any  thing  from  your- 
self to  the  gentlemen  of  the  jury,  in  addition 
to  what  has  been  addressed  to  them  by  your 
learned  counsel,  you  are  at  liberty  to  do  so, 
and  this  is  the  proper  time. 

Thiitlewood, — I  should  wish  two  witnesses 
to  be  examined  who  are  now  in  Court,  against 
the  testimony  of  Dwyer,  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Edmond  Ward,  to  swear  he  had  extorted  money 
from  him. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Abbott. — You  must  not 
state  that;  the  time  for  giving  evidence  is 
passed ;  the  evidence  was  gone  through  last 
night;  but  at  the  request  of  your  learned 
counsel  the  Court  was  adjourned  till  to-day, 
it  would  be  breaking  through  all  the  rules  of 
proceeding  to  allow  any  such  evidence  now  to 
be  given ;  if  you  wish  to  address  any  observA- 
tions  to  the  jury  now  is  your  time.  / 

-  TMttlewood. — I  am.  quite  satisfied,  my  lord* 

REPLY. 

•  Mr.  SoUcUoF  G<iiefni.-rGeDtlemen  of  tha 


8961 


I  6EOB6B  lY. 


Trial  ^AHhur  TUdhnbod 


r&w 


j«fy  ;^Ia  riting  to  address  yo«  is  ivppdct  of 
tint  pTOMcutioiiy  I  hftYe  t  moat  painM  aod 
MUdons  task  to  perfonn.  At  the  Miraot  of 
the  pabliCy  I  am  bound  to  discbarge  the  duty 
which  I  owe  to  the  country  to  the  utmost  of 
my  ability  and  power,  and  I  feel  anxioosy 
therefore,  that  nothing  on  my  part  should  be 
omitted  that  may  be  necessary  for  the  purpose 
of  presenting  this  case  in  its  true  colours  before 
you.  On  the  other  hand,  however,  I  feel 
equally  soKcitous  that  in  what  I  am  about  to 
state  I  may  not  misrepresent  a  single  fact,  or 
press  a  single  argument  against  the  prisoner 
mrther  than  the  justice  of  the  case  may  abso* 
lately  require.  And  I  beg  leave  to  join  with 
my  learned  friend  who  has  just  addressed  you, 
in  praying  that  you  will  dismiss  from  your 
minds  all  prejudices  and  previous  impressions 
ttofavouraole  to  the  prisoner; — ^that  you  will 
fbrget,  as  far  as  it  is  possible,  all  that  you  may 
have  heard  upon  the  subject  of  this  proseen- 
tkm,  every  thing  that  is  not  established  by 
proof,«Huid  that  you  will  confine  your  atten- 
tion solely  and  undividedly  to  the  evidence 
which  you  have  heard  from  the  witnesses  who 
have  been  sworn  in  the  oanse.  But  I  fod  that 
in  this  request  I  am  urging  that  which  is  un« 
necessary  and  superfluous ;  I  am  addressing  an 
English  jury,  sworn  to  adosinister  justice  im« 
partially  between  the  public  and  the  prisoner; 
and  I  ought  therefore  to  apologise  for  inti- 
mating a  doubt  that,  in  the  discharge  of  so 
important  a.duty,  you  can  suffer  your  attention 
to  be  diferted  for  a  single  moment  from  that 
evidence  by  which  the  fate  of  tilie  prisoner 
must  alone  be  determined, 

The  situation  in  which  the  prisoner  now 
stands  affords  an  admirable  illustration  of  the 
excellence  of  that  system  of  laws  under  which 
we  have  the  happiness  to  live ;  a  striking  proof 
of  their  being  built  upon  the  firmest  principles 
of  justice  and  freedom.  It  is  admitted  that  he 
had  projected  the  assassination  of  all  the  prin- 
cipal ministers  of  the  Crown.  It  not  only  is 
proved  in  evidence,  but  it  is  distinctly  admitted 
Dy  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner,  that  such  was 
the  intention  which  he  had  hiffboured  in  his 
mind,  and  which  he  had  actually  prepared  to 
carry  into  execution ;  you  have  it  proved,  that 
by  the  prisoner's  own  hand,  that  unfortunate 
man  whose  name  has  been  mentioned  in  the 
course  of  these  proceedings,  met  his  .death. 
Yet  while  that  passion  and  prejudice  which 
these  circumstances  were  calculated  to  excite 
in  the  public  mind  existed  in  its  first  violence, 
he  was  not,  and  could  not  be  put  upon  his  trial 
for  the  offence  with  which  he  is  charged  :  he 
was  entitled  to  such  an  interval  as  miffht  afford 
an  opportunity  for  that  feeling  to  subside,  so 
far  as  it  was  capable  of  subsiding.  He  was 
fhrther  entitled,  before  he  could  be  put  upon 
his  trial,  to  that  which  is  never  allowed  in  any 
other  criminal  charge  affecting  a  man's  life,  to 
have  ddivered  to  him  aU  the  partienlan  of  the 
accusation  which  he  wa«  to  be  called  upon  to 
answer,  not  yesterday  or  the  day  before,  but 
iMtttythreewedkf  I  beHew  fiom  die  pment 


time,  in  order  timt,  consulting  widi  his  eounset, 
he  might  have  full  opportunity  to  avail  himself 
of  any  objections  in  point  of  law,  wftich  ho 
might  have  to  urge  s^nst  the  sufficiency  of 
the  charge.  In  addition  to  this,  he  has  been 
allowed  that  important  privilege  which  is  eoiK 
ferred  only  upon  persons  under  the  heavy 
accusation  preferrea  avainst  the  prisoner,--^ 
he  has  had  a  list  of  all  toe  jurors  who  could  by 
possibility  be  called  to  sit  upon  thb  trial.  He 
has  had  an  opportunity  of  rejecting  ariiitrarily 
to  the  number  of  thirty-five,  any  who  might  be- 
called  to  constitute  the  jury  in  whkh  he  is  s0> 
much  interested ;  and  it  may  therefore  be  con* 
sidered  that  you,  who  are  now  to  decide  upon 
his  fate,  are  a  jury  of  his  own  selecting.  Xtt 
addition  to  all  this,  and  which  you  wUI  find 
most  material  in  the  progress  of  this  inquiry,, 
he  has  had  a  list  of  every  witness  who  could  be 
called  on  the  part  of  the  Crown.  That  list  haa 
been  furnished  to  him,  in  order  that  he  might 
have  an  opportunity  of  inquiring  into  the 
previous  character,  the  previous  histoiy  and 
conduct  of  every  witness  who  might  be  called 
against  him,  in  order  that  he  might  have  an 
op]K>rtunitv  of  being  prepared  wirii  evideneo 
to  impeach  the  chvacter  of  sudi  av  woiM 
admit  of  impeachment.  Snchy  too^  gentlemen, 
is  the  benevolence  of  the  £ngUsh  law,  diat  he 
has  been  allowed  to  apply  to  the  Court,  te 
appoint  such  counsel  as  he  might  think  proper 
to  select,  for  conducting  his  defence*  It  is 
therefore  too  much  to  say,  as  has  been  urged 
by  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner,  that  a  person 
standing  in  his  situation  has  to  combat  with 
peculiar  disadvantages  and  difficulties^  sineein 
no  other  situation  would  he  as  a  prisoner  have 
experienced  advantages  or  benefits  comparablo 
to  those  afforded  on  this  occasion,  in  order  to 
enable  him,  according  to  the  foots  of  the  cue, 
to  prepare  for  his  defence,  against  that  moet 
senous  and  solemn  charge  now  prefisiTed 
against  him, — a  chaige  of  conspiring  to  over- 
turn that  constitution  and  that  system  of 
government,  under  which  he  is  entitled  to  such 
inestimable  privileges ;  and  that,  with  a  view 
of  establishing  some  other  form  of  government, 
in  which  the  establishment  of  advantages  of  n 
similar  character  and  description  could  never 
reasonably  be  expected. 

This  is  the  charge  preferred  against  the  pri- 
soner at  the  bar;  and  when  I  mention  the 
grave  and  serious  character  of  the  accusation, 
I  merely  repeat  the  language  of  my  teamed 
friend,  and  with  the  same  view,  namely,  to 
call  upon  you  to  be  careful  that  vou  do  not,  on 
light  and  general  evidence,  find  the  prisoner 
guilty  of  so  grievous  a  crime;  that  you  will 
bestow  upon  this  inquiry  that  anxious  and 
careful  attenti<m  which  its  importance  de- 
mands ;  and  that  you  wUl  not  deliver  a  von 
diet  of  guilty  against  him,  unless  you  are  satit' 
fied  of  nis  guilt  on  the  dearest  evidence*  At 
the  same  time,  however,  if  that  is  the  imprei* 
siott  which  shall  ultimately  be  made  on  yoor 
ttindf  by  the  evidence,  then,  fhariast  of  eDB« 
se^nenctSy  looking  Qt^hir  tp  li|«  i%^C  kM^ 


W9} 


JfSff 


TVvtitps. 


A.  a  1S90. 


[606 


#9r  t»  A>4lrft»«iithflitf  hiitfitiMl  <riibout  feyawTt 

^goUHsgir  yw  Auljr  0  your  cowo^tj  ao  4he 
j^duAAt  wbicb  i^QU  tiifdl  proacmAca* 

WiUi  M^pect  10  wJbtat  has  l)een  said  upon  the 
Jaw  4>f  (he^objec^  ittcasoot  I  think  be  n^cestaiy 
lor  me  ^  •taowble  yoiti  jvrUh  any  obierF«tioof . 
Xb«  iBhwve  preierjad  j^gainat  uie  prkooer^t 
4}ie  tor  ta0  nothing  in  it  4hat  is  technical 
--^iMM^iiM  that  M  4iffioHltcif  afqpcabenaiQB.  It 
b  in  its  AaraAlw  and  4^eaoiu»tu)ii  the  plasaest 
4batfla»  poiisibLy  be  coneoivecL  Heis «bairged 
fviih  bajRuig  oanspirad  fee  •oaaKarn  ibe  goiarv- 
anaotfof  itba^eopnUyj  and  svith  bamng  amod^g 
lathar  laeans  andeavomed  la  aooompUsh  that 
«l^apt  by  ftfaa  tapaagintlinn  af  bis  .m^lesly^s 
jDiniitan.  SI  yon  find  tba^  be  is  tguilty  of 
Itfyrit^iso  oQp^ved — ^i^  you  SM  that  iba  has 
A«an  iOODoamad  m  takiag  xaaasjoras  lor  the 
lattajnmant  of  4bat  and,  tbeo  in  point  of  law 
Jiieiis,gvilty'Of  the  ^moa  which  is  io^puted  V> 
Jbimivpen  Am  raaard ;  and  ^b^rafoia^  aa^ri^g 
Milui^g  moot  upon  the  )awj.bat4irecti4igjFour 
attention  .siopiy  4a  -tba  bc^s,  yau  «xe  Appnaad 
^  the  .substance  of  tba.cbaiga,  and  it  wiUiie 
tof  {Fan  4p  ac^  wbatber  it  is  made  out  to  your 
«ati&w>tioii  in  the  evidence  which  <bss  ibaan 
.^fiaiad  iu  tsx^ppoit  .of  the  acousation. 

Thane  ai^e  some  fitcts  admitted  on  ihe  other 
JUa,  af  s>  anost  stoking  Mid  as;tiaoiidinanr 
^hawM^ar,  It  is  admitted  >thaft  the  .filot  «vhi<& 
i  hava  atalbed  aaas  fonpad  Jaut  the  assassination 
itf  Jus  «Byias^iS  ministaxsy  not  ior  4ha  >tywa»- 
ainatinm  of  itwo  ar  three  indsvidnals  among 
^ham,  lagwnat  avbom  the  pcisoaar  at  4be  bar 
AighttbeiSNpposed  to  entertain aoma  panonal 
^maitytbutttbeprqieot  waa,  at^na  Jbin>^'to4a« 
4tnif  .all  the  «oonfidential  aanants  'Of  ithe  jgo- 
sasnmant.  ^Qms  has  bean  adauttad  in  tha 
most  uaaquiy(¥>aUanguage,ia  tbata>adastand 
watm  'dimfkci^mt^  by  the  loounaal  ior  the 
iviaanar.  'She  objeot  whiob  the  parities  rto 
ftfMS|^iiyfio^}hadMi'aia^j«FaiyAs  westata>and 
hmm  praaed  in  lavidauQe  ^^  4he  .pa«t  of  the 
4Mvwacution,  4o  oaerium  tba  KMrammant  of  the 
Mamtryj  land  ^be^ecttihat.ja  Jnggaatadand 
aqppoMd  'On  iba  lOtber  aid^  -but  wAich  is  jKit 
altentttod  .to  -be  proved^  is,  ttbat  this  plan  wpa 
Hammi  rmavaly  xvitb  ^  view  of  |»lu9dar,  and , 
^  the  puiip«aa  ofoiaatiag  aou&Miioii,  .of  .whiob , 

fi^Bdar  alana  waa  la  be  the lobjaot*  Iiiemam- ' 
ic,  ^hanwvag  that  n^  ikamed  (xjandt  te' 
fiounaalifiwr  the  pmmar^  who  jiowi^its  near  m^  ■ 
i&4ha'i:ousBe  m  hia  addrasstto  you  ^aateidagb' 
aMadlbafctbe  aibaWafiihisacimmal^Mgn^iaaa 
Mi  qf(p!oiitical  )matia)as:aad  political  waws.^  If 
tbis  aUtaaoskt'lo  ^■nfleiuofte>kis  moifisivSi  minirt 

taas^did  4heu;aiise<ont  .of  ipolitiaal  imalivas  Mid 
political  views,  what  ground  is  there  iinr 'that 
mai&l^vaaulation  of  *Uia«aDtls»ianvu4H>fias 
imn^fftinp  ihat>tlia.al|jw!t4if  ita«ias404waajte 
wiafaiiou,  4iotamb  m  viow^to^iauoliilionaffy  mo- 
jaals,  but  mWy  far  iba  pucpaaa  of  |)luQdarl 
Am  ^^mn  <p|f  laamed  iriaod  ris  speaking  .of 
ibe>v4si0nasy  project  attiibutad  lo  the  piisoner 
al.tha  bar,;  wbaa  iba  talks  ^  its  aatrvtmifaioa 

n|bw  iamolniWe.  i^^mmail  itaiparta   iud 


wkU  aUaag  avideaca  you  ought  ta  raqniia  ba- 
fysft  you  can  ^ring  yaur  minds  to  t>eliaFe  i^  I 
ask  aritb  confidence  wbather  Iba  suggestion 
which  be  hi^  made  a9  tp  the  ob^t  which  these 
pai<ie|  had  in  view  in  the  assasainatiou  of  his 
mj^esiy's  ministeiay  namalyy  that  it  was  solely 
with  a  yiaw  to  oonfusion  and  plunder— whe- 
ther, I  say,  that  is  not  in  a  tenfold  degree 
more  improbable^  mom  absurd,  more  extravar 
,gan^  4han  (that  whiob  I  have  stated  as  the 
motiaey  and  which  <««  have  proved  by  ^ 
aumesoai  witnesses  called  on  Aba  pact  of  ihe 
prosaontiaa? 

{•shall  nowibeg. leave  to  direct  jour  attention 
to  the  evidanoa.    I  will  not  wander  out  of  it  to 
make  a  single  cfcaervatiau  that  it  does  aat 
furly  •warrant,  uay«  aeqoire  from  thaoounsel 
ibr ^heuiosaoution.  My  learned  fidend  who  has 
just  addressed  yott,atate8  that  this  ease,  »a  &r 
9M  .the  treason  is  oonoecnedf  rests  solely  upon 
the  testimony  of  Adams :    I  beg  leave  entirely 
to  dissent  from  this  statement  of  my  learned 
Inend'    J  trust  I  shall  satisfy  you  when  I 
coma  40  direct  your  attention  more  particularly 
to  Ihaendence^  .that  this  is  a  mare  gratuitous 
and  unsupported  assertion  on  tba  part  of  my 
learned  fnand.    At  present,  theretoie,  I  state 
that  it  does  not  depend  by  any  means  upon 
the  endenoe  of  Adams  alone ;  on  the  contrary, 
them  is  in  this  causa,  even  if  you  were  to  blot 
itbe  evidence  of  Adams  from  your  notes,  sufi-' 
gieat  avidenoe  from  the  uncontioverted  facta 
.proved  by  ^witnesses,  sot  imtpeaohed  or  im* 
.paachabla,  4o  justify  and  je<)uire  you  to  ooma 
.to  the  aanolusion  timt  the  pnsoner  is  guy  ty  af 
.the  fiffianoe  with  which  be  is  charged. 
'    jBut  m  fio  much  has  been  said  upon  the 
•taatimeny -of  Adams,  give  me  leave  for  a  nM>- 
manttto  call  your  attention  to  the  situation  in 
ukhicbihetatands,  and<to  those  rules  and  prin> 
mples  not.meael|r  «f  Um^  btttiof  common  ^enae 
nnd  laasan,  is^ob  ought  ito  b^  ^used  in  ithe 
aatiaiata  af  ttha  esadit  •due  4o  his  testivmpy. 
Wbaa  a.-paraopioemes  ficnwaidin'tbeiaitualion 
Af  an  afloomplica»  iar  4be  purpose  of  giving 
^mdanoaa^iiusilaa.asaoaiMtei^  it  is  admitted 
that  his  testimony 'anght  to  te  i^eoaived.    Jf 
ftha  aaidanee  Qf«tpei«m<in  dibisaituation  were 
ip  be  aUiseiaaejactad,  «c»  if  it  wave>to<be  dia- 
aepMrdad  by  Juriesiin  the  pnoticalieKafciaB  of 
■tbair  4uty^  aba  coaaequanoas  would  hie  moat 
iajwions  to  te  intaaests  and  safety  of  aooiaty* 
a^r  wihat  is  ithe  tpHneipal  defeaoe  against  dark 
and  dangerous  conspiracies  of  tbii  nature  ?-*- 
Xhe  jaamnsyaihich  men  entertain  of  their  aa* 
aoaiatas,  Mui  the  dsead  they  fcel  .of  being 'be- 
iaayed  V  'them.     But  onoe  establish  as  a 
fMiiuiiplf  <ihat  the  eiridenae  of  an  aaeomplioe  is 
|a>he  Amigfwda4»  and  you  lose  the  atroogast 
and  Aioat  affactiml  ebeok  against  the  enter- 
pnnss.uf  ndelMd  and  .desperate  mea.    They 
will  cae^ion  their  idaaigna  asithout  fear  and 
arilboot  iiMtmint,  iwhan  thay  know  that  they 
aae  sacuae  against  the  consequences  of  tba 
oowaidioe  or  tieacfaary  of  their  associates  in 
guilt.    It  would  be  impoasible,  therefore,  vrith* 
out  las^UngaothemcKtdangeronaoonaeqMences, 

3M 


S99] 


1  GEORG£  IV. 


Triti  of  Arthur  ThMtmood 


{0Ot> 


to  exclude  the  testimony  of  a  penon  in  this 
situation :  but  when  a  witness  comes  before  a 
jury  who  are  to  decide  upon  his  evidence, 
whether  he  be  an  accomplice  or  stand  in  a 
less  unfavourable  light,  you  are  still  to  consider 
from  all  the  circumstances  in  the  case  what 
degree  of  credit  is  due  to  his  testimony :  For 
I  know  of  no  rule  of  law  that  applies  to  an 
accomplice  that  does  not  apply  to  eveiy  other 
witness  who  eomee  into  a  court  of  justice. 
That  you  will  and  ought  to  examine  his  evi- 
dence with  more  care  and  jealousy  I  am  ready 
to  admit.  But  still  the  question  comes  at  last 
to  this :  What  is  the  degree  of  credit  to  which, 
under  all  circumstances,  he  appears  to  be  en- 
titled ?  Let  us  then  consider  for  a  moment, 
and  see  what  are  the  tests  by  which  the  evi- 
dence of  a  person  standing  in  this  situation  is 
to  be  tried'.  It  is  of  course  most  material  to 
inquire  into  his  previous  character.  If  a  man 
whose  former  \\h  has  been  correct,  lapses  in  a 
single  instance  into  crime,  and  afterwards  re- 
penting of  his  conduct,  or  aliihrmed  at  the 
danger  to  which  he  has  brought  himself,  be- 
comes a  witness  for  the  Grown — ^his  previous 
character  is  a  most  important  subject  of  con- 
sideration and  inquiry. — If  you  find  that  to 
have  been  base  and  infamous,  you  will  of 
course  add  that  circumstance  as  an  ingredient 
against  him,  and  will  be  disposed  to  place  less 
reliance  on  his  testimony.  Again,  you  will 
ask  yourselves  what  interest  the  witness  has  in 
the  story  which  he  is  telling.  I  can  under- 
stand that  if  an  accomplice  in  coming  into  a 
court  of  justice  is  trying  to  redeem  himself  by 
laying  the  whole  weight  of  criminality  on 
others,  that  his  evidence  in  this  respect  should 
be  listened  to  with  great  suspicion  and  caution: 
but  when  you  find  the  effect  of  his  evidence  is 
to  criminate  himself  as  much  as  his  associates, 
YOU  will  ask  what  motive  he  can  have  to  en- 
hance the  crime,  and  to  alter  its  character ;  and 
thus  to  add  to  his  other  offences  the  deep  and 
infamous  sin  of  perjury.  Applying  this  test  to 
the  evidence  of  Adams,  I  ask  what  motive  can 
be  assigned  that  should  induce  him  to  give  a 
false  account  of  this  transaction. 

There  is  another  test  to  which  I  also  request 
your  attention,  because  it  is  of  infinite  impor- 
tance in  this  cause.  If  he  is  telling  a  story  in 
which  he  knows  he  may  be  contradicted — ^if  he 
states  that,  which  if  untrue  may  be  proved  to 
be  fake  by  witnesses  in  the  power  of  the 
prisoner,  you  will  be  disposed  to  place  the 
more  reliance  upon  his  testimony,  particularly 
if  those  witnesses  who  might  be  caUed  are  not 
called  to  contradict  him.  Lastly,  you  will  in- 
quire to  what  extent  and  in  what  particulars 
his  evidence  is  confirmed  by  testimony,  fh>m 

gurie  and  unsuspected  sources.  And  here  I 
eg  leave  to  observe  that  I  agree  in  the  doc- 
trine laid  down  by  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner, 
that  confirmation  in  light,  trivial  and  collateral 
circumstances,  may  not  materially  suppott  the 
general  testimony  of  the  witness;  but  if  you 
shall  find  that  confirmation  extending  itself 
throughout  the  whole  of  his  narrative---if  you 


shall  find  the  witness  cpnfirmed  wherever,  from 
the  nature  of  the  case,  it  is  possible  he  could 
be  confirmed,  you  will  then  be  disposed  to  reljr 
upon  his  veracity.  When  he  is  speaking  -ot 
facts  in  the  knowledge  only  of  himself  and  his 
associates,  and  in  which  therefore  there  is  no 
possibility  that  he  could  be  supported,  I  think 
then  when  I  come  to  direct  your  attention  more 
particulariy  to  the  evidence  of  Adams  and  to 
the  tests  to  which  I  have  adverted,  you  will  be 
satisfied  of  the  truth  of  his  statement. 

First,  with  respect  to  his  previous  character. 
I  have  already  mentioned  that  many  days  (I 
believe  nearly  three  weeks)  before  the  trial,  a 
list  of  the  witnesses  to  be  called  on  the  part  of 
the  prosecution  was  delivered  to  the  prisoner. 
I  have  stated  the  grounds  of  this  reguUtion, 
namely,  to  afford  the  prisoner  a  full  opportonf- 
ty  of  inquiring  into  the  character  of  those  per- 
sons who  were  to  give  evidence  on  the  part  of 
the  Crown,  and  that  he  might  be  prepared  with 
witnesses,  if  the  facts  would  admit  it^  to  ex- 
pose and  impeach  their  lives  and  conduct. 
The  name  of  Adams  was  of  course  in  that  list. 
He  had  been  long  known  to  Brunt,  one  of  the 
prisoners ;  he  seems  to  have  been  acquainted 
with  him  when  in  France ;  therefore,  if  there 
was  any  thing  to  impeach  his  former  character^ 
that  impeachment  might  be  established  by  evi- 
dence, oecause  Brunt  had  the  means  of  know- 
ing it.  With  all  these  opportunities  and  ad- 
vantages, then,  has  the  prisoner  been  able  to 
adduce  any  evidence  for  tne  purpose  of  shew<- 
ing  a  single  blot  or  blemish  in  the  previous 
history  and  character  of  this  individual  ?  -  You 
will  remember,  perhaps,  that  an  attempt  was 
made  to  insinuate  that  he  had  left  this  country; 
and  withdrawn  himself  to  France,'  in  conse- 
quence of  some  misconduct  towards  his  em- 
ployer. Upon  further  tnquiry,  however,  it 
turned  out,  that  there  was  not  the  slightest 
ground  for  such  a  suggestion ;  and  if  he  had  in 
any  way  misconducted  himself,  that  individual 
might  have  been  called  to  give  evidence  of  the 
fact,  and  his  absence  is  a  circumstance  abso- 
lutely decisive  in  favour  of  the  witness. .  It  ap- 
pears, that  Adams,  was  by  trade  a  shoe-maker. 
He  had  been  formerly  in  the  army,  and  he 
went  therefore  to  France,  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  employment  in  his  business,  among 
the  English  officers  at  that  time  stationed  at 
Cambray.  The  witness,  therefore,  comes  into 
-court  free  from  every  previous  imputation  or 
stain  upon  his  character ;  not  only  nas  no  evi- 
dence been  adduced  andnst  him,  but  it  is  per- 
fectly clear,  from  the  racts  which  I  have  ad« 
verted,  that  his  character  and  conduct  had  been 
such,  that  no  such  evidence  could  have  .beeo 
adduced. 

I  have  already  observed— and  I  beg  now  to 
remind  you  of  the  observation-— that  in  con« 
sidering  what  degree  of  reliance  you  can  j^ace 
upon  his  testimony,  you  will  further  inquire 
what  interest  he  has  in  the  result  of  this  trial. 
He  was  one  of  the  persons  engaged  in  the  con- 
spiracy ;  he  was  apprehended  for  the  ofienoe, 
and  when.apprehended;  he  was  admitted  as  a 


901] 


fw  High  T^aMn* 


A.  D.  1820. 


[903 


witness  for  the  Crown.    You  all  know  that  a 

Serson  so  circamstanced,  must,  of  course  un- 
erstaud,  that  if  he  conducts  himself  with  pro- 
priety, and  tells  the  troth,  he  will  receive  a 
pardon  from  the  Crown.  I  would  ask  you  then, 
what  motive  he  can  possibly  have  to  relate  the 
case  otherwise,  than  as  it  really  occurred  f 
What  reason  can  there  be  why  he  should 
charge  himself  and  his  associates,  with  a  crime 
of  a  different  description,  and  of  a  blacker  die 
than  that  in  which  they  were  really  engaged  P 
And  will  you  suppose  that  a  man  without  mo- 
tive, without  any  reason  that  has  been  suggest- 
ed or  even  hinted  at  by  the  counsel  for  the 
prisoner,  would  add  the  guilt  of  peijury  to  his 
other  crimes,  and  that  too  for  the  purpose  of 
oonsigntng  so  many  of  his  fellow-creatures  to  a 
disgraceful  and  ignominious  death  P  Is  it  pos- 
sible that  you  can  conceive  any  individual, 
without  at  least  some  motive  of  interest  to 
himself,  guilty  of  such  base  and  complicated 
wickedness  ?  Will  you  not,  therefore,  require 
some  very  clear,  distinct,  and  satisfactory  evi- 
dence, to  lead  you  to  the  conclusion  of  his 
httving  falsified  the  facts  of  the  case,  when  he 
can  derive  no  possible  advantage  from  such 
conduct ,  and  no  motive  can  be  assigued  for  so 
base  and  infamous  a  proceeding  ? 

But  there  is  anotner  observation,  which  I 
beg  leave  to  press  strongly  upon  your  atten- 
tion. The  witness  has  told  you,  that  at  the 
various  meetings  to  which  he  has  spoken, 
different  individuals  from  time  to  time  attend- 
ed who  were  the  associates  of  the  prisoner  at 
the  bar :  he  has  mentioned,  among  others,  a 
person  of  the  name  of  Hall,  who  is  at  this 
moment  within  the  reach  of  the  prisoner ;  he 
has  mentioned  a  person  of  the  name  of  Potter, 
the  friend  of  Brunt  (for  yon  recollect  upon  the 
morning  after  Brant's  return,  when  he  was 
engaged  in'  securing  the  baskets  of  ammuni- 
tion, his  apprentice  Hale,  was  desired  to  carry 
them  to  Potter*s  house,  in  Snow's-fields);  the 
witness  has  told  you,  that  both  Hall  and  Pot^ 
ter  were  at  the  last  meeting  in  Fox-court ;  he 
has  told  you  Uiat  Palin  was  at  this  meeting, 
another  of  the  prisoner's  associates,  and  Harris 
also  has  been  mentioned,  in  whose  house  the 
prisoner  was  apprehended.-  All  and  each  of 
those  persons  might  have  been  called  for  the  ^ 
purpose  of  proving  that  Adams  had  given  a 
nlse  account  of  vthaX  passed  at  these  meetings. 
If  his  account  were  really  untrae,  as  the  coun- 
sel on  the  other  side  have  supposed,  is  it  pos- 
sible to  give  any  satisfiau:tory  answer  to  this 
observation  P  Does  it  not  carry  conviction  to 
your  minds  ?  Does  it  not  prove  to  demonstra^ 
tion,  that  the  account  given  by  Adams,  as  to 
vfhat  passed-  at  those  meetings,  is,  in  every 

Krticular  correct  ?  If  Hall  were  not  present, 
might,  as  stated  by  Adams,  have  been 
called  to  prove  the  falsehood  of  the  charge. 
If,  on  the  contrary,  he  did  attend,  he  might 
have  been  called  to  prove,  that  the  account 
which  Adams  has  given  of  what  passed  upon 
the  occasion  was  &1se ;  the  same  with  respect 
to  Fahn;  the  same  with  respect  to  Potter;  Uie  I 


same  with'  respect  to  Harris.  My  learned 
friend  has  not  ventured  to  touch  upon  this 
circumstance,  because  his  excellent  judgment 
assured  him  it  was  a  fact  so  unmanageable  and 
decisive,  that  it  was  impossible  to  give  to  k 
even  a  plausible  explanation  or  answer. 

Having  then  stated  in  what  manner  Adams 
might  have  been  contradicted,  if  the  story 
which  he  has  related  were  untrue,  let  me  now 
direct  your  attention  to  tlie  manner  in  which 
his  evidence  has  been  confirmed, — ^not  as  has 
been  suggested,  merely  in  trivial  matters,  or 
from  doubtful  sources ;  but  in  the  most  im- 
portant particulars,  and  from  the  most  unsus- 
pected and  unquestionable  testimony,  the 
whole  forming  a  body  of  corroborative  evidence, 
so  strong  and  irresistible,  that  no  person  who 
does  not  wilfully  shut  his  eyes,  and  blind  his 
understanding,  to  the  force  of  troth,  can,  for 
a  moment,  entertain  a  doubt,  as  to  the  con- 
clusion to  which  it  inevitably  leads. 

You  will  remember  that  one  of  the  first 
witnesses  called  after  Adams,  was  a  person  of 
the  name  of  Hale.  He  was  apprentice  to 
Bront,  connected  with  one  of  the  prisoners,  a 
witness  above  all  suspicion.  No  questions 
were  put  to  him  on  cross-examination,  tending 
to  raise  a  doubt  as  to  the  truth  of  his  story; 
nothing  was  thrown  out  for  <he  purpose  of 
leading  you  to  suppose,  that  there  was  any 
impeachment  of  his  character.  Now,  I  beg 
leave  to  request  your  attention — ^and  long  and 
painful  as  this  inquiry  has  been,  I  am  sure 
you  will  give  it  to  me — ^while  I  recaH  to  your 
recollection  those  marked  circumstances  of 
confirmation,  arising  in  the  first  instance  out 
of  the  testimony  of  Hale.  He  has  told  you . 
that  the  room  was  hired  by  Ings  and  Brunt ; 
that  they  looked  at  it  together ;  and  that  Brunt 
said  to  Ings,  "  it  will  do,  go  and  give  her  a 
shilling.''  .  Brant,  therefore,  was  concerned  in 
hiring  the  room.  But  where  there  is  guilt, 
concealment  is  generally  attempted.  What 
was  the  account  Brant  gave  to  Mrs.  Rogers  P 
It  appears  she  entertained  some  suspicion  of 
Ings.  She  asked  Bront  who  he  was.  He 
replied  *'  that  he  was  a  butcher  by  trade.''  *'  I 
know  nothing  of  him,"  be  said,  "  except  see- 
ing him  accidentally  at  a  public-house. '  He 
gives  the  same  account  in  ttie  presence  of  the 
Bow-street  officer,  Taunton.  Is  this  then 
correct  or  false  ?  Does  it  not  appear,  by  the 
testimony  of  Hale,  that  for  good  or  for  evil  he 
was  at  tne  very  time  he  was  giving  this  ac- 
count, most  intimately  and  closely  connected 
with  Ings  P  He  tells  you  again,  thai  after  ih^ 
room  was  taken,  these  parties  continued  to 
meet  there  night  after  night,  for  the  period  of 
five  weeks.  He- names  the  particular  individu- 
als who  were  in  the  habit  of  attending.  Now 
is  it  supposed,  by  my  learned  friend,  that  this 
is  inconsistent  with  the  evidence  of  Mrs. 
Rogers?  When  the  question  was  put  to  Mrs. 
Rogers,  she  said,  "  1  saw  Davidson  and  some 
other  men  once.  I  cannot  say  that  they  met 
often."  But  she  immediately  afterwards 
explained  the  reason  of  this.    She  said  ^*  sha 


903} 


1  GEORQB  IV. 


TriaitfArthmt  Thktmood 


(0M 


coidd  ||iTf  BO  aecoviit  of  It,  beewinr  ihfr 
seldom  at  home.''  Here  Uieo  is  Hale^  an 
unsuspected  wHnesSy  the  apprentice  of  one  of 
the  parties,  statinf  upon  his  oath,  that  these 
meetings  were  held  CTciy  night,  and  attended 
by  the  prisoners.  Does  not  tins  then  confirm> 
in  a  Duost  important  point,  th»  endeae^  of 
Adams?  For  what  purpose  did  ittsj  meetf 
Was  these  any  object  of  bosiness  er  amnso 
meat  in  whseh  they  were  engaged,  to  aceawit 
for  this  evcttflistancr?  Has  any  attempt  been 
made  to  explaio  it  by  eTidenoe,  or  eren  by 
stafemestP  Up  to*  this  momea*  has  any 
motire,  consistent  with  the  inlmcenee  of  the 
nrisoneis,  bee*  assigaed  for  these  meetidgs? 
It  was  sen  nnfovnished  room,  eontainiatf 
nothing  but  a  single  chair,  Ings  baring  stated 
at  the  time  when  be  hired  it,  that  he  sboakd 
bring  in  fiimitnf  e,  but  which  he  n^er  attempted 
to  do.  I  repeat  it  then^  do  not  theM  eircani;« 
stances  spoken  to  by  Hale,  confirm  ia  this 
strongest  manner  dw  testhnony  of  Adams  } 

Mark  another  foet.  Adams  tells  yon,  that 
arms  were  from  time  to  tiam  collected  in  this 
room,  and  afterwards  carried  to  the  d^pftl; 
he  particulariy  speaks  to  a  number  of  pdte« 
staves  brought  there  for  the  jrarpoee  of  hariag 
ferrules  put  on  them.  This  h  the  aeeenat 
given  by  Adams ;  and  here  I  beg  yon  will  tfh 
collect  that  Adams  is  in  custody,  and  has  had 
no  opportunity  of  communicating  with  Hale. 
He  is  at  large,  no  cbarm  hti  been  prefetrvd, 
or  was  ever  thought  of  being  pseferred  against 
him.  He  teUs  tov,  that  oae  day  tha  door 
being  aecidentalfy  open,  he  olwerted  a  irambef 
of  these  pike-Staves,  to  tha  amount  of  aboat 
twenty  in  the  eetner  of  the  rooak  How  doM 
he  describe  their  appearance?  They  wtPS  like 
branches  recently  cnt  ftom  ifrea».-^Yoii  have 
seen  fbem  ooTtespondinn  with  the  deicriptioft 
which  he  has  given.  Hide  conilttos  Adams; 
and  die  fact  ia  establiBhed,that  this  was  oae  d 
the  places  made  use  of  fef  ooHasthig  anM. 
There  is  another  eircumstanee  conaecM  with 
these  pike-staves,  to  which  I  beg  to  dhreet 

Smr  attentioA.  It  was  stated  by  Adams,  that 
radburn  was  employed  to  put  en  the  fusiaits, 
and  that  it  Was  aone  in  the  room<  -Whet  ia 
this  respect  m  the  testimony  of  Hale  ?  He  says, 
**  about  the  time  I  observed  the  pike-staves,  i 
heani  a  hammeriag  mid  sawing  repeatedly  in 
the  evening.''  Co^  Adams  have  anticipated 
this?  These cireMibsunees^  at fifst view appa* 
rently  trifling,  bi^«ome  of  ininite  impoftaaeey 
hi  considering  the  credit  due  to  the  aaitative 
of  Adams;  for  it  is  impossible  that  they  coald 
have  been  invented  or  arranged  for  the  oce*- 
eion. 

But  there  are  other  drcamstances  of  t  dia« 
racter  still  more  marked  and  deciiiire.  Yo« 
remember  thtt  Adams  stated,  that  on  the 
Saturday,  these  parties  had  become  impatient* 
It  had  been  oiiginally  intended  to  make  ho 
attack  upon  the  house  of  oae  of  the  miidscersy 
when  the  cabinet  were  all  eseeaMed  at 
dinner.  The  death  of  die  king  had  interhipted 
these  eMtrteiaiaeati*   Ibiii  was  &#  opyti 


tanity  of  cartyiag  ISA  pro^  ibtaeflbct;  aadk 
Brant  afierwaids  stated,  in  the  peesenoe  of  em^ 
of  the  witiBSS8e»<Monnment),  that  the  deadi 
of  die  king  had  aiteied  their  plans.  Mow,  t» 
advert  to  die  testinmny  of  Adesne.  Ois  thm 
Satufldayr  havinf  become  impatieat,  die  pii«f 
soaev smd^  ^  wa mast  have  ameeting  la»i 


—     < 


row ;  we  joiust  form  a  eoannittee,  and 
what  can  \m  deoe."  This 
pwfiuas  to  the-  9ttid  etf  Wtibnmrf^  Yea  wm 
toid  by  AdaaiSy  that  a  oomndttcm  was  aecoid 
iagly  fomted  on  the  Saodi^  aaii  uiug  9  that  id 
consisted  of  inoie  dam  tba  osaat  namber  aC 
persons^  tnd  sat  fot  a  censidesahla  tiaaa  ha 
deUberatioD  apea  dba  pnrieot  wkech  tliey  htA 
in  view.  What  ietim  evidence  of  Hak>  Bw 
abw  tetts  yea  thai  these  tras  a  meecii 
Sanday  momiag^  aad  that  it  waaaf  i^ 
character  liN>m  die  pserveas  meetii^p.  It 
attended  by  a  larpftv  auasber  of  penoi%  aiA 
they  appeared  ta  ba  moOe  eleeely  oagagad  im 
censahatkm  togedihr^  i  do  iMt  reai  the  ovi« 
denceaeigaalaag^  Iwieh  asmachaipceai- 
ble  to  reliava  yea  kam  unaeeeseary  repetitiaa  % 
but  if  yoa  will  hehr  aad  attaad  ta  thesacib-* 
setvations,  and  bear  them  ia  miad  whaa  llw 
evideaog  is  reoapitalaledby  the  learned  jadgs^ 
I  will  pledge  myscM^  that  yea  will  not,  ia  aa^ 
iastaaee,  ted  them  budt  upoa  any  mia-repse« 
seatatioa  or  mie-atatemaat.  flhovldj  hawavtr^ 
any  earor  occur,  I  am  pemnadad,  thai  you,  tlM^ 

ensonar  at  the  bar,  and  idi  who  bear  mey  tftti 
e  satisfied,  thtt  ia  a  etas  af  this  daeoti|p- 
tioni  it  most,  te  my  part  be  wiottyaaiaietu 
tlonal. 

Noddaa  forthot  ducats  ia  the  teetimoaf  af 
Hale,  nntd  the  day  wbea  the  profect  was  tab« 
executed.  Adams  tidle  yoa,  that  aboatlbar 
orflfa>a^ddekoathatdmF)  be  was  in  Bnmt^ 
ream  ;  that  fttraaga  and  aaatber  man,  wlMa* 
be  did  mit  knew,  caeoe  in  and  ttted  tiMtina^ 
ftrs  or  she  pistelt ;  and  thAt  Btaal  beiag  apii> 
proheusive  that  thsy  were  overtoalted  by  nm^ 
soasoa  the  appoiite  side  ol  thewayi  ilewiidl 
them  to  go  unmadialcty  into  the  Mh  tauoL 
Hals  states  the  iamafoctsahnostia  the 
terms*  In  thia  paMtaaksr  also  ha 
the  testimdny  that  has  been  given  by 

It  is  suggested  ta  are  that  samethiaf  ao* 
catted*— btrt  perhaps  I  aiH  a  filtle  eat  of  ooaia^ 
ia  advertiag  to  it  dow-t*4ii  the  adjainhig  raoa 
when  Dwyerwa* then;  aad  that  it  w«s  oo»» 
tended  by  dse  esoasel  fee  the  pthwaar^  thai 
Adams  did  aat  agree  vrith  Dwysria  his  ae- 
count  of  that  part  of  drettaasactioa.  Batyaa 
will  raoolleet  that  Adams  told  you  hedid  oot 

SI  re  tha  rooM  on  the  tsid  of  Febtttary>  till 
te  in  dw  dhy^till  thiae  or  foar  o^dook  la  tire 
aftofaoon,  and  yoa  remeadier  Dwyet  foitted 
the  loom  by  oae>  sa  that  it  vrae  kaposeibla 
Uiat  what  was  laid  in  the  presenee  of  Dfsyer 
ooaM  have  been  heafd  by  Adhms.     ^ 

Bat  to  revaif  to  the  ovideiMe  af  Bale,  yo^ 
will  aa  doabt  reooilaec  another  reterekaMa 
olreaaiitMMa  of  eanflnnatNa  ta  watea  1  afli 
aboat  re  direct  yonr  tttstrtiw. 
olavmriHrA 


90ftl 


ftft  Hig^  rr^iiM. 


A.  0*  I«fi0. 


rsoe 


ft  pToAnAftlion  to  b*  posted,  at  »y  lewKd 
finesd  sttppoMS  ok  ube  boiiwa  tint  wcvt 
to  be  Mt  on  fiie,  bot  to  be  pnt  up  dmot 
the  firet,  is  order  tbat  it  might  be  read 
by  tbe  people^  He  aaked  for  peser; 
no  paper  adapted  to  the  porpoaa  coula  be 
uoGured ;  sonietluii^  waa  aaid  about  prooor- 
iDg  inch  paper  as  is  usaaUy  eaiployed  for 
nefPspapers^  Dot  Adam  tells  yoQ  he  suggested 
that  eartiidge  jraper  wonld  answer  better. 
Meoey  vas  atcerdiwgly  given  hgr  Tbistlewoed 
to  pcocwre  it,  andBraaAiienieiit  and  directed 
hie  mpceatice  te  bnqr  >>'  sheets*  Hut  was 
stated  bjrAdasst  He  las  had  no  opportuBtty 
ol  apesluog  with  Oale  upon  tht  siiiaeot;  he 
bat  had  no  Bieant  of  atraijptghit  evidence  in 
ooncert  with  him ;  bat  this  ia  the  aeeoniil 
irHnch  he  girts  i  The  paper  wat  pwditstd, 
and  the  procinTttiian  written.  Hale  in  his 
emdenct  teUs  yen  that  Bnual  came  nnt  and 
desaved  bias  to  pnrduse  some  eartiidge  paper, 
•ad  that  he  aooordiBgly  bovght  A  (meels^ 
which  were  taken  into  theroenvat  Adaawhad 
slated.  In  this  important  cimHBtttnot  then 
Adtms  is  eoofirmea  by  Hale^  at  far  as  it  it 
npssibk  thai  he  ooaid  be  eonirmedi  fo 
Ualt  was  not  adnstled  into  the  room,  and 
of  eovne  eaa  gire  BO  aeoouat  of  the  purpose 
t»  wlnefa  this  paper  was  applied. 

LBtva  look  at  the  eate  a  little  further^  The 
paitiM  set  oat  ibr  the  place  of  rendcvron^  and 
Brantameiig  thereat  is  stated  byAdeat  to 
have  faetn  in  CakHstreet^  and  to  have  been  an 
attivepartictpaAor  in  every  thing  that  oococted 
at  that  spot*  He  iras  not  apprehended  at  the 
tiase^hafiag  saceeeded  in  efeeting  hit  ttem^ 
What  then  is  the  aeeoant  givnn  hj^Hale  t^^He 
sagrs  hia  matter  rttuxned  henm  about  nine 
o^cloch  in  A*  evening,  eenfimed  and  ittigaed  ; 
hiM  eeat  splashed,  hit  boots  covered  with  arad. 
laaniediately  upon  his  anival^  ndJieming  hie 
wofh,  ha  said, '<  it  wat  idl  over;  a  nnmbet  ef 
oflben  bad  come— -that  he  had  saved  his  ]if!i, 
and  that  was  idL''  Does  not  this  thea  mott 
evidently  point  to  the  transaolsen  in  Cato^ 
stnet?  Does  it  not  ooalirm,  beyond  the  pos- 
MbiUty  of  doubt,  the  testimoi^  of  Adams  as 
to  Brnnt  having  been  one  of  those  vrhe  were 
engaged  in  that  tranaaetion? 

There  is  a  remarkable  dromnstance  to  whidi 
I  now  wish  to  beg  jreur  attention^  because  it 
relates  to  the  ulterior  projects  vrhich  the  pari- 
ties had  in  view*  You  will  remember  Adams 
stated  that  the  plan  they  had  fonaed  was^  to 
atnke  a  grand  blow,  by  attacking  the  ministen 
ns  they  wen  assembled  in  Groevenor-squave; 
but  tlus  was  only  a  part  of  their  crindoal  de« 
•sign.  There  was  another  body,  uotconsisling 
of  tlm  same  mdividualt  ns  the  eomitel  fcr  the 
pntoner  has  auppoeed,  but  ef  the  fnenda  of 
Fslin,  at  to  vrhom  he  had  asked  Thittlewood  at 
one  of  ttie  meetings  whether  he  migfat  not  com- 
mnnicate  to  them  dm  portioalaa  of  the  phut. 
Ibeie  was  ate  ethitd  party  under  the  mee* 
tionof  Ooek,  dtttined  to  another  entsrpiise; 
Isr  the  twenty^five  perstnt  assamblsd  in  Oato* 
tmetJbitsed  en^  a  small  part  of 
tngaged  in  this  conspiracy* 


Hnvmg  reetlled  these  etreamstaneea  toyonr 
atfentioD,  let  me  remiiid  you  ef  what  wat  said 
by  Brunt.  A  person  came  ia,  endently  ont 
of  those  who  had  been  in  Cato-street ;  Bmnt,; 
after  some  conversation,  mddenly  eaclwmed 
**  It  is  not  all  over  yet;  le|  us  go  and  seewlmt 
they  are  about;"  and  they  immediately  went 
out  together.  Brunt  resftainsd  absent  till  nsnr 
elevea  o'clock.  For  what  purpose  4e  jnm 
suppose  they  went  out  ?-— the  obfcct  ii  eiridatt  s 
it  wat  intended  thait  other  opccaiions  ahould 
take  place  in  diSnrent  parte  ot  tbe  metiupelH!^ 
and  finding  thsy  weiudetetad  M  the  west  ead 
of  thetow%  Bmot e9ielaMned>  ^It  it  not  ali 
over  yet/' and  went  to  inmieintoi  the  lesuM 
of  the  ether  movementsw  Th»  dcned  the  ps** 
ceedinga  of  that  day,  eontanii^K,  froaa  tot  t» 
luty  the  testiiDwmy  of  Adams.  What  tether 
takeaplacel  He  bad  deswred  hit  appisntion 
to  ciean  hit  boott  early  in  the  memvagy  iqp]nn» 
hensive  that  they  mi|^t  excite  atteniiott)  b» 
rose  eaily  himself  and  went  into  the  batk 
rooopir<'«iato  that  room  with  whisi^  when  Tann-* 
ton  came  up,  he  said  he  had  nothini^  to  do» 
He  tbsre  opened  a  eupbeardpaivi  took  out  ikm 
remnina  off  the  ammnnition  and  o^er  artickni 
whicb  were  there  depeeited-»«end  gfeimisn 
(net  hand^grcntdet  to  be  used  at  Imd  Han- 
rowby^for  those  weae  carried  to  Cato-ttTCtt)^ 
fire  baUs,and  cartridgss  for  the  artilleo^  madn 
in  flannel  bets..  These  were  taken  eisl  of  tfem 
cupboard  and  put  into  two  badcets  i  one  of 
them  he  covered  with  an  apron  ef  his  wifi*i^  * 
which  had  been  used  es  a  blind  in  that  very 
irbicb  he  affected  tn  have  n<^  ceit* 
In  a  few  moments  afterwwd%  Tktimen 
the  officer  came  m>,  he  seised  thebeekels^and 
addressing  hijnself  to  Brant,  asked  what  wan 
in  them :  he  said  they  were  net  his,  he  knew 
nothing  about  them  ;  upon  which  he  wat  isn* 
mediately  taken  into  custody.  Upon  thetn 
tets  it  would  be  idle  to  make  any  oemaMnt. 
They  am  deeitive  at  to  the  guHt  of  tbe  partiett 
and  confirm  in  the  ttronfStt  manner  tht  test»« 
mcoy  of  Adams. 

Passing  firem  the  evidence  of  Hale,  tel  tat 
direct  vow  attsntion  to  another  fiKt.  Yen  all 
remember  what  wat  stated  by  AdaoM^  that  tbe 
arsM  uFcre  broogbt  sucesssively  to  the  room  in 
f  OS-court,  and  that  they  were  earned  tan 
tbttice  to  a  place  that  was  called  tbe  d^t,et 
Tidd's  house;  aad  that Thittiewood, the pai« 
soner,  was  [always  amdout  for  their  removai. 
You  find  Taunton  the  effiosr,  immfdiately  after 
he  bad  seafched  tiie  )pr^t>utes  tin  Fo»«ourc, 
proceeding  to  Tidd's  housew  He  Acre  iwsad 
the  arms  that  have  been  produced  to  yeiu 
weepent  of  every  descr^ytaon,  net  calcidntod 
merely  for  an  attack  npen  a  sin^e  houae  in 
which  sixteen*  or  seventeen  nsssont  wure  at" 
sembled,  but  evidently  and  aeasonstr^ly  'mm 
tended,  ftem  tbe  natnie  and  sixe  of  die  prepn* 
ralioas,  fist  aasaa  more  extensive  purpose.  A 
trank  istisnnd,  oesUaining  l,tOO  hsil  cartridges^ 
liand-greaades^  ive-hnlls,  ositridget  Ibr  Ihn 
artittsry,  ate  etan  diatoeersd.  But  lan  haraed 
ftindlntealftednwiaeas.  fimthtMrnoatcf 


907] 


1  GEORO£  IV. 


Trial  of  Atikur  ThitOemood 


[908 


endeaToaring  to  explain  thete  drcumstances, 
— ^the  daughter  of  Tidd,  who,  of  course,  would 
be  disposed  to  give  the  most  fovourable  ex- 
planation for  her  father.  But  what  is  the 
amount  of  her  evidence  f  She  tells  you  that 
the  trunk  containing  the  ball  cartridges  had 
been  carried  to  the  apartment,  three  or  four 
days  before  the  33rd  or  February.  It  had  been 
decided,  that  the  project  should  be  carried  into 
eflfect  on  the  Wednesday ;  and  the  box^  widi 
die  cartridges,  Vas  evidently  sent  to  the  d^pdt 
with  that  view.  It  remained  there  ready  for  use 
during  the  whole  time,  and  was  left  untouched 
in  consequence  of  the  failure  of  the  plan,  till 
the  officer  Taunton  took  it  into  his  possession. 
But  it  is  said  by  the  vritness,  that  some  person 
took  away  a  part  of  the  arms  on  the  2Mif  and 
returned  them  on  the  following  morning.  If 
tibis  be  true,  it  corresponds  exactly  widi  the 
facts  of  the  case.  When  the  prisoners  deter- 
mined to  cany  their  enterprise  into  effect  on 
the  Wednesday,  of  course  the  persons  engaged 
in  it  armed  themselves  from  the  magaxtne  at 
Tidd's,  and  after  the  attempt  had  been  defeated, 
they  were  then  naturally  carried  l)ack  to  the 
place  from  whence  they  had  been  taken.  The 
evidence  of  this  voung  woman  then,  so  far 
from  impeaching  the  case  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecution,  tends  most  directljf  and  distinctly 
to  confirm  it.  Her  account  coincides  with  the 
particulars  stated  by  Adams,  and  proves  most 
clearly  that  the  story  he  has  told  is,  in  these 
particulars,  correct. 

I  hope  I  am  not  fatiguing  ^our  patience  with 
this  detail ;  but  when  the  life  or  a  man  is  at 
stake,  I  am  sure  you  will  readily  devote  to  me 
all  that  attention  which  may  be  necMsanr  to 
the  investigation  of  the  truth.  You  will,  I  am 
persuaded,  submit  without  reluctance  to  the 
sacrifice,  from  a  sense  of  the  importance  of 
that  duty  which  is  cast  upon  you :  I  beg  then 
to  request  your  attention  to  another  striking 
circumstance.  You  will  recollect,  that  some 
oonversation  took  place  in  the  room  with  re- 
spect to  a  communication  made  by  Hobbs,  the 
landlord  of  the  White-hart  public-house. 
Adams  has  stated  to  you,  that  in  consequence 
of  that  communication  much  agitation  pre- 
vailed in  the  meeting,  and  that  Brunt  proposed 
a  particular  measure  of  precaution,  to  which  I 
shall  presently  advert.  I  beg  leave  previously, 
however,  to  observe,  that  if  the  fact  as  to  the 
communication  made  by  Hobbs  were  untrue, 
Hobbs  himself  might  have  been  called  by  the 
prisoner  for  the  purpose  of  contradicting  the 
testimony  of  Adams.  There  was  ample  time 
to  have  obtained  his  attendance;  a  whole  day 
elapsed  after  Adams  had  been  examined. 
Hobbs  is  easily  accessible,  and  might  have 
been  called ;  but  he  does  not  make  his  ap- 
pearance. Can  vou  therefore  doubt  the  truth 
of  this  part  of  the  evidence  of  Adams ;  and 
that  it  is  as  correct  as  his  statement  of  tiie 
other  foots  to  which  I  have  called  your  atten- 
tion ?  But  to  return  to  the  course  of  observ»> 
tion  which  I  was  pursuing : — In  consequence 
of  the  itpprehentton  .and  alann  which  seemed 


to  prevail  in  the  meeting.  Brunt  proposed,  by 
way  of  security,  to  set  a  watch  upon  lord  Uar- 
rowby*s  house.  This  proposition  originated 
with  Brunt ;  it  was  immediately  adopted,  and 
Davidson  with  another  person  was  directed  to 
commence  the  watch  on  Tuesday  evening,  at 
six  o'clock ;  they  were  to  be  relieved  at  nine 
by  two  others  who  were  to  continue  at  their 
station  till  twelve.  The  whole  of  this  arrange- 
ment was  purely  accidenlal :  observe,  then,  in 
how  extraordinary  a  manner  this  purt  of  the 
narrative  of  Adams  is  confirmed.  We  called 
the  watchman,  who  said,  **  I  observed  some 
persons  lurking  about  the  square  that  evening, 
and  among  them  a  black  man,  or  man  oi 
colour,  who  attracted  m^  particular  attention.'^ 
But  the  confirmation  is  still  more  striking. 
Adams  has  told  you  that  he  and  Brant  relieved 
Davidson  and  his  companion,  and  that  they 
went  into  a  public-house,  at  the  corner  of  the 
Mews  in  Charles-street,  where  a  young  man 
challenged  Brunt  to  play  at  dominos.  £q- 
quiry  was  made  in  the  neighbourhood,  for  the 
purpose  of  ascertaining  the  truth  of  this  state- 
ment, and  it  turned  out  to  be  perfectly  correct. 
Gillan,  the  witness  whom  you  have  heard,  was 
the  person  to  whom  Adams  alluded. '  He  re- 
collected the  person  of  Brunt,  and  confirmed, 
in  every  particular,  the  testimony  of  Adams. 
In  every  step  that  we  take,  you  perceive  in 
.how  remarkable  a  manner  his  evidence  corres- 
ponds with  the  accounts  given  from  quarters 
where  no  suspicion  can  by  possibility  attach. 

Another  witness,  to  whose  evidence  I  be^ 
leave  to  request  your  particular  attention  is 
Monument  He  is  undoubtedly,  to  a  consider- 
able extentj  implicated  in  the  guilt  of  the  pri- 
soners. It  is  supposed,  or  suggested,  by  my 
learned  friend,  that  the  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers  was  to  be  effected  solely 
wiUi  a  view  to  plunder.  Was  it  so  7  Attend 
to  the  language  of  Thistlewood  upon  his  first 
visit  to  Monument:  ''Great  events,''  he  ob- 
serves, *'  are  at  hand.  The  people  are  every 
where  anxious  for  a  change.  1  have  been 
deceived,"  he  proceeds  to  say,  **  by  many  per- 
sons^ but  I  have  now  got  some  men  who  will 
stand  by  me."  Is  it  possible  to  misunderstand 
this  language  T  What  was  the  change  that  be 
contemplated  T  What  are  the  great  events  to 
which  he  referred }  Murdering  the  ministers 
for  the  purpose  of  plundering  London  I  Is  it 
possible  to  suppose  that  this  could  have  been 
the  design,  or  that  any  man  could  have  ent^^ 
tained  a  thought  of  commencing  a  system  oC 
plunder,  by  so  extraordinary  and  atrocious  an 
enterprise  ?  In  what  way  would  the  murder 
of  his  majesty's  ministers  have  facilitated  .this 
object?  When  he  says,  **  great  events  are  at  - 
hand — the  people  are  every  where  anxious  for 
a  change — I  have  been  deceived  by  many  peo^ 
pie,  but  I  have  now  got  some  men  who  will 
stand  by  me ;"  what  could  he  possibly  be  ud-> 
derstood  to  mean,  but  that  he  ¥Pa8  engaged  in 
some  political  and  revolutionary  enterprise  of 
a  dangerous  nature,  and  had  got  men  who 
would  jtaod  by  and  oo-opemte  with  him  ui> 


9091 


Jbt  High  Treason. 


A.  t).  1820* 


[910 


his  endeaTOon  Urckrryit  into  effect?  And 
80  it  was  eTidently  nndierstood  by  Monament. 

It  is'impossiblenot  to  call  to  one*s  recolleo* 
tion  in  this  inquiry,  the  fonner  station  in  life 
of  the  prisoner  Thistlewood.  He  has  been  an 
officer^  I  beliere,  in  his  majesty's  service ;  he 
has  moved  in  the  situation  and  rank  of  a  ^n- 
tieman ;  and  yet  you  find  him  with  his  previous 
habits  descending  so  low  as  to  become  the 
intimate  companion  and  associate  of  journey- 
men mechanics,  and  of  others  in  the  humblest 
condition  of  society,  associating  with  them 
daily,  holding  consultations  with  them  in  a 
small  unfurnished  back-room,  ia  an  obscure 
court,  inhabited  by  the  most  obscure  indivi- 
duals. Is  there  not  some  extraordinary  mys- 
tery in  this  association?  Would  he  have 
stooped  to  this  indignity,  unless  he  had  had 
some  great  object  in  view,  which  he  was  de- 
sirous of  accomplishing,  and  which  he  could 
t>nly  accomplish  by  their  means  ?  Is  not  this 
conduct  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  a  circum- 
stance that  must  weigh  greatly  in  your  deliber- 
ations upon  this  case,  and  the  nature  of  the 
enterprise  in  which  he  was  engaged  f 

But  to  return  to  the  evidence  of  Monument. 
He  proceeds  to  Cat(^street,  and  upon  his 
arrival  there  the  whole  plan  is  developed  to 
him.  But  it  is  suggested  by  the  counsel  for 
the  prisoner,  that  as  far  as  relates  to  Cato- 
street,  there  is  some  discrepancy  between  the 
evidence  of  Adams  and  Monument  Tlie 
former  stated  the  number  in  the  room  to  be 
twenty;  and  when  Monument  was  there 
Thistlewood  observed,  that  the  number  was 
twenty-five.  But  how  does  this  upon  a  little 
inquiry  turn  out?  When  Adams  arrived, 
all  the  party  had  not  assembled ;  Tidd  and 
Monument,  and  probably  some  others,  came 
in  afterwards ;  and  it  is  further  to  be  ol»erved, 
that  the  men  were  not  actually  counted,  there 
being  nothine  but  the  mere  declaration  of 
Thistlewood  that  they  amounted  to  twenty-five. 
These  then  are  the  supposed  contradictions, 
which,' for  want  of  better  matter,  are  relied 
upon  for  the  purpose  of  endeavouring  to  per- 
suade you  that  the  evidence  of  Adams,  or 
Monument,  or  of  both  of  them,  is  not  worthy 
of  credit 

Some  other  differences  of  a  trivial  nature 
have  also 'been  insisted  upon,  between  the 
account  given  by  Adams  and  the  statement  of 
the  officers,  as  to  what  passed  after  the  latter 
had  arrived  at  the  stable.  But  can  you  sup- 
pose for  a  mpment,  fh>m  this  circumstance, 
that  Adams  was  not  present  at  that  meeting? 
Who  does  not  know,  that  in  a  scene  of  contu- 
sion of  this  description,  when  the  mind  is  agi- 
tated, and  every  thing  is  in  a  state  of  disorder 
and  tumult,  the  account  given-by  those  who 
are  present^  and  eye-witnesses  of  the  facts, 
will  always  be  at  variance  in  some  particulars 
from  eacn  other?  One  man  recollects  one 
circumstance,  and  another  person  will  observe 
and  recollect  another;  and  it  is  a  common 
obeervacion  in  courts  of  justice, — and  I  refer 
to  it,  because  obffBirvatioiis  would  not  be  re« 


peated  until  they  become  trite  and  hacknied, 
unless  they  were  founded  in  truth,— that  when 
two  men  describe  the  same  transaction,  if 
they  describe  it  precisely  in  the  same  way,  it 
leads  to  a  suspicion  of  .their  veracity,  and  of 
previous  arrangement  and  concert;  for  it  is 
inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  the  human 
mind,  that  they  should,  in  a  confused  and 
complicated  transaction,  agree  in  all  the  minute 
particulars  of  their  story.  And  I  therefore 
repeat,  that  not  the  slightest  inference  can  be 
raised  in  favour  of  the  prisoner  from  any  sup- 
posed difference  between  the  statement  of  the 
officers  and  that  of  Adams,  as  to  what  took 
place  at  the  moment  of  ascending  the  ladder, 
kuthven,  the  first  who  mounted  the  ladder, 
did  not  hear  any  person  call  out  from  bel6w ; 
Adams,  on  the  contrary,  said,  somebody  called 
out,  **  Look  above  there,"  as  the  officers  ap- 
proached ;  Ruthven  did  not  remember  this, 
nor  Ellis — ^therefore  my  learned  friend  says, 
there  is  some  contradiction,  and  you  ought  not 
to  believe  that  Adams  was  present.  But  you 
will  recollect,  that  Westcoatt  said  he  heard 
these  expressions  used;  and  I  mention  this 
circumstance  to  confirm  ray  position,  and  to 
show,  that  honest  men,  acting  with  the  best 
possible  intentions,  when  giving  an  account  of 
the  same  transaction,  will  often,  in  many  par- 
ticulars, differ  from  each  other.  Ruthven  tells 
you  that  he  called  out,  '*  Seize  their  arms,  we 
are  officers !  *'  now  whether  he  said  any  thing 
about  a  warrant  or  not,  I  will  not  take  upon 
myself  to  assert;  but  another  officer  says,  the 
word  warrant  was  used.  Really,  when  such 
circumstances  are  relied  on  by  my  learned 
friend,  you  must,  out  of  respect  to  his  judg- 
ment and  talents,  feel  that  he  is  under  the 
necessity  of  resorting  to  them,  and  of  catching 
even  at  straws,  because  he  has  nothing  more 
substantial  upon  which  to  rest  his  defence. 

I  beg  leave  now  to  advert  to  a  witness  of 
considerable  importance  in  this  case,  I  mean 
Dwyer.    Some  attempt  has  been  made  to  im^ 

J>each  his  credit  Dwyer  told  you,  he  had 
ived  thirteen  years  with  the  same  roaster,  Mr. 
Smith.  That  account  is  not  contradicted.  A 
person  of  whom  you  knew  nothing,  of  whose 
credit  you  have  no  means  of  judging,  comes 
here  for  the  purpose  of  telling  you,  that  the 
conduct  of  Dwyer,  upon  some  former  occasion, 
about  two  months  ago,  was  infamous;  and 
that  therefore  he  would  not  believe  him  upon 
his  oath.  Dwyer  denies  the  fact  alleged 
against  him.  Who  is  this  witness  that  pre- 
sents himself  before  you  ?  A  labouring  me- 
chanic: we  know  nothing  further  of  him. 
Can  any  reason  be  assigned,  why  jrou  should 
place  more  reliance  upon  his  testimony  than 
on  Dwyer  himself,  who  has  lived  and  worked 
for  thirteen  years  with  the  same  master.  But 
observe  the  conduct  of  this  witness,  who  comes 
to  impeach  the  credit  of  another.  He  tells 
you  that  a  base  and  infamous  proposition  was 
made  to  him  by  Dwyer,  and  he  acceded  to  it* 
It  is  true,  that  according  to  his  own  statement 
he  afterwards  withdrew,  but  he  still  continued 


907] 


1  GEORO£  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur 


C908 


endeayoaring  to  explain  thete  drcumsUnces, 
— ^the  daughter  of  Tidd,  who,  of  course,  would 
be  disposed  to  give  the  most  favourable  ex- 
planation for  her  father.  But  what  is  the 
amount  of  her  oTidence  f  She  tells  you  that 
the  trunk  containing  the  ball  cartridges  had 
been  carried  to  the  apartment,  three  or  four 
days  before  the  23rd  or  February.  It  had  been 
decided,  diat  the  project  should  be  carried  into 
effect  on  the  Wednesday ;  and  the  box,  widi 
die  cartridges,  Vas  evidently  sent  to  the  d^pdt 
with  that  view.  It  remained  there  ready  for  use 
during  the  whole  time,  and  was  left  untouched 
in  consequence  of  the  failure  of  the  plan,  till 
the  officer  Taunton  took  it  into  hb  possession. 
But  it  is  said  by  the  witness,  that  some  person 
took  away  a  part  of  the  arms  on  the  23ra,  and 
returned  them  on  the  following  morning.  If 
&is  be  true,  it  corresponds  exactly  with  the 
facts  of  the  case.  When  the  prisoners  deter- 
mined to  cany  their  enterprise  into  effect  on 
the  Wednesday,  of  course  the  persons  engaged 
in  it  armed  themselves  from  the  magazine  at 
Tidd's,  and  after  the  attempt  had  been  defeated, 
they  were  then  naturally  carried  l)ack  to  the 
place  from  whence  they  had  been  taken.  The 
evidence  of  this  voung  woman  then,  so  far 
from  impeaching  the  case  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecution,  tends  most  directly  ana  distinctly 
to  confirm  it.  Her  account  coincides  with  the 
particulars  stated  by  Adams,  and  proves  most 
clearly  that  the  story  he  has  told  is,  in  these 
particulars,  correct. 

I  hope  I  am  not  fatiguing  ^our  patience  with 
this  detail ;  but  when  the  life  or  a  man  is  at 
stake,  I  am  sure  you  will  readily  devote  to  me 
all  that  attention  which  may  be  necMsanr  to 
the  investigation  of  the  truth.  You  will,  I  am 
persuaded,  submit  without  reluctance  to  the 
sacrifice,  from  a  sense  of  the  importance  of 
^t  duty  which  is  cast  upon  you :  I  beg  then 
to  request  your  attention  to  another  striking 
circumstance.  You  will  recollect,  that  some 
conversation  took  place  in  the  room  with  re- 
spect to  a  communication  made  by  Hobbs,  the 
landlord  of  the  White-hart  public-house. 
Adams  has  stated  to  you,  that  in  consequence 
of  that  communication  much  agitation  pre- 
vailed in  the  meeting,  and  that  Brunt  proposed 
a  particular  measure  of  precaution,  to  which  I 
shall  presently  advert.  I  beg  leave  previously, 
however,  to  observe,  that  if  the  fact  as  to  the 
communication  made  by  Hobbs  were  untrue, 
Hobbs  himself  might  have  been  called  by  the 
prisoner  for  the  purpose  of  contradicting  the 
testimony  of  Adams.  There  was  ample  time 
to  have  obtained  his  attendance;  a  whole  day 
elapsed  after  Adams  had  been  examined. 
Hoobs  is  easily  accessible,  and  might  have 
been  called ;  but  he  does  not  make  his  ap- 
pearance. Can  von  therefore  doubt  the  truth 
of  this  part  of  the  evidence  of  Adams ;  and 
that  it  is  as  correct  as  his  statement  of  die 
other  facts  to  which  I  have  called  your  atten- 
tion ?  But  to  return  to  the  course  of  observ»> 
tion  which  I  was  pursuing : — In  consequence 
of  the  apprehension  .and  alann  which  seemed 


to  prevail  in  the  meeting,  Brunt  proposed,  by 
way  of  security,  to  set  a  watch  upon  lord  Har- 
rowby*s  house.  This  proposition  originated 
with  Brunt ;  it  was  immediately  adopted,  and 
Davidson  with  another  person  was  directed  to 
commence  the  watch  on  Tuesday  evening,  at 
six  o'clock ;  they  were  to  be  relieved  at  nine 
by  two  others  who  were  to  continue  at  their 
station  till  twelve.  The  whole  of  this  arrange- 
ment was  purely  accidental :  observe,  then,  in 
how  extraordinaiy  a  manner  this  put  of  the 
narrative  of  Adams  is  confirmed.  We  called 
the  watchman,  who  said,  '*I  observed  some 
persons  lurking  about  the  square  that  evening, 
and  among  them  a  black  man,  or  man  of 
colour,  who  attracted  m^  particular  attention.'' 
But  the  confirmation  is  still  more  striking. 
Adams  has  told  you  that  he  and  Brunt  roliev^ 
Davidson  and  his  companion,  and  thattbey 
went  into  a  public-house,  at  the  comer  of  tibe 
Mews  in  Charies-street,  where  a  young  man 
challenged  Brunt  to  play  at  dominos.  ^- 
quiry  was  made  in  the  neighbourhood,  for  the 
purpose  of  ascertaining  the  truth  of  this  state- 
ment, and  it  turned  out  to  be  perfectly  coirect. 
Gillan,  the  witness  whom  you  have  beard,  was 
the  person  to  whom  Adams  alluded. '  He  re- 
collected the  person  of  Brunt,  and  confirmed, 
in  eveiy  particular,  the  testimony  of  Adama* 
In  every  step  that  we  take,  you  perceive  in 
.how  remarkable  a  manner  his  evidence  corres- 
ponds with  the  accounts  given  from  quartsrs 
where  no  suspicion  can  by  possibility  attach. 

Another  vntness,  to  whose  evidence  I  beg 
leave  to  request  your  particular  attention  is 
Monument  He  is  undoubtedly,  to  a  consider- 
able extent,  implicated  in  the  guilt  of  the  pri- 
soners. It  is  supposed,  or  suggested,  by  my 
learned  friend,  tluit  the  assassination  of  h» 
majesty's  ministers  was  to  be  effected  solely 
widi  a  view  to  plunder.  Was  it  so  7  Attend 
to  the  language  of  Thisdewood  upon  his  first 
visit  to  Monument:  '^ Great  events,"  he  ob- 
serves, *'  are  at  hand.  The  people  are  every 
where  anxious  for  a  change.  1  have  been 
deceived,'*  he  proceeds  to  say,  *^  by  many  per- 
sons, but  I  have  now  got  some  men  who  will 
stand  by  me.**  Is  it  possible  to  misunderstand 
this  language  ?  What  was  die  change  that  he 
contemplated  ?  What  are  the  great  events  to 
which  he  referred  i  Murdering  the  ministers 
for  the  purpose  of  plundering  London  I  Is  St 
possible  to  suppose  that  this  could  have  been 
the  design,  or  that  any  man  could  have  enter* 
tained  a  thought  of  commencing  a  system  of 
plunder,  by  so  extraordinary  and  atrocious  an 
enterprise  ?  In  what  way  would  the  murder 
of  his  majesty's  ministers  have  facilitated  .this 
object  ?  When  he  says,  **  great  events  are  at 
hand-— the  people  are  every  where  anxious  far 
a  change — I  have  been  deceived  by  many  peo- 
ple, but  I  have  now  got  some  men  who  will 
stand  by  me  f  what  could  he  possibly  be  un-> 
derstood  to  mean,  but  that  he  ¥Pa8  engaged  in 
some  political  and  revoludonary  enterprise  of 
a  dangerous  nature,  and  had  got  men  who 
would  Jtand  by  and  oo-operate  with  him  ift 


90dl 


Jhf  High  Trtaam. 


A.  D.  1820. 


roio 


his  endeaTOOrs  tcr  dmy  it  into  efifect  ?  And 
80  it  was  eTidenUy  understood  by  Monament. 

It  is'impotisible  not  to  call  to  one's  recoUfto* 
tion  in  this  inquiry,  the  former  station  in  life 
of  the  prisoner  Thistlewood.  He  has  been  an 
officer,  I  believe,  in  his  majesty's  service ;  he 
has  moved  in  the  sitnation  and  rank  of  a  gen- 
tleman ;  and  yet  you  find  him  with  his  previous 
habits  descending  so  low  as  to  become  the 
intimate  companion  and  associate  of  journey- 
men mechanics,  and  of  others  in  the  humblest 
condition  of  society,  associating  with  them 
daily,  holding  considtations  with  them  in  a 
small  unfurnished  back-room,  ia  an  obscure 
court,  inhabited  by  the  most  obscure  indivi- 
duals. Is  there  not  some  extraordinary  mys« 
tery  in  this  association?  Would  he  have 
stooped  to  this  indignity,  unless  he  had  had 
some  great  object  in  view,  which  he  was  de- 
sirous of  accomplishing,  and  which  he  could 
x>nly  accomplish  by  their  means  \  Is  not  this 
conduct  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  a  circum- 
stance that  must  weigh  greatly  in  your  deliber- 
ations upon  this  case,  and  the  nature  of  the 
enterprise  in  which  he  was  engaged  ? 

But  to  return  to  the  evidence  of  Monument. 
He  proceeds  to  Cat(^street,  and  upon  his 
arrival  there  the  whole  plan  is  developed  to 
him.  But  it  is  suggested  by  the  counsel  for 
the  prisoner,  that  as  far  as  relates  to  Cato- 
street,  there  is  some  discrepancy  between  the 
evidence  of  Adams  and  Monument  Tlie 
former  stated  the  number  in  the  room  to  be 
twenty;  and  when  Monument  was  there 
Thistlewood  observed,  that  the  number  was 
twenty-five.  But  how  does  this  upon  a  little 
inquiry  turn  out?  When  Adams  arrived, 
all  the  party  had  not  assembled;  Tidd  and 
Monument,  and  probably  some  others,  came 
in  afterwards ;  and  it  is  further  to  be  observed, 
that  the  men  were  not  actually  counted,  there 
being  nothing  but  the  mere  declaration  of 
Thistlewood  that  they  amounted  to  twenty-five. 
These  then  are  the  supposed  contradictions, 
which,' for  want  of  better  matter,  are  relied 
upon  for  the  purpose  of  endeavouring  to  per- 
suade you  that  the  evidence  of  Adams,  or 
Monument,  or  of  both  of  them,  is  not  worthy 
of  credit 

Some  other  differences  of  a  trivial  nature 
have  also 'been  insisted  upon,  between  the 
account  given  by  Adams  and  the  statement  of 
the  officers,  as  to  what  passed  after  the  latter 
had  arrived  at  the  stable.  But  can  you  sup- 
pose for  a  mpment,  from  this  circumstance, 
that  Adams  was  not  present  at  that  meeting? 
Who  does  not  know,  that  in  a  scene  of  conra- 
slon  of  this  description,  when  the  mind  is  agi- 
tated, and  every  thing  is  in  a  state  of  disorder 
and  tumult,  the  account  given  -by  those  who 
are  present^  and  eye-witnesses  of  the  foots, 
will  alwavs  be  at  variance  in  some  particulars 
from  each  other?  One  man  recollects  one 
circumstance,  and  another  person  will  observe 
and  recollect  another;  and  it  is  a  common 
obaervation  in  courts  of  justice, — and  I  refer 
to  it,  becliase  obsorvations  would  not  be  re« 


peated  until  they  become  trite  and  hacknied, 
unldss  they  were  founded  in  truth,— that  when 
two  men  describe  the  same  transaction,  if 
they  describe  it  preciselv  in  the  same  way,  it 
leads  to  a  suspicion  of  ^their  veracity,  and  of 
previous  arrangement  and  concert;  for  it  is 
inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  the  human 
mind,  that  they  should,  in  a  confused  and 
complicated  transaction,  agree  in  all  the  minute 
particulars  of  their  story.  And  I  therefore 
repeat,  that  not  the  slightest  inference  can  be 
raised  in  favour  of  the  prisoner  from  any  sup- 
posed difference  between  the  statement  of  the 
officers  and  that  of  Adams,  as  to  what  took 
place  at  the  moment  of  ascending  the  ladder. 
Ruthven,  the  first  who  mounted  the  ladder, 
did  not  hear  any  person  call  out  from  bel6w ; 
Adams,  on  the  contrary,  said,  somebody  called 
out,  ^'  Look  above  there,''  as  the  officers  ap- 
proached ;  Ruth?en  did  not  remember  this, 
nor  Ellis — ^therefore  my  learned  friend  says^ 
there  is  some  contradiction,  and  you  ought  not 
to  believe  that  Adams  was  present.  But  yon 
will  recollect,  that  Westcoatt  said  he  heard 
these  expressions  used;  and  I  mention  this 
circumstance  to  confirm  ray  position,  and  to 
show,  that  honest  men,  acting  with  the  best 
possible  intentions,  when  giving  an  account  of 
the  same  transaction,  will  often,  in  many  par- 
ticulars, differ  from  each  other.  Ruthven  tells 
you  that  he  called  out,  '^  Seize  their  arms,  we 
are  officers  I"  now  whether  he  said  any  tiling 
about  a  warrant  or  not,  I  will  not  take  upon 
myself  to  assert;  but  another  officer  says,  the 
word  warrant  was  used.  Really,  when  such 
circumstances  are  relied  on  by  my  learned 
friend,  you  must,  out  of  respect  to  his  judg- 
ment and  talents,  feel  that  he  is  under  the 
necessity  of  resorting  to  them,  and  of  catching 
even  at  straws,  because  he  has  nothing  more 
substantial  upon  which  to  rest  his  defence. 

I  beg  leave  now  to  advert  to  a  witness  of 
considerable  importance  in  this  case,  I  mean 
Dwyer.  Some  attempt  has  been  made  to  im- 
peach his  credit  Dwyer  told  you,  he  had 
lived  thirteen  years  with  the  same  roaster,  Mr. 
Smith.  That  account  is  not  contradicted.  A 
person  of  whom  you  knew  nothing,  of  whose 
credit  you  have  no  means  of  judging,  comes 
here  for  the  purpose  of  telling  you,  that  the 
conduct  of  Dwyer,  upon  some  former  occasion, 
about  two  months  ago,  was  infamous;  and 
that  therefore  he  would  not  believe  him  upon 
his  oath.  Dwyer  denies  the  fact  alleged 
against  him.  Who  is  this  witness  that  pre- 
sents himself  before  you  ?  A  labouring  me- 
chanic: we  know  nothing  further  of  him. 
Can  any  reason  be  assigned,  why  jrou  should 
place  more  reliance  upon  his  testimony  than 
on  Dwyer  hiniself,  who  has  lived  and  worked 
for  thirteen  years  with  the  same  master.  But 
observe  the  conduct  of  this  witness,  who  comes 
to  impeach  the  credit  of  another.  He  tells 
you  that  a  base  and  infamous  proposition  was 
made  to  him  by  Dwyer,  and  he  acceded  to  it. 
It  is  true,  that  according  to  his  own  statement 
he  afterwords  withdrew,  but  he  stiilcontinued 


907] 


1  GEORO£  IV. 


TrM  of  Arthur  TkMemoad 


[908 


endeafoaring  to  explain  these  ciicomstaiioes, 
— ^the  daughter  of  Tidd»  who,  of  coune,  would 
be  disposed  to  give  the  most  faToorable  ex- 
planation for  her  father.  But  what  is  the 
amount  of  her  evidence  f  She  tells  you  that 
the  trunk  containing  the  ball  cartridges  had 
been  carried  to  the  apartment^  three  or  four 
days  before  the  23rd  or  February.  It  had  been 
decided,  that  the  project  should  be  carried  into 
effect  on  the  Wednesday ;  and  the  box,  widi 
the  cartridges,  Vas  evidently  sent  to  the  d^pdt 
with  that  view.  It  remained  there  ready  for  use 
diiriug  the  whole  time,  and  was  left  untouched 
in  consequence  of  the  failure  of  the  plan,  till 
the  officer  Taunton  took  it  into  his  pMsession. 
But  it  is  said  by  the  witness,  that  some  person 
took  away  a  part  of  the  arms  on  the  23ra,  and 
returned  them  on  the  following  morning.  If 
this  be  true,  it  corresponds  exactly  with  the 
facts  of  the  case.  When  the  prisoners  deteri- 
mined  to  cany  their  enterprise  into  effect  on 
the  Wednesday,  of  course  the  persons  engaged 
in  it  armed  themselves  from  the  magaxine  at 
Tidd's,  and  after  the  attempt  had  been  defeated, 
they  were  then  naturally  carried  l)ack  to  the 
place  from  whence  they  had  been  taken.  The 
evidence  of  this  voung  woman  then,  so  far 
from  impeaching  the  case  on  the  part  of  the 
prosecution,  tends  most  directly  and  distinctly 
to  confirm  it.  Her  account  coincides  with  the 
particulars  stated  by  Adams,  and  proves  most 
dearly  that  the  story  he  has  told  is,  in  these 
particulars,  correct. 

I  hope  I  am  not  fatiguing  ^our  patience  with 
this  detail ;  but  when  the  hfe  of  a  man  is  at 
stake,  I  am  sure  you  will  readily  devote  to  me 
all  that  attention  which  may  be  necMsaij  to 
the  investigation  of  the  truth.  You  will,  I  am 
persuaded,  submit  without  reluctance  to  the 
sacrifice,  from  a  sense  of  the  importance  of 
that  duty  which  is  cast  upon  you :  I  beg  then 
to  request  your  attention  to  another  striking 
circumstance.  You  will  recollect,  that  some 
conversation  took  place  in  the  room  with  re- 
spect to  a  commumcation  made  by  Hobbs,  the 
landlord  of  the  White-hart  public-house. 
Adams  has  stated  to  jou,  that  in  consequence 
of  that  communication  much  agitation  pre- 
vailed in  the  meeting,  and  that  Brunt  proposed 
a  particular  measure  of  precaution,  to  which  I 
shall  presently  advert.  I  beg  leave  previously, 
however,  to  observe,  that  if  the  fact  as  to  the 
communication  made  by  Hobbs  were  untrue, 
Hobbs  himself  might  have  been  called  by  the 
prisoner  for  the  purpose  of  contradicting  the 
testimony  of  Adams.  There  was  ample  time 
to  have  obtained  his  attendance;  a  whole  day 
elapsed  after  Adams  had  been  examined. 
Hoobs  is  easily  accessible,  and  might  have 
been  called ;  but  he  does  not  make  his  ap- 
pearance. Can  yon  therefore  doubt  the  truth 
of  this  part  of  the  evidence  of  Adams ;  and 
that  it  is  as  correct  as  his  statement  of  tibie 
other  focts  to  which  I  have  called  your  atten- 
tion ?  But  to  return  to  the  course  of  observ»> 
tion  which  I  was  pursuing : — In  consequence 
of  the  apprehension  .and  alann  which  seemed 


to  prevail  in  the  meeting,  Brunt  proposed,  by 
way  of  security,  to  set  a  watch  upon  lord  Har- 
rowby*s  house.  This  proposition  originated 
with  Brunt ;  it  was  immediately  adopted,  and 
Davidson  with  another  person  was  directed  to 
commence  the  watch  on  Tuesday  evening,  at 
six  o'clock ;  they  were  to  be  relieved  at  nine 
by  two  others  who  were  to  continue  at  their 
station  till  twelve.  The  whole  of  this  arrange- 
ment was  purely  accidental :  observe,  then,  in 
how  ^traordinaiy  a  manner  this  part  of  the 
narrative  of  Adams  is  confirmed.  We  called 
the  watchman,  who  said,  '*  I  observed  some 
persons  lurking  about  the  square  that  evening, 
and  among  them  a  black  man,  or  man  of 
colour,  who  attracted  m^  particular  attention." 
But  the  confirmation  is  still  more  striking. 
Adams  has  told  you  that  he  and  Brunt  relieved 
Davidson  and  his  companion,  and  that  they 
went  into  apublic-house,  at  the  comer  of  the 
Mews  in  Charles-street,  where  a  young  man 
challenged  Brunt  to  play  at  dominos.  En- 
quiry was  made  in  the  neighbourhood,  for  the 
purpose  of  ascertaining  l^e  truth  of  this  state- 
ment, and  it  turned  out  to  be  perfectly  conect. 
Gillan,  the  witness  whom  you  have  heard,  was 
the  person  to  whom  Adams  alluded. '  He  re- 
collected the  person  of  Brunt,  and  confirmed, 
in  every  particular,  the  testimony  of  Adams. 
In  every  step  that  we  take,  you  perceive  in 
.how  remarkable  a  manner  his  evidence  corres- 
ponds with  the  accounts  given  from  quarters 
where  no  suspicion  can  by  possibility  attach. 

Another  witness,  to  whose  evidence  I  beg 
leave  to  request  your  particular  attention  is 
Monument  He  is  undoubtedly,  to  a  consider- 
able extentj  implicated  in  the  guilt  of  the  pri- 
soners. It  is  supposed,  or  suggested,  by  my 
learned  friend,  that  the  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers  was  to  be  effected  solely 
wiUi  a  view  to  plunder.  Was  it  so  ?  Attend 
to  the  language  of  Thistlewood  upon  his  first 
visit  to  Monument:  <^ Great  events,''  he  ob- 
serves, '^  are  at  hand.  The  people  are  every 
where  anxious  for  a  change.  1  have  been 
deceived,''  he  proceeds  to  say,  "  by  many  per- 
sons, but  I  have  now  got  some  men  wfao  will 
stand  by  me."  Is  it  possible  to  misunderstand 
this  language  ?  What  was  the  change  that  he 
contemplated  ?  What  are  the  great  events  to 
which  he  referred  ?  Murdering  the  ministers 
for  the  purpose  of  plundering  Loudon !  Is  it 
possible  to  suppose  that  this  could  have  been 
the  design,  or  that  any  man  could  have  enter- 
tained a  thought  of  commencing  a  system  of 
plunder,  by  so  extraordinary  and  atrocious  an 
enterprise  ?  In  what  way  would  the  murder 
of  his  majesty's  ministers  have  facilitated  .this 
object?  When  he  says,  ^^  great  events  are  at 
hand — the  people  are  every  where  anxious  for 
a  change — I  have  been  deceived  by  many  peo- 
ple, but  I  have  now  got  some  men  who  will 
stand  by  me  ;"  what  could  he  possibly  be  un-> 
derstood  to  mean,  but  that  he  was  engaged  in 
some  political  and  revolutionary  enterprise  of 
a  dangerous  nature,  and  had  got  men  who 
wodd  stand  by  and  oo-operaie  with  him  ia- 


9091 


Jbr  High  Treason. 


A.  t).  1820. 


[910 


his  endesTonrs  tcrckrryit  into  effect?  And 
80  it  was  eridently  understood  by  Monament. 

It  is'impottsiblenot  to  call  to  one's  recollect 
tion  in  this  inquiry,  the  former  station  in  life 
of  the  prisoner  Thistlewood.  He  has  been  an 
oflicer,  I  believe,  in  his  majesty's  service ;  he 
has  moved  in  the  situation  and  rank  of  a  gen- 
tleman ;  and  yet  you  find  him  with  his  previous 
habits  descending  so  low  as  to  become  the 
intimate  companion  and  associate  of  journey- 
men mechanics,  and  of  others  in  the  humblest 
condition  of  society,  associating  with  them 
daily,  holding  consultations  with  them  in  a 
small  unfurnished  back-room,  ia  an  obscure 
court,  inhabited  by  the  most  obteure  indivi- 
duals. Is  there  not  some  extraordinary  mys- 
tery in  this  association?  Would  he  have 
stooped  to  this  indignity,  unless  he  had  had 
some  great  object  in  view,  which  he  was  de- 
sirous of  accomplishing,  and  which  he  could 
t>nly  accomplish  by  their  means  ?  Is  not  this 
conduct  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  a  circum- 
stance that  must  weigh  greatly  in  your  deliber- 
ations upon  this  case,  and  the  nature  of  the 
enterprise  in  which  he  was  engaged  f 

But  to  return  to  the  evidence  of  Monument. 
He  proceeds  to  Cato-street,  and  upon  his 
arrival  there  the  whole  plan  is  developed  to 
him.  But  it  is  suggested  by  the  counsel  for 
the  prisoner,  that  as  far  as  relates  to  Cato- 
street,  there  is  some  discrepancy  between  the 
evidence  of  Adams  and  Monument  Tlie 
former  stated  the  number  in  the  room  to  be 
twenty;  and  when  Monument  was  there 
Thistlewood  observed,  that  the  number  was 
twenty-five.  But  how  does  this  upon  a  little 
inquiry  turn  outP  When  Adams  arrived, 
all  the  party  had  not  assembled;  Tidd  and 
Monument,  and  probably  some  others,  came 
in  afterwards ;  and  it  is  further  to  be  observedy 
that  the  men  were  not  actually  counted,  there 
being  nothing  but  the  mere  declaration  of 
Thistlewood  that  they  amounted  to  twenty-five. 
These  then  are  the  supposed  contradictions, 
iidiich,-  for  want  of  better  matter,  are  relied 
upon  for  the  purpose  of  endeavouring  to  per- 
suade you  that  the  evidence  of  Adams,  or 
Monument,  or  of  both  of  them,  is  not  worthy 
of  credit. 

Some  other  differences  of  a  trivial  nature 
have  also 'been  insisted  upon,  between  the 
account  -given  by  Adams  add  the  statement  of 
the  oflBoers,  as  to  what  passed  after  the  latter 
had  arrived  at  the  stable.  But  can  you  sup- 
pose for  a  moment,  from  this  circumstance^ 
diat  Adams  was  not  present  at  that  meetinff  ? 
Who  does  not  know,  that  in  a  scene  of  contu- 
sion of  this  description,  when  the  mind  is  agi- 
tated, and  every  thing  is  in  a  state  of  disorder 
and  tumult,  the  account  given  by  those  who 
are  present^  and  eye-witnesses  of  the  facts, 
will  alwavs  be  at  variance  in  some  particulars 
from  each  other?  One  man  recollects  one 
circumstance,  and  another  person  will  observe 
and  recollect  another;  and  it  is  a  common 
obeervation  in  courts  of  justice, — and  I  refer 
to  it,  becliuse  obvamttioos  would  not  be 


peated  until  they  become  trite  and  hacknied, 
unless  they  were  founded  in  truth,—- that  when 
two  men  describe  the  same  transaction,  if 
they  describe  it  precisely  in  the  same  way,  it 
leads  to  a  suspicion  of  .their  veracity,  and  of 
previous  arrangement  and  concert;  for  it  is 
inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  the  human 
mind,  that  they  should,  in  a  confiised  and 
complicated  transaction,  agree  in  all  the  minute 
particulars  of  their  story.  And  I  therefore 
repeat,  that  not  the  slightest  inference  can  be 
raised  in  favour  of  the  prisoner  from  any  sup- 
posed difference  between  the  statement  of  the 
oflScers  and  that  of  Adams,  as  to  what  took 
place  at  the  moment  of  ascending  the!  ladder. 
Ruthven,  the  first  who  mounted  the  ladder, 
did  not  hear  any  person  call  out  from  bel6w  ; 
Adams,  on  the  contrary,  said,  somebody  called 
out,  "  Look  above  there,''  as  the  officers  ap- 
proached ;  Ruthven  did  not  remember  this, 
nor  Ellis — ^therefore  my  learned  friend  says, 
there  is  some  contradiction,  and  you  ought  not 
to  believe  that  Adams  was  present.  But  you 
will  recoUect,  that  Westcoatt  said  he  helird 
these  expressions  used;  and  I  mention  this 
circumstance  to  confirm  ray  position,  and  to 
show,  that  honest  men,  acting  with  the  best 
possible  intentions,  when  giving  an  account  of 
the  same  transaction,  will  often,  in  many  par- 
ticulars, differ  from  each  other.  Ruthven  tells 
you  that  he  called  out,  '*  Seize  their  arms,  we 
are  officers  !*'  now  whether  he  said  any  thing 
about  a  warrant  or  not,  I  will  not  take  upon 
myself  to  assert;  but  another  officer  says,  the 
word  warrant  was  used.  Really,  when  such 
circumstances  are  relied  on  by  my  learned 
friend,  you  must,  out  of  respect  to  his  judg- 
ment and  talents,  feel  that  he  is  under  the 
necessity  of  resorting  to  them,  and  of  catching 
even  at  straws,  because  he  has  nothing  more 
substantial  upon  wliich  to  rest  his  defence. 

I  beg  leave  now  to  advert  to  a  witness  of 
considerable  importance  in  this  case,  I  mean 
Bwyer.  Some  attempt  has  been  made  to  im^ 
peach  his  credit.  I)wyer  told  you,  he  had 
lived  thirteen  years  with  the  same  roaster,  Mr. 
Smith.  That  account  is  not  contradicted.  A 
person  of  whom  you  knew  nothing,  of  whose 
credit  you  have  no  means  of  judging,  comes 
here  for  the  purpose  of  telling  you,  that  the 
conduct  of  Dwyer,  upon  some  former  occasion, 
about  two  months  ago,  was  infamous;  and 
that  therefore  he  would  not  believe  him  upon 
his  oath.  Dwyer  denies  the  fact  alleged 
against  him.  Who  is  thifl  witness  that  pre- 
sents himself  before  you  ?  A  labouring  me- 
chanic: we  know  nothing  further  of  him. 
Can  any  reason  be  assigned,  why  jrou  should 
place  more  reliance  upon  his  testimony  than 
on  Dwyer  himself,  who  has  lived  and  worked 
for  thirteen  years  with  the  same  master.  But 
observe  the  conduct  of  this  witness,  who  comes 
to  impeach  the  credit  of  another.  He  tells 
you  that  a  base  and  infamous  proposition  was 
made  to  him  by  Dwyer,  and  he  acceded  to  it. 
It  is  true,  that  according  to  his  own  statement 
he  aftertnvds  withdrew,  but  he  still  continued 


011] 


1  GBOaOE  IV. 


TiidtfAHhw  TMOkmood 


ma 


to  ha^  cttupaoj  and  RaBonatr  '«ith  Dw^ec 
Such  is  the  account  'which  the  witness  gtvm 
of  hij  own  duiracter  and  conduct  Wouid  aa 
honest  man,  eatitled  to  credit  in  a  court  of 
Ittstice,  have  acted  as  he  describes  himself  to 
bave  acted  upon  this  occasion?  and  when  a 
man  'thus  stigmatizes  himself  what  seliance 
can  yoa  place  on  his  testimony,  when  lie  is 
called  for  the  puipose  of  UaCkenug  the  cha- 
ncter  of  another?  He  tells  you  furthei^  -that 
bt  made  no  chaige  before «  magistrate,  huA 
continued  to  associate  with  this  indivJdiul  a^ 
befoce.  But  there  is  another  important  &ct, 
which  speaks  for  itselC^  -and  cannot  deceive 
you,  and  which  is  directly  at  raziance  with  the 
aceouat  given  by  this  witness.  He  says, 
Dwyer  was  very  flush  of  money ;  he  «as  throw- 
iqg  about  iiis  notes ;  and  that  circumstance  led 
to  the  x»c|>osition  to  which  I  have  adverted. 
So  fan  uom  this  being  the  casc^  ^ou  remember 
tfhat  Dwyer  is  a  marned  man,  with  a  ftymily  df 
^ihjree  children,  and  was  ob%ed  to  apply  for 
assistanre  lo  Ibe  parish  of  Jdary4e4>one,  and 
thsU  thc^  put  him  to  work  at  the  ■aili  where 
they  employ  persons  in  that  situation.  This 
was  at  the  vsary  pedod  when  the  witness  sm 
be  was  so  tfiush  of  money,  about  two  months 
m§g9.  Such  is  the  natuie  and  ihe  value  of  the 
attack  that  bas  been  made  i^pon  the  testimony 
i]f  Dwyer. 

J9ow  let  us  coandec  what  is  the  atoiy  which 
Dwyer  .xelates,  who  must,  I  am  pecsaaded^ 
notwithstanding  the  Attempt  made  by  the*other 
side,  atandin  ivour  sudisment  as  an  uninmeacb- 
able  ^dtness.  He  tells  you  iXaiadaon  £ame  to 
him,  and  said  ^'  that  be  bad  some  proposition 
to  communicifte^  that  it  must  be  communicated 
OM  the  Tuesday  evening,  but  that  he  could  not 
can,  heraBM  be  was  going  to  ata&d  aentryT' 
What  a  xenarkable  oiicumatance  is  tbii^  comb- 
ing out  too  by  mere  accident.  Where  was 
Davidson  goings?  He  was  going  to  wabch  at 
lord  Hacrowl^s  on  4be  l^iesdav,  of  which 
Dwyer  could  ^ve  Jiiad  *no  knowledge.  But  to 
pussue  the  ACoouBt^vfin  by  Dwyer.;  beitays 
that  Harrison  in  4»Bse|t«ence  -of  this  interview 
oalleft  imon  bio^  and  on  the  Wednesday  mouv- 
iag  for  tne  first  time  introduced  him  to  Poz^ 
court.  While  be  was  there  jrome  of  the  other 
parties  came  in,  JVhisllewood  among  ibe  rest, 
and  the  parucnlars  of  4his  scheme  were  jon- 
lolded  to  him*  He  was  requested  to  Join  in 
the  enterprise.  He  wu  supposed  io  ^possess 
eonsiderable  influence  vover  many  of  bux^un- 
tiymen  -living  in  Qee*8*conft  And  .the  neigh- 
bourhood of  that  plaAO.  I^^y  «ndeavouted» 
theBefore,  tooress bim,ii&to  their  aerrice^ they 
stood  in  neediof  assistanoe,  and  jeemed  to  have 
thoqght  that  at  this  late  4i(hi^  wiben.tbe  acheme 
was  jopt  for  asecutioi^  Jthen  was  oot  .much 
risk  in. making  anchA'CommunicatioBu  JUaU 
events,  when  men  att  embajdud  in  demerate 
designs  of  (hisnatuEe,  something  must  lie  put 
to  bazaid,  something  'oaai  be  trusted  4x>  their 
agents  and  instiuments.;  th^  must  put  them- 
selves in  some  degree  in  the  .power  of  othec^ 
■ad  sely  upoa  their  genentoi^  or, fidelity  isai 


this  is  genemlly  done  in  the  last  atage  of  pn6p> 
paratioi^  fom  a  hope  that  before  ^.any  thinff 
can  escape  or  be  revealed*  the  objeet  itseff 
may  be  accomplished.  Tbe  outline  of  ihm 
plai^  therefore,  precisely  as  stated  by  Adams 
u  his  evidence,  was  communicated  to  Dwyex. 
He  tells  you,  that  the  ministers  fi^ere  to  ha 


assassinated  by  one  paJty,  another  party 
to  Aet  Bre  to  the  metropolis  at  various  potal^ 
and  a  third  body  was  to  take  possession  of  the 
artUlery .  These  particulaw  were  stated  to  bLn 
by  Harrison  and  the  other  persons  assembled 
in  Pox-court.  Mark  the  other  cifcumstaaces 
of  the  case.  Does  not  the  preparation  aoooid 
with  this  ?  Do  not  the  mateiials  that  were  at 
that  interview  exhibited  to  him,  eii^pport  Ibe 
rest  of  the  atatement  ?  For  what  purpose  were 
&e^ie-balls  prepared?  For  what  purpose  were 
the  band-grenaaes  provided.?  But  above  all^ 
lor  what  puipose  were  ihe  rflannel  bt^gs  of  gun- 
powder  to  be  ttsed  P  evidently  ibr  the  artiUeiy, 
tor  which  they  were  intended  as  cartridges* 
We  have  beard  muchicom  the  counsel  for  the 
psisoner  about  the  wildoess  and  extrax^gaooe 
of  this  scheme;  And  J  4o think  ii  wasjuoat 
vrild,  extnuri^an^  and  jviaionary.  But  Assume 
only  jone  fact,  one  4:ipinion  that  prevailed  iw 
the  mind  of  the  prisonei^iAAd  it<ceases  at  once 
to  >have  that  cbaraotec  The  prisoner  bed  gq&- 
ceived  that  the  great  mass4)f  ibe  peqple  of  this 
country.  And  particularly  «f  the  metropolii^ 
weie  aisafiected  to  Ibe  government  j  tbtt  ibey 
were  tired  of  the  constitution,  and  Af  that  Ay»> 
tem  of  laws  under  whidi  the  nation  bad  ae 
loEig  floniished;  thattbe  g>ecyple,  to  useliis  pwa 
langug^^  were  eveiy  v^ve  anxious  for  a 
change;;  and  that  th^  would  be  ready  at  twee 
to  joio  m  iwertuming  the  coastitutioiv  And 
establishing  a  new  scheme  orgovemment.  He 
hoped»  ihereforci,  thai  by  sti^ng  e  gmat  and 
stuofting  blov^y  in  the  aasaasination  <if  Jtbe 
ministers  of  the  Crowq,  by  causing  fires  to  te 
lighted  in  diflerent  fATts  of  the  metcc^list  And 
creatii^  that  confusion  and  terror  wbiob  wonld 
necessarily  result  from  these  AXtraordinaqr 
events  every  tie  would  he  ioo«ened,iobediAaoe 
and  order  would  ceas<^,  the.i^irit  of  hatred  (and 
disa&ction  to  the  government  would  >eveqr 
where  display  itself,  and  that  the  whole  p^yaical 
fome  of  -tne  metropolis  migiNt  ibe  brought  ieto 
action,  and  empkiyed  to  auhArert  the  iews  and 
oonatitution  of  the  empire.  This  was  4be 
nature  and  character  of  the  design^;  not  Ae  wild 
and  visionaiy  as  my  learned  .friend  .auppnw^ 
if  the  prisoner  was^cosrect  intbe  .estimate arbicb 
he  baa  formed  of  the  qpinions  .and  foeliap  Af 
thegreat  b^lk  of  ,the  people.  But  int&a  i 
trust  andimowthat  hewAsmJatakenj  for  whal^ 
ererdiacontent  and  jdisaatisfJMrtion  miyrjprevaU 
from  teamorary  And  amdental  eaiwM^  wbat* 
everm^lnethe  vioIenoD'Of  pasty  feeUogaaad 
party  Animosity,  I  never  «an  b^vetbat  Ae 
people  Af  this  fymAtnr  Are  not  sinoendy  And 
warmly  attached  to  the  oonatitution  oTthek 
ibseiathera^  aiid  to  that  Admirable  .and  equal 
^tem  of  .la.w;^  %  whigb.thair.  pypenfe  j£ietc 
1ms,  Aad^hMiiB  MB  «P  wigHamlyiwDiected, 


9id} 


Jmr  Hi^  7Wato>i< 


A.  D.  1820. 


r9i^ 


Had  ftn  eiplonoii  taken  pkce^  And  manf  per* 
•onty  which  is  by  no  mean*  impossible,  joined 
in  it^  destruction  and  devastauon  to  a  great 
extent  might  certainly  bare  been  produced ; 
but  I  never  can  believe  that  it  would  have  been 
attended  with  any  real  danger  to  this  coustitu- 
Iton  and  empire.  But  such  was  not  the  opinion 
that  prevailed  in  the  mind  of  the  prisoner ;  far 
other  were  his  notions ;  he  considered  that  the 
great  mass  of  the  people  was  tainted  with  re- 
Tolntionary  principles,  and  that  if  the  functions 
of  government  could  but  for  a  moment  be  sus- 
pended, the  whole  of  their  power  would  be 
Draught  into  action,  and  the  destruetion  of  the 
present  system  would  be  accomplished.    I  do 
aot,  therefore,  feel  the  weight  of  that  part  of 
my  learned  friend's  argument,  in  which  he 
woold  lead  you  to  believe,  that  the  plan  could 
not  have  been  entertained  by  the  prisoner,  be- 
eaiise  it  was  wild  and  visionary :  this  would  be 
to  belie  all  history,  and  to  betray  a  deplorable 
ignorance  of  the  human  character,  and  of  the 
heart  and  mind  of  man.    My  learned  friend 
has  himself  recalled  to  your  recollection  an 
inetance,  not  of  a  person  comparatively  in  a 
humble  station  of  life,  but  of  an  individual  of 
bigh  rank,  of  great  fortune,  of  considerable 
talent  and  experience  in  the  affairs  of  the 
world,  the  earl  of  Essex,  engaging  in  a  scheme 
maeh  more  extravagant,  much  more  visionary 
and  frantic,  than  that  imputed  to  the  prisoner 
at  the  bar ;  and  for  which  his  life  was  sacrificed 
to  the  violated  laws  of  his  country.    Nay,  look- 
ing around  at  what  is  now  passing  before  us 
in  other  parts  of  this  empire,  I  would  ask, 
whether  the  schemes  entertained  and  pursued 
by  those  to  whom  I  am  alluding,  are  not  to 
tiie  full  as  wild  and  visionary  as  fiiose  ascribed 
to  the  prisoner  and  his  associates.    And  within 
our  own  time  I  remember  an  unhappy  person 
standing  in  the  same  situation  as  the  prisoner 
at  the  bar^  an  officer  of  high  rank  in  his  ma- 
jesty's service,   of  great  and    distinguished 
bravery,  of  adcnowledged  talent  and  experi- 
ence,— ^I  allnde  to  colonel  Despard*— charged 
%ridi  a  traasonaUe  conspiracy,  which,  in  its 
Mject  and  the  means  hj  which  it  was  to  be 
•oeomplished,  was  infinitdy  more  wild,  ez- 
timvaganty   and   frantic^   than  the   atrocious 
tdieme  which  you  aje  now  considering :  and 
yet  no  doubt  has  ever  bean  entertained  by  any 
reasonable  man  of  the  truth  of  that  plot,  or  of 
the  propriety  and  justice  of  the  vmict  pro- 
nooncea  against  him.    And,  therefore,  without 
oontrasting  the  absurdity  of  my  learned  friend's 
mppoeition,  that  this  was  a  scheme  of  assassi- 
nation merely  with  a  view  to  plunder,— -with- 
out oontrastinjg  thia  supposition  with  the  revo- 
kitionary  project  spoken  to  by  the  witnesses, 
tnd  which  is  supposed  to  be  so  wild  and  irra- 
tional,—*bot  taking  the  question  plainly  and 
•iniply,  the  extravagance  of  the  project  affords 
no  reasonable  argument  against  tne  guilt  of  the 
prisoner.    The  only  question  will  be,  has  the 
fret  been  proved  ?  is  the  case  established  in 

•  7  How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  p.  S45. 

VOL.  xxxm. 


evidence?  does  the  proof  satisfy  your  minds, 
not  whether  the  project  itself  was  absurd  and 
senseless,  not  whether  it  was  such  a  scheme  a» 
reasonable  men  would  have  entertained,  but 
whether  it  was  in  reality  formed  ? 

I  have  been  insensibly  led  from  the  obser-^ 
vations  I  was  making  on  the  testimony  of 
\  Dwyer.  Immediately  aftei  the  communication 
I  was  made  to  him,  he  left  the  house ;  this  waa 
about  one  o'clock.  He  teUs  you  he  was  glad 
I  to  get  away ;  while  he  was  deliberating  witb 
himself  what  course  he  should  pursue,  he  ac-* 
cidentally  met  major  James,  and  told  him  all 
that  had  passed.  Major  James  sent  him  to 
the  Secretary  of  State.  In  all  this  he  might 
have  been  contradicted,  if  what  he  has  stated 
was  untrue ;  for  major  James  was  present,  and 
might  have  been  called  on  the  part  of  the  pri- 
soner. What  is  there  then  to  lead  you  to 
doubt  the  evidence  of  Dwyer  P  to  lead  you  to 
believe  that  he  is  a  man  capable  of  coming 
into  court  and,  disregarding  the  sacred  obliga- 
tion of  his  oath,  and  ever^  other  feeKng  that 
sways  the  heart  of  man,  to  invent  and  fabricate 
a  story,  which  is  to  consign  to  an  ignominious 
death,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  and  his  asso- 
ciates. Before  you  can  come  to  this  conclu- 
sion, you  must,  without  evidence,  believe  him 
the  most  base,  in&mous,  and  merciless  of 
mankind. 

Then,  when  my  learned  friend  says,  thi» 
case  rests  so  entirely  on  the  testimony  of 
Adams,  that  if  you  get  rid  of  that,  you  have 
nothing  else  upon  which  to  come  to  the  con- 
clusion of  guilt  against  the  prisoner,  he  has 
either  forgotten,  or  intentionally  passed  over, 
the  testimony  of  Dwyer,  and  which  confirms 
in  the  strongest  manner  the  leading  particulars 
of  the  plan,  as  communicated  by  Adams. 

It  is  further  objected,  that  none  of  these 
witnesses  were  together,  they  were  never  pre- 
sent at  the  same  time-  I  thank  my  learned 
friend  for  the  observation  :— if  they  were  not 
present  at  the  same  time,  if  they  had  no  con-i 
nexion  with  each  other ; — if  Adams  and  Dwyer 
were  present  at  different  periods,  when  differ- 
ent communications  were  made ; — ^the  corres- 
pondence between  their  evidence  is  more  re- 
markable, and  the  more  convincing.  It  shewa 
there  is  no  concert  between  them.  They  tell 
that  of  which  they  were  themselves  witnesses ; 
and  what  passed  at  one  period  was  in  exact 
unison  and  correspondence  with  what  took 
place  at  another. 

There  is  another  witness,  a  person  of  the 
name  of  Hiden,  whom  my  learned  friends  on 
the  other  side  have  not  attempted  in  the 
slightest  degree  to  impeach,  either  by  evidence 
or  by  cross-examination,  and  whose  conduct 
bas  throughout  been  perfectly  correct.  The 
same  communication  was  made  to  Hiden  which 
was  afterwards  made  to  Dwyer.  The  precise  ' 
day  of  the  communication  he  did  not  recollect. 
He  was  struck  with  horror  at  the  proposal,  and 
commnnicated  it  to  lord  Harrowby.  So  anx-^ 
ious  was  he  to  give  the  information,  that  he 
intercepted  lord  Harrowby  as  .he  was  coming 

3N 


915]         1  GEORGE  IV. 


out  of  the  9mkf  and  delmr«d  to  him  a  Ml0r 
iddretsed  to  lord  Caitlereagh,  oontainiog  th* 
kitelligenee  which  he-had  received.  My  leern* 
ed  friend  wis  desiroiw  to  throw  this  hack  to  a 
distant  period.  The  witnen  did  not  recollect 
the  pieciee  day,  whether  it  was  one^  or  two, 
or  three  days,  before  the  iotended  meeting; 
he  had  not  taken  pains  to  prepare  his  endence 
for  the  occaoon.  Lord  lurrowby  is  called ; 
he  tells  you  it  was  on  the  Tuesday,  about  two 
•'dock,  some  hoars  after  Hie  andr  had  been 
decided  npon  in  Fox-court,  in  consequence  of 
Ate  jNodttction  of  the  aew8pq>er. 

Now  that  I  have  meationM  the  newanaper^ 
I  must  obserre,  that  mv  learned  friend  snjH 
nosed  this  account  of  the  intended  dinner  to 
be  all  a  fabrication;  that  Edwards  was  the 
aothov  and  inventot  of  it^  for  the  purpose  of 
hiTolTiDg  the  prisoner  and  his  associates  in  the 
gnih  of  high  treason.  I  am  sure  every  thing 
that  rests  merehjr  upon  assertion,  every  thing 
that  is  not  proved  in  the  cause,  all  that  ie  sar<« 
mised  about  spies,  and  ether  topics  of  a  similar 
nature^  resting  upon  no  proof,  will  be  rejected 
from  your  consideration;  but  was  it,  as  my 
leaned  friend  has  hinted,  an  ideal  dinner? 
The  cards  had  been  sent  out  on  the  Friday,  or 
Saturday,  and  it  was  announced  in  the  usual 
way  in  one  of  tiie  ministerial  papers.  But 
some  doubt  was  entertained  upon  this  point ; 
a  gentleman  was  called^  representing  himself 
to  be  the  court  reporter ;  he  said,  the  comma-' 
sicatioii  did  not  proceed  firom  him;  but  a 
person  from  the  New  Times  office,  in  which 
paper  the  article  appeared,  produced  the  ma« 
auscript^  which  contained  several  other  an« 
nouneements  of  a  simihurnaiture^  and  they  were 
all  proved  to  be  in  the  hand*wriung  of  another 
court  reporter  of  the  name  of  Lavenu.  Snch 
are  the  extraordinary  surmises  and  suspicions, 
^vrfaich  have  been  introduced  into  this  case.  It 
was  supposed,  that  no  dinner  was  intended ; 
that  the  whole  was  a  fiction ;  that  some  person 
behind  the  scenes,  ^ho  possessed  great  influ- 
ence over  the  prisoner,  and  could  move  him 
Uke  a  poppet,  had  for  his  own  purposes  in- 
setted this  article  in  the  paper;. but  when  the 
afihir  comes  to  be  investigated^  the  cloud  is  at 
once  dispelled.  The  faot  is,  that  a  proper  and 
decent  interval  having  elapsed  since  the  fune* 
lal  of  the  king,  the  cabinet  dinners  were  re- 
sumed, the  cards  were  issued,  and  on  the 
IViesday  it  appeared  in  the  usoal  form  in  the 
newspaper. 

But  to  return  to  the  evidenoe  of  Hiden.  He 
says  that  Wilson,  one  of  the  prisoners,  cem- 
monieated  to  him  aU  the  particoiam'  of  the 
plot,  and  his  statement  oovrespoods  precisely 
with  the  acoount  given  by  Adams,  by  Dwyer, 
and  by.^fowment ;  that  few  parties  werete 
be  formed ;  that-the  town  was  to  be  sete»fi»e 
in-  varioue  places ;  that;  afttaoka  were  to  be 
made  in  dimrant  quarters;'  and  that  for  that 
pnrpoe^  tfttecaanott  were  te  be  seised,  and  all 
tWs  was  to  be  consequent  on  the  attack  at 
lord  Harrowby's.  Wilson  further  stated,  diat 
Oee'a^oart  where-D^tfyer  lived  were  all  in  it, 


r  JlUsltewood  [§10 

for  DwvarhBd  given  them  reaeoo  to  mppos^ 
he  would  embark  in  the  transaotioDw  He  tel^ 
yea  that  he  felt  it  aecessaiy  to  do  se,  for  hie 
own  personal  security.  Tkna  is  at  oeee  a  am^ 
irmatioB  of  the  tnitk  of  the  statements  both  of 
Dwyer  and  Hidem  They  have  had  no  com* 
BMnicatiee  together;  Dwyer  had  given  the 
prisonen  reason  to  ftuppese  they  would  be 
joined  by  the  people  at  Uee's-conrt ;  and  Wil- 
soB  eomnuMioatea  that  circnmstaaee  to  Hiden, 
whidi  oonfitms,  in  a  remaxkaUe  manner^  the 
evidence  of  Dvvyer. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  will  arit  yo«  with  eoo^ 
fidence,  what  becooMs  of  the  observation  thef 
this  case  rests  entirely  on  the  teetimony  off 
Adams  ?  Am  I  not  justified  in  saying,  that 
if  Adams  were  the  most  infomoos  of  witnesses^ 
and  yon  were  even  to  blot  his  evidence  firaaa 
voor  notes,  there  is  abundantly  sufficient  te 
bring  home  the  case  to  the  prisoner  at  the 
bar? 

Passing  from  this  evidence,  letnscemete 
the  events  of  Cato^treet/— 4e  foots  wfaieh  caiH 
not  be  contradicted  or  disputed,  which  speak 
for  themselves,  and  speak  so  stiengly,  tiwt  m^ 
learned  friends  have  been  compeltod  to  admil 
that  there  was  at  least  an  intention  to  assasi* 
sinate  his  majestjF's  ministers.    But,  I  coneetee 
that  if  yoa  shaU  be  of  opinion  that  such  an 
intention  was  entertaineo,— en  intention  le 
assassinate  not  merely  this  or  that  indtvid«al 
in  the  government,  but  by  one  great  and 
sweeping  blow  to  destroy  tiie  whole  oabinet^-^ 
tins  will  go  a  great  wey  indeed  te  satisfy  yee, 
that  there  were  further  objects  in  eontempl*- 
tion ;  because  I  cannot  suppose  that  from  any 
motives  of  enmity  or  rsveage  directed  a|;aliiBl 
individuals  of  whom  the  prisonees  ooahl  have 
no  personal  knowledge,  they  would  have  ene* 
banced  in  a  design  so  dangerous  aiid>  so  wid^« 
ed.    If  they  formed  the  design- of  mmdeiieg 
the  ministers  oF  the  Crown,  it  is  impessible  te 
suppose  that  this  was  intended  to  be  effiectei 
with  any  other  than  an  insurrectionaiy  view* 
I  think,  therefore,  that  in  this  eoneession  ea^ 
.  feorted  from  my,  learned  friends  by  the  ferae  off 
the  evidenoe,  they  have  abandoned  the  caseef 
the  prisoner;  for,  with  all< their  ingenaitfytlMy 
could  not  even  shape  a  plae4blh>  oaseia  sem* 
port  of  their  snppositien'tfaat  smcha^blaweoew 
have  been  inteneed  with  anyothev' 
to  form  the  basis  of  an*  insurreelion^  in 
it  was  hoped  and  espeoted  that  thegieat>bod)^ 
of  the  people  would  ittstaady  jein«    Aetts^he 
triflina  mcensof  thepaities^  thnD  cansidaseii 
tion,  ia  the  view  I  have*  tahen>ol  the  oas%  hi 
no  objection  against  thereai^ o|)  tl»  damtt« 
AU  that  they  oonoeived  te>  W  neeenavy  Ihe 
the  attainment  off  their  olijedt  waa  toetrike^eotf 
mat  bfewr-^te  exhibit  an*  appeannae'  ef 
fosee;  andt  Ihef  eraAdeatiy^  eipeatedt  tMff 
woeld'  be  followed-  by^a^  geoml'  MTolt' thegp 
might  lead  aed  coiid«ic9  at' their  pUasMsah 

Without  entering  inte  details  of  whattooH 
place  in  Cato-street,  I  beg-leavetodireot  ytMt 
attention  for  a  moment  to  the  nature  of  the 
prepamt|ons«    If  the  conspiracy  was  merely 


0171 


Jot  ^^  Trtutnt 


A*  D.  1B20. 


lOlt 


vtth  4  VMW  tapkmder,  wbjr  prapttxe  iMrteiials 
fer  loading  cannon  ? — whj  prepare  io  large  a 
quantity  of  ammunitioa?  My  learned  friend 
has  attempted  some  explanation  of  the  motives 
of  that  part  of  the  design  which  related  to  the 
netting  fin  to  the  metropolis.  If  he  thought 
•ttcfa  explanation  necessary,  and  endeavoured 
to  show  how  it  agreed  with  the  auppoeed  de* 
sign  ^  plunder,  it  was  «quaUy  incumbent  on 
him  to  give  a  stnnlar  explanation  as  to  the 
olhcr  ciBciunstanoes  of  preparation  aade  by 
the  piisoners :  bat  be  has  not  attempted  to  do 
Ihia.  And,  tnirvth,  the  materials  odleoted 
were  inconsistent  with  any  other  view  of  the 
fiaee  than  that  which  I  have  stated ;  and  they 
ttonfirm  beyesd  the  possibility  of  doubt  the 
atory  told  1^  Adams,  Monument,  and  Hiden ; 
the  latter  •f  whom  was  so  anxious  immediately 
Io  give  iafoiusation,  for  the  pntpoaeof  coun* 
Itncting  this  most  in&moiis  plol. 

But  it  is  objected  tliat  we  have  not  caUed 
other  witnesses  who  might  have  been  woduced 
-^that  there  is  a  person  of  the  name  of  JBdwatds 
whom  we  have  not  examined.  The  fact  is,  we 
have  called  two  persons  who  were  engaged  in 
the  conspiracy  with  the  prisoners.;  and  if  we 
iiad  called  ethers,  it  woukl  only  have  had  the 
effirat  of  lemiing  fte  a  still  more  copious  torrent 
of  invective  firaaa  the  other  side.  We  have 
called  two  witnesses,  and  we  faavm  oesiknned 
their  testimonT  bayood  the  possibility  of  dis« 

Cite.    But  when  my  learned  friends  say  we 
venot ceiled  certain  other  pemens  to  sup» 
pert  the  case  of  tbe  prceecutaon,  how  maik, 
laore  strongly  does   the  observation  apply 
Ugainst  the  priaoner  who  hae  wMnesses  in  his 
power  to  produce,  his  own  friends  and  asso» 
oiete»^Potter,  Palin,  Hvlis,  and  Hidl,  and 
others  vrfao  were  present  on  the  same  eeossion^ 
eiko  have  been  asentioned,  and  who  might 
kave  heen  catted  te  Aow  that  the  ecoount  given 
by  the  witnesses  lor  the  Gievn  is  islae  and 
ahricatad;  end  yet  not  one  of  Uiett  has  vp* 
pearsd  to  oofttradiet  the  statement  made  on 
the  part  ef  the  preaecntion. 
■   But  this  plot,  it  is  contended,  had  no  politic* 
•al  object  in  view.    Observe  the  language  and 
eenduct  of  die  peisoner.     The  numbers  at 
GalD^treet  were  not  so  many  as  he  expected ; 
o-xthey  amounted  only  to  twenty^ve.  lie  was 
nlatmed;— he  waa  apprehensive  the^  might 
deaert  hinu    He  endeavenred  to  inspire  theaa 
vith  oonidenoai     He  waooed  them  of  the 
danger  of  retseating.— It  would  prove,  he  said, 
noother  Despard's  job.     Why  that  aUnsion, 
bothccanse  his  enteiprise  was  of  a  sinuhw 
chaneter1«*-Gan  it  be  exphdned  on  any  other 
jprineiple  ?  Does  it  not  show  what  was  neasing 
v  hie  mind  at  the  time,  and  evince  toe  true 
antore  of  the  enterprise  more  satisfiustetily 
tken  evidence  of  anv  other  descri^on  !    But 
ID  puaoe  this  ttiU  nvther : — Davidson  is  ap» 
pnriieoded,  and  immediately  exclaims,  ^let 
Ihaae  he  daaancd  who  will  not  die  in  liberty's 
eansei"  and  he  sings  a  line  ef  die  admisaUe 
Wlad  of  the  peat  Biums^  •  Seou  wha'  ha'  with 
Wiaitaae  faled^    Does  not  ins  speak  foe  itself 

I 


in  terms  too  distinct  to  be  misenderatoodl 
Does  it  not  unfold  his  heart  and  mind  to  our 
observation,  and  show  what  was  passing  there 
at  the  time ;  what  was  the  object  of  the  crimi- 
I  aal  enterprise  in  which  he  had  embarked  ^-what 
it  was  for  which  he  was  then  a  prisoner?--* 
Assassination  to  be  followed  by  plunder  ?-— 
No,  but  assassination  to  be  followed  by  revo« 
lution,  and  the  establishment  of  that  which  he 
miscalled  libertv«  And  here  it  is  impossible 
not  to  deplore  me  selMelusion  of  these  mis- 
guided men  who,  engi^ed  in  an  atrociouir 
design  agmnst  the  laws  and  constitution  of 
their  countiy,  and  which  was  to  commence  by 
the  sacrifice  of  some  of  the  best  blood  of  the 
nation,  by  the  murder,  among  others,  of  that 
distinguished  individuid  who  had  led  our  armies 
to  victory,  and  exalted  among  the  nations  of 
the  earth  the  name  and  character  of  English* 
men,  coidd  suppose  that  they  were  treading  in 
the  steps  of  the  great  Socfttiah  chieftain,  who, 
vrith  the  spirit  ana  the  energies  of  a  real  patriot, 
laboured  to  free  his  country  from  a  foreign 
y<dce;  and  with  inadetpnte  means  and  re*, 
sonrees,  but  animated  by  an  uneonqnerafole 
spirit,  kept  at  bay  the  power  of  England,  per- 
forming d!eeds  of  the  most  heroic  valour,  tiU  he 
fell  at  last  a  victim  to  the  basest  and  most  de* 
gradmg  troadiery. 

I  have  gone  throudi  this  cattse<  I  feel  my- 
self exhausted,  and  I  am  afraid  I  have  worn 
out  vour  patience.    My  omissions  will  be  aap« 

Shed  by  my  lord.  Let  no  suggestions  maae 
y  my  learned  friend  operate  on  year  mind% 
except  ao  for  as  thcae  suggestions  arise  cot  of, 
and  are  snpporled  by  the  evidenee.  It  is  easy 
to  acatter  insioaattons,  and  to  imprte  blame; 
hnt  you,  I  am  sure,  will  not  oonsider  aceuai^ 
tion,  st^l  leas  dark  and  indistinct  aurndses^  ai 
proof.  Yoa  ace  tald  that  the  prisoner  ia  eon«^ 
tending  with  the  passer  of  the  Crawn,  but  he  ii 
contending  before  a  Britiah  iuiy,  wbe^  if  tb^ 
were  to  incline  to  either  side,  it  woetd  be  in 
fovour  of  the  accused :  and  I  am  sure,  knowing 
as  I  do  those  who  are  associated  with  me  upon 
this  oeoasion,  there  is  no  wish  or  disposition, 
onHhe  part  of  the  prosecution,  to  press  against 
the  prisoner  any  point  beyond  what  justice  re- 
quires*  We  have  no  other  duty,  and  can  have 
no  other  desire  than  to  lay  the  case  fiurly  be- 
fore you.  It  vrill  be  for  you,  then,  reoeivittg 
the  law  from  hia  lesdriiip,  who  is  bound  by  the 
same  obiigatioa  as  yourselves,  to  say  whether, 
upon  the  evidence  which  has  been  laid  before 
you,  you  are  satisfied  that  the  prisoner  is  guilty 
of  the  crime  with  which  he  is  charged.  Every 
assistanoe  whidi  extensive  talent  and  long  or* 
perience,  and  knowledge  of  the  law  eould  af- 
ford te  a  person  in  Ids  situation,  he  baa  re- 
ceived.   Nothing  Ihhi  been  wasting  to  his  de* 


Before  I  cooelade,  I  beg  leave  to  repeat 
what  has  been  said  by  my  learned  friend^  the 
oounael  fat  the  priaoner,  that  if  yon  entertala 
a  raaaonable  doubt  on  the  aubjMt  ^  hia  guilt, 
it  will  be  your  duty  to  acquit  him :  but,  on  the 
other  haaid,  as  the  guasdiaas  of  the  pubiie 


919] 


1  GEORGE  If. 


Trial  vfArikur  nitOeaiood 


t930 


peace,  actin;;  under  the  sacred  obligation  of 
the  oath  which  you  have  taken,  if  you  are 
satisfied  that  the  case  is  proved  against  him, 
you  will  discharge  your  duty,  without  looking 
to  the  consequences,  with  that  firmness,  impar- 
tiality, and  integrity  which  have  ever  been  the 
distinguishing  characteristics  of  an  Englidi 
jtfry. 

SUUMXNG'TJP. 

Lord  Chief  Jutike  AbhotL — Gentlemen  of 
the  Jury;^-This  is  an  indictment  against 
Arthur  Thistlewood,  the  prisoner  now  at  the 
bar,  and  several  other  persons,  who,  in  the 
progress  of  this  triali  have  also  appeared  at 
the  bar  in  order  that  they  might  be  identified 
by  some  of  the  witnesses,  charging  them  with 
the  crime  of  high  treason,  'fhat  crime  has 
been  truly  stated  to  you  to  be  the  greatest 
known  to  the  law :  it  is  so,  because  it  com- 
prises not  only  individual  and  private  e? il  as 
most  others,  but  a  great  and  extensive  public 
evil  also.  A  charge  so  serious,  requires  at  the 
hands  of  an  English  jury,  and  will,  I  am  sure, 
from  what  1  have  already  seen,  receive  from 
you  the  most  grave  and  mature  consideration. 

The  charge  upon  the  record  is  divided  into 
several  heads : — the  first  is,  tliat  of  compassing 
and  imagining  to  depose  the  king — ^the  second, 
that  of  compassing  and  imagining  to  put  the 
king  to  death— the  third,  that  of  compassing 
and  imagining  to  levy  war  against  the  king,  in 
order  to  compel  him  to  change  his  measures 
and  councils-*-and  the  fourth,  that  of  actually 
levying  war  against  the  king.    Two  of  these 
eharges,  namely,  the  compassinfg  and  imagin- 
ing the  death  of  his  majesty,  axid  the  actually 
levying  war  against  him,  were  declared  to  be 
treasons  by  a  statute  passed  as  long  ago  as  the 
reign  of  king  Edward  the  third,    in  the  con- 
struction of  that  ancient  statute  it  had  been  held, 
not  only  in  many  cases  passing  in  judgment  in 
our  Courts,  but  also  by  the  opinion  delivered 
to  us  ,by  grave  and  learned  writers  upon  the 
law  on  that  subject,  that  all  conspiracies  and 
attempts  to  depose  his  majesty,  and  all  con- 
spiracies and  attempts  to  levy  war  against  him, 
were  overt  acts  of  a  treasonable  intention  to 
take  away  his  life,   because,  as  experience 
shews  us,  the  death  of  4he  sovereign  generally 
follows  his  deposition.    In  order,  however,  to 
remove  any  mistake  that  persons  might  fall 
t|)to,  a  statute  was  passed  in  the  reign  of  his 
late  majesty,  similar  in  substance,  and  nearly  so 
in  language,  to  several  statutes  which  had  been 
formerly  passed,  bat  which  operated  for  a 
season  only,   by  which    the   compassing  or 
imagining  to  depose  his  majesty,  or  the  com- 
passing and  imagining  to  levy  war  against  him, 
or  to  compel  him  to  change  his  measures  and 
councils,  were  each  declared  to  be  a  substan« 
tive  treason.    And  as  the  evidence  in  this  case 
points  more  directly  to  the  compassing  to  de« 
pose  and  to  levy  war  against  him,  than  to  the 
actual  intention  to  take  >away  his  life,  the  most 
simple  way  of  presenting  this  case  to  you,  is, 
U>  diirect  your  minds  io  those  pacts  of  this  in- 


dictment, whi<A  charge  the  compassing  and 
imagining  to  depose  the  king,  and  to  lewj 
war  against  the  king  in  order  to  compel  him  t» 
change  his  measures  and  councils. 

You  will  observe,  that  the  substance  of  tho 
charge  is  anade  to  consist  in  the  intention — in 
the  compassing,  imagining,  and  intending,  and 
not  in  tne  actual  deposition  of  his  majesty,  or 
in  the  actual  levying  war;— such  intentioB, 
however,  must  be  muiifested  and  followed  up 
by  certain  acts  of  the  parties,  which  acts  mutt 
be  (as  they  are  in  this  case)  stated  on  the  re- 
cord, and  proved  to  the  satisfiictionof  the  jury, 
as  evidencing  Uie  traitorous  intention. 

Now  the  acts  charged  on  the  indictment  are, 
as  applied  to  each  count,  the  same ; — they  are 
first,  the  meeting,  conspiring,  and  consulting 
amongst  themselves  to  destroy  the  government 
of  this  realm  as  by  law  established-— meetings 
and  consultations  to  levy  war  against  the  kii^, 
to  subvert  the  constitution  and  government  as 
by  law  established — ^meeting  and  conspiring  to 
assassinate  and  murder  divers  of  the  privy 
eouncil  of  the  king — ^maliciously  and  traitor- 
ously providing  large  quantities  of  arms  and 
weapons,  in  order  to  arm  themselves  and 
others,  for  the  purpose  of  raising  and  levying 
war  against  the  king^-meeting  and  consfurtBg 
to  seise  divers  cannon,  warlike  weapons,  anna, 
and  ammunition,  in  order  to  arm  themselves 
and  others,  for  the  purpose  of  raising  and 
levying  war  against  the  king--meeting  and 
conspiring  to  bum  and  destroy  divers  bouses 
and  ooHdings  in  and  near  London,  and  divers 
barracks  used  for  the  reception  and  residenee 
of  the  soldiers,  troops,  and  forces  of  the  king, 
and  to  prepare  combustibles  for  the  purpose 
of  burning  and  destroying  the  said  houses, 
buildings,   and    barracks — ^nd   further,   the 
actual  assembling   in   arms  with  intent    to 
assassinate,  kill,  uid  murde  rdvrers  of  the  privy 
eouncil  of  the  king  employed  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  the  afiairs  and  government  of  this 
kingdom,  and  to  levy  war  against  the  king. 

These,  gentlemen,  are  the  foots  charged  in 
the  indictment  as  (in  technical  language)  the 
overt  acts,  that  is,  as  the  evidence  of  the  in» 
tention,  and  the  steps  and  measures  adopted 
in  order -to  carry  that  intention  into  effect;  to 
these  acts  therefore  the  evidence  that  has  been 
laid  before  you  has  been  directed,  and  if  these 
acts  are  proved  to  your  satisfaction,  or  any 
important  part  of  them,  it  will  then  be  for  you 
to  consider,  whether  the  criminal  and  traitorous 
intention  charged— to  depose  the  king,  or  to 
levy  war  against  him — ^is  satisfactorily  proved, 
and  if  so,  as  each  is  treason,  it  is  not  mateaal 
to  distinguish  between  them. 

You  have  heard  in  this  evidence,  of  a  Tery 
extraordinary  (I  may  say  for  the  present)  pro* 
ject,  alleged  to  have  been  entertained  by  this 
person  now  at  the  bar,  and  others  associating 
with  him ;  a  protect,  as  it  is  said,  to  takn 
away  the  Jives  <»  all  the  persons  most  con- 
fidentially employed  in  the  Administration  of 
the  government  of  this  realm  by  his  migesty, 
whsn  they  shofdd  hs  sssamUed  at  a  diBiier,  aiii 


d2tl 


jP^  m^TrioMu 


A.  t>.  ttSOi 


t03S^ 


that  soma  of  Hm  eoniptnton  wera  to  proceed 
At  the  same  time,  and  others  immediately  after* 
wards,  to  set  on  fire  buildings  in  Tarious  jMirts 
of  the  town,  to  seize  some  pieces  of  artillery^ 
to  tako  possession  of  the  Mansion-house,  and 
to  declare  that  a  new  government  was  estab- 
lished ;  thereby  to  oT^throw  tiie  eiisting  go- 
vernment and  the  subsisting  order  of  tlungs, 
and  to  substitute  something  else  in  its  place. 
This  is  the  general  nature  of  the  project  im- 
puted to  the  prisoner  ut  the  bar;  it  is  im* 
portant  for  you  to  consider  whether  that  pro- 
ject is  to  your  satisfection  proved.  Tbe  ques- 
tion iSf  not  whether  it  was  likely  to  be  suo- 
tessfnl,  but  whether  it  was  intended  by  these 
persons,  and  whether  steps  were  taken  to  carry 
It  into  effect.  The  improbability  of  the  success 
of  sucJh  a  scheme  is  fit  matter  for  your  consider- 
ation in  weighing  the  evidence  that  is  laid 
before  you,  in  order  to  prove  that  the  scheme 
did  exist ;  but  your  inquiry  is,  did  that  sdieme 
exist  or  did  it  not?  and  is  it  proved  to  your 
satisftiction  by  the  evidence  that  has  been  laid 
before  you. 

A  very  large  body  of  e^enoe  has  been  laid 
before  you,  in  order  to  prove,  that  such  a  pro- 
ject, however  wild  and  visionary,  was  in  fact 
contrived,  and  that  steps  were  taken  by  the 

Snsoner  and  others  to  cany  it  into  effect* 
ome  vritnesses  have  given  you  minute  details 
of  various  conversations  taking  place  at  various 
times;  and  in  weighing  the  effect  of  that 
testimonv,  it  seems  to  me  that  you  will  do  well 
to  consider,  rather  the  general  substance  and 
import,  than  the  precise  accuracy  of  eveiy 
particular  expression  that  may  have  fidlen  from 
any  one  witness :  a  long  detail  vrill  hardly  ever 
be  free  from  some  occasional  error  or  mistake ; 
the  question  properly,  is  not  whether  there  be 
any  trifling  error  «r  misuse,  but  whether  the 
suDstance  and  body  of  the  testimony  laid  be- 
fore you  be  or  be  not  in  your  judgment  true. 

Some  of  the  persons  who  have  been  called 
before  you  to  give  evidence  upon  this  occasion 
are  truly  represented  to  be  persons  who  ac- 
knowledge themselves  to  be  accomplices  in  this 
most  traitorous  design — that  observation, 
however,  does  not  apply  to  all  who  have  given 
evidence;  and  much  observation  has  been 
made  upon  the  credit  that  ought  to  be  riven 
to  persons  in  that  situation.  Upon  that  subject 
'  I  will  only  say,  that  by  the  law  of  this,  and  I 
believe  of  every  other  country,  accomplices 
are  witnesses  competent  to  be  heard:  the 
credit  that  is  to  be  given  to  them,  is  matter, 
in  this  country,  for  the  consideration  of  gentle- 
men in  your  situation ;  and  that  credit  must 
depend,  in  a  neat  degree,  on  the  probability 
of  the  story  they  tell,  or  on  the  confirmation 
that  may  be  given  to  tiiem  from  other  and  pure 
sources,  so  for  as  what  they  mr »  capable  of 
coofiimatioii,  and  Qpon  the  absence  of  that 
contradiction  which  may  be  adduced  if  Ae 
story  related  be  not  true.— Tbere  is  no  rule  of 
law  which  says  that  the  testimony  of  4icoom- 
plices  mutt  be  credited  ;«-4hen  is  no  rule  of 
law,  or  of  practice,  that  Jmi  said  it  «mift  be 


rejected  t— to  say  it  must  be,  woidd  offer  tho 
greatest  possible  latitude  to  crimes  ;  because, 
as  was  truly  observed  by  one  of  the  learned 
counsel  for  the  prosecution,  if  bad  men  once 
are  given  to  nnaerstand  they  are  in  no  danger 
of  being  brought  to  justice  from  disclosures 
made  b^  those  who  participate  in  their  crime, 
they  will  trust  to  tnis  and  proceed  in  their 
widLed  designs ;  whereas  we  know  bad  men 
entertain  great  distrust  of  each  other,  which 
often  prevents  the  perpetration  of  those  offences 
which  cannot  ■  be  committed  vrithout  the  con* 
currence  of  several  persons. 

Having  made  these  general  observations  in 
Older  to  direct  your  attention,  in  the  best  vray 
that  I  am  able,  to  the  evidence  that  has  been 
laid  before  you,  I  will  now,  as  it  is  some  houn 
since  the  evidence  was  distinctly  heard  by  you, 
proceed  to  re^d  a  great  part,  if  not  the  whole 
evidence ;  so  much  as  occurs  to  me  as  neces* 
sary  to  submit  to  your  consideration,  and  moro 
if  you  desire  it. 

llie  first  vritness  called  vras  Robert  Adams, 
on  whom  so  much  remark  has  been  made  by 
the  learned  counsel  on  one  side  and  the  other. 
According  to  his  account,  he  must  be  con- 
sidered as  an  accomplice  in  the  treasonable 
conspiracy,  if  any  treasenable  conspiracy  ex- 
ist^, because  he  acknowledges  that  he  attend* 
ed  many  meetings,  and  vras  one  of  those  who 
were  assembled  to  carry  it  into  efi^t.  The 
account  he  gives  of  himself  is,  that  he  is  a  shoe- 
maker; that  he  formeriy  belonged  to  Uie 
royal  regiment  of  Horse  uuards ;  that  he  has 
left  that  service  eighteen  TJBan ;  that  he  first 
became  acquainted  vrith  Brunt,  one  of  the 
persons  indicted,  about  the  year  1816,  at 
Cambray,  in  France ;  that  his  first  introduc- 
tion to  the  prisoner  Thistlewood,  vras  on  the 
13th  of  Januaiy,  at  his  ovm  lodgings  in  Stan- 
hope-street, Clare-market.  He  says,  **  I  vras 
introduced  by  Brunt,  who,  in  going  into  the 
room,  said  to  Thistlewood,  this  is  Uie  man  I 
vras  speaking  to  yon  about;  Thistlewood  said, 
*  You  vrere  once  in  the  life-guards,^  I  said  no, 
I  had  belonged  to  the  Blues ;  he  said,  *  I  sup- 
pose you  are  a  good  soldier,'  I  replied  that  I 
could  use  a  sword  to  defend  myself,  but  I  vras 
not  so  dever  as  I  had  been,  not  having  been 
in  the  habit  of  using  arms  for  some  time.'' 
Then  he  says  ikax  Mr.  Thistlewood  began  to 
allude  to  the  genteel  people  of  the  countiy, 
endeavouring  to  make  tnem  appear  mean  and 
contemptible;  saying,  that  there  vras  not  one 
of  them  who  vras  worth  so  small  a  sum  as  ten 
pounds,  that  was  worth  any  thing  for  the  good 
of  his  oountry :  as  to  the  shopkeepera  of 
London,  he  sand  they  were  a  set  of  aristocrats, 
and  were  all  woridng  under  one  system  of 

JDveroment ;  that  he  shoidd  glory  to  see  the 
ay  that  all  Uie  shops  were  shut  up  and 
plundered;  that  Mr.  Hunt  vras  a  damned 
covrard  and  no  friend  to  the  people,  and  he  had 
no  doubt  acted  as  a  spy  for  government ;  that 
Mr.  Cdbbett,  with  all  his  vrritiags,  was  of  no 
good  to  the  conntiy,  and  he  had  no  doubt  that 
he  toowaa«.qyyaa  well  4b  Mr.  Hunt.    Ho 


H»J 


1  O^BGS  lY. 


Trud^Afikm  Tkktkmo^ 


[«94 


W^Mves  ti^Al  Apisbed  tb«  4is«ottnew    He  wvj%f 
be  was  ffienvar ds  opnfined  for  debt  Im  White* 
ciossi-itrfie^  pnson ;  timt  he  mw  Mr.  Thiatle* 
wood  QB%  Sunday  eJt  the   White   Han   ia 
Brook'sHnarJcety  a  bouse  Ibmt  by  a  peraoo  of 
the  name  of  Hobbs ;  besides  ThistJewoody  Ingit 
Brunt,  and  a  pecson  of  the  miae  of  HaU  (who 
is  net  one  of  those  indicted)  wf  re  fthei^  end 
Tidd»  wtie  is  one  of  the  p^nooe  indicted, 
fwne  in;  ^*we  met  in  a  room  in  ths  baek 
yard."    The  witness  aaya,  that  he  eapne  eiit  of 
pfisoa  on  the  aotb  of  Januaiy,  thai  on  the  31st 
he  saw  Thistlewood  the  firisenar  in  a  back 
lipQqs  on  the  sane  floor  where  Brunt  Ured, 
whi/ch  i#  in  Fox-court,  Gmy's<4n»4ajie ;  Brant» 
IngSt  and  Hall  who  is  pot  indicted,  and 
Pi^idsoa  who  is,  were  present ;  nothing  parti* 
oalar  took  place  on  that  night ;  that  he  net 
thep  again   on    the    Wednesday  ereaing; 
XUstlewood,  Bmnty  David9on,  Harrison,  and 
%  Derson  of  the  name  of  Edwards,  who  is  not 
indicted,   were   present;  nothing  particular 
passed  on  that  oceasion,  only  that  iia  saw  a 
number  of  pike  staves;  Inistlewoed  was 
a^ous  to  hare  then  ferruled,  and  expressed 
hinwelf  rather  surpriaed  that  Bradbum,  who  i« 
9ae  of  the  persons  indicted,  was  not  oome ; 
and  DaTidson  in  parta»laiv  expseseed  hinself 
dissatisfied ;  he  slid  that  BradbQin  bad  been 
fupplied  with  money  to  buv  fenulee  ibr  those 
etares,fHidh9  was  dissattified  that  thegr  were  ml 
done:  he  sayi,  ^  the  staves  were  quite  green, 
and  appeared  a«  if  they  bad  Just  beep  eut." 
tlie  stetes  Have  been  prodaeed  to  you,  and 
£rom  the  eppeamiee  af  them  yen  will  probably 
be  able  to  judge,  i;4ieAer  at  that  time  they 
^iiould  or  would  not  hare  ^   q>paaraooe 
described. 

He  does  not  know  that  aay  thing  elae  pasa* 

«d  at  that  meeting;  but  the  meelingp  eon* 

tinned  to  be  held  twiee  a  day  in  thet  laam,  up 

to  the  aard  of  Februaiy :  he  says  that  he  heard 

^iDttt  s^y  that  ha  bad  hised  a  roem  for  Ji^; 

there  was  no  iundture  ia  the  room.    Ha  saya» 

^^  One  evening  afterwards»  about  tan  daya  bei* 

lore  the  funeral  qf  his  Ute  majesty,  I  went  up 

into  the  ioa«i«    Thistlewood  and  Harriee^ 

vase  sittii^  before  the  ire;  they  made  room 

€ar  ne,  aad  I  sat  down  batweea  then,    Har*^ 

risoa  told  Thistlewood  he  had  met  one  of  tha 

life-guards,  who  told  him  that  as  many  of  the 

boraa  aad  loot  as  could  be  spared  would  be  at 

'^  miiiea^'a  funeral ;  that  this  wQuld  be  a  ia- 

vourable  opportunity  to  kick  up  a  row,  and  aea 

<^at  they  oeuld  do  that  nighty  which  ouita 

met  with  the  pdsonet'a  approbatioa,  and  be 

^ugbt  it  would  be  a  good  opp<Klunity,  end 

■be  had  no  doubt  if  they  eould  take  tha  two 

pmoee  of  eaaaon  firom  Qfaya^anrUna,  and  lAia 

ai»  piee ea  from  the  artillery  gmmd^  they  vaaldy 

'Ware  moraing,  be  able  to  put  theBMelyea 

in  passassion4)f  Loadaa :  that  it  aay  annmnaii 

^ataock  went  to  Windear,  the  tiaopa  would  ba 

aa  tired»  when  they  got  to  London,  Ihey  wioidd 

baabla-ta  da  nothing.    Ike  prisqawsaidy  hm 

Hmwffhi  it  night  be  aa  imaged,  that  tlmf 


Windsor;  thatit  mould  also  be  ^aoeeeaiy  to 
gat  possession  of  the  teHegraph  over  the  wamr, 
to  prevent  any  inielligaaee  beiag  conveyed  to 
Woolwich;  that  by  this  time  they  should  ba 
able  to  Ibna  a  provisional  govameeent,  who 
weie  to  send  to  the  sea  ports  ta  prevent  any 
gentleman  from  leaving  this  country  without  a 
passport  from  this  pravisioaal  govemmeat. 
Me  spoke  of  Dover,  Biighton,  BHmngatc,  and 
Margate,  especially  of  Briditoa,  not  that  ha 
thought  the  aew  king  would  be  able  to  be  there 
or  even  at  the  faneial  of  his  &ther,  on  aoooant 
of  his  then  illness.    He  said  it  was  of  no  use 
for  the  new  king,  q>eekiag  of  his  present 
miyesty  by  that  name^  to  think  of  wearing  tha 
Crown;  that  the  present  fi^mily  had  inlumted 
the  Crown  \ao%  enough.    Brunt  and  lags  af- 
terwards easse  into  the  room,  and  Thistlewood 
oommuoieated  to  them  what  had  beeneaid. 
Brant  and  Ings  heeid  him,  but  positively  da- 
dared  that  there  was  nothing  short  of  the  as- 
sassination which  they  had  io  ?iew  would  sa* 
tiefy  them.''    Fiom  this  it  must  be  inferred,  if 
what  this  witness  says  is  true,  that  the  convaiw 
satioa  between  diese  pemoas  was  about  amas- 
sinatioa;  and  it  vi  further  to  be  observed,  that 
if  what  this  witnuM  states  is  tiu^  it  is  dear 
that  that  had  been  talked  of  at  a  former  meet- 
ing.   He  says,  Brunt  had  told  me  theee  wera 
two  or  three  of  them  who  had  dmwn  out  the 
plan  with  a  view  to  assaniaate  the  aMaastera 
at  tiie  first  cabinet  dinner  which  they  had  i  they 
scarcely  ever  met  but  this  was  the  sol^eot  of 
eoBvaraation.  ^  On  Saturday,  tha  tOth  of  Feb- 
raaiy,''  he  says, ''  I  went  again  to  the  room  in 
Foi«OMurt,  about  eleven  or  twelve  o'dock  ii| 
the  fbnsnoon ;  I  saw  Tbiatlewood,  Pavidson, 
Harrison,  Ings,  Brunt,  and  Hell  there,  aa  my 
going  into  the  room  I  they  were  all  set  rowicl 
die  room  ia  a  deep  stedy ;  in  about  a  minula 
they  all  got  up,  turned  round,  and  said,  well 
thea  it  is  agreed, — ^we  are  come  to  tha  detei^ 
minaliea  that  if  aothiag  oaeurs  between  thia 
Mid  Wedneeday  night,  oa  the  next  Wednea* 
day  night  we  wiU  go  to  work:  it  was  said 
th^  were  all  so  poor  they  aould  wait  no 
longer.    Thistlopwood  proposed  that  the  eoai- 
nittea  ahoald  meet  amrt  naming  at  aiaa 
o'clock,  10  draw  ant  a  plan  to  go  by,  aad  ba 
said  to  Brant,  you  had  better  go  saaad  thn 
afteraeon  aad  acqaaiat  what  man  yea  can 
bring  forward,  in  oider  to  bong  them  to  tha 
eoBwaittee  room  tomorrow  morning.    Brasit 
laid  he  hfti  some  work  Io  do»  and  he  thoimihe 
be  aboald  ]|ot  have  tima»  bat  be  woiM  gat  up 
ia  the  momoQg aod  aaqaaiot  a  lew;  but  tb«i 
they  did  not  wmit  a  gitat  many  to  be  ia  tha 
fooik    Bcoat  wee  Abevt  ta  loMe  the  foasa 
when  the  wiaaae»eaUed  la  him,  and  eaid,  i4 
would  be  higUy  aecemevgr  tbat  aH  who  attattd* 

^^^a     ajn^    ^W^P^^^w^^^^i^p^^    wgw^    ^^^^Wv     i^^^awflP*wP^j     n^^apaaa— • 

biiag  anae  witb  then  ia  aiae  apy  ettcesa 
ahauld  ooma  op,  aad  Brunt  said,  if  any  offiaer 
was  to  caom  into  tha  team  he  woald  itia  hioa 
thiOBgh.'*  Tbsa  be  pioeeeds.  ia  aay»  ^Osi 
Suads^  nomiag  I  went « little  afier  eleven  3 


^Madpiaient  any  ardei^  Waving LmlaA  £»•  it  nu  etf  dnfc^tem  Hie  fiegandtbe  snaw^ 


MSI 


Jbr  H^  Tr^aton^ 


that  I  did  iM»t  w»  m\»  ma  ttMte  til!  TIdd 
0poke  to  me ;  ttiete  were  Tbistlewood,  Brent, 
IngSy  HaU,  DcindsoD,  HanrisoD,  Cook,  Brad- 
Iraro,  Edwards,  Wilson,  and  myself  there.    I 
ftmnd  they  had  not  entered  on  the  business 
upon  whieh  they  had  met.    The  prisoner,  on 
looking  at  the  nmnber  of  heads,  said,  I  think 
in  is  time  to  begin  the  business ;  counting  the 
heads,  and  seeing  twelve,  he  said  i  thiidc  ^t 
it  qafite  enough  to  form  a  committee.  Ttdd- 
wtts  proposed  to  take^e  chair,  by  Thistlewood. 
Tldd  took  the  chair,  and  sat  down  with  a  pike 
in  his  hand.    Thistlewood  was  oir  his  right, 
imd'  Brant  on  his  left  hand.    Thistlewood  be* 
gad^  and  said,  gentlemen,  I  presume  you  all 
kuow  what  you  are  met  here  tor,  and  turning 
to  the  door,  said,  the  west^nd  job.  Brunt  said^ 
mention'  their  names,  what  signifies ;  but  was 
eaHed  to  order  by  the  chairman.    Tliisthswood 
sand,  gentlemen,  we  are  come  to  this  determi- 
nation, as  we  are  all  of  us  tired  of  waiting  sb 
lonff,to  do-lftiisjob.    As  we  find  there  is  no 
proiHibility  of  the  ministers  meeting  all  together 
between  this  and  Wednesday  night,  we  are 
eome  to  tt  determination  to-  take  (fiem  sepa^ 
futeiy,  at  their  own  houses ;  we  shall  not  have 
m  opportunity  of  destrt^ng  so  many  as  if  they 
were  to  dine  «dl  together,  if  we  take  them  sepa- 
rately ;  but  we  must  content  ourselTes  with  getk> 
ting  two  or  three,  or  four,  as  we  can  get  them.  I 
anppciseit  will  take  as  many  as  forty  or  fifty  mciif 
to  do  ihe  west-end  job;  and  I  propose,  at  the 
same  time,  that  the  two  pieces  or  cannon  in 
Gfay's^nn4ane^  attd  the  six  pieces  of  camion  at 
Ihe  Artillery-ground,  shaH  be  taken.  Cook  pro- 
posed to  take  the  lead>  and  «o  take  the  command 
at  tiie  taking  of  those  cannon :  he  proposed',  aftef 
fObBae  were  taken,  to  take  the  Mansion-house  as 
rseal  for  the  pi^sional  goremment.''    He 
says,  then  diey  were  to  make  an  attempt  upon 
the  Banlb  of  Bngland :  he  says.  Cook  proposed 
further,  that  Palin  should  be  the  man  intrusted 
to  set  fire  to  die  buildings  in  different  parts  of 
London.    This  was  all  that  passed  on  thai 
subject;  but  Thistlewood  said  there  wu  time 
enough,  between-  iSkalt  aadf  Wednesday*  nighti 
to  settle  and  improt^e  it;  bet  he  would  (hop 
i§t&  suBjett  feir  the'  present,  as  Brtmt  had  a 
^moshion  to  make':   upon  thi^r,   Ue   saTs^ 
•  Bronte eamtf  forward  tO'  state  his  pita;  Vut 
Msllewood  sdd,  *Sto{>^  niy  pn^position  bad 
bMier  be  nnt 'pot  fitottf  ttte'Cmdi^;'  itwas' put 
Htm  the*  dbair,  anAi  carried'  tmdiniiaiously. 
ttvAt  now  came  forward  and^posedthatthey 
ifiouM  asMM^iiafta'as  maaf&f  the  iMnistet%  as 
ibey  eoidd,  on- Wedtiesday  night,  if  no  oppor^ 
tonltyof  their  diniiig  tog  Aier  'ocetarted'  heme 
Ihattime;  tbeH  he fortber^noposed^,  diatthe 
tteii  wlio  iSiottld  flo  for'tfie'issaasiuatiou  of  the 
■raristers  should  be  divided  into  sepanitto  lots^ 
smd  that  one  msen  was  to  be  selected  oat  of 
Melvlot  to  give  the  blow,  and  whatever  man 
it  foil  'Upon  shoulft  be  bound'  to  do  it  or  be 
ttiirdertd' himself;    FpotI  Aislasked'  Brunt 
if  be  eupposed  it'  war  not  possible  for  a  matt  to 
attempt  such  a  things  and  ftil  in  it;  and  if  be 
did  fail,  should  he  be  run-  through  upoir  thd 


A.  IX  1890.  [d30 

spot?    He  said  ito,  certainYy  not,  unless  theiv 

was  the  least  sign  of  cowardice :  if  he  failed  in 

doing  it,  and  was  tlvoueht  a  good  man,  he 

should  not  be  run  through.    Brunt  here  ended 

his  discourse.    It  was  put  by  the  cbarrman  in 

the  same  manner  as  Thistlewood's  measure^ 

and  agreed  to.    About  two  minutes  afterwards-, 

before  any  thing  else  occurred,  Palin,  Potter, 

and  Strange  came  in.'^    Palin  and  Potter'  ttri 

not  persons  indicted,  nor  is  Cook,  who  is  owfi 

Cf  the  persons  spoken-  of  by  this  witness  a$ 

being  present.    Uook,  Potter,  Palin,  and  Half, 

four  persons  now  named,  are  not  included  in 

the  indictment.   Strange  came  in  also.   ^  They 

were  asked  to^  sit  down,  and  Thistlewood'  told 

them  of  plans  that  had  been  proposed  :  they 

agreed  to  them  the  same  as  the  rest  had  donel 

After  this  Palin  got  op  and  said,  that  agr^eid^ 

as  he  Ad  to  the  plaas^  which  had  been  pro^ 

posed,  ther^  was  one  thing  which  he  wanted 

to  know :  there  were  mai^  objects  proposed, 

and  to  corrr  all'  at  one  time,  if  it  could  be 

done,  would  be  a  great  acquisition.    ^  You 

talk,***  he  says,  **  of  takin^^  from  forty  to  fifty 

men  to  the  west-end  job;  now,  I  want  to 

know  where*  the  men  are  to  come  ftom  that 

are  to(  tsfce  iheier  cannon'  itt  GrayVinn-lane^ 

attd  those  at  the  Artillery-grotind :  fio*  doubt 

yotr  Itoow  better  than   me   what   strength 

yov  faanr  got."    He  says;  "  I!  catinot  sty  at 

present  ^^Hmt  niDnofber  I  can*  bring  forward .    1 

want  to  ktlow  atto,*^  sitid  he,  '<  in  calling  npAoik 

the  men  I  intend  to  go  to,  if  P  can  tell  themv 

in  fact,  Tth«  i^'  to  be  done.**    Hie  WltuM 

says,  ''T7pon*thib  the  chairmah  said,  that  ift> 

doubt  Mr.  Palin  knew  the  men  he  had^  to  de- 

pendf*  upon*.    B*  was'  agreed'  that  Palin  sftofila 

make*  such-  cottimunidations  as^  hie  might  thitdt 

prudent,  and  Pirlin  was  satisfied.    There  was 

nothing  tr^msactM  rejgpilbrly  in  the  chair  afte^ 

that ;  but  they  begaii  to  think  of  going  home'tt^ 

get  dieir  dinners,  in  order,  in  the  aflefnoon*, 

to  go  to  their  men  f  and  die  prisonei'  said  to* 

Brunt,  *'Gh,  well  thought  of;  now,  Mr.  Piliik 

is  here,  I  would'  advise  you  to  tdce  him'tothe 

spot  close  by,  and  see  whether  it  is  praetlcalde- 

or  not.-"  TRat  w«U,  to  go  to  the  new  PurrtinflV 

inn^boilding,  itf  Hblbonr,  to  seewltfgtlMrif  tln^ 

pra!cticablb  tiyfiVe'it^  they  went;  and^retiMdl 

in-  about  t^  minutes;  y^^  Ptalii  sttid^  it 

wibi'a  y^  ^tAif'  jo/tt;  attd-  it  Would'  liiake  * 

dathueQ^  good  fte^ ;  Htt^  they*be^aii  tb  dtptctt^ 

No^  mudr  observation  way  ntttde  to  yoti 

tfpon  the  titter  incredibility  of  dds;  blscatriNf^ 

being  a  new  building,  it  couldnot  easily  be 

set  on  fire ;  according  to  the  appelaranc^  itk 

the  stteet  it  is  so,  but  whether  it  is  completad 

or  not  inside^  I  do  not  know.    This,  howtfreiV 

ik  most  importknt ;  it  was  observed  that  if 

it  was  untrue  Palin  is  a  competent  witnes^ 

and  the  prisoner  might  have  called  him,  and 

Cook  is  another  who  has  not  been  indicted? 

both  of  whom  are  competent  witnesses  for  the 

prisoner.    Neither  of  them  could  the  Crown 

compel  to  giv6  evidence,  but' they  might  be 

called  by  the  prisoner,  because  they  would  not 

Aea  be  catted'  to  criminate  themselves;  and 


9271 


1  GEORGE  IT. 


Trid^Artkwr  TUdkmm* 


[»2» 


tbey  ni^  hare  dcaitd,  if  mitifwrty  vitk 
tntk  ikif  could  hare  denied,  eoy  eonremtioo 
like  that  wliic^  tliis  man  apoks  to.  He  taji, 
''The  prisoner  said»  before  thej  left  the  room, 
be  thoogfat  it  woohi  be  neceaiary  to  get  the 
nen  together  and  give  them  a  treat.  Brant 
turned  roond,  and  laid  with  an  oath,  althoogh 
be  had  not  got  much  wori^  he  had  a  pound  note 
which  he  would  appl^  to  that  porDoce;  and 
the  prisoner  then  inquired  whether  uej  might 
be  taken  to  the  Whiu  Hart;  that  was  a  place 
wbere  they  had  formerly  met,  bat  Brant  said 
be  did  not  much  like  to  go  there  after  what 
bad  been  said ;  he  said  his  own  room  would 
do,  if  ha  could  send  his  boy  and  apprentice 
out  of  the  way.  Thistlewood  then  talked  of  bis 
own  booscy  but  on  giring  it  a  second  thought, 
be  said  that  will  not  do,  as  an  officer  Utcs  op- 
posite, and  if  he  should  perceive  men  coming 
Mdiwaids  and  forwards  it  would  give  suspi- 
cion.'' He  says,  **  I  believe  that  finishes  the 
Sunday-morning  business.'*  He  says,  ^  On  the 
Sunday  evening  I  went  lo  the  White  Hart,  and 
bad  some  convemtion  with  Hobbs.  On  Mood  ay 
noraiog  I  went  again  lo  the  room  about  ten 
o'dodL ;  Thistlewood .  Brunt,  Harrison,  Hall,  and 
Ings  were  there,  and  others  I  do  not  reooUect. 
I  said,  I  had  sometbinc  to  communicate  to 
them,  and  told  them  that  Hobbs,  the  landlord  of 
the  White  Hart,  had  told  me  that  two  officers 
had  been  there,  and  that  they  asked  whether 
there  was  not  a  radical  meeting  at  his  house ; 
from  wl^ch  he  inferred  that  there  was  informa- 
tion given  at  lord  Sidmouth's-office,  that  there 
waa  a  meeting  of  that  description  held  there. 
'^  Upon  this  Harrison"  (to  use  the  expression  of 
the  witness)  ^  turaed  round  to  me  like  a  bull 
dog,  and  said^  Adams,  yon  have  acted  vrrong, 
for  if  yon  had  heard  any  thing  it  was  your 
l>nsiness  to  come  to  me  or  Mr.  Thistle- 
;wood«  I  said  I  did  not  conceive  that  1  had 
any  right  to  withhold  it  from  any  one ;  that  I 
thought  it  my  duty  to  communicate  it  to  all, 
as  it  conceraed  all.  They  swore  at  me  again, 
and  said  I  had  no  business  to  communicate  it 
to  any,  but  to  them.''  He  sayi^  ^  I  argued 
witn  tiiem  that  I  had  acted  right  m  oommuni- 
cating  to  them  what  I  had  hmd.  They  then 
proposed  breaking  up  to  call  upon  their  men, 
and  also  to  attend  at  a  meeting  ^led  the  Mary- 
le*bone  Union :  before  we  parted,  I  was  ap» 
pointed  to  oome  again  to  wunt'a  room,  that 
evening,  to  tell  anjr  person  who  came^  that 
there  was  no  meeting"  they  baring  deter- 
mined to  go  themselves,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  the  witness,  to  the  Umon  Club. 
He  says,  ''  I  went  to  Brant's  room,  and  Potter 
soon  joined  me.  We  went  to  the  White 
Hart,  and  Palin  and  Bradbura  came  there  to 
us* .  On  the  Tuesday  morninff,"  he  says,  ''I 
went  to  the  room  again:  there  were  then 

£  resent.  Brunt,  Thistlewood,  logs.  Hall, 
^aridson,  Harnson,  Wilson,  Palin,  Potter, 
and  Bradbura.  While  there,  Edwaids  came 
in  and  went  up  to  Thistlewood  and  told  him 
there  was  to  be  a  cabinet  dinner  next  night. 
Thistlewood  said  I  don't  think  that  it  troe*  A 


wood,  it  oootained  an  acooont  that 
were  to  dine  ateariHarrowby's^in 
square,  on  Wednesday  evening."    Then 
relates   that    very  terrible 


hf  Brant,  which  I  need  not  repeat  to  yon. 
He  says,  "Thistlewood  proposed  then  dmt  n 
committee  should  sit  directly  to  form  a  fredb 
plan  regarding  the  Tsisinition.  X  intea- 
rapted  him,  tod  called  to  their  reeoIlcctioK 
what  Hobbs  had  said  to  me :  upon  this  Hani* 
son  walked  badiwaids  and  forwards,  and  said 
if  any  man  attempted  to  threw  cold  water 
on  the  conoera,  he  would  run  that  man  thraogj^ 
with  a  sword.  I  was  put  out  of  the  chair  and 
Tidd  was  put  in.    Tnistlewood  wanted  to 

rroceed  in  the  business^  when  Palin  said,  slap^ 
want  to  be  satisfied  about  what  haraeaad 
yesterday  before  we  proceed  any  nuther. 
Upon  this  "  he  says,  **  after  soase  cercaMmy, 
Brant  proposed  tint  there  should  be  a  wat^ 
put  upon  the  eari  of  Harrowby's  that  night." 
They  seem  to  have  considered  that  if  thiqf 
kept  watch  there,  and  saw  no  police  offioeis 
or  military,  or  any  preparationa  to  prevent 
their  design,  they  mi^t  fairly  oondude  their 
design  was  unknown,  if  what  the  witness  saj» 
is  correct.  Then  he  says,  "  The  piiaoaer, 
Thistlewood,  said  he  hoped  every  body 
would  be  satisfied  if  no  police  officers  or  soC 
diers  went  into  the  house ;  and  that  they  would 
do  what  they  had  talked  of  to-morrow  even-i 
iog;  the  plan  of  the  Sunday-moraing  wns 
altered  as  respected  the  assassination.  Thistle* 
wood  then  proposed  that  there  should  be  forty 
men  allowed,  and  more  if  they  could  be  got ; 
he  said  there  would  be  fourteen  or  sixteen  of 
the  ministers  which  would  be  a  rare  hanl  U^ 
murder  them  all.  I  propose,  he  said,  goine 
to  the  door  with  a  note  to  present  to  enn 
Harrowby :  when  the  door  is  opened,  for  the 
men  to  rash  in  and  seiie  the  servants,  and 
present  a  pistol  to  them,  and  directly  threate» 
them  with  death  if  they  offer  to  make  the 
least  resistauce  or  noise.  This  bang  done,  » 
party  Were  to  rush  forwards  to  take  the  com* 
mand  of  the  staircase;  two  men  were  tobeplacod 
at  the  stairs  leading  to  die  upper  part  of  the 
house^  one  was  to  have  fire-arms,  to  ba  protected 
by  another  with  a  hand-grenade  in  his  hand  ;  m 
couple  of  men  were  to  take  the  head  of  tte 
stain  leading  to  the  lower  part  of  the  hoone^ 
they  were  to  be  anned  the  same  as  the  othei» 
at  the  upper  stairs ;  if  any  servants  attempted 
to  make  any  retreat  from  the  lower  part  oC 
the  house,  or  from  the  upper  part  of  the  house^ 
these  men  vrith  the  hand-grenades  were  ta 
clap  fire  to  them  and  fling  them  in  amongat 
them ;  two  men  at  the  same  time  were  to  b^ 
placed  at  the  area^  one  with  a  blunderbu8s,i 
and  another  vrith  hand-grenade ;  if  any  body 
attempted  to  make  their  retreat  from  the 
lower  part  of  the  house  that  w«^,  they 
were  to  have  a  hand-grenade  thrown  in 
amongst  them  there;  at  the  same  time  all 
these  objects  were  to  be  accomplished  by  se-^ 
euring  the  house,  those  mea  who  were  to  co^ 


9391 


far  High  Trmuan. 


A.  D.  18%. 


1930 


in  for  the  assassination  were  to  rush  in  di- 
rectly after,  where  their  lordships  were,  and  to 
murder  all  they  found  in  the  room  good  or 
bad ;  he  said  if  there  were  any  good  ones  they 
would  murder  them  for  keeping  bad  company. 
Then  the  witness  says,  **  Ings  "  who  is  repre- 
sented to  be  a  butcher,  **  volunteered  to  enter 
the  room  first  with  a  brace  of  pistols,  a  cutlass, 
and  his' knife  in  his  pocket,  with  a  determina^ 
tion,  after  the  two  swordsmen,  that  were  ap- 
pointed to  follow  him,  had  despatched  them, 
to  cut  every  head  off  that  was  in  the  room, 
and  the  heads  of  lords  Castlereagh  and  Sid- 
mouth  he  would  bring  away  in  a  bag,  he 
would  provide  for  the  purpose  two  bags.** — 
A  circumstance  worthy  of  your  notice,  because 
you  will  beaTin  mind  that  there  were  two 
empty  bags  found  on  the  person  of  Ings  when 
he  was  taken  into  custody.    He  says  "  he  said 
he  intended,  when  he  got  into  the  room,  to  say 
^'well,  my  lords,  T  have  got  as  good  men  here 
as  the  Manchester  Yeomanry,  enter  citizens, 
and  do  your  duty.'    Upon  Uiis  word  of  com- 
mand from  Ings  the  two  swordsmen  were  to 
enter,  to  be  rollowed  by  the  rest  of  the  men 
with  pikes,  pistols,  cutlasses,  or  whatever  it 
'  might  be,  and  to  Ml  to  work  immediately  in 
murdering  them  as  fast  as  they  could  ;*'  he 
says,  **  Harrison,  who  has  been  a  soldier,  and 
I,  myself,  were  picked  out,  being  the  only  men 
amongst  them  used  to  the  sword,  and  men  of 
the  greatest  strength   and  power.    Harrison 
had  been  a  soldier  in  the  life-guards.    On 
Harrison  being  proposed  to  go  into  the  room, 
Dustlewood  asked  me  if  I  would  go  in ;"  he 
says  **  I  considered  my  life  in  danger"  (there 
had  been  considerable  threatening  language 
if  he  is  to  be  believed),  '^  and  I  agreed  to  go." 
After-the  execution  was  done  in  the  house, 
they  were  to  leave  the  house  as  quickly  as 
possible:    Harrison  was  the  man  that  was 
appointed*to  go  to  King-street  Horse-barracks, 
and  to  take  one  of  those  fire-balls  and  throw 
it  amongst  straw  to  set  fire  to  the  premises ; 
alter  they  left   Orosvenor-square,    Harrison, 
Wilson,  and  the  rest  of  the  party  were  to  pro- 
ceed to  OrayVinn-lane  to  the  City  Light- 
Horse  barracks,  for  the  purpose  of  meeting  a 
party  of  men  that  were  intended  to  be  planted 
there,  and  in  case  those  men  found  themselves 
not  sufficiently  strong  to  take  the  two  pieces 
of  cannon  at  the  Light-Horse  bamicks,  they 
#ere  to  wait  their  arrival  and  would  assist 
them;   they  were  to  proceed  from   thence 
to   the   Artillery-ground,  ythOte   Cook  was 
to   be  appointed;   in  order  to  lend  him  a 
hand  in  case  he  had  foond  himself  not  snffi- 
iHently  strong  to  take  the  six  cannon  there. 
Cook  was  to  wait  there  for  the  arrival  of  This- 
tlewood  if  he  did  not  like  to  proceed ;  he  was 
to  bring  the  cannon  fh>m  the  ground  into  the 
street,  and  to  load  them' in  order  to  be  ready 
to  fire  on  any  persons  that  might  interrupt 
Blim  :  bdt  if  he  found  Ids  strength  sufficient  to 
enable  him  to  proceed,  he  was  to  advance 
from  there  to  the  Mansion-house,  if  he  found 
himself  capable  of  advancing  to  the  Mansion* 
VOL.  XXXIIL 


house  he  was  to  divide  the  six  cannon  into 
two  divisions,  and  take  three' on' one  side  and 
three  on  the  other ;  then  he  was  to  demand  f 
the  Mansion-house,  and  on  a  refusal  he  was 
to  fire  at  it  on  both  sides,  it  was  thought  on 
doing  that  they  would  soon  give  it  up— the 
provisioned  goverikment  was  to  sit  there :  after 
the  Mansion-house  was  taken  the    Bank  of 
England  was  to  he  the  next  place  to  be  at. 
tacked,  they  were  to  plunder  it  of  all  they 
could  get,  but  not  to  destroy  the  bck)ks  if  they 
could  help  it,  for  they  thought  by  keeping  pos- 
session 01  the  books,  that  would  enable  them 
to  see  further  into  the  villainy  that  had,  be 
said,  been  practised  in  the  country  for  some 
years  past ;  the  regulation  of  the  further  pro- 
ceedings was  to  be  left  till  Wednesday ;  Pa- 
lin's  plan  was  determined  on,  but  the  time  was 
not  then  settled.     After  the  chair  was  left^ 
Harrison  proposed   that   there  should   be  a 
counter-sign  to  be  communicated  to  all  their 
friends,  the    countersign  was    Button;    the 
man  that  came  up  was  to  say,  6,  ti,  t,    the 
other    man  -  was    to    say,  t,  o,  n,    these    put 
together  were  to  produce  Button,  this  was  a 
token  by  which  they  were  to  know  each  other. 
He  says,  **  it  was  proposed  that  a  man  should 
stand  at  the  end  ot  Oxford-road  to  communi- 
cate to  any  man  that  came  up  to  htm  the 
room  where  they  were  to  meet  the  next  night. 
In  the  afternoon  I  went  to  the  house  again  ; 
in  going  up  stairs,  I  perceived  a  strange  smell, 
on  going  in  I  found  Edwards,  Ings,  and  Hall 
there ;  Edwards  was  making  fuses  to  put  -to 
the  hand-grenades;  Ings  ¥ras  dipping  some 
rope  yam,  picked  for  the  purpose,  into  stuff  to 
make,  what  they  termed,  illumination  balb  for 
Palin ;  Hall  was  dipping  those  into  an  iron 
pot  and  putting  sheets  of  paper  on  the  floor  to 
receive  these,  af^er  they  came  from  the  pot 
they  were  wrapped  up  in  it  to  prevent  their 
sticking  to  the  hands.    I  stoppea  only  a-  few 
minutes.    On  the  same  Tuesday  evening,  I 
went  again,  and  then  found  two  strange  men 
r  had  never  seen — one  I  found  to  be  Harris, 
but  I  do  not  know  the  name  of  the  other ; 
Brunt  and  Thistlewood  were  there,  Davidson 
went  to  keep  watch  at  six  o'clock ;  Tidd  and 
Brunt  went  off  to  relieve  him  at  nine  o'clock, 
they  started  about  half  past  eight,  but  Brunt 
returned  in  about  five  minutes,  as  Tidd  had 
met  with  a  man  who  was  likely  to  be-of  gr«iat 
consequence  and  could  not  go.    On  looking 
round  the  room  he  asked  me  to  go;  as  we 
went  we'  met  Edwards,  I  asked  him  if  any 
thing  particular  bad  been  seen,  he  said,  what- 
ever had  been  seen  he  should  communicate 
to  Mr.  Thistlewood;   Brunt  and  I  went  to 
.Grosvcfnor-square,  we 'saw  Davidson    in  the 
square  and    another    man    that    I  did  not 
know.'^    He  says,  **I  told  Brunt  I  was  tired, 
and  we  went  to  a  public-house  at  the  comer 
of  the  mews  where  we  had  some  porter,  and 
where  Brunt  played  at  dominos  with  a  youB|f 
man,  and  we  staid  there  till  eleven  o'clock, 
and  then  we  went  out  and  walked  till  twelve 
o'clock,  and  then  we  went  home.    On  Wed<« 
30 


081} 


I  GpORGE  IV. 


TriiU  (^Afikmr  ninlauood 


(1889 


Deeday,  the  next  day,  I  went  again  to  Fox* 
court  and  I  (Mind  Brunt  in  his  own  room; 
Strange  came  in  alone,  and  soon  after  two 
more  persons;  I  turned  my  head  and  saw 
some  pistols  upon  the  drawers.  Strange  an4 
the  men  that  came  in  tried  the  flints  ;  Brunt 
then  invited  them  into  the  back  room;  on 
going  there,  I  saw  several  cutlasses,  a  blun- 
derbuss, the  pistols  were  brought  in  and  the 
strangeiB  began  to  put  flints  into  them ;  they 
bad  not  been  long  there  before  Thistlewood, 
Ings,  and  Hall  came  in ;  Thistlewood  k>oked 
found  and  said, '  well,  my  lads,  this  now  looks 
•omething  like,  as  if  there  was  something 
ymng  to  be  done.'  I  complained  of  be- 
ing in  low  spirits,  and  Brunt  sent  .out  (or 
some  gin  and  some  beer ;  idiile  the  beer  was 
being  fetched,  Thistlewood  said  be  wanted 
some  paper  to  write  some  bills  on,  such  as 
•ewspapers  were  printed  on,  I  said,  I  thought 
tartridge  paper  would  do  as  well,  and  be,  ^t 
is  Thistlewood,  then  said  who  wil^  fetch  it  ? 
Brunt  said  my  boy,  or  i43prentice,  shall  fetch 
iit;  Thistlewood  save  Brunt  a  shilling  to  send 
(sr  the  paper,  half  a  doaen  sheets  were  brought 
and  Thistlewood  sat  down  at  a  table  to  write 
three  bills  to  stick  up  against  the  buildings 
that  might  be  set  on  fire/'  the  words,  as  the 
witness  reocUects  them,  were  these:  ''Your 
^rrants  ara  destroyed,  the  friends  of  liberty 
are  called  upon  to.  come  forward,  as  the 
proTiaioDal  government  is  now  sitting.  J  ames 
Ings,  Secretary,  33rd  February,  1820.  In 
wiitiag  the  last  bill,  I  perceived  Mr.  Thistle- 
wood to  be  extremely  agitated,  so  much  so 
that  he  could  hardly  write,  he  said  he  was  yery 
tired,  and  did  not  know  what  was  the  matter 
with  bin,  but  he  could^not  write  any  more  ; 
he  then  proposed  that  Hall  should  take  the 
pea,  but  liall  objected,  another  person,  a 
atrsttger,  aflerwanls  took  the  pen  and  sat 
down  to  write  what  Thistlewood  dictated  to 
bim  :**  what  became  of  the  papers  he  does  not 
know. 

The  witness  was  then  questioned  as  to  what^ 
was  oontained  in  that  paper;  some  doubt 
being  entertained  on  the  part  of  the  jud|^ 
whether  it  was  proper  evidence  to  be  received 
under  the  particular  circumstance  of  not  hay« 
ing  been  seen  in  the  hands  of  the  prisoner,  the 
Sc^citor-general  said,  very  properly,  he  should 
not  press  the  contents  of  that  paper,  and  there- 
fi»e  we  have  no  account  of  it.  The  witness 
says,  ^  while  this  paper  was  writing,  Ings  was 
preparing  himself  in  the  manner  he  was  to 
enter  the  room  at  lord  Hanowby's ;  he  put  a 
black  belt  round  his  waist  for  a  brace  of  pia- 
tols,  and  another  black  belt  across  his  shouloer ; 
after  this  there  was  a  bag  hung  to  each 
shoulder,  in  the  form  of  a  soldier's  hayersack ; 
he  then  placed  a  brace  of  pistols  one  on  each 
side,  and  a  cutlass ;  he  yiewed  himself  and 
said  with  an  oath,  I  am  not  complete  now^  I 
have  forgot  my  steel  and  pulled  out  a  large 
knife,  and  brandished  it  about  as  if  he  were  in 
the  act  of  cutting  off  the  heads  he  intended* 
Ue  said  he  intended  to  cut  off  two^  and  bring 


them  away,  togeHier  with  one  hand  of  a^y  loid 
Castlereagh,  which  might  at  a  future  daiy  be 
thought  a  good  deal  of; — these  expressions  he 
had  used  many  times.''    The  witness  describ* 
ed  the  knife ;  it  was  a  large-bladed  knife  from 
ten  to  twelye  inches  long;  the  handle  was 
bound  with  waxrcnd*     Such  a  knife  yon  will 
bear  in  mind  waa  afterwards  seiaed  ia  tba 
stable  from  one  of  the  persons  there  who  vj^ 
pears  to  have  been  Ings.    He  says,  ''wluU 
this  waa  passing,  the  others  were  arming  thea»» 
selyes.    The  first  persona  who  left  the  room 
went  about  four  or  five.    Palin  came  ia  about 
an  hour  before  X  left,  and  Thistlewood  and 
Bmnt  on  some  business  left  the  room,  and  theo 
Palin  said,  gentlemen,  I  hope  all  that  have 
met  here  this  afternoon,  are  well  acq^aaintad 
with  what  you  are  goins  upon;  iu  tlie  fiat 
place  you  ought  to  think,  within  yourseLveS) 
whether  you  are  going  to  ^  your  country  % 
service  or  not;  yeu  ought  to  think  whether 
this  assassination  wiU  be  countenaoced  by 
your  country.    IS  you  conceive  that  the  assa»- 
siaation  will  be  countenanced  by  your  coun- 
try, and  that  the  people  of  the  country,  altar 
you  have  done  it,  will  turn  of  your  side ;  eyecy 
man  that  flinches  firom  his  duty,  or  turns  out  a 
coward,  ought  to  be  buu  through:  unless  you 
come  to  this  deietisination  it  is  impossible  to 
do  any  good.''    He  s^,  "  then  a  man,  whosa 
nam«  I  do  not  know,  interrupted  him.    Thisi* 
tlewood  and  Brunt  l»d  not  then  come  in ;  the 
tall  man  said,  you  seem  to  speak  as  if  eyery 
man  were  ija  possession  of  what  we  are  going 
upon ;  if  we  turn  out  with  a  yiew  to  serve  owr 
country,  I  am  not  afraid  of  my  life,  and  he 
who  is  aft'aid  of  his  life,  ought  to  have  nothing 
to  do  with  an  affair  like  this.    Brunt  came  im 
after  this,  and  perceiving  an  alteration  in  tiit 
countenance  of  the  meeting,  he  wished  iM^ 
know  the  cause ;  he  was.  told  these  were  some 
ia  iha  room  who  wished  to  know  further  of  tha 
plan.    Upon  this  Brunt  said,  this  is  not  the 
place  to  teli  them  that;  the^  should  go  wi^ 
him  to  the  room  in  Edgware  road»  ai^  thoBa 
every  one  sfiould  be  apprised  of  what  they  i»* 
tended  to  do."    He  says»  '^  Ileft  the  loom  firsts 
and  Strange  and  three  or  four  othecs,,  thai  I 
do  not  know,  went  out  afterwards*    It  wae 
agreed  they  should  walk  two  and  two,    im 
order  to  avoid  suspickm."    Then  be.  giyes  aa 
account  of  his  going  up  Holbom,  and  that  he 
waa  tapped  on  the  shouldec.    He  says,  **uk 
this  room  these  was  a  cupboard,  in  which  there 
were  swords,  hand-grenades,  and  flannel  bage 
for  cartridges  for  the  cannon — alltheamman^ 
tion  was  not  at  Bnint'sii  but  what  they  called 
the  d^p6t,  which  was  at  Tidd'a  house,  who 
lived  in  the  next  room  to  n^yself«    When  I  set 
off  from  Brunt's,  I  had  a  blunderbuss  under  my 
great  coat,  and  Bmul  gavce  ma  a  broomstick^ 
which  was  prepared  to  reeeiive  a  bayonet,  ta 
carry.    Among  other  ansa  at  the  d4p6t  were 
some  pikes,  some  o£  them  oki  files,  and  soma 
of  them  old  bayonet  points.;  he  sajps,  thai  % 
man.  came  up  and  tola  him  to  slacken  his  papci, 
as  Brunt  was  gcpe^ck  for  ayactbiefe;  hedui 


99Sf\ 


Jar  High  Treastm. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[934 


M  Md  weal  <Mi  to  tbe  «nd  of  Oxfotd-^treet  t  ** 
Tk  teems  Im  did  tiot  kncyir  this  room  to  Cato- 
slreet,  he  nvee  tired  of  ste^in^;,  end  w«ft  on  hSs 
iMy  ^ck  and  be  met  Bruot,  then  he  retarned 
hook  with  Bnmt  «im1  weot  along  the  Edcware- 
toid  «?kii  him  until  they  met  Thistlewool,  v^ 
took  them  to  Cato«etreet:  he  ftayt^  **  when  I 
got  to  the  9lablo*door  HarHson  came  op  and 
told  me  to  go  io^  and  I  did  so,  I  then  saw 
Davidson  sitting  down  and  Wilson  standing  as 
if  tft«y  were  doing  something  to  the  pikes ;  I 
oanaot  say  the  number  of  persons  there  then ; 
b«t  at  tihe  conclusion  there  were^  aeeordiog  to 
Thitttewood's  aocount,  eighteen  above  and  two 
below;  there  was  a  carpenter's  bend)  with 
amiB  of  diffsrent  descriptions  on  it,  and  there 
WW  a  ehest  by  the  window  where  I  plaeed 
ayeelf ;  when  1  went  in  they  were  handling  the 
d^iM«ot  things,  Tidd  came  in  and  proposed 
ffoing  to  the  sqnare  to  see  whether  the  minis* 
tors  were  getting  together;  Tliistlewood  was 
irtwent  for  some  time,  and  when  he  came  back 
I  heard,  below  stairs,  a  great  deal  of  talkinr. 
in  consequence  of  that  I  went  down  where  I 
fiHiDd  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Davidson,  Harrison, 
«tt4  Wilson ;  on  seeing  me  they  said  the  car* 
liages  are  getting  tiiere  as  fast  as  they  can,  no 
leat  than  sis  or  seten  are  already  there :  Bhmt 
timied  round  and  said,  what  a  hanl  we  shall 
have  among  them.  After  this  I  went  up  stairs. 
Thietlewood  was  much  agitated,  and  Tidd 
OMaein  very  litde  afterwards.  Ings  turned 
VMmd  and  said,  do  not  think  of  dropping  it 
iwws  if  TOO  do,  I  shall  hang  myself;  it  was 
said  Tidd  would  not  come ;  Thistlewood  said 
ha  would  forfeit  his  existence  if  Tidd  did 
not  oome ;  afterwards  he  came.  Thistlewood 
hoped  they  would  not  give  up  what  they 
had  begun ;  if  they  did,  it  would  torn  out 
aDother  Despard's  job;^  allodintr  to  the  ease 
df  a  perseo  of  that  name,  of  which  you 
hafve  heard ;  he  says,  '^  Thistlewood  Aen  be- 
gan to  count  the  mmber  of  men  that  were 
theie,  and  said  altogeffaer  there  were  twenty, 
and  that  that  was  plenty ;  he  said  fourteen 
iMfdd  be  saflfcient  to  go  into  the  room,  and 
the  other  six  would  be  sufficient  to  take  care 
of  the  servants;  on  this,  fourteen  men  were 
pMiLed  out,  and  Brunt  produced  a  bottle  of 
gin  which  was  handed  round.  Thistlewood 
said  the  number  is  sufficient ;  supposing  lord 
Marrowby  should  have  sixteen  servants,  they 
are  not  prepared,  we  are.  We  can  do  what 
we  have  to  do  in  ten  minutes.  Almost  di- 
rectly afterwards  we  heard  a  noise  at  the  bot- 
tom of  the  ladder  leading  up  to  the  loft.''  He 
says,  ^  Thistlewood  upon  this  took  the  candle, 
and  looked  towards  the  bottom  of  the  bench." 
He  says,  ^  He' turned  round  and  put  the  can- 
dle at  the  bottom  of  the  bench  quite  conftised ; 
aa  thb  instant  the  officers  ascended  the  ladder, 
and  took  command  of  the  room ;  two  stood 
aft  the  top  of  the  ladder  and  presented  two 
piatoiff,  and  said, — Holloa  1  is  any  body  in  the 
room?  here  is  a  pretty  nest  of  you.  We  have 
got  a  warrant  to  arrest  you  all,  and  as  such 
fit  hope  yott  witt  go  peaceably— One  of  the 


officers  wbo  was  then  upon  the  ladder  said, 
Make  way,  let  me  come  forward-^a  group 
then  got  into  the  inuer  room,  and  I  saw  an 
arm  rush  suddenly  forward,  and  at  the  same 
time  I  saw  a  pistol  ftred ;  as  soon  as  the  pistol 
Was  fired,  the  candle  was  put  out,  and  it  was 
impossible  for  me  to  see  what  passed.  On 
this  it  was  eiven  out  that  one  of  the  officers 
was  murdered,  and  I  got  away  and  went  home. 
I  was  apprehended  on  the  Friday  fcklowing, 
and  have  been  in  custody  ever  since.''  He 
was  desired  to  look  at  the  persons  at  the  bar, 
many  of  whom  he  recognised.  The  person  of 
Strange  he  did  not  recollect;  whether  any 
alteration  of  dress  prevented  it,  I  am  not  able 
to  say.  An  observation  has  been  made  upon 
what  the  witness 'says  were  the  words  used  by 
the  officers,  namely,  ^  we  have  got  a  warrant 
to  arrest  you,  and  we  hope  you  will  go  peace- 
ably ;''  and  it  is  said,  that  Ibe  officers  did  not 
say  that  they  said  that  they  had  a  warrant,  but 
they  observed  that  they  were  officers,  and  de- 
sired that  the  arms  might  be  seized,  or  that 
they  shoidd  surrender;  the  expressions  have 
certainly  much  the  same  import,  but  which  is 
the  correct  one  it  is  impossible  to  say. 

The  witness  was  then  cross-examined,  and 
was  asked  what  had  carried  him  to  this  meeting; 
and  he  made  use  of  an  expression  which  was 
very  improper,  and  ought  not  to  have  been 
used  in  this  place,  he  answered,  <'  My  legs.^ 
He  says  farCher,  ^  I  went  there  under  the  pre- 
tension of  assassinating  his  majesty's  ministers 
to  every  outward  appearance,  but  my  inwud 
intention  was  entirely  against  it,  I  had  at- 
tended many  meetings  at  which  this  plan  was 
debated,  and  was  chairman  of  one.  Fear,'' 
he  says  ''kept  me  to  it.  After  leaving  the 
army  I  went  to  Cambray,  to  follow  my  trade 
as  a  shoemaker,  and  there  became  acquainted 
with  Tidd.  I  carried  between  thirty  and  forty 
potttHls  with  me,  it  was  my  own.  Brunt  in- 
troduced me  to  Tbistlewood(,  for  the  purpose 
of  assassinating  the  ministers; — this  waspro- 
posed  to  me  by  Brunt,  before  I  ever  saw  lliis- 
tlewood ;  and  I  consented  to  be  introduced  to 
Thistlewood  for  that  purpose.  The  first  ac- 
count I  ever  gave  of  wnat  had  passed  was  on 
the  Saturday  after;  I  did  not  give  it  under 
any  understanding  that  I  was  to  become  a 
witness— my  conscience  accused  me,  I  had 
acted  vrrong,  and  I  made  a  vow  that  if  God 
would  spare  me,  I  would  make  a  disclosure 
of  an  I  knew."  Then  he  is  asked,  whether  it 
was  not  because  he  would  not  like  to  be  hang- 
ed that  he  disclosed  this  ?  to  which  his  answer 
is,  ''  I  do  not  know  who  would^"  He  says, 
''  I  had  some  of  these  feelings  before  I  entered 
the  room  in  Cato-street;  but  after  I  entered 
the  room,  and  after  the  murder  of  Smithers 
was  committed,  I  was  worse."  Now,  gentle- 
men, you  will  iudge  whether  die  picture  which 
this  witness  exhibits  of  himself,  is  not  the  na- 
tural picture  of  the  mind  of  a  bad  man  en- 
gaged, as  he  was,  in  a  very  wicked  design, 
fesaful  of  his  own  accomplicfts,  afraid  to  go 
oDy  and  aftaid  to  recede,  equally  apprehensive 


935] 


I  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  (^Arikm  HkitOmoni 


rsM 


of  both,  inrofiolnte  and  undeterndned  whether 
he  should  make  any  disclosure  till  he  was  in 
custody ;  at  which  time  it  watt  necessary 
instantly  to  make  a  disclosure,  which  he  says 
he  did,  without  any  promise  of  any  reward. 

He  says,  ''  The  greatest  number  of  persons 
tha^  I  ever  saw  assembled  together  was  on  the 
20th  of  February,  in  the  morning ;  there  were 
about  fifteen,  all  poor  men  for  what  I  know.'' 
The  prisoner,  he  says,  gave  money  to  Hall  to 
fetch  the  newspaper.  *'  The  largest  sum  of 
money  I  ever  saw  was  six  shillings  produced 
hy  Thistlewood  to  Brunt.  I  do  not  Jmow 
where  the  men  were  to  come  from  that  were 
to  do  all  this  mischief.'*  Then  he  was  asked, 
you  provided  powder  for  the  cannon,  but  you 
had  no  balls.  Upon  which  he  sajrs,  it  was 
proposed  to  take  a  sledge  hammer  along  with 
them,  and  knock  off  the  tops  of  the  iron  rail- 
ings, and  that  they  would  ao  greater  mischief 
than  cannon-ball. — He  says  that  the  prisoner 
said  this.  He  says,  ''  I  do  not  know  what  is 
become  of  Edwards ;  I  haTe  not  seen  him  since 
the  22nd  of  February.  I  have  seen  him  as 
active  as  the  rest  of  them.''  Then  some  ques- 
tions were  put  to  him  as  if  importing  that  his 
was  the  hand  that  held  the  sword  by  which 
Smithers  died.  He  says,  *'  I  was  at  the  end 
of  the  room,  under  the  Bench  next  Cato-stree^ 
four  or  five  feet  off ;  I  saw  the  arm  that  ex- 
tended from  the  door.** 

Upon  re-examination  he  says,  ^Tbe  army 
wa^  at  Cambray  when  I  was  there,  and  I  was 
carrying  on  my  trade  with  the  English  soldiers 
there." 

This,  gentlemen,  is  the  whole  of  the  testi- 
mony given  to  you  by  this  witness,  Adams; 
and  if  this  be  true  in  substance  and  general 
effect,  it  does  prove,  not  merely  an  intention 
to  assassinate  the  several  persons  engaged  in 
the  government  of  the  country,  but  shews  also 
ttiat  that  was  only  a  part  of  a  further  and  more 
extensive  plan ; — of  a  plan  to  seixe  the  cannon, 
take  possession  of  the  Mansion-house,  and 
establish  a  provisional  government  there,  upon 
the  vain  expectation  that  if  once  such  a  blow 
could  be  struck,  there  were  many  people  in 
the  metropolis  ready  to  join  the  standard  of 
rebellion ; — this  hope  will,  I  trust,  always  be 
disappointed,  whoever  shall  at  any  time  en- 
tertain it; — ^it  however  seems  to  nave  been 
entertained,  if  we  are  to  believe  this  witness. 
It  is  observed,  that  he  mentions,  several  times, 
a  person  of  the  name  of  Edwards,  whose  name 
is  in  the  list  of  witnesses :  why  he  is  not  called 
it  is  not  for  me  te^say ;  those  who  conduct  the 
prosecution  probably  have  their  reasons  for 
not  laying  before  you  further  or  other  evidence 
than  they  have  laid  before  you.  Whether  he 
is  willing  'to  be  examined  we  do  not  know ; 
probably  he  is;  can  you  then  condude  be- 
cause he  is  not  examined,  that  all  that  is  said 
by  Adams  is  untrue  ?  It  is  for  you  to  judge. 
Tne  observation  on  the  absence  of  witnesses, 
I  am  soriy  to  say,  presses  with  greater  force 
on  the  prisoner ;  because'there  are  three  or  four 
persons  present  at  conversations  mentioned  by 


this  witness,  cither  of  whom  would  be  a  con^ 
petent  witness  to  contradict  Adams.  With 
respect  to  the  character  of  Adams,  except  so 
£Eur  as  he  implicates  himself-^except  by  his 
ovm  account,  no  other  objection  is  made4o 
him — no  witness  is  called  to  say  any  thing 
against  him,  either  as  to  his  former  life  or  cqih 
rersation ;  nothing  appears  against  him  bcfi»» 
you,  except  the  part  be  took  in  this  transac- 
tion. 

Another  witness  who  speaks  to  the  designs 
of  these  persons  is  Hiden,  who  certainly  is  of 
a  vezy  different  character  and  deseription  from 
Uie  witness  Adams;  he  is  not  to  be  considered 
as  an  accomplice,  nay,  according  to  the  aeeomil 
he  has  given, — the  truth  of  which  it  seems  is 
admitted, — ^there  is  no  doubt  he  does  not  labour- 
under  any  imputation;  because  he  disclosed 
what  he  knew  early  enough  to  have  prevented 
the  accomplishment  of  the  object. 

I  will  now  read  to  you  the  evidence  of 
Thomas  Hiden.  He  says,  ^I  have  been  a 
cow-keeper,  I  had  seen  Wilson  formeriy  at  a 
shoemaker's  dub ;  a  few  days  before  the  23id 
of  February  I  met  him  in  the  street,  and  he 
asked  me  if  I  would  be  one  of  a  party  to  de» 
stroy  his  majesty's  ministers  at  a  cabmet  dinney  ; 
that  all  things  were  ready— that  they  had  such 
thines  as  hand-grenades.  He  said  di^  de- 
pended on  my  being  made  one  of  them,  and 
that  Mr.  ThisUewood  would  be  glad  to  see  me ; 
he  told  me  the  hand-grenades  were  to  be  lighted 
with  fiises,  and  to  be  put  under  the  table,  and 
all  that  escaped  the  explosion  were  to  die  by 
the  edge  of  tne  sword,  or  some  other  weapon.'* 
Then  be  says,  *'  Wilson  told  him  that  they 
were  to  light  up  some  fires  by  way  of  keeping 
the  town  in  confusion  for  a  few  days ;  and  it 
would  become  a  general  thing."  He  mention- 
ed several  houses,  as  some  tlmt  they  meant  -to 
set  fire  to.  He  says,  '^  I  told  him  tbat  I  would 
do  it.  I  believe  this  was  fonr  or  five  days  be- 
fore the  discovery  at  Cato-street.  I  went  to 
lord  Harrowby's  the  day  before  the  discovery; 
I  followed  his  lordship  to  the  Paik  and  gave- 
him  a  note  with  information.  I  saw  WUson 
,  again,  between  fonr  and  five  in  the  aftemooo^ 
in  Manchester-street,  Manchester-equare ;  he 
called  me,  and  told  me  there  was  to  be  a  ca- 
binet dinner  that  night  at  lord  Harrowby's  in 
Grosvenor-square.  He  told  me  I  was  to  go 
up  to  Cato-street,  to  a  public-house  by  the  sign 
ot  the  Horse  and  Groom,  and  there  I  was  to 
go  in — it  is  the  comer  of  Cato-street — or  I -was 
to  stop  at  the  comer  till  I  was  shoved  into  a 
stable  dose  by ;  I  asked  at  what  time,  and4ie 
said  by  six  o  clock.  I  asked  him  how  many 
there  were  to  be  there,  and  he  said  about 
twenty  or  thirty.  I  asked  him  whether  there 
were  going  to  oe  any  others  in  other  places  P 
and  he  said  there  was  to  be  another  party  in 
the  Borough ;  another  in  Gray?s-inn-lane ;  one 
in  Gee's-court,  or  in  the  dty ;  I  cannot  be 
certaifi  which.  He; said  that  all  Gee's-coiut 
were  in  it,  but  they  would  not  act  unless  the 
English  were  in  it  first;  because  they  had  been 
deceived  so  often.    I  niMlerstood  they 


037J 


>• 


TrtaiOH* 


Irish  people  wlio  U?ed  inOee'i^oiirt ;  it  is  in 
Oxford-street,  opposite  St.  George's- market. 
He  said)  a  geatleman's  serrant  had  heen  sup- 
porting some  of  the  party,  and  would  give  them 
more  moaey  if  thev  would  act  upon  the  subject. 
He  asked  me  if  I  had  a  pin,  and  I  told  him  I 
had  a  rubbishing  one ;  that  the  lock  was  at  a 
gun^smith's  to  repair :  he  said  they  would  pro- 
vide me  with  a  gun  and  something  to  work  it 
with."  Then  he  goes  on  to  say,  <' Wilson 
further  told  me  there  were  two  pieces  of  can- 
•on  in  Giav's-inn-lane  that  they  could  set  at 
Tery  easily  by  breaking  in  some  small  doors ; 
that  there  were  four  pieces  of  cannon  at  some 
Ajtillery-grouad,  which  they  could  easily  p^t 
by  killing  a  sentinel."  He  says, ''  After  doine 
the  grand  thing  in  the  Square,  Wilson  said 
they  were  to  retreat  and  meet  somewhere  in 
the  neighbourhood  of  the  Mansion-house :  he 
told  me  to  be  sure  and  come  to  my  time,  or 
else  the  grand  thing  would  be  done  before  I 
came.'*  Upon  this  he  says,  "  I  went  to  John- 
street  about  seven  o'clock ;  when  I  got  to  the 
gateway  into  Cato-etreet,  at  the  comer  of  the 
Horse  and  Groom,  I  saw  Wilson,  and  David- 
son the  man  of  colour*  Davidson  said,  I  was 
behind  my  time :  he  asked  me  if  I  would  go 
ia,  that  Mr.  Ihistlewood  was  there.  .  I  tdd 
him  I  could  not  go  in,  as  I  had  to  go  for  some 
epsam.  I  asked  him  what  time  they  should 
leave  there ;  he  said  about  eic^t  o'clock.  He 
told,  me  if  I  was  not  there  before  they  were 
gone,  I  was  to  follow  them  to  Grosvenor-sauare, 
and  1  should  find  them  at  the  fdtarth  house 
from  the  comer  of  Grosvenoi^square,  on  the 
bottom  side  next  Chnrdi-street.'' 

On  his  cross-examination,  he  says  it  was  lour 
or  five  da^  before  the  23rd  of  February,  that 
he  had  this  first  conversation  with  Wilson :  he 
had  known  him  seven  or  eight  months  before. 
He  88TS  he  cannot  say  from  his  memory  on 
what  aay  he  gave  the  note  to  lord  Harrowby. 
He  says,  **  When  Wilson  told  me  of  the  plan, 
it  was  as  we  walked  up  and  down  Manchester- 
street."  Then  a  letter  is  shewn  to  the  witness, 
addressed  to  lord  Castlereagh,  which  he  says 
is  his  writing ;  it  is  the  letter  he  gave  to  lord 
Harrowby,  as  he  could  not  see  lord  Castlereagh 
to  whom  it  was  addressed,  informing  him  of  a 
plot  to  destroy  his  m^esty's  ministers. 

Now,  gentlemen,  this  witness,  Hiden,  you 
see,  is  entirely  free  firom  all  impeachment  either 
by  any  testimony  against  him,  or  his  own  con- 
duct ;  and  his  own  conduct,  so  far  from  iai<' 
peaehing  him,  is  highly  creditable*  He  says 
Wilson  informed  him  of  taking  these  cannon 
io  Gray's-inn^lane,  going  to  the  Arallery-ground, 
and  then  to  the  Mansion-house,  mentioning 
those  matters  shorter  than  Adams  did.  .  What* 
ever  is  said  by  any  one  person  upon  the  subject 
of  a  conspiracy  in  whicn  they  are  satisfactorily 
.^abewn  to  have  been  all  engaged,  is  to  .be  re« 
oeived  not  only  against  the  person  who  utters 
Up  but  against  all  who  have  been  concerned  in 
it;  you  will  consider,  therefore,  the- effect  of 
this  evidence,  and  whether  this  is  not  a  strong 
QDnfir^iation  of  the  more  detailed  stoiy  that 
has  been  gtvea  by  Adams, 


A.  D.  1820.  [83ft 

The  next  witness  called  to  gfve  an  aceounC 
of  their  designs,  is  Monument,  who  is  certainly 
an  accomplice,  not  of  so  long  standing  as 
Adams,  Imt  he  must  be  taken  to  have  con- 
sented  to  the  scheme  so  far  as  related  to  the' 
assassination  of  his  majesty's  ministers.  He 
says,  "  I  am  a  shoemaker,  and  Uved  in  Garden- 
court,  Bald¥nn's»gardens,  near  firook's-market. 
I  am  now  a  prisoner  in  the  Tower.  *  I  remem^ 
her  meeting  Thistlewood,  at  a  person's  of  the 
name  of  Ford,  a  few  days  before  the  meeting 
in  Finsbury-market ;  that  is  about  two  nionths 
before  the  23rd  of  February ;  he  afterwards' 
called  on  me  with  Brant;  and  he  said,-  after  a' 
few  minutes,  that  he  wished  to  speak  to  me, 
and  I  went  outside  the  door  with  him,  and  be' 
said  to  me  great  events  are  at  hand,  the  people- 
are  every  where  anxious  for  a  change ;  I  have 
been  promised  support  bv  a  great  many  meo' 
who  have  deceived  me,  but  now  I  have  got* 
meu'  who  will  stand  .by  me.*  He  then  asked - 
me  whether  I  had  any  arms;  I  said  no,  I  had 
not.  He  said  evenr  man  ought  to  be  armed 
now :  he  said  all  of  them  had  got  some  aims  ; 
some  had  got  a  sabre,  some  had  got  a  pike, 
and  some  a  pistol :  he  said  I  might  miy  a- 

Eistol  for  four  or  five  shillings ;  I  told  him  I 
ad  no  money  to  buy  pistols,  I  was  too  poor 
to  do  any  thing  of  the  kind :  he  said  he  wotdd 
see  what  could  be  done ;  he  says  about  two  or 
three  days  afrer  this  Bnmt  called  on  him,  but' 
nothin|^  particular  passed.  Brunt  said,  he  waa- 
rather  in  a  hurrv.  Then  he  says,  on  Tuesday,- 
the  32nd  of  Febraary,  Brant  called  again,  ao« 
oompanied  bv  Tidd,  he  told  me,  in  explaining 
tiie  cause  of  his  absence,  that  die  kin^s  death 
had  made  an  ai^teration  in  their  plan  necessary : 
wlmt  ti^ey  were  I  should  know  at  the  meeting* 
thAt  was  to  be  held  the  night  after,  at  Tyburo- 
tumpike;  that  if  I  saw  any  people  about  them, 
I  was  to  go  to  them  and  say  &, «,  t,  and  if  they 
were  friends  they  would  answer,  /,  o,  n,  that 
he  should  call  on  me  the  following  monung' 
and  tell  me  more  particulars.  The  next  day, 
Wednesday,  Brant  called  again,  between  four 
and  five  oxlock  in  the  afternoon,  and  asked 
me  whether  I  was  ready  to  go  with  him ;  I 
told  him  my  work  would  not  be  done  before 
six  o'dodL:  he  then  said,  I  must  go  to  the 
person  whom  he  had  brought  with  him  the 
day  before,  whose  name  was  Tidd,  and  that 
he  lived  in  Hole-in-the-wall  Passage,  BrookV 
market.  I  went  there,  about  half  past  six- 
o'dodc,  and  found  Tidd  at  home :  he  said  that 
several  men  that  had  promised  to  come,  had 
not  been  so  ^ood  as  their  word,  and  that  he 
should  not  wait  longer  than  seven  o^doek.  At 
seven  o'dock  he  went  to.  a  comer  of  the  room, 
and  todc  out  of  a  trank  a  large  pistol,  and  put- 
it  in  a  belt- he  had  round  his  Dody :  he  then* 
took  about  six  or  eig^t  pikes,  about  a  foot  long,- 
which  he  wrapped  in  brown  paper;  and  he 
took  a  staff  about  four  feet  long,  with  a  hole 
in  one  end  of  it.  We  went  through  Brook-, 
street -into  Holbom,  from  thence  up  Oxford- 
street.'  While  I  was4n  the  room,  I  asked  him 
whne  we  were  going  to :  he  said  to  a  room  in- 


99ti 


1  GEOBGB IV. 


Trial  ^AfUhmr  Thkiknood 


[940 


tht  — wft  t>  JotMi  fAnmtf  MgnwiMtidi  As 
V0  wtft  ooiiig  along  he  fpKre  me  die  p&reNguJF: 
I  aiked  oia  iviMtW  ve  were  fouig  to  the 
Honee  ef  Commoae :  he  flud  ao,  there  weoe 
t0O  mmxf  aeUien  about  there,  i  then  ailDed 
him  nhen  it  was  we  w«re  goiag  to,  and  at 
iMt  he  said  Gf€8veBor.oi»au«;  that  there  was 
%  oahbiet  di«ttr  Aere  uet  eveoiag;  he  did 
■ot  eay  at  whose  hoaee.  We  went  on  to  Cato* 
^reet,  in  the  Bdgwane  eoad ;  when  we  get 
thtre,  vnderneafli  m%  aaehway  leading  to  it,  I 
Miw  two flwn  whom  Tidd  seemed  to  know;  he 
was  a  little  hefoij^  and  spoke  to  theas.  After 
stopping  with  them  a  lew  moments  in  the 
street,  we  went  into  the  stable ;  we  went  vp 
the  atepSy  where  we  fenndy  1  think,  abont 
twentgr-mvr  or  twenty-fire  men ;  b«t  I  had  not 
heen  there  i^ve  two  or  <hine  mimtes,  when 
eeaae  petaon  asked  how  many  them  wer^  msd 
proposed  to  eount  them ;  but  Mr.  Ihistlewood 
aai^  these  was  no  oeoasioa,  for  there  wese 
flFa»on44weaty.  These  was  a  tall  thin  man, 
with  a  hsotm  great  ooat,  sitting  on  one  side  of 
a  curpnatw'i  bensh,  wsih  two  belts  oa,  and  I 
think  a  swoed  by  his  side,  who  was  speaking 
of  the  iaquropriety  of  going  with  so  small  a 
nimber  as  five  land  twcmly  men  to  lord  Har- 
rowby's*  Upon  this  Thisliewoody  Ike  piisoner, 
said,  die  nnmberwas^to  enou^,  for  he  only 
wanted  fourteen  men  to  go  into  Ike  room,  and 
lord  Hamwby  had  siaeleen  «aon  eeiw 
,,  etiM  that  miiriher  was  euttoietc  The 
in  ifte  br0wn  ooat  said,  after  the  haanom 
ie  done^  ond  am  ossne  out,  moet  likely  these 
laHl  be  a  erewd  round  the  door,  how  am  we  to 
mslBeottr  osoapef  Upon  which  Thisdswood 
aaid^pea  know  the  targost  body  is  aliaady  gone, 
this  is  the  emsilleet  part;  apoo  wtuok  Duridsoa 
sssd  to  this  amn  it  was  not  right  in  him  to 
throw  oeld  walar  aaoa  their  |[iroceediqgs ;  if  he 
altaid  of  his  lifo  he  might  go,  aad  they 
Id  do  witheot  hiai.  Biwrt  smd,  sooner 
thaa  disy  woald  gsreap  the  basiaem  W  wieold 

einto  the  house  akme  and  Wow  them  ap,  if 
penshodeioagwidithem;  aad  he  esid,  lor 
yen  kaow,  we  haee  got  that  aideh  eaa  do  it, 
or  aweds  to  dial  eftd.  Then  the  amn  ia  the 
brown  oaal  said,  that  thoagh  he  did  not  thkk 
it  tight  to  ffo  himself,  miU  asthsv  wamall  for 
it,  he  would  not  he  againalit ;  and  he  proposed 
that  an  the  asea  ia  the  room  shoidd  pat  thees- 
aelaea  imder  the  ordem  of  lir.  Tbwtlewood 
upon  vhich  Mr.  Thistlewood  aaUi,  that  every 
one  engaged  in  that  faaainem  would  hare  the 
eaase  henanr  as  himself ;  and  he  propeeed  thai 
the  iiartiin  men  who  Aoald  <voluBteer  to  go 
iato  the  seon^  should  rangg  thomselTos  on  die 
olher  sida  of  dm  room,  vAere  the  firing  allei> 
waale  eaase  fiomwhen  the  oflkers  easse^-* 
sihoattorelTO  or  thirteen  did  so  in  the  eoatse 
of  a  law  aMuatoe.  1^,  adm  was  oae  of  the 
foarteea,  was  epming  out  to  ase  to  my  I  nnght 
ohoese  my  eitaadon^iphen  Mr.  Thistlewood  pot 
him  back,  and  eaid,  you  aH  know  yoar  piaees. 
AAer  dns  Thiedowood  was  abseat  for  a  fow 
Btoments;  when  he  vataNied^  be  eaid  they  had 
moiled  MtoUigeMa  that  die  ihike  of  Weittng- 


ton  and  lord  Sidmoadi  were  aitived  at  Ml 
Hatrowby's,''  That  is  all  he  recollects  until 
the  ofleen  oaaM  up,  and  he  was  taken  into 
eastody. 

UpoB  orosa-emmination  he  says.  ^  I  never 
siKAe  to  Tkietlewood  till  I  saw  him  at  Mr. 
Ford's,  at  Lambeth.  I  attended  the  meeting 
at  Finsbory-asarkot,  but  did  not  take  much 
notioe  of  what  passed.  I  had  no  particalar 
acipmintanco  with  the  prisoner  at  tnat  time. 
I  norer  kaew  Brunt  till  Thistlewood  brought 
him  to  my  house.  I  do  not  know  Edwards  at. 
aU.  Three  or  four  men  were  in  the  stable 
below,  and  the  room  was  pretty  fell ;  the  man 
in  the  brown  ooat  was  not  Adams ;  Ihave  seen 
Adams  at  Hicke'ei>haU  and  here.  I  hare  no 
mooUeetion  at  all  of  seeing  ham  before  that. 
I  remember  eeeiag  Straage  in  the  room  ;  he 
is  rather  shoit,  and  was  staading  by  the  side 
of  mo.  I  oan  tell  nothing  about  Adams ;  I 
did  not  hear  any  person  make  ai^  obsoiraden 
exorpt  die  man  in  the  brown  eoat.  I  wee 
taken  into  ooilody  in  the  room.  I  made  no 
resistanoe.    I  had  no  arms." 

Upon  ra-eoamination  be  says,  *  The  room 
was  neaily  fall  alien  I  casse ;  I  had  been  there 
abovt  a  garter  of  an  hour  before  the  odlccis 
coBM.  I  kaew  ao  oao  theta  except  Tidd, 
Bmnt,  Thtfdewood,  aad  Davidson.''  Yea 
rsooHoct  AdaaM  said  there  was  greaA  uneeei- 
nem  at  this  meedag,  on  aoeount  of  Tidd  not 
aniring  till  a  Iato  boar ;  Monument  confiiaw 
baa  by  etatiag  diat  he  and  TMd  did  not  leara 
Tidd*s  hease  dll  eeran  o^elock.  lie  saye, 
^  Ibew  was  a  eandle  ia  the  room,  I  canaot  say 
if  there  was  more  thaaesm.  There  was  a  great 
oaaatity  9i  eworda  and  pistols,  and  two  or 
msee  bhmdeibumee  npon  die 
beneh.  Strange  wan  appreheaded  at  the 
taoM  with  aw;  them  ^mm  foar  in  the 
aplma  the  eoldiers  eame  ia  and  took  as  aiinto 
CQstedy.*  lliea  he  ie  oKaaiined  findier  aboat 
Sdwerds,  and  he  ss^a^  '^I  was  with  Mr. 
Thisdewaod  at  Whitehall,  beiag  hand^mibd 
to  him.  He  told  me  when  I  itao  exandnod 
before  the  priry  ooaneil,  I  should  eay  Mr. 
Xdwafds  brought  aw  to  the  meedag.  I  asked 
how  I  eeald  ted  saoh  a  foAsehoed,  when  he 
knew  I  had  imrareeea  the  ssan;  be  tanghcd 
and  said,  that  was  of  ao  eoasequenee,  for  if  I 
wao  asked  what  sort  of  a  peieon  he  was»  I  was' 
to  say  he  was  a  man  not  madi  taller  than  I 
was,  of  a  sallow  eompleaicia  and  dressed  ia  a 
brown  coat.''  It  Moaw  that  lEhistleweod  then 
gaspo  him  a  deeeriptien  of  fidwsrdsb  This 
Sdwasds,  gentlemsn»  atteaded  at  several  of  the 
mssday,  bat  it  doss  aei  appear  that  he  was 
the  piapoeer  of  aay  of  dm  plana  that  were 
agitoted.  Thea,  m  imeati  to  a  aery  proper 
qassdea  put  by  oao  of  you,  gentlesaea,  he 
says,  **  1  been  aot,.smoe  my  a^rebeasioa,  had 
aay  eonvorsatioa  sihisitmiai  wini  a  man  of  the 
naase  of  Adaam,  easept  speaking  a  word  or 
two  to  him,  but  none  eooeemiag  thie  basiaosa. 
We  hare  been  s^amtely  confined,  aad  I 
nsear  saw  him  eaoept  ifdien  I  was  taken  np- 
ae  a  witneoa  to  Hickye-hidl^  and  when  I  wan 


Ml] 


^  High  Tnamit, 


A.  D.  leacK 


m» 


broagUt  op  heie  to-day*''  Thay  were  iMth  in 
Ciwtodv,  aad  kefpt  separate,  I  suppose.  This 
man  also  gives  you  aa  account  that  the  scheme 
wax  not  confined  to  the  dreadftil  crime  of 
assassinatioa^  bat  was  to  extend  farther  ;  the 
CMunencesient  of  the  conversation  wsth 
Thiatlewood  shews  it,— -'^  Great  events  are  at 
hand ;  the  people  are  every  where  aaxioos  for 
a  change  j  I  have  been  promised  support  by 
a  great  many  men  who  have  deceived  ae; 
biU  now  I  have  got  men  who  will  standby  me*." 
This  is  the  testimony  of  that  witness.  His 
Wotber  Tbomas»  is  afterwards  called,  but  I 
shall  not  mention  hi»  testimony  to  yovatpre- 
shO,  but  prooeed  iP  that  of  D^ei^  who  speaks 
livrther  to  the  desisns  of  these  persons. 
Tbomaa  Dwyer,  of  No.  15,  Gee's^conrt,  Os- 
loid-stnset,  si^^  ^  before  the  23rd  of  February, 
I  betame  acquainted  with.  Davidson,  I  saw 
bus  twice  ;  on  one  of  those  oceasioDs  I  became 
acqoaiotod  with  Thistlevroed ;  we  went 
together  to  a  public-house,  at  the  end  of 
MoiineauiFetzeet,  near  Gato-street;  tbatwas 
about  the  9th,  10th,  or  11th  of  Febiuaiy, 
either  Wednesday,  Thursday,  or  Friday;  he 
said  nothing  particular  to  me  at  that  time,  he 
said  he  was  in  five  or  six  different  revolutions^ 
and  that  Iieland  vn»  in  a  disturbed  state  at 
that  time ;  I  am  an  Iriahmony  and  ho  said  be 
bad  a  good  many  of  my  countrymen.  I  saw 
Banridsoa  on  the  afternoon,  of  the  23nd  of 
Februaiy }  the  next  meming  ^  person  called 
OB  me  and  I  went  with  bin  lo  Bosrcourt 
Gray'sp-inn-lane ;  he  had  a  bundle  wrapped  un 
in  paper;  art  Fo«-coiut  wo  vrent  into  the  back 
loom :  I  think  he  got  the  key  ficom  a  woman 
in  the  front  room,  there  was  an  old  chaie  in 
the  room;"  he  says  afterwuds, '^some  balls 
wrapped  up  with  rope  yam  were  taken  out  of 
a  cupboard,  Harrison  said  it  was  a  grenade. 
Thistlewood,  Davidson,  and  a.  few  more  came 
in  subsequently ;  Davidson  had  a  Uunderbuss, 
a  pair  ol  pistols,,  and  a  baronet  in  Us  side 
pocket ;  one  ox  tiro  mere  came  in  afterwards, 
among  whom,  was  Brunt:.  After  Davidson  had 
shewn  the  pistols,  he  said  that  he  had  given 
twelve  shillings  for  Ihem^  Bront  said  that  be 
would  go  out  and  buy  a  pair ;  Thistlewood  said 
that  some  of  the  grenades  were  to  be  thsown 
into  the  Horsshbarracks,  and  some  more  of 
ahem  into  lord  Harrowby's  to  set  fiie  te  the 
boose  and  blow  it  up;  lliistlewood  asked  me 
bow  many  of  mv  ceuotrjrmen  I  could  muster 
for  bal£-past  eight  that  evening^  I  told  bim  six 
or  seven  and  twenty,  he  told  me  thev  were  to 
assemble  at  the  Home  and  GrQom>  out  I  was 
ao  be  at  six  o^clock  at  the  Pomftet^^astle,  at 
the  end  of  Bacratt'svceurt,  leading  into  Wig^ 
more-street,  CaveDdish^square ;  that  is  a  bouse 
frefluented  by  Insbniea;  I  was>  to-  take  a  few 
of  toe  best  of  them  aod  go*  to  the  Found£n^ 
hospital^  knock  at  the  Porter'a-lodgie„  put  a 
pistol  to  hia  breast^  turn  down  sound  the  rig)sb 
oand  and  there  were  five  or  six  aod  twenty 
stand  of  arms  at  the  next  lodge ;  I  was  to  seize 
them.  At  the  same  time  another  party  were 
to  seize  two  pieoei  olcaanon  that  weoe  at  the 


City  VolttBleers'  Riding-school,  in  day  Vino- 
lane  ;  he  said  that  there  were  men  (hat  would 
make  a  breach  in  Finsbury,  he  said  that  there 
was  to  be  a  cabinet  dinner  at  lord  Harrowby's 
that  day,  and  that  they  were  to  make  an 
attack  upon  them  there ;  after  thia  I  saw  a 
bundle  taken  out  of  the  cupboard,,  it  was 
planted  on  the  6oot  and  a  pint  pot  produced, 
the  bundle  contained  gunpowder,  which  was 
measured  with,  a  tin  measure  into  several 
woollen  bags  :^  Harrison  did  this<i  ASCet  that 
Thistlewood  said  there  was  a  dosen  of  pike 
handles  to  be  taken  to  Mary-Ie-bone ;  the  re^ 
maindes  were  to  go  to  Finsbury ;  I  was  asked 
to  take  some  but  I  refused^  i  had  not  seen 
them  ;  I  saw  the  has  of  powder  that  was  mea- 
sured and  the  grenades  were  put  in  it ;  Harrison 
directed  apezw>n  to  op  to  Aeliorse  and  Groom 
in  Gato-street  witb  the  pike  haudles ;  Harrison 
went  away  witb  those  thinga  In  the  bag,  the 
powder  in  the  flannel  bags  and  I  think  the 
grenades  also.  He  s^s,  *^  I  got  home  again 
about  twelve  o^cIock,  I  told  major  James  that 
day,  and  in  consequence  of  what  he  said  to  me 
I  went  to  the  Secretaiy  of  Stale'*  about  one  or 
half  past  one.** 

Upon  crQSfr«auniaatiooy' he  says,.  ''I  am 
a  bricklayer  by  trade.  Davidson  introduoed 
me  to  Thistlewood  first  on  the  4th  of  February, 
I  knew  none  of  the  party  before,  they  never 
having  knonm  me  before  os  I  them,,  they 
opened  to  me  their  secrets;  I  do  not  know 
wnat  there  was  in  my  character  to  induce  them 
to  trust  me^  except  that  I  had  been  in  t£^ 
parish  for  nfteen  years.  WEea  I  was  asked 
DOW  many  men  I  couU  get,.  I  said  it  was  a 
hard  thing  to  inveigle  a  parcel  of  innoeent 
men,  and  I  did  not  know  that  I.  could  ttt 
them,,  but  I  agreed  to  bring  Uie  menJ'  m 
says,  **  I  was  rather  frightened  while  I  was'in 
the  room.  I  was  ordered  to  go  to  the  Found* 
ling  Hospital  for  some  arms,  but  I  did  not 
intend  to  do  so»  I  wanted  to  ofiX  out  of  the 
place ;.  X  do  not  know  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Hucklestone,  I  was  onoe  in  thi»  Court*on  the 
trial  of  a  woman  who  had  robbed  a  inan  of 
7/..  but  on  no  other  occasion  ;  I  wasiin  Ireland 
at  the  time  of  the  rebellion,.X  was  then  quite  a 
boy."  This  is  the  whole  of  his  evidence;  if 
you  think  his  evidence  to  be  correct,  here  again 
Thistlewood  announces  his  further  plan  about 
seizing  the  cannon  in  Gray's-inn-Iane  and 
Finsbury  and  the  general  seheme^  and  he  dis* 
covered  a  great  part  of  those  arms,  afterwards 
produced  on  the  table  before  yea.  According 
to  the  witness's  account,  he  was  asked  by 
Hazrisoa  te  gp  to  this  meeting  at  Fox-couct» 
not  knowinff  what  waa  proposed ;  when  he 
came  there,,  he  agreed  to  do  it»  though  he  had 
no  intention  to  do  so,  ftut  he  did  agree.  A 
witness  is  called  afttfwards  to  impeach,  bia 
testimony.  There  are.  Sour  witnesses  to  e]b» 
plain  to  you  the  deaigus.  of  these  persons^  two 
of  them  are  accosai^ices,  and,  in  genesal,  none 
but  accomplices,  will  be  intimately  acquainted 
.with  such  dark  designs;  two  others  cannot  be 
considered  accomplice^  but  tbqi  must  be  mea 


043] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qf  Arthur  tkuthmod 


C9a 


whom  the  others  supposed  to  be  fit  and  ready 
to  join  in  their  project,  and- to  whom,  there- 
fore^  they  made  a  communication,  if  that  com- 
munication was  made  with  so  little  reserre,  as 
it  seems  to  ha? e  been  done ;  but  still,  if  you 
believe  the  witnesses,  the  communication  was. 
made,  and,  therefore,  they  thought  they  were 
talking  to  men  who  were  ready  to  join  them. 

A  great  many  other  witnesses  ha?e  been 
called,  to  confirm  the  testimony  given  by 
these,  but  if  tibese  witnesses,  without  further 
examination  of  other  -persons,  or  any  further 
testimony  produced  before  you,  shall  be  con- 
sidered  as  having  related  the  truth,  the  treason 
is  undoubtedly  proved  ;  for  their  testimony 
has  proved  the  meetings,  consultations,  and 
preparations  of  arms  and  ammunition  for  the 
avowed  purpose  of  assassinating  the  king*s 
ministers,  and  to  bring  about  a  change  in  the 
government  of  this  country ;  nothing  less  than 
that  can  be  the  fair  import  of  any  of  the  dis* 
cussions  deposed  to  by  any  one  of  these  four 
witnesses. 

However,  by  the  way  of  confirmation,  they 
call  Eleanor  Walker,  a  servant  to  Henry  Rogers, 
at  No.  4,  Fox-court,  Gray's-inn-lane,  who 
proves  that  Brunt  hired  a  lodging  for  Ings, 
which  Adams  told  you  was  the  case. 

Then  Mrs.  Rogers  says  Brunt  took  the 
room  for  Ings ;  he  said  he  hoped  he  would 
pay  though  he  knew  nothing  of  him,  except 
seeing  him  at  a  public-house.  Now,  that  cer- 
tainly is  not  correct,  because,  according  to  all 
the  testimony,  it  is  clear  he  had  seen  and 
known  Ings,  if  not  before  that  room  was  taken 
for  him,  yet  he  saw  him  afterwards. 

Then  another  more  important  witness  is 
called,  who  is  an  apprentice  of  Brunt:  he 
says,  "  I  remember  a  person  taking  the  back 
room  two  pair  of  stairs,  in  Fox-court,  Gra/s- 
inn-lane ;  that  person  was  Ings ;  Brunt  and  he 
looked  at  the  room  together.     When  they 
came  out  of  the  room,  1  heard  Brunt  say  to 
logs,  it  will  do,  go  down,  and  give  them  a 
shilling.    After  that  Ings  used  to  come  to  the 
room ;  he  left  the  key  of  the  room  always  at 
Brunt's  when  he  went  out :  eve^  evemng  a 
number  of  visitors  used  to  come  to  tnem,  among 
them  constantly  were  Thistlewood,  Tidd,  Brad- 
bum,  Edwards,  Hall,  Potter,  Strange,  Adams, 
and  Davidson,  the  man  of  colour;  and  more 
used  to  come  whose  names  I  do  not  know :"  he 
says,  '^  I  saw  no  furniture,  they  used  to  take 
chairs  out  of  Brunt's  room  to  sit  on  $  they 
used  to  call  Thistlewood  sometimes  T.  and 
sometimes  Arthur;  when  the  door  has  been 
open,  I  have    seen  long  poles   like    rough 
branches  of  trees ;  about  twenty  of  them  were 
in  the  room :"  he  saysf  ^  I  have  neard  hammer- 
ing and  sawing.    Brunt,"  he  sap,  **  was  taken 
up  on  Thursday  the  24th  of  February.    On 
the  Sunday  morning  before  that,  there  was  a 
meeting  of  a  larger  number  than  I  had  seen 
come  before ;"  all  those  he  before  named  were 
there ;  "  after  the  meeting  broke  up.  Strange 
remained  in  my  master's  room ;  there  was  a 
meeting   on  the  Monday  evening,   and  on 


Tuesday  several  persons  were  in  and  out  in 
the  course  of  that  day.    On  Wednesday,  some 
came  into  the  workshop," — ^that  woula  be  the 
workshop  of  his  master — ''they  had  got' some 
pistols,  and  were  putting  new  flints  into  them ; 
there  were  five  or  six  pistols.     One  of  tfie 
men  said,  there  were  people  overlooking  them, 
and  Brunt  told  them  to  go  into  the  badL'room. 
Strange  and  a  man  whom  I  did  not  Imow 
were  putting  in  the  flints," — that  is  a  circum- 
stance mentioned  to  you  by  Adams,  their  be- 
ginning to  put  these  flints  in,  and  retiring  into 
the  back  room. — **  In  the  course  of  the  afteis> 
noon,  Thistlewood  asked  me  for  a  piece  of 
writing-paper,  and  took  it  into  the  back-room, 
after  that  my  master  came  out,  and  ordered 
me  to  get  six  sheets  of  cartridge  paper,  and 
gave  me  six  pence.    I  went  aiki  bought  it,  and 
gave  it  to  my  master,  who  took  it  into  the 
back-room." — ^Adams  telb  you  there  was  this 
conversation,  and  money  was  given  in  order 
to  procure  cartridge-paper  for  waiting  these 
bills  upon. — He  says,  ''  this  was  between  four 
and  five  o'clock  in  the  afternoon ;  my  master 
went  away  about  six ;  a  man  went  away  with 
him  who  was  a  stranger.    I  handed  a  table 
from  my  mistress's  room  into  the  baek-room 
on  that  day;" — ^which  it  seems  had  never  been 
done  before,  and  why  that  should  be  done  on 
tl^at  day,  except  for  the  purpose,  of  writing,  is 
not  disclosed ;— ''  when  my  mistress  was  going 
to  hiSLf  we  wanted  the  table ;  I  knocked  at  the 
door  of  the  back  room  to  get  it;  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Potter  opened  it,  and  gave  it  to  me ; 
by  the  opening  of  the  door,  I  could  tee  who 
were  in  toe  room :  I  saw  four  or  five  persons 
in  the  room  :  I  saw  Tidd  after  my  master  was 
gone  :  at  between  seven  and  eight  o'clock 
Mrs.  Brunt  called  him,  and  he  came  into  her 
room;  she  took  him  to  the  cupboard,  and 
shewed  him  a  pike  head  and  a  sword,  and 
asked  him  what  she  should  do  with  them ;  he 
took  them  out  of  the  room,  and,  I  believe, 
into  the  back  room.    Tidd  soon  af^  went 
away,  and  left  word  that,  if  any  body  called 
soon,  they  were  to  make  haste  and  follow  to 
the  White  Hart  piri)lic-house.      Potter  and 
some  others  cvude,  and  went  on  there.    My 
master  came  home  about  nine  o'clock  the  same 
night,  his  dress  was  dirty,  and  he  seemed  con- 
fused ;  he  said  to  his  wife,  it  is  all  up,  and 
that  where  he  had  been  a  great  many  officers 
came  in,  that  he  had  saved  his  life,  and  that 
was  aU."    He  says,  *'  Just  at  this  part  of  his 
conversation,  another  man  came  in,  and  shook 
hands  with  Brunt,  and  asked  him  if  he  knew 
who  had  informed ;  the  man  said.  No :  he  said 
he  had  bad  a  dreadfal  blow  on  the  side,  and 
was  knocked  down.    Brunt  said,  there  is  some- 
thing more  to  be  done,  and  he  and  the  man 
went  out  together."    An  observation  has  bee& 
made  on  that  expression,   ''there  is  some- 
thing more  to  be  done  yet,"  as  if  Brunt  knew 
that  this  scheme  of  assassination  was  not  the 
only  thing  to  be  don^ ;  you  will  judge  whether 
that  expressiion  has  that  import.  Then  he  says, 
"  after  they  were  gone,  Mrs.  Brunt  and  I  went 


94«] 


fdt  Bigh  Tf^oion. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[046 


iDtoUiebMk  Toom'i  vthtte  we  (bund  one  of 
the  pioles  I  Imd  seen  before,  and  in  the  cup* 
board  were  sereial  rolb  of  brown  paper  with 
tar  in  them,  some  paper  twisted  up,  and  some 
things  as  big  as  my  two  fists,  and  strings  rolled 
round  them,  aod  an  iron  pot  that  Brunt  had 
had  for  some  time  before.    At  eleven  o'clock 
my  master  again  returned  home ;  and  said  he 
should  waut  me  to  get  up  as  early  in  the 
morning  as  I  could,  to  clean  his  boots ;  they 
were  very  dirty ;  he  called  me  next  morning 
at  half  past  six,  and  asked  me  if  I  knew  the 
Boroughy  wfaidi  I  did,  but  not  Snow's-fields ; 
then  we  went  into  the  back  room,  where  I 
took  two  baskets  by  his  direction,  and  we  put 
the  things  out  of  the  cupboard  into  them  ;  he 
told  me  they  were  going  to  Potter's  in  Snow^s- 
fields ;  one  of  the  baskets  was  tied  in  a  blue 
apron,  which  had  been  put  up  as  a  curtain  in 
that  room  that  he  called  Ings's  room :"  then  he 
says,  **  I  went  into  Brunt's  room  to  look  for 
something  to  tie  the  other  basket  in,  and  two 
officers  came  up  and  took  my  master  into 
custody ;  thev  searched  the  room  and  took  the 
baskets.    Tiod  lived  in  Hole-in-the-wall  Pas- 
sage, Brook's-market,  and  Adams  next  door 
to  fainu    I  have  been  at  the  lodgings  of  both." 
On  cross-examination,  he  says  ''  Brunt  was 
a  journeyman  shoemaker,  but  not  in  very  poor 
circumstances,  he  had  one  child ;  Tidd  was  a 
shoemaker  living  near  us,  he  has  a  wife,  and  I 
believe  children  ;  I  don't  know  if  he  is  a  poor 
man ;  Adams  is  a  shoemaker  also ;  Ings  had 
the  lodgings  nearly  five  weeks.    I    believe 
there  were  meetings  every  night  during  that 
time,  the  greatest  number  I  remember  was  on 
the  Sunday  morning :  about  twenty  men  were 
there  then.    I  know  some  of  the  people  I  have 
named;  Strange  is  a  bootmaker's  shopman; 
Edwards,  who  was   there  very  often,  is   a 
modeller,  he  was  there  oftener  than  Adams  ; 
Hall  is  a  journeyman  tailor,  and  the  whole 
were  of  that  rank  in  life;  the  baskets  spoken 
of  were  rush  baskets,  and  the  materials  filled 
them ;  there  were  about  twenty  branches  of 
trees  in  a  green  raw  state ;  I  dont  know  how 
they  came  there,  there  was  but  one  left  on  the 
Wednesday  morning;  there  used  to  be  a  fire 
in  the  room,  I  do  not  know  if  they  burnt  the 
poles,  but  there  was  one  left.''    This  -  witness, 
yon  see,  proves  beyond  all  question  that  this 
room  was  taken  by  Brunt  for  Ings,  and  that  it 
was  frequented  in  the  evenings  and  on  some 
iBomings  hv  the  persons  Adams  spoke  of,  and 
there  were  band-grenades,  pikes,  and  fire-arms 
seen  by  him. 

The  next  witness  is  Thomas  Smart,  who  is 
a  watchman  in  the  parish  of  Saint  George, 
Hanover-square.  He  says,  he  •  was  on  the 
watch  on  the  south  side  of  Grosvenor-square, 
the  22nd  of  February  last,  his  box  nearly 
faces  lofd  Harrowby's ;  he  went .  on  at  eight 
o'clock ;  soon  after  he  went  on  he  saw  four 
snflpkious  looking  men  walking  about  thesquare, 
two  tall,  and  two  short,  one  was  a  black  man, 
or  nearly  so,  **  it  was  after  I  called  half-past 
m^t ;  I  took  particular  notice  of  them,  they 

vol.xxxi5l  I 


were  looking  dolm  the  areas,  and  taking  no- 
tice of  the  areas."  This  was  intended  to  con-^ 
firm  what  Adams  said,  that  Davidson  was  on 
the  watch  that  night.  Henry  Gillan  says,  he  was 
at  a  public-house  in  Charles-street,  Grosveoor- 
square,  at  the  comer  of  the  Mews,  on  Tuesday, 
the  22nd  of  February ;  he  says,  '*  I  saw  the  short 
man  with  a  brown  coat  (Avnt) ;  there  was  a 
tall  man  along  with  him,  they  had  bread  and 
cheese  and  porter ;  we  played  at  dominos.  I 
went  away  before  ten  and  left  them  there  :'* 
that  is  another  circumstance  to  confirm  what 
Adams  said,  that  he  and  Brunt  went  that 
evening  on  the  watch,  and  that  they  were  at 
this  house  where  they  had  bread  and  cheese, 
and  Brunt  played  at  dominos. 

Then  John  Hector  Morison  is  examined, 
who  is  a  journeyman  cutler  to  Mr.  Underwood 
in  Drury-lane,  he  recollects  a  sword  being 
brought  to  him  on  Christmas  Eve  by  a  man 
dressed  like  a  butcher  (he  points  out  Ings  to  be 
the  man),  he  had  the  swoni  under  his  smock 
frock  without  a  scabbard ;  he  desired  to  have 
it  well  ground  with  a  fine  point,  he  said  his 
name  was  Eames,  or  Ings,  the  sword  was 
ground  and  he  took  it  away  in  two  or  three 
days :  a  few  days  after,  he  brought  another 
for  the  same  purpose,  it  was  a  particularly 
long  one ;  one  of  the  swords  afterwards  seized, 
at  or  near  Cato-street,  is  afterwards  identified 
by  him. 

Edward  Simpson  is  called,  who  is  corporal- 
major  of  the  second  regiment  of  life-guards, 
and  knew  the  prisoner  Harrison,  who  was 
discharged  out  ot  that  corps  about  six  years 
ago.  ^ '  Harrison  knew  the  Ki ng-street  barracks, 
^ye  windows  of  which  looked  into  Gloucester 
Mews,  but  they  were  stopped  up  a  few  days 
after  the  aflfeir  in  Cato-street"  That  is  only 
to  shew  that  Harrison,  the  person  who  was 
afterwards  to  proceed  to  the  barracks  to  throw 
the  fire  balls  in,  might  reasonably  be  selected 
for  that  purpose,  as  having  been  stationed 
there. 

John  Aldous  is  called.  He  says  he  '*  is  a 
pawnbroker  in  Berwick-street ;  he  knows  the 
prisoner  Davidson  from  baring  pledged  things 
at  his  shop ;  on  the  23rd  of  J'ebruary  he  came 
there,  ana  took  a  brass-barrelled  blunderbuss 
out  of  pawn." 

Then  my  lord  Harrowby  was  called ;  who 
tells  you  that  Hiden  did  come  to  him  in  the 
Park,  and  did  deliver  to  him  a  letter  directed 
to  lord  Castlereagh ;  that  he  afterwards  ap- 
pointed to  meet  him  in  Hyde-park,  and  did 
meet  him  there.  He  says,  that  he  himself  is 
one  of  his  majesty's  pnvy  council,  and  is  the 
president  of  the  council ;  and  he  did  intend  to 
give  a  cabinet  dinner  on  the  23rd  of  February. 
At  the  cabinet  dinners  no  persons  but  those 
who  compose  what  is  called  the  cabinet  are  in« 
vited ;  the  cabinet  consisting  of  the  principal 
officers  of  state.  The  invitations  were  sent  out 
in  the  latter  end  of  the  preceding  week.  Then 
he  gives  you  the  names  of  the  persons  who 
compose  the  cabinet,  and  who  were  invited 
upon  that  occasion ;  namely,  my  lord  Chan« 

3P 


mffi 


I  QSOaOE  IV. 


«aUQr4  Ikt  «aEi  jof  ]ivefpMl>.4liil  Usi  of  Hw 
Drcanij ;  Mr.  Vamittart,  chumlkr  of  tiM 
fiKobequer;  «he  earl  of  fithiiiy  Mcrelary  of 
£laAf  lor  the  Colooiid  ElepaitmeBt;  lord  CMlfo* 
teagfa,  secretary  of  Stale  for  tU  Fonign  D*« 
factment;  lord  Sidaoutfa,  aeoretaty  of  fiUte 
for  the  Home  Depaitmant;  ^m  caii  af  West- 
BDonland,  lord  Privy  Seal ;  laid  MelfiOt,  fini 
load  of  Uia  Admindly ;  tha  didBe  of  Wdlia^tiM, 
master  general  of  the  OnhiaiiGe ;  Mr.Caaniiic^ 
firat  oommiaBioiiar  of  the  India  BoMd ;  Mr. 
EohiosoD,  preaideot  of  iha  Boaad  of  Tiade ; 
Mr.  Batfaiirst,  chaaceUor  of  the  dwd&y  of  La»- 
eaater;  Mr.  WellesUy  Pole,  master  of  tka 
Mint;  and  the  earlof  MulgrmtaUofivhoak, 
he  says,  are  pnry  councillorSyand  penuMS  em* 
{di^ed  in  the  most  importaat  offices  in  the 
administration  of  the  execnftife  coTenHnent. 
He  says,  thcnr  are  in  oommon  pailaooa  called 
his  m^jesty^  ministers.  He  sm,  '<Oa  the 
Tuasday  before  the  Wedneadur  of  the  intended 
dinner,  I  was  riding  in  the  Faik,  abool  two 
•'dock,  prq>aratory  to  mj  attending  a  council 
at  Carlton  palace.  I  had  no  serrant  with  ae. 
A  person  addressed  me  near  6rosTiaBor«gatey 
and  said  he  had  a  letter  addressed  to  lord 
Caatlereagby  which  he  was  desirous  to  ooan^ 
to  him :  it  was  of  eonsideraUa  importance,  and 
concerned  both  that  noble  lord  and  myselC 
The  letter  ptoduoed  is  the  letter.  The  man 
(who  was  the  last  witness),  at  mv  desire  gave 
me  bis  addresa  on  this  card,''  which  his  iord- 
ibip  prodnced,  **  He  met  me  by  appointment 
on  Wednesday  morning  in  tbe  ring  amongst 
the  young  pUntations  in  Hyda-park.  A&r 
tbis  was  communicated  to  me,  I  did  not  inform 
my  servants  that  the  dinner  was  not  to  take 
place,  but  X  directed  that  the  preparations 
should  go  on  as  if  the  dinner  was  to  take 
place,  until  I  wrote  a  note  from  the  earl  of 
liverpool's,  to  my  head  servant,  to  say,  that  the 
cabinet  #ould  not  dine  there,  but  that  the  pre- 
paration should  be  going  on  as  if  it  was  intend- 
ed thev  should ;  the  party  would  have  assem* 
bled  if  the  dinner  had  taken  place,  between 
seven  and  half-past  seven.''  He  says  further, 
that  he  had  some  previous  general  knowledge, 
and  had  some  reason  to  expect,  for  some  time 
past,  that  there  was  some  intention  of  this  kind, 
he  does  not  know,  nor  has  ever  seen  Edwards, 
upon  whom  ao  much  obseiradoa  has  been 
amde. 

Then  John  Baker,  the  butler,  ia  called ;  he 
merely  remembers  a  cabinet  dinner  being  ii^ 
tended  to  be  had  at  lord  Harrowby's  house  on 
the  SSrd  of  February  last ;  the  cabinet  dinners 
bad  been  suspended  for  some  time.  Cards  of 
invitetion  were  issued  to  the  ministeKS  on  th^ 
leth  or  19di,  that  is,  the  Friday  or  the  Satnr** 
d|<y;  he  says  preparationa  ware  Bwda  for 
dinner  on  the  Wednesday,  as  usual,  and  be" 
did  not  receive  .the  intimation  that  lus  mmes- 
ty's  ministers  would  not  dine  tbera  that  day, 
until  eight  or  ten  mittutes  after  eiaht  o'dook. 
Then  he  mentions  a  ciroumstence  wbieb  serves 
to  account  for  what  haa  bean  said,  that  th^ 
wipposed  tha  company  had  anirad,  for  ^ 


[MM 

Hanowfay,  and  tbeaa  wera  caniagea  at  Mf 
crace'a  door  about  aia  or  aaven  o'dackc  an 
ttmt  persons  wbo  were  watelung  at  a  difilanat 
augit  aappose  that  these 


ping  at  lord  Hairowby's;  peilmpa  you 
thiuL  that  may  satisfaotorily  acoouot  €or  what 
was  said  at  Cato-etieet,  that  some  «f  the 
■unisters  w«re  ooma. 

ThomM  Monument  says,  that  be  ia  Iba 
brother  of  the  witness,  Jdm  M«uumant,  asrf 
he  confirms  his  brother  aa  Car  as  his  imnwiedga 
extends.  He  says,  Ibat  Thiatiewood  naUad 
upon  bis  bfotber ;  be  brongfat  Bnaat  with  bun  ( 
after  they  had  cease  aoto  the  room  they  alaid 
ftve  or  ten  miraites,  when  they  went  ont  to* 
gather  and  remained  about  two  or  thma  rainutesy 
and  than  returned.-  Tbistlewood  and  Bmat 
went  away  anin.  Hp  says,  ^  on  the  Tuaaday 
before  this  affiur,  Tidd  and  Bnint  called  on  my 
brother ;  my  brother  said,  vrhy  Bmnt  I  (houfli 
I  had  lost  you,  as  it  is  so  long  since  I  saw  yen. 
Brunt  said  that  the  king's  death  bad  made  n 
Htde  alteration  in  tbeir  plans;  my 
asked  what  theae  plans  were,  and  Brunt 
tbey  had  different  objects  in  view.  Bmnt  dinn 
asked  my  brother  te  meet  him  atiybum-tuni^ 

e'ke  on  the  next  evening ;  my  brother  i^^reed ; 
runt  said  to  Tidd,  suppeae  we  give  them  an 
outline  of  the  plan.  Tidd  made  no  anawer4 
Brunt  then  told  ua  to  be  at  TybunMamptte 
at  six  o'clock  on  the  Wednesday  evening;  they 
gave  us  the  pass^word — ft,  ti,  /, — and  if  aay  en 
Uieir  party  were  there  they  would  answer  t^OyWu 
I  did  not  promise  to  go ;  they  did  not  pi 


me  to  go,  and  I  did  not  gn.  Brunt  called 
about  five  for  my  brother,  but  we  were  busy, 
and  my  brother  could  not  go  at  diat  tioM* 
Brunt  then  told  him  to  call  upon  Tidd,  who 
lives  in  the  Hole-in-the^wall  paaaage,  I  did  not 
see  my  brother  after/' 

This,  ffentlemen,  is  the  evidence  that  has 
been  laid  before  you,  as  oonfirmatoiy  of  tbe 
account  given  you  bytha  witnesaea,  Adama, 
Hiden,  Monument,  and  Dwyer :  many  of  tbt 
facts  sworn  by  Adams  are  awom  to  by  otbera; 
the  comanunications  made  as  to  the  treaaooabla 
purpose  are  such  as  no  pavson  not  engaged  ia 
It  conld  be  likely  to  be*aeqnaintad  wi&. 

Then  tbey  proceed  to  catt  aeme  peiaooa  wbe 

Srove  Hainaon  waa  seen  at  this  bnildi^  at 
ato-street,  that  he  said  he  bad  takea  k,  and 
waa  going  to  dear  it  out  and  obtained  soma 
aaodles ;  and  then  they  call  the  several  police 
elBeers  and  au  officer  in  the  anny»  iieatenant 
Fitxclarence,  to  give  an  account  of  tbe  arreat 
and  appvehensien  of  a«reral  of  tbe  peoona 
there  assembled,  and  ^  stlzuscs  tbera  made 
of  arms  and  other  things. 

It  does  not  appear,  to  me,  niuaasary  to  fo 
through,  in  detail,  the  testimony  el  fteae  wii* 
nesses,  because  it  is  not  matnial  fer  yen  to 
consider  by  what  partienlar  individnal  a  pialol 
was  preaented :  it  b  inpoitaBt  to  obaaive  that 
when  the  officers  came  to  this  plaoe  to  epprn* 
bend  the  pecsoasy  many  of  them  made  a  moat 
desperate  reaiatance ;  that  is  a  drfumitanre 


•m^ 


^  tSgk  frtofON* 


A.  D.  1890. 


(»«• 


daMrnng  vow  cotosidcKtiOB ;  but  a  minvt^' 
detaii  of  noot  tkb  or  that  indiividiMilididy  doea 
not  appear  Bace»ar]r  to  be  giTen  to  you  now, 
thaaga  it  war  Beceaiary  it  shoald  be  laid  be^ 
iN>6r  yotk  lA'tlie  fiiat  tmtancey  hj  tbe  eiaauB-^ 
atioa*  of  the  witnesses.  Yoa  find  tiiem  iaa; 
slaible:-  a  mai^  was  seen  oa  the  spot,  from' 
Wh<H»  a.  swbid'  war  taken,  and  a  butcher's' 
Imile ;.  that  knife  is  the  knife  supposed  to  hkwti 
been  taken  by  Idj^  it  answers  the  deiteiiptioa' 
given  of  thatt  kntfe^  Wright  wasr  not  able  tot 
secure  lags,  and  cannot  say  he  was  the  person. 
It  is  ftiBther  proi«d,  however,  that  when  Ingv 
was  apprehended,  he  was  found  to  have-  a 
haversack  slung  to  each  shoulder,  a  belt 
hackled  pound  mm,  and  some  cartridges,  and 
a  knife  case.  The  circnmstance  of  his  having 
these-' two  ^ bags,  is  observ^i  upon  by  the  coun«- 
asi  for  the  prisoner;  and  it  is  suggested  the^ 
are  more  ni  for  plunder  than  fer  sndi-  aa 
abominable  purpose  as  Adams  descdbed:  it 
ii  not  Toify  mat^ial  what  purpose  they  w^re 
tdben  ftiy  because  he  might  not  ohoobetO'sa^ 
Ifaeo  thatha  meaar  to  take  the  plate,,  and^mig^ 
ai^hetoofethebags  for  another  purpose  ^tbtil 
Iha  fedt'Of  his  hamng  the  bags  is  woh^'of 
jlotar  atteatiod'as^oonflroring  Adams. 

Yc«»  next  haa»-tbe  acoonnt,  byTaonftan^  of 

the  appffebcaaioti  tif -  Bwt  at  his  lodgings^  and 

of  the-  oonlents  of  the  two  ba^eta  that  were 

feund,.  and  it  ia-  ioiportant  for  yon  to  attend 

t»  thali    Tauatoa  says^  **  I  found  Bruat  in  a 

feODt  idom  UA  twl^  pair  of  stairs,  I  searched 

the  mom'  aaa  foond'  notfasng-  material :  in  tfaa 

back  room  I  found  two  bastes,  one  tied  up  ia 

an . apopoai    Brunt ' was-then  in  the  front  room ; 

S^asked^ibim'as  to  the  badcets,  and  he  said  ha 

hnew   nathmg  about  them/'     He  chooses^* 

tharafoife,  to  give  an>  untrue  account  in  that 

ias|>sct^,ferit  is  dearn  by  the  testimony  of  the 

apprentice,  that  he  did  kno^  about  tbem,  "^  he 

#m  the  room  did  nbt  b^ong  to  him :  there 

was  a  pik&  staff  in  the  room,  and- an  iron  pot 

witfa^  mashrof  tarat  the  bottom  of  it.    When  I 

fisnad' he  denied  the*  apardnents  I-  sent  for 

ihm  laaoBAdy^  Miei  Rbgers,  and  asked  her  who 

tAQe»«pal«nieols  behmged  to  ?    She  said,  that 

Imt  nseee^ 'Bleaaor  Waikw,  bad  let  than  to « 

nmm*  she  did'  no^  know,  ia  the  presence  of 

Bn»t.>   I>asked^  Brunt  who  this  man  -was ; .  ha 

he 'had  methim*in  a  public  house^  what 

■DOFwas  ha: did  not  icnow.    From  this 

I  want  to  Tidd's  in  Hole-in-the-^^rir 

nearOray's'inn-lane,  where' I'fonnid 

ar-noy  large  box^  thU  of  bdl  cartridges^  965^ 

arad'  ai^reat  qaamity  of-  gunpowder,  and' in  a 

IfsrusBflk  these  weiia«  484  baUs^  171  ball  caiv 

tsvdgas^and'^9  bsA  caramflges^without  powder, 

fvilha  ball'  in  eaah'  cartridgo,  about  thtee 

pBMadaRof  ganpawderia  apaper^  a<coaneca»* 

a«S'  be^'with  ten<  hand^grinad«l,  and  eleves 

flannel  bags  of  powder,  one  pound  eadi,  ten 

inal  bagreaqpty,-  aamall  bagwHh  a  powder 

8nd:sisly«Mght  baUs,   fotnrfliiHa  and 

Mta'piha* handles.''    Tbeie  ara  tha 

tMags.foarid  a*  TMd*^y  widch  Adattis  trite 


atBMmt^syTaunton  says^contained  nine  PH*<(>v 
widi  rope  yam  and  tar,  and  some  steel  alings^ 
four  grenades^  three' paperii  with  rope  yam  and 
tar,  two  flannel  biigs  of  powder,  one  pound 
each,,  one  paper  with  some  powder  in-  it,-  one 
leather  bag  with  sixty^three  balls  in  it. 

Oa  cross-examination,  he  says  '*  I  found  all 
tiiese  tlungs-on  the  tMith  of  Febniaiy  ;  Bnlnt 
was  nr6Seat  when  I  found  tliem^  l  went  to 
Tidd^  about  half-past  eight  o'clock  ia  ditf 
moning.''  Then  another  officer  is  called,  and 
tfa^  several  things  fonnd  in'  Cat'-  .leet^  and 
upon-  the  persons  Who  we.^  apprehended 
there^  are  produced  before  you.  Yoa  saw 
them,  a  oonsideraUe  number  of  large  hand« 
grenades,  several  pike-heads,  carbines,  mus^ 
ketsy  pistols,  blunderbusses,  sticks,  and  many 
othefr  things  which  I  need  not  enumerate. 

Then  ll£>rison'  is  called,  who  says  ^  this  ia 
the  >  first  s#ord  I  sharpened  for  lugs,  I  know  it 
by  a-  mark  on  the  blaae." 

Then  Edwatd  Hansbn,  a  Serjeant  tn  the 
Royal  Artill^ry^  was  called,;  who  took  to 
pieces  one  of  thoBcr  things,  whidi  they  call 
htedftgretiades^.  aadi  explamed  to  you  ttsna« 
tar6  and  effect,  and  described  it,  asituadoubt- 
edly  i$f  as  a^Wry  destructive  instrument.  This 
one  bad  tweM  pieces  of  iron  in  different  parts 
of  it,  it  was  intended  this  should  burst,  and  its 
oontents  fly  about  ioi  all  directions,  to  the 
grekt  annoyance  and  probable  destruction  of 
diepersona  near. 

Tnts  closed  the  evidenee  on  the  part  of  the 
C^own. 

On  the  part  of  the  piisoner,  they  called 
Mary  Baikef^  a  daughter  of  Tidd,  to  whom  n<l 
questions  were  put  in  cross-examination,  from 
a*vefycommeiidaUe  delicacy,  as  it  appeared  to 
ma,  on  accc^nt  of  1ier  near  relationsnip  to  one 
of  the  prisoners ;  but  you  will  judge  whether 
ht^  testimdny  does  not  confirm  that  of  the 
witnesses  for  the  Crown*  She  says,  on  tha 
24th  of  February,  Uie  poliee  officers  came  to 
her  fether's,  and  found  a  box  and  other  things ; 
it  was  abost  hatf-past  eight  in  the  morning ; 
they/  took-  awtty  some-  pike-staves ;  they  had 
been  broaghttfaat  monung;  but  she  does  not 
know  by  whom ;  whether  she  was  present  to 
see' them  or  not^  she  does  not  recollect. — ^^I 
know  Adams^  I  bad  seen  him  at  my  fadier's 
befoke(  {'know  £dwards»  I  had  seen  him  thera 
often.  Tha  things  weiie  brouflrht'  that  morningt 
I*  bad  seta'simuar  things  there  before  that 
time;  I  should  have  judged-  them  to  be  the 
same.  Edwards  hadtdcen  a  part  of  them 
away';  I  do  not  know  who  took  the  rest : 
Bdwwda^  took  part  away  on  Wednesday ;  my 
fiither  taok'nona  away.  Bdwaids  ^d  not  take 
any  bbx  :  the'  box  wais  bnml^ht  a  day  or  two 
beibia  njf  fkdicr  was  taken.^  There  was  a 
box  wfaicn  you  will  reeollkt  Taunton  proved 
bafbuod 'there,  coslaining  thi^  great  qnantity 
of  uartridgel,  powdar,  and  things  of  that  kind : 
sher'sayt,  **  !•  d6  not  kaovr  who  brought  tha 
box."  Aacoidiag^  thetefore,  to  the  testis, 
noay  of-thle  yomig  i^onMuk  this  box  had 
be«&«t  tei4ita«  softM  dl^ygbfoirthe  dighl 


951J 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  Arthur  TkMemod 


E952 


"When  they  were  apprehended,  and  ■  things 
similar  to  those  lying  before  her,  she  had  seen  at 
a  former  time  at  that  bouse;  that  certainly 
seems  rather  to  confirm  than  contradict  the 
testimony  of  the  witnesses  for  the  Crown. 

Tiien,  by  way  of  beating  down  the  credit  of 
the  witness  Dwyer,  they  call  a  person  named 
Edward  Huckleston;  he  says  he  has  known 
Dwyer  for  some  years  intimately,  and  he  says, 
'<  I  do  not  think  he  is  fit  to  be  believed  on  his 
oath/'  Upon  his  cross-examination,  he  says, 
*'  I  have  seen  him  have  money,  and,  knowing 
that  he  was  but  a  bricklayer,  and  had  little  or 
no  work,  I  was  surprised.  I  was  in  distress ; 
he  told  me  he  would  put  me  in  the  way  to 
make  plenty  of  money  if  I  would  go  with  him. 
I  agreed;  and  he  proposed  that  we  should 
charge  some  gentleman  with  an  unnatural  of- 
fence ;  that  he  was  to  go  up  first,  and  then 
that  I  was  to  join  him.  i  left  him,  quite 
shocked  at  the  idea.  This  vras  about  three 
months  ago.  He  said  he  had  got  70/.  at  a 
time  from  one  gentleman  in  St.  James's-street, 
by  only  catching  him  by  the  collar,  and  accus- 
ing him.  I  met  him  next  night  at  the  Rodney's- 
head,  and  he  caHed  me  a  coward.  I  told  him 
of  the  danger,  and  reminded  him  that  his  bro- 
ther had  been  transported  for  the  same  thing. 
He  said  his  brother  did  not  know  so  well  how 
to  manage  as  he  did  :  '^  he  says,  ^  from  that 
time  1  have  avoided  him.  I  am  a  shoemaker, 
but  am  now  articled  to  a  cow-doctor,  in 
Newman-mews.  I  first  communicated  this  to 
my  brother  about  a  week  ago.  I  did  not  men- 
tion it  before,  lest  I  might  be  ill-treated,  as  I 
Lad  to  go  so  much  about  among  the  cow-keepers. 
Some  of  the  Irishmen  have  gone  away  now,  and 
that  induced  me  to  summon  up  courage  to 
mention  it  to  my  brother.  When  Dwyer  made 
this  proposal  to  me,  it  was  two  or  three  months 
ago ;  1  did  go  part  of  the  way  with  him,  but 
when  he  told  me,  I  was  horror-stmck,  and  got 
back  as  soon  as  I  could.'' 

Then  Dwyer  is  called  up  again,  who  says 
that  all  Huckleston  has  said  is  untrue :  he  says, 
— *'  I  have  seen  the  man,  but  did  not  know  his 
name  was  Huckleston.  I  have  met  him  in 
Oxford-road,  not  in  a  public-house.  I  never 
proposed  to  him  to  charge  any  person  with  an 
unnatural  offence.  In  February  last,  I  worked 
in  the  parish  mill,  at  Mary-le-bone,  and  got 
three  shiUiugs  a  day :  I  worked  there  twice  in 
different  weeks ;  I  have  a  wife  and  children." 

On  his  crosJs-examination,  he  says,  he  did 
not  recognize  the  last  witness  on  his  comine 
into  Court, .  and  say,  'f  Oh,  Huckleston ;"  and 
it  seems  that  that  was  a  mistake  on  the  part  of 
the  learned  counsel  who  examined  him;  he 
says,  "  I  did  not  know  his  name  at  all.  I  have 
seen  him  very  often ;  he  resorted  to  the  end  of 
James-street,  and  I  lived  in  Gee's-court.  I 
never  went  to  a  public-house  with  him.  I  re- 
sorted to  the  Rodnev's-head ;  if  I  have  seen 
him. at  the  Rodneys-head,  it  must  be  some 
time  ago.  I  have  not  repeatedly  met  him  in  a 
public-house.  I  don't'  know  that  I  can  swear 
J  never. snw  him  at  a  pubUc-house.  J  will 


swear  I  iiave  not  been  wiUi  him  «t  the  Bod- 
ney's-head  within  these  three  months.  I  am  a 
bricklayer  by  trade.  I  have  worked' for  a  Mr. 
Smith  who  lives  at  No.  22,  Mortimer-street, 
Cavendish-square,  for  thirteen  years."  Yon 
have,  therefore,  this  witness  Huckleston  called, 
you  see,  to  represent  to  you  that  Dwyer  is  not 
a  man  entitled  to  your  credit ;'  all  that  is  said 
by  him  is  contradicted :  whidi  of  then  tells 
the  truth  it  is  for  you  to  say.  Yon  are  not 
merely  to  reject  the  testimony  of  one  person 
because  another  comes  forward  and  says  some- 
thing derogatory  of  him.  You  are  to  consider 
whidi  of  the  two  is  the  person  most  entitled  to 
your  credit.  Dwyer,  if  he  has  told  us  the 
truth,  did  make  a  communication.  HuK^eston 
admits,  though  this  abominable  scheme  was 
communicated  to  him,  he  never  went  to  a  ma- 
gistrate ;  but  then,  he  says  he  was  apprehensive 
of  being  ill-treated,  because  there  were  many 
Irish  in  the  neighbourhood. 

On  the  part  of  the  prisoner,  they  next  called 
Joseph  Doane,  who  sajrs  he  is  called,  couit 
reporter ;  he  communicates  to  six  nevFspapers 
what  passes  at  the  court  properly  so  caJled, 
which  ne  picks  up  from  time  (6  time  as  he  can. 
He  is  shewn  the  New  Times  of  the  22nd  of 
February,  containing  an  announcement  of  this 
dinner;  he  says  he  cannot  speak  to  whedier  he 
wrote  that  at  thb  distance  of  time,  but  from 
the  wording  of  it,  he  rather  thinks  he  did  not 
prepare  the  notice  of  that  cabinet  dinner,  be- 
cause it  contains  the  word  "  grand,"  which  he 
would  not  have  put  in,  as  he  knows  the  calmiet 
dinners  are  always  the  same. 

Then  they  call  Andrew  Mitchell,  the  printer 
of  the  New  Times ;  he  produces  the  manuscript 
of  that  article ;  he  says,  it  did  not  oome  firom 
Mr.  Doane.  "  I  received  it  from  Mr.  Lavenn, 
and  this  was  the  manuscript  that  was  used 
upon  this  occasion." 

John  Whitaker,  who  has  seaidied  sevetal 
papers,  says  that  the  New  Times  is  the  only 
paper  which  contained  an  account  of  the  dinner 
to  be  given  at  lord  Harrowby's,  and  that  was 
in  a  paper  of  the  22nd  February.    How  thai 
announcement  or  advertisement  or  whatever  it 
may  be,  found  its  way  into  the  nevrspaper,  we 
do  not  know,  and  it  would  be  in  vain,  pinfaaps, 
in  this,  as  in  many  other  cases,  to  endeavoar 
to  discover  by  what  accident  or  means^a  matter 
of  this  nature  finds  its  way  into  a  newspaper. 
What  inference  is  to  be  drawn  from  this  testi- 
mony you  must  judge  for  yourselves.    1  confess 
it  does  not,  in  my  mind,  lead  to  any  satisfactory 
conclusion  one  way  or  the  other.    The  dinner 
undoubtedly  was  intended ;  that  is  staled  fay 
lord  Harrowby  and  his  servant ;  whether  any 
body  had  heard  of  that  dinner,  and  so  tfaoiigfat 
fit  to  add  it  to  other  articles  of  tiie  saine  de- 
scription, or  how  it  got  into  the  peper^  "we  do 
not  know. 

This  is  the.  whole  of  the  evidence  tbet  has 
been  laid  before  .you,  oti  the  part  of  the  de- 
fendant. '  Hiere  are  no-witnesses  called  to  ise- 
peaeh  Adams,  Monvment*  or  Hiden.  The 
impeachment  jof  Adams,  and  JMLommieiti  .^flwet 


9033 


Jbr  Hi^  2Viii0ioii* 


A.  D.  1890. 


E054 


i^esi  therafbra  od  the  part  they  acknoivledge 
themselves  to  have  taken  in  this  transaction ; 
and  it  is  for  you  to  judge  whether  their  state- 
ment is  true.    If  yon  are  to  helieve  one  of 
these  persons,  you  will  consider  whether  it 
does    not    necessarily  follow  that  wbat    the 
others  have  told  you  is  suhstantiated,  because 
Hiden's  account,  thoueh  more  cautious,  is  to 
the  same  import  and  effect  as  the  others.    You 
have  had  exhibited  here  before -you  upon  the 
table,  and  proved  to  have  been  found,  a  quan- 
tity of  arms,  and  other  things  to  theextent  that 
has  been  mentioned.    It  seems  almost  to  be 
conceded,  upon  the  evidence  that  has  been 
laid  before  you,  that  the  conspiracy  to  assassi- 
nate the  king's  ministers  at  that  dinner  was  so 
substantiated  by  proof,  that  it  could  not  be 
expected  you  should  withhold  your  credit  from 
it.    If  you  are  to  believe  that  there  was  that 
wicked  scheme  and  project  intended,  you  will 
further  consider  whether  it  is  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  that  was  all  that  was  intended ; 
youwill  consider  what  the  probability  is.  These 
persons  are  many  of  them  unconnected,  in  most 
respects,  with  each  other,  certainly  unconnected 
witn  the  persons  who  conduct  the  affairs  of  his 
majesty's  government ;  therefore  you  will  consi- 
der whether  it  is  not  more  naturalto  suppose  that 
those  who  meditated  this  assassination,  meditat- 
ed it  as  part  of  a  plan  of  a  ffeneral  simultaneous 
insurrection,  which  they  hoped  would  result 
Irom  it,  than  to  suppose  that  they  meditated 
this  and  this  alone — whiether  it  was  intended 
to  gratify  their  thirst  fw  human  blood,  or  whe- 
ther it  was  a  part  of  an  ulterior  plan.    Upon 
that  question  it  i&  fit  you  should  attend  to  the 
great  quantity,  as  well  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
weapons,  and  instruments  of  destruction  which 
have  been  produced  before -you,  which  cer- 
tainly are  more  in  number -than  could  be  re- 
quired or  used  for  the  purpose  merely  of  that 
w>minable  vi^it  and  attempt. that  was  to-be 
made  in  the  house  of  lord  Harrowby.    The 
hand-grenades  are  of  a  description  to  be  used 
there :  the  fire  balls  do  not  seem  at  all  appli- 
cable.   When  you  find  all  these  materials  col- 
lected together  in  the  custody  of  some  of  these 
persons,  some  at  one  place,  and  some  at  ai^ 
oUier,  you  will  take  the  whole  into  your  serious 
consideration.    If,  upon  the  whole  of  this  evi- 
dence, you  shall  feel  satisfied  that  a  conspiracy 
to  levy  war  against  his  majesty,  or  to  depose 
him,  IS  made  out  by  the  evidence  laid  before 
you — ^if  your  consciences  are  satisfied  of  that, 
you  will  discharge  the  painful  du^  imposed 
upon  you  by  pronouncing  the  prisoner  guilty. 
I^  upon  a  due  examination  of  all  the  circump- 
stances,  attending  to  the  observations  of  the 
•  very  eloquent  counsel  who  have  addressed  you 
on  the  part  of  the  prisoners,  your  minds  shall 
not  be  satisfied  that  they  £d  entertain  this 
criminal  project  which  has  been  mentioned  to 
you,  you  then  will  discharge  a  more  pleasant 
duty,  and  acquit  the  prisoner.    You  vrill  con- 
sider the  case,  and,  I  have  no  doubt,  your  ver- 
dict will  do  justice  between  the  public  and 
the  piiioiier; 


Fcrmm  ^  <As  Ji(f3f.-«-My  lard|  cai^  wt  hive 
a  copy  of  the  indictment  P 

lord  Chief  JuOke  il&6o</.— Certainly.  [It 
wn  handed  to  the  Jury]. 

The  Jury  withdrew  at  a  quarter  before  five, 
and  in  five  minutes  returned  into  court  to 
request  a  copy  of  the  act  of- parliament  of 
the  36th  Geo.  3rd. 

Lord  Chief  JiMiee  Ahbott-^OeuiH&nenf  t^e 
act  of  parliament  shall  be  put  into  your  hands 
as  you  desire,  but  before  I  do  so  it  is  fit  I 
should  mention  to  you,'  that  by  its  terms  it  is 
made  to  continue  during  the  natnial  life  of 
our  late  most  gracious  sovereign,'and  until  the 
end  of  the  next  session  of  parliament  after  a 
demise  of  the  Grown ;  it  had'  not,  therefore, 
expired  before  the  present  indictment,  but  ly 
a  later  act*  it  is  made  peripetual.  I  need  not 
give  you  that,  because  mis  had  not  expired* 

A  Juryman. — ^If  your  lordship  will  read  it,  it 
will  be  sufficient. 

Lord  Chief  Jmtke  ^(ftoff.— Certainly.  The 
act  begins  by  reciting— ''We,  your  majesty's 
dutiful  andloval^subjects,  the  lords  spiritual  and 
temporal,  and  commons  of  Great  Britain,  in  this 
present  parliament  assembled,  duly  consider- 
ing the  daring  outrages  offered  to  your  majes- 
ty's most  sacred  person,  in  your  passage  to  and 
from-  your  parliament  at  tne  opening  of  this 
present  session;  and  also  the  continued  at- 
tempts of  evil  and  wicked  disposed  persons  to 
disturb  the  tranquillity  of  this  your  majesty's 
kingdom,  particularly  by  the  multitude  of  se- 
ditious paiUpblets  and  speeches  daily  printed, 
Sublished,  and  dispersea,  with  unremitted  in- 
ustry,aiidvrith  a  transcendent  boldness,  in  con- 
tempt of  your  majestv's  royal  person  and  dig- 
nity, and  tendinff  to  tne  overthrow  of  the  lavrs, 
government^  and  happy  constitution  of  these 
realms,  have  judged  that  it  is  become  necessaiy 
to  provide  a  farther  remedy  against  all  'suchtrea- 
sonable  and  seditious  practices  and  attempts. 
We,  therefore,  calling  to  mind  the  good  and 
wholesome  provisions  which  have  at  different 
times  been  made,  by  the  vrisdom  of  parliament^ 
for  the  averting  such  dangers,  and  more  espe- 
cially for  the  security  and  preservation  of  the 
persons  of  the  sovereigns  of  these  realms,  do 
most  humbly  beseech  your  majesW  that  it  mar 
be  enacted ;  and  be  it  enacted  by  the  king% 
most  excellent  majesty,  by  and  with  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  lords  spiritual  and  temporal, 
and  commons  in  this  present  parliament  assem- 
bled, and  by  the  authority  of  the  same,  that  if 
any  person  or  persons  whatsoever,  after  the 
day  of  the  passing  of  this  act,  during  the  natu- 
ral life  of  our  most  gracious  sovereign  lord  the 
king  (whom  Almighty  God  preserve  and  bless 
vrith  a  long  and  prosperous  reign)  and  until 
the  end  of  Uie  next  session  of  pariiament,  after 
a  demise  of  the  Crovrn,  shall,  within  tiie  realm 
or  without,  compass,  imagine,  invent,  devise. 


rf-i 


•Stat.l^Oio.Mcid. 


9^ 


iQKAiUWiy. 


T)rM^4tlt*m  TUiMtmood 


(909 


or  intend  death  or  destmction,  or  any  bodUy 
^MMi  MoMa^  W  qeatn  oc'sMfmeCietty  nminiy 
or  wounding,  imprison«ent  or  resciaint  of  the 
jMBon,e£the.9^.ej^QWi«oY«iai|P  to#tha  king, 
fib  hein  and  successors-*^''  Nov,^.  gfNitkaifDB 
comes  the  part  which  forms  the  subject  of  one 
ot  thO'OOVBtS'ef  tlU(  indietnent:  ^'-^-ortode- 
MeohinaPtlMii  item  Ae*  styles  honour,  or 
fitaglf  MBO:  oT  Ae  itai|pihl'  Cfowv  of  this 
realm,  or  of  any  otherof  fannajInty^^nnBions 
<Vccou;atP«VQttQ  la^va-wa&^iiMiistbiBm^iMly, 
to  h/eixa  or  9upces90ia»  vitbua  tbi>  realia>  mi 
qrd«r»  Iqr  ft)rc«  ot  nontlUaiTm,  to  OMnpeL  hiai: 
qir  tlim  ta  ehaaga  his  oc  tbei^e  meainwii  <» 
^ftnos^iC  wUch.it  anathar».  "  or.  io  order  tO: 
B^  ^  *Ai^  ^  conwtffyia  mi«v  oa  to.  tnlir 
ipidali^o];  Q]rai9tpm.both  ^oaef ,.««  eiifaer  hoasa^ 
oX  padiinnftiU„  qc.  Io  Temoy»  or  s(Ur-  aayi  fe« 
V^jigaaRoi  atiaiuKi^,  with  fiMroa^  t^.  iwf««Uthia 
i|l94n|y^oc  any  otbei;of  hia«)i^e9t|^s«domi«iona 
or  ctiiv)ft9efi|U»d43^the(oh«^ywo9e  af.hi^aiqiati 
ty,  his  heirs  and  successors ;  and  such  compas- 
SHDgs,  JMngwiitiaiiw^  inreBtitns,  dfevites  orin- 
tentions,  or  anv  of  them  shall  espresa,  vrtter^  or 
40ritti«i^l^  BomibiiiKany  Bi>«itfuis.ar  -vmtiag, 
qr  iiT  ^I  ^^^  act;  esKleaa,  beina  legftUv  conr 
meted  thereof,  ufoat  tha  oatthsi  dt  tpwo  lavrful 
y^^  dtedible  witByptWi  Uflon. trials  or  olberwie» 
<sonvic|iMQr.aitai0jied  h^  daa  Qw«BB0.Q£laia;. 
ihm.  ev^rj;  suclu  parsoi.  and  pamoas,  so  aa 
ijtiweA»id.  Q]|fandipg»  shall  ha  daaiwid  dedaasd. 
udiafijudgfMi.  U>  batatraitQ^,ei»d(,trailon,  aiad. 
s^lfiuflur.p^na^f  dcathi^  and«  sjk^  loeaawi 
4Nr£M^,ai..ii|.cafta»  af  higk  trowiaq,'' 

I{»^Q.u,reQ))ve.aay  fiirthea  m)bHiaUoii  J<will. 
fp3(fi-it  t0.yp«;.but^i^  sf»wad,,Iith0ugh(».taJiw 
ujufik  for. grafted'  1^.th% opuaaal  on  oneaMUi 
^tlMtothei^,th«t.thaprq)eo|»  if;proved».waa 
ittraaipi^la^c«wMq[unfC»  to  d^paea  tha  Uag^ 
qs^to  lm,^»t.  agj^AJMl  ibfb  kiaf  r.  If  tl^jrhad^ 
sfiocaedad-^aP^Cur  afctQ^a«MiU>ih(  a.  prowoaal 
lpirtgmyiSU>  tbar.rtqpdt  fiMw^iom  would  hura 
€^i9fifiL  /W/ aMami^  ll|y  wianbeay.  aad»  bjh 
4m^.ti9^  opiP<y>t  hw  Jiwa<iSia.«iUar«hifc maiii. 
•WQii^  smmJ  cpuaaahft  iii  sMili  uodoabtadlflrh  a.* 
of,  waft.  ifij;thA¥  thill  ncu  Aftk  actual 


asing  or.  %iaanaetiQia  fi>a  tha  sediiM'  of  evf 

fiinpaeed  pablia.  griavanee  was  alwaya  eoB« 
altoad  aa  an  aotiiaii  Imiogof  war^  under  tha 
old  iMtuie  oCSdwaiitha  3rd« 

The  Jury  again  retired,  and  in  a  quarter  of 
aa  hour  returned  into*  court,  findins  the 
prisoner  Oxsrvrt  ov  tbe'  third  and  nurth 
counts* 

CM  ^Jhr^^M^r-^bidliLorfl  the  pasaaaa 
lor.  judgmant^  my^  lord.? 

BanfeiS^Jtuthr  jm^tt-^ffo,  not  now. 


thalc  the  jury,  should)  ha.  samtioaad  foe  £ridef 
moniag^  %ii  I  Caar  thaia  auoi^hava-haea  saaaa 
misuadeiriMitdiiigt 

Lord'  eSkfef  AfffarifN^.-^nd'  notice  tl> 
the  jury  to  attend  again  on  Friday  meniing^: 
the  ofll^r  shall  go  round' arihr  as  he  can. 

JWsiiaa  qf  th$i  JiMy.-^-WiU  yom  lasMite 
hafa  Ae»gpeiaeii  to  &cbm^vBikam  aMeM* 
iog  tha;eMiiiBg.tBialftl-. 

Ijtnf  CRfeT  Jib^ior  Mhttt—^yt  consdtinK 
with  the  other  tud{ges^,weare  oTopiaioir,  |on 
may  be  excusaa  fironr  senring  on  the  next  tnd; 
we  cannot  say  your  attendance,  shall  be  ex- 
cosed '  OB  'ftiture  trihis* 

jlJw^mmCMt*  G«ffiEM«i^;r-We  baaehttd 
^wjfraidooiia  dMty  to> peiibim,. aad  wa  shall 
haid^haTa  tkofi  to  iBowweg-OMawlveai 

IMt'GM^'Justk€Aimt:--Wh  hope  some- 
lldng  more  wiQ.'be  .dbneibr  you ;  but  you  will 
not  DO  wanted  beibre  next  Monday,  at  all 
eients :  fUrtfaertiianr  that'I  cannel  say. 

Ux4.a0mlrm*   'Woidoinotpiaw  il^^fhiihar 

thaitothai^Qr>lMi^- 

Mr;  Jmtke  Mkhknikm.-^Let  itije  announcedl 
tfiat  these  trials,  wilt  be' resumed  on  Fridaj^ 
morning^*' 

•^Saa*  thei  fbttowBiiiGaaaM . 


009] 


y'^^^^r    '  ^^^^kW     ^^^H^RIwi 


JUlkMID. 


Idsft 


70*.  The  wh(^  Pkt^ceedings  on  the  Trial  of  James  Ings,  for  Higb 
Treasoa,  before  tbe  Court  holden  under  a  Special  Commis- 
sion^  for  the  Trial  of  certain  Ofifehces  therein  mentioned^  on 
die  ^Ist  and  22tid  days  of  April:  1  GfiO.  IV.  A.  d.  1820* 


SfiSSIONS  HOCBE^  OUO  BAILSY, 
Frid&t,  Apfttt  21st,  1810. 

T1)e  Ri{jt)t  Hem.  lord  CMgfJvtUkt  IkSim. 

The  Right  Hoiu  lord  GAi^JWofi[R5cli«ids]. 

Hie  Hon.  Mr.  ^Ttafioe  Itidicrdiim. 

Tlie  Cpffimon  Serseont*  * 

And  Others  his  Mijesty's  Justices,  8ce. 

James  Ihos  was  set  to  the  btr;  and  Joka 
Thoifaas  Bnuil^  aichurd  Tidd,  William 
DaTidsoB)  James  William  Wilson,  John 
HarnsoD,  Ridiard  Bmdbvm,  John  Shaw 
Strange,  James  Gilfihrist,  and  Charles 
Cooper,  were  placed  at  the  bar  behind* 

The  Jurv  panel  was  called  oter,  commen- 
cing widi  No.  108. 

Ckmiu  Fannar^  hardwaremaa,  awDRi* 
{JkrulopkerDmimmf  ship-bniMer,  cbaUcnged  by 

the  priaoner; 
WUUam  Jama  Fanmt^  baker,  chaMcnged  bj 

the  priaoimr. 
JJaM  17eiiitm%    firmer,  diaUoDged  by  tibe 

Crown. 
€j€ofgc  Sntkhf  jaipanner,  sworn. 
ikor^  Tkcrpf  dockraae^makety  6haUn§ad  bf 

dieCrowm 
Bauy  SeaborUf  eooper,  eieased  on  aecomrt  of 

ilmeis. 
Runm  Sherbom,  esq.  and  fimner,  challenged 

by  the  prisoner. 
JBthoard  .SwiplsK,  sbipvrighly  challenged  by  the 


pnsoi 


>aer. 


JDflRMS,  shopkeeper  chalk  aged  by  the 
Crown. 

Mkkard  Fnmkiy  esq.-  a»d  sflk-Hkepeer,  chal- 
lenged by  the  prisooeff. 

nomm  Lmgby,  ship^BiidlMr,  <^ellsiiged  by 
the  Crown. 

Geprge  Priai,  esq.  chslkinged  by  the  prisoner. 

Ammsj  iraam,  gentlemaa  and  meichant,  dwl* 
lenged  by  the  pfisoner. 

WUHmm  Moon,  bndkiayeiy  awoim. 

Mkhad  JUmu,  esq.  ekaUniged  by  thwCfow»» 

vlamss  SdSf  ftnaer^  swons^ 

AyM  Bmon,  esq>  awi  peg  toi>doahf,  chatong> 
•d  by  ibe  Gvewn.  i  • 

Omffjge  3Wofv  hMAvnt^  cbaUeBgdl  by  the 


priscmef^ 
JMn  wi 


Woodirn^^  gentftmais,  challmigdl  bf  the 
prisoner. 


.*.  ». 


pieeedhig 


Edmmd  Citni^  j0weUqr»  ehaUeoged  by  ifee 

prisoner. 
Jb*»  Mt^^ne,  geatlmum,  challenged  Iff  M 

prisoner* 
lyivid  Pom,  esq,  challenged  by  the  pfisMer. 
Bkhard  Tucker,  cheesenoageri  ehaiuettged  to 

the  prisoner. 
Ih)mas  BeaduMfy  farmer,  sworn. 
B4)bert  Ced^,  ngger^  cheUenged  by  the  pri- 

soner. 

Thomas  Fw,  eiq.  and  coachmaM<ff,thalletigd 
by  the  Crown. 

MaUhe»  Bekker,  tfaitner,  chafi«iig«d  by  thh 
Crown; 

Bemamm  WaMH,  gentlemltti,  chldltoged  by 
the  prisoner. 

O^ofgC  Burrowi,  silversmith,  fined  for  non-at« 
tendance,  fine  afterwards  remitted  on  hie 
appearance,  and  swearing  he  bad  been  pre- 
vented being  in  time  by  indiftposition. 

Edward  EiUs,  gentleman  and  stock-broker, 
challenged  by  Che  prisenttk 

Btniamm  nljftk,  ergan-bnikUr,  swoA)« 

WUimm  Oan^  iBather-djeMer^  ehattehged  by 
thepcisQoen 

Mh  Jadmmf  gbM-enMer^  ehaUtnged  by  lh# 
prisoner. 

Jahm  Bw^  geatWmaa  awd  seedemaii^swortit 

Folk  Bmtk,mt^  and  distiUei^  chalknged  bjr 
thaprisonM« 

Charim  Benkam,  mmlm  foidener,  ehattengea 
bytheCrewDi    . 

Zftomai  JRoUn^  siWiistoMv  ebaB^agsd  by  the 

Crown. 
JdmRau,  gintlematk*  eicnsed  o»  aeeomt  of 

the hraupositien  of  aiduld  in  •  dangeioiK 

stated 
Frmwk  DflrriU^esq.  ebaU«iged  by  the  prisoMt^ 
WHUmm  Pertyy  plasterer,  swonw 
Jolm  Giorgt  Haimd^  fiiasNciiller^  ehattengedi 

by  the  prisomsiL 
Jtniibaid  BMu^  stone-masMi^  ohaUenf  ed  by 

the  Crown* 
JeA»JfiiM,gentJeman^cWleiigedby  lh«Crow»< 
€Ui0iu  SStm  Prttotk,  esq«  ehallenged  by  thtf 


l{fl(prt%  auHnec^8W<ird« 
BmordLe^mk,  esq^  mid  oowhocpdr,  fiaed 

fiw  ndn-aMendaflee. 
GaeK§tFo€^  sawyer,  nhnlliagjiil  by.the  Ciewn. 
WHium  Jimk,  ptaaaber^  ch»llenged  by  th« 
'  CroEwn. 
Mdmmrd  Cmi,  caipeatei^  ehalksged  bgr  ih# 

Cieanu  f- 

George  Golding,  surveyor,  ofanUsngidr  bgr  th# 

prisoner. 


M6} 


1  GBOBOE  IV. 


Trial,tfJamm^Iiigi 


tfNtO 


Bfiieri  Roberiif  onmaiiy  ehall6iiged  by  Ibe 

Ciown* 
WUUam  Smmdf  ibimdery  challenged  by  tbe 

Ciowii. 

Charlet  Page^  esq.  and  merchant,  challenged 


by  the  prisoner. 

Wi&am     "■ 


CoUy  hxmeVf  challenged  by  the 
prisoner. 

JmU  Lewu,  watchmaker,  dudlenged  by  the 
Crown.  • 

EAoard  Flower,  esq.  schoolmaster,  challenged 
by  the  prisoner. 

Mm^.  fioMy  centleman '  and  tallo1r*cfaandlery 
challenged  by  the  Crown. 

John  'Yo^9  gentleman  and  scakmaker,  sworn. 

Stafford  Price,  gentleman,  and  currier,  chal- 
lenged by  the  prisoner. 

Jomn  CarVf  joiner,  sworn. 

Wiiiiam  j£fl{gooaifo,  joiner,  sworn. 

TRBJU&T. 


Charles  Fanner, 
George  Smith, 
WiUiam  Mooie, 
James  Ede, 
lliomas  Beachamp, 
Benjamin  Blyth, 


John  Beck, 
William  Percy, 
Benjamin  Rogers,  . 
John  Young, 
James  Caiy, 
William  Edgecomb, 


Tbe  Jnnr  were  charged  with  the  prisoner  in 
the  usual  rorm. 

XHE  Indictment  was  opened  by  Mr.  BoUand. 

Mr.  Sokdior  Gefier0/.«-Oentlemen  of  the 
jury; — II  is  ny  duty  to  state  this  case  on  the 
mrt  of  the  prosecution,  and  I  am  sure,  know- 
ing whom  I  now  have  the  honour  of  address- 
ing, that  it  is  unnecessary  lor  me  to  request 
your  serious  and  patient  attention  to  the  par- 
ticulars which  I  am  about  to  detail ;  you  must 
fcel  that  you  owe  it  to  yourselres ;  you  must 
leel  that  you  owe  it  to  the  public  justice  of 
the  country.;  you  must  feel  in  a  particular 
manner  that  you  owe  it  to  the  prisoner  him- 
self who  now  stands  beiore  you  fbr  his  delivei^ 


Oentlemen,  there  is  a  circumstance  to  which 
in  justice  to  ^e  prisoner,  it  is  my  duty  to 
advert.  I  should  not  hare  alluded  to  it  if  it 
nusf  not  of  necessity  have  already  come  to 
your  knowledge — I  mean  the  conviction  that 
lias'  already  taken  place.  ■  I  entreat  and  conjure 
you  that  you  will  not  suffer  that  conviction  at 
all  to  operate  upon  your  minds,  to  the  preju- 
dice of  the  prisoner  who  now  stands  oefore 
you.  Tou  are  to  decide  upon  this  case  aocord- 
mg  to  the  impression  which  the  evidence  shall 
make  upon  your  own  minds;  and  yon  are  not 
to  be  influenced  by  an  impression  which  evi- 
dence that  has  ab^ady  been  heard  may  have 
made  upon  the  minds  of  othcf^men.  •  You  are 
to  come  to  the  conaideration  of  this  question 
totally  divested  of  all  previous  prejudices  and 
impressions,  and  you  are  to  decide  this  case 
impartially,  according  to  the  evidence  as  it 
shul  be  given  upon  oath  before  you  against 
tbe  prisoner  at  the  bar. 


With  re^Mct  to  the  law,  as  app&cable  to 
this  subject,  it  will  not  be  necessary  for  me  to 
trouble  you  with  a  single  observation.  No 
doubt  can  be  entertained  upon  it  No  ques^ 
tion  has  hitherto  been  raised  in  the  course  of 
these  inquiries  with  respect  to  the  law.  The 
charge  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  divested 
of  every  thing  that  is  technical,  is  shortly  and 
simply  this ;  that  he  has  conspired  with  other 
men,  whose  names  will  be  mentioned  in  the 
course  of  these  proceedings,  to  overturn  by 
force  and  violence  the  lavrs  and  constitution 
of  Uie  country.  This,  though  stated  in  tikhni- 
cal  language  upon  .the  record,  is  the  .substance 
of  the  change  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar. 
The  object  at  which  the  parties  aimed  was  to 
be  effected  by  means  of  an  extensive  plan  of 
assassination;  it  was  to  be  effected  also. by 
other  means  to  which  I  shall  presently  have 
occasion  to  direct  your  attention. 

In  this  stage  of  the  prosecution,  all  tbat  I 
have  to  do  is,  in  a  plain  and  simple  manner^ 
carefully  abstaining  from  all  exaggeration,  to 
state  to  you  the  focts  that  will  be  detailed  in 
evidence  in  support  of  this  charge.  I  shall 
state  them  as  I  now  know  they  will  be  pioved, 
without  distorting  a  single  hd  or  civcomstanoe 
to  the  prejudice  of  the  prisoner  •'at  the  bar. 
We  are  all  interested  in  the  fair  and  impartial 
administration  of  justice ;  no  motives  arising 
out  of  any  particular  circumstances  can  pos- 
sibly operate  upon  the  nund  of  a  person  stand- 
ing in  the  situation  in  vrhkh  I  am  now  placed 
to  lead  him  to  forget  his  duty.  .  The  fair,  im« 
partial,  and  uprisht  administration  of  justice 
IS  that  upon  which  we  justly  pride  ourselves  ; 
it  is  the  best  gift  we  enjoy  unaer  the  laws  and 
constitution  of  our  country. 

The  prisoner  at  the  bar,  vrith  a  person  of 
the  name  of  Thistlewood,  a  person  of  the  name 
of  Davidson,  another  of  the  name  of  Brunt,  a 
person  of  the  name  of  Wilson^  and  several 
others  who  will  be  mentioned  in  the  course  of 
this  inquiry,  held^  in  4he  eariy  part  of  4lie 
year,  secret  meetings  and  consultations  at  a 
place  known  by  the  name  or  sign  of  the  White 
Hart,  in  Brook's-market.  'fhose  conauha* 
tions.-  vrere :  held  in  a  back  room  in  a  yard  be- 
longing to  that  public-house.  I  shall  not 
trouble  you  by  stating  what  took  place  at  those 
meetings,  because,  after  they  had  been  held  in 
that  place  for  a^ahort  period  of  time,  for  some 
reason  to  which  it  is  unnecessary  that  I  should 
direct  your  attention,  they  left  that  place,  and 
held- their. meetings  in  another  situation  to 
which  I  am  now  about  to  advert. 

One  of  the  prisoners,  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Brunt^  who  is  a  shoemaker  by  trade,  lived  in 
a  place  called  Fox-oonrt,  in  Gray's*inn-4ane ; 
be  occupied  two.  <  apartments  in'  the  front  of 
the  house;  there  was  in  the  back  of  the  bouse, 
upon  the  same  .floor, .  another-  unlnmiahed 
room,  and  that  room  was  hired  for  the  purpose 
of  Continuing  those  meetings  whidi  had  beei^ 
formerly  held  at  the  White  Hart.  Tbe  pri- 
soner at  ttie  bar  and  Brunt,  in  conjunctioii, 
hired  the  apartment.    This  took  place  About 


6611 


for  High  Tnoion* 


the  middle  of  fhe  month  of  January,  and  from 
that  period  to  Wednesday  the  23rd  of  Teb- 
ruary,  to  which  your  attention  will  often  be 
called  in  the  course  of  this  inquiry)  those 
meetings  were  held  always  once,  and  fre- 
quently twice  a  day,  by  the  persons  whom  I 
have  mentioned,  all  of  them,  except  Thistle- 
woody  being  in  humble  situations  of  life,  jour- 
neymen mechanics — Tliistlewood  himself  was 
in  a  more  elevated  situation,  having  formerly, 
I  believe,  held  a  commission  in  his  majesty's 
service.  The  object  of  those  meetings  was,  to 
form  a  plan  for  overturning  the  government 
of  the  country ;  and  the  plan  which  was  form- 
ed, which  will  be  proved  to  you  in  the  most 
distinct  manner  by  the  evidence  I  shall  lay 
before  you,  was  of  this  nature.  In  the  first 
place  it  v^as  proposed,  that  when  an  oppor- 
tunity offered,  all  his  majesty's  ministerSj  being 
assembled  at  a  cabinet  dinner,  which  is  usually 
held  about  once  a  week  during  the  meeting  of 
parliament,  should  be  assassinated.  It  was 
proposed  that  arms  should  be  provided  for 
that  purpose^  which  I  will  by  and  by  describe. 
About  thirty  or  forty  persons  were  considered 
as  sufficient  for  tlie  accomplishment  of  this 
object,  and  it  was  arranged  that  on  knocking 
at  the  door,  under  pretence  of  delivering  a 
letter,  a  party  armed  with  swords,  pistols,  and 
hand-grenades,  should  rush  into  the  room 
"Where  those  persons  were  assembled  at  dinner, 
and  that  they  should  be  all  destroyed.  Ano- 
ther party  was  to  watch  the  stair-case,  to  pre- 
sent any  assistance  from  the  servants ;  a  third, 
the  area,  and  other  persons  were  to  take  care 
that  no  interruption  should  occur  to  the  eie- 
cutioD  of  this  project  from  persons  without. 
This  was  a  part  of  the  general  plan.  It  was 
thought  the  blow  would  create  such  an  im- 
pression, in  striking  off  all  the  first^uthorities 
ID  the  country,  that  it.would  afford  an  oppor- 
tunity for  carrying  into  complete  effect  the 
other  projects  of  the  conspirators.  One  of 
these  projects  was,  to  set  fire  to  various  parts 
of  the  town,  and  a  party  to  be  headed  by  a 
person  of  the  name  of  Palin  (who  was  one  of 
the  association)  was  to  execute  that  project. 
Another  project  was,  to  take  possession  of  some 
pieces  or  cannon  stationed  in  the  Artillery- 
ground.  The  party  to  cany  into  effect  that 
part  of  the  plan  was  to  be  headed  by  a  person 
of  the  name  of  Cook.  A  fourth  party  was  to 
take  possession  of  two  pieces  of  artillery  sta* 
tionea  in  GrayVinn-lane, 

It  is  necessary  for  me  to  inform  you  that 
all  the  persons  whose  assistance  was  to  be  col- 
lected on  this  occasion  were  not  to  be  let  into 
the  whole  history  and  contrivance  of  this  plot. 
The  secret  was  confined  to  those  who  were  ia 
the  habit  of  assembling  in  Fox*court;  but 
they  had  associates  vrithont,  who  understood 
that  a  plan  was  going  on;  that  something  was 
in  preparation  to  which  they  were  to  lend 
their  assistance^  when  it  was  qpe  for  ezeco- 
tion,  and  that  when  ripe  for  execution,  the 
pttrtionlan.were  to  be  communicated  to  them. 

For  the  purpose  of  canying  this  into  execu- 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


A.  D.  1820.  [9^ 

tion,  arms  of  various  description  were  pro- 
cured. It  is  unnecessary  for  me  to  particu- 
larize the  whole  of  them,  but  I  shall  direct 
your  attention  to  one  or  two  descriptions  of 
weapons.  Independently  of  swords  and  pis- 
tols and  a  great  number  of  pikes,  there  were^ 
collected,  for  this  purpose^  a  number  of 
hand-grenades.  These  were  collected  chief- 
ly by  the  prisoner  Davidson :  they  were 
formed,  each  of  them,  of  a  tin  box  filled  with 
about  a  quarter  of  a  pound  of  gunpowder ;  a 
fuse  communicated  with  the  interior;  large 
pieces  of  iron  were  placed  round  the  box,  and 
the  whole  was  secured  with  cord,  and  after- 
wards dipped  into  pitch  and  tar,  and  cemented 
strongly  together.  Those  grenades  were  in- 
tended, in  the  first  instance,  to  be  thrown  into 
the  house  where  the  ministers  were  assembled 
at  dinner :  and  they  were  ailso  to  be  made  use 
of  for  the  purpose  of  aiding  in  the  further  pro- 
jects which  the  parties  had  in  view.  Another 
description  of  instrument,  prepared  for  the 
occasion,  were  fire-balls,  which  were  called  by 
them  illumination-balls,  to  be  made  tise  of  by 
the  party,  under  the  direction  of  Palin,  in 
setting  fire  to  different  buildings  in  the  metro- 
polis. These  preparations  went  on  for  a  con« 
siderable  period  of  time.  As  the  instruments 
of  destruction  which  I  have  thus  described 
were  successively  prepared,  they  were  brought 
to  the  place  in  Fox-court  for  inaction,  and 
they  were  afterwards  transferred  from  that 
place  to  what  was  called  the  d^p6t,  the  lodg- 
mgs  of  one  of  the  conspirators,  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Tidd,  who  lived  in  a  place  called 
Hole-in-the-wall-passage,  near  Brook's<mariLet. 

The  plan  which  had  been  thus  formed,  be- 
fore it  was  completely  matured  and  readv  for 
execution,  was  suspended  by  the  death  of  the 
king.  In  consequence  of  that  event  the  ca- ' 
binet  dinners  were  discontinued,  and  it  became 
therefore  impossible  to  execute  the  project  at 
the  period  when  it  was  originally  intended, 
and  you  will  find  these  parties  were  continually 
expressing  their  disappointment  at  the  delay. 
They  became  at  last  so  impatient,  that,  on  Sa- 
turday the  19th  of  February,  they  determined 
to  consider  whether  some  other  plan,  if  not  so 
effectual,  at  least  to  a  degree  effectual  for  the 
accomplishment  of  the  purpose  they  had  in 
view,  might  not  be  substitnted  for  it;  and 
accordingly  they  determined,  that  on  the  foU 
lowing  day,  Sunday,  in  the  forenoon,  a  com- 
mittee should  be  appointed  for  the  purpose  of 
considering  what  measures  should  be  taken,  it 
was  then  considered  that  there  was  no  imme- 
diate prospect  of  all  the  ministers  meetings  to- 
gether, so  as  to  enable  them  to  attempt  the 
enterprise  wfaidi  had  been  contemplated.  On 
the  Sunday,  they  accordingly  met  together, 
and  formed  themselves  into  a  committee ;  and 
Thistlewood,  who  undoubtedly  was  the  leader 
and  framer  of  the  whole  plan,  proposed  that 
as  it  was  probable  they  might  be  able  to  col*« 
lect  about  forty^men  for  tiie  purpose  of  exe* 
cutinswhat  was  denominated  the  west-end** 
job,  forty  determined  persons  calculated  for 

3Q 


960) 


1  GEORGK  IT. 


Trial  of  Jama  lugi 


C964 


an  enterpiise  of  tint  kind  iiicNild  divide  thenfr 
selves  into  four  perties»  for  the  purpoie  of 
putting  to  deatb,  at  the  tame  time^  four  of 
those  who  were  considered  the  leadiog  mtm- 
ben  of  the  cabinet.  This  plan  was  agitated^ 
proposed^  c^msidered,  ana  at  last  reaoWad 
upon.  It  was  determined  that  all  the  reat  of 
the  prpfect  should  be  earned  into  effect,  as  it 
had  been  originidly  intended ;  but  that  instead 
of  striking  the  blow  at  all  his  majesty's  minia* 
tersy  as  circumstances  did  not  permit  that  to 
be  carried  into  effect,  they  would  confine 
themselves  with  the  means  th^  possessed  to 
the  taking  off  four  of  the  leading  uembera  of 
Ithe  cabinet,  whose  names  will  he  mentioaed 
to  you  in  the  course  of  the  evidence.  The 
prisoner  at  the  bar  expressed  a  hope  that  he 
should  be  of  the  party  destined  to  put  to  death 
my  lord  Castlereagb,  andhe  exclaimed,  '<  It  will 
not  be  necessary  to  draw  lots  for  the  purpose 
of  knowing  who  shall  be  the  individual  to  put 
him  10  death,  for  I  am  ready  to  do  that  with 
my  own  hand."  After  this  resolution  was 
adopted,  the  parties  separated,  and  it  was  un- 
derstood, that  if  on  the  following  Wedn^ay 
(which  was  the  day  on  which  the  cabinet 
dinners  were  usually  given)  there  should  be 
■o  opportunity  of  stnking  the  great  blow, 
then  the  plan  should  be  carried  into  effect  in 
the  manner  I  have  now  stated.  They  met 
again  on  the  Monday,  and  also  on  the  Tuesday 
moniing. 

In  the  mean  time  the  king's  funeral  had 
taken  place,  and  as  a  proper  interval  had 
elapsed,  it  wtfs  considered  that  those  dinners 
might  again  be  renewed ;  and  in  the  latter  end 
•f  the  preceding  week,  either  on  the  Friday  or 
on  the  Saturday,  cards  of  invitation  had  been 
issued  by  the  desire  of  lord  Harrowby,  re- 
questing the  attendance  of  the  cabinet  minis* 
ters  at  a  dinner  to  be  given  at  his  house,  on 
Wednesday  the  23rd.  You  are  aware  that 
these  dinners  are  usually  announced  in  the 
public  papers,  and  particularly  in  the  papera 
which  are  supposed  to  be  in  the  interest  of 
Government  The  court  reporter  sent  the  ac« 
count  of  the  invitation  to  tiie  New  Times,  and 
it  appeared  in  that  paper  on  the  morning  of 
Tu^ay  the  SSnd  instant.  These  oonspi- 
xatoiB  were  assembled  on  that  morning,  at  their 
plaoe  of  rendesvottS,  in  Fox*court.  It  was 
mentioned  that  a  dinner  was  to  be  held  on 
the  following  day,  and  that  it  was  advertised 
in  the  newspapers.  A  newspaper  was  sent 
for,  the  paragraph  was  read,  and  the  utmost 
exultation  was  expressed  (in  terms  so  gross 
that  I  do  not  choose  to  repeat  them)  by  the 
prisoner  now  on  his  trial.  EVeiy  thing  was 
imasedialehr  in  a  bustle,  and  they  determined 
to  go  Totfnd  to  their  dilforent  associates,  to  get 
them  in  readtnesB,  to  carry  into  efihct  the  en- 
terprise on  the  foHowittg  i|ight. 

I  should  state  to  you  that  they  did  not  con* 
rider  that  the  room  in  Fbx«eonrt  would  be  a 
eonvenient  spot^  from  whenoe  to  issue  to  the 
ececttlion  of  their  praject*  They  weie  exposed 
there  to  a  good  deaii  of  observation^  and  it  was 


al  too  remote  a  distanoe  fivm  Ike  swit  when 
the  blow  was  to  be  stmek.  In  order,  tfaen^ 
for^  to  carry  on  their  design  with:  more  fuim 
lity,  they  had  hived  premises  in  an  obseusst 
stieet,  lalled  C^Orsiieet,  near  the  Bdgwaver 
soad ;  a  street  thvoogh  which  there  is  no  pee^ 
sage  for  earriagea.  PresDises  consisting  of  a 
saiiall  stable^  a  eavt-hense,  a  loh^  and  tfwo 
rooms  communicating  with  the  loft,  were  hired 
for  the  purpose  of  carrying  the  plot  into  ef^ 
feet,  from  a  peraoa  of  the  name  of  Finh,  b^ 
Harrison,  one  of  the  partiea  most  active  in  thft 
eottsptracy ;  and  it  was  detemined  that  em 
the  following  evening,  about  six  or  sevem 
o'clock,,  arnied  in  the  manner  necesoaiy  foe 
aecomplisbing  their  object,  they  should  a»» 
semble  at  these  premises  in  Cato-etreet. 

When  this  project  was  thus  nearly  ripe  foe 
execution,  it  was  conceived  that  theymig^t, 
with  the  less  danger^  eommunicate  the  pmnim 
culars  of  it  for  the  purpose  of  getting  additional 
assistance ;  and  aecordingly  a  eommunicatiois 
upon  the  sol^eet  was  made  by  one  of  the  eon- 
smtators,  Wilson,  to  a  person  o#  the  name  of 
Hiden,  a  milkman,  bvinoin  the  Heighboarh<M)d 
of  Manchestet^uare.  Wibon  told  him  that 
there  was  a  design  to  overturn  the  govemmeaft 
of  the  countsy :  he  told  him  that  this  was  to  ba 
effected  by  means  of  assassmating  his  majesty'a 
ministers,  who  were  to  dine  on  the  fottowiag 
day  at  lord  Harrowby's ;  and  that  these  wera 
parties  who  were  to  take  possession  of  tha 
artilleiy  in  Giay's-iim-lane,  and  in  the  dtf, 
and  another  party  to  set  fire  to  the  town,  im 
different  parts,  for  the  purpose  of  prodnciny 
general  oonfosion  and  disorder;  and  aa  the 
labouring  classes  of  the  people  were  sappoaed 
to  be  disaffwted  to  the  govemmeat  or  tha 
country,  that  it  was  hop^  a  general  rising 
would  take  place,  and  that  a  force  veuld  b« 
collected  sufficient  to  set  al  defiance  the  ra* 
maining  authorities  of  government. 

When  this  communication  was  made  t» 
Hiden,  he  listened  to  it  with  astonishment;  and 
when  required  to  join  in  it,  he  immediately 
assented,  because  he  felt  that  when  sueh  a  pro- 
position was  made  to  him  by  persons  oapabla 
of  forming  such  a  plan,  if  he  shcrald  refose  hia 
assent  to  it,  his  own  personal  security  would 
be  endangered.  He  promised,  therefore,  ta 
meet  the  conspirators,  laid  he  would  briag 
such  accesrion  of  force  as  was  in  his  pawer^ 
and  after  this  communication  was  made,  >»• 
turned  to  his  own  home.  He  then  began  la 
reflect  seriously  upon  tiie  nanire  of  this 
diabolical  project ;  he  turned  in  his  mind  uHbaft 
Qoorse  he  should,  pnieae,  and  be  immedialBl|r 
sat  down  and  wrote  a  letter  to  my  lord  Gastla« 
zeagfa,  communicating  the  particulan  e£  Qstm 
plan.  With  this  letter  he  proceeded  to  St. 
JamesV^iiuara,  afraid  to  knock  at  the  daor  of 
my  lord  Castleraagh,  lest  he  riionld  be  obsemd, 
but  remaining  in  the  neit^hooriiood  for  tha 
purpose  of  seeing  his  lordship  in  the  atiaet,  of 
deUveting  to  him  this  letter,  and  ef  making  tha 
imporUnt  disclosure.  No  oppoitaaity  of  onifw 
ing  this  design  into  eiibct  oocmived,  imd  he  thai 


1 


Jar  High  TreoMon. 


A.  D.  1830. 


(066 


prooaedad  from  SL  JaBi€8*8-fl(|iuire  toGrosre- 
WJt^eqvMitf  where  my  lord  Harrowby  re^iden, 
for  the  pnvpose  of  endeavouring  to  make  a 
eommunieaUon  to  that  noUeman.  Fortunately 
my  lord  Harrowby  went  oat  to  lide  unae* 
«ompanied  by  a  senraDt;  Hiden  stationed 
himself  at  Grosrenor-gate,  and  waited  hie 
return.  This  oocuired  about  two  o'clock  on 
the  Tuesday.  He  told  bis  lordehip  that  the 
letter  contained  information  of  a  most  im- 
fmrtaiit  nmnre,  and  requested  his  lonkfaip  to 
4ake  cate  Hmt  it  should  be  instantly  delivered 
ito  lord  Caitleieagh.  Lotii  Hasrowby  asked 
Avhether  he  had  giten  his  name  and  addrees  in 
Hhe  letter ;  he  said  he  had  not,  but  he  immedi- 
Alely  delivered  a  eard  to  his  lordehip ;  and  the 
jnoment  this  eemmuoioatjoa  was  made  to 
4|Ovemmeoty  of  coufse  every  step  was  taken 
mi  the  polioe  offices  for  the  purpote  of  counter- 
jMling  the  design^  andaeeuring  the  conspirators, 
when  they  should  assemble  the  next  night  in 
Cato^reet  for  the  aoeomplishment  df  their 
object. . 

At  about  two  o'dock  on  the  following  di^, 

many  of  the  parties  assembled  in  Fox-court, 

for  die  purpose  of  finally  equipping  themselvee 

.  iot  then  enterprise,  and,  among  others,  the 

prisoner  at  the  bar.    Thistlewood  came  in, 

.and  seeing  them  thus  engaged,  used  some 

words  of  encouragement,  wA  said,  '^we  must 

■write  a  proclamanoo.*'    Brun^  who  lived  in 

the  front  room,  jent  out>his  boy  for  some  sheets 

of  cartridge  paper;  six  sheets  were  produced, 

and  ThisUewood  sat  down  and  wrote  three 

copies  of  a  proclamsdoti  in  these  terms : — 

<«  Your  tyrants  are  no  more :— the  friends  of 

liberty  are  requested  to  come  forward,  as  the 

provisional  government  is  now  sitting" —  sign- 

,ed**J.  Ings«  secretary.*' — It  was  intended  that 

.Abase  prochmatiens  shoi^dd  be  posted  up  in 

tbe  neighbourhood  of  the  places  where  the 

.fires  were  lighted,  that  they  mig^t  be  seen  by 

.  Ae  persons  there  assembled,  and  might  add  to 

the  general   alarm;   and,   gentlemen,   what 

would  have  been  the  state  of  the  metropolis  at 

tliat  moment,  supposing,  at  nearly  the  hour  of 

*  midnight,  it  had  been  circulated  through  this 

.  extensive  city,  that  every  one  of  his  mi^ty's 

natnisteis  bad  been  cut  off  fay  assassins ;  thst 

the  town  was  set  on  fire  in  different  places ; 

aod,  in  addition  to  all  this,  that  artillery  was 

moving  from  different  points  towards  the  city ; 

aad  that  a  provisional  government  consisting 

of  unknown  persons,  mid  therefore,  perhaps, 

the  more  terrific  and  alarming,  was  acknlly 

HistaUedaBdsuhstitttted  in  lien  of  the  tegiti- 

msale  government  of  the  empire  ;-^wbat  would 

bsive  been  the  state  of  agitation,  alarm,  tumult, 

9md  disorder  in  the  metropolis,  if  sueh  an  event 

lind  taken  iploce  ? 

.  AAer  this  the  prisoner  prepared  hims^  for 
she  purpose  of  protiBeding  to  the  place  of  ren- 
siezvons,  with  pistols  ia  his  belty  a  sword,  two 
tegs  or  haversnfts  over  his  shmddeSrs,  and  a 
l»Jteher*s  kaife  (for  he  is  by  trade  a  Imlcher) 
wihiLh  he  prodooed  to  the  party,  with  the 
handle  woi^id  toond  with  wax  tadf  which  he 


had  so  secured  in  order  that  he  might  have  the 
firmer  hold.  He  Was  resolved,  he  said,  to  take 
off  the  heads  of  two  of  tbe  ministers  who  wall 
be  mentioned,  and  to  expose  them  for  the  pur- 
pose of  exciting  the  people  to  insurrection, 
duch  was  the  language  of  the  prisoner,  mis- 
calculating extremely  the  feelings  of  the  people 
of  this  country,  if  he  supposed  they  could  be 
excited  to  insurrection  by  assassination  and 
murder ;  for,  if  any  thing  were  wanting  to  have 
deterred  them  from  engaging  in  such  an 
enterprise,  it  would  be  sufficient  that  it  had 
been  commenced  by  assassination^—a  crime 
foreign  to  the  character  of  Englishmen,  and 
which  I  hope  and  trust  will  ever  remnin  alien 
to  their  feelings  and  habits. 

After  the  prisoner  had  thus  prepared  him- 
self, the  conspirators  by  degrees  went  off  for 
the  purpose  of  assembling  themselves  in  Cato* 
street  They  met  there  at  about  six  o'clock. 
When  they  arrived,  their  numbers  amounted 
only  to  about  twenty ;  fower  than  tbey  had 
calculated  upon,  for  it  was  supposed  that  from 
thirty  to  for^*vras  the  number  that  would  have 
assembled  at  that  meeting.  For  some  little 
time,  there  was  a  suspicion  and  a  jealousy 
in  the  meeting,  in  consequence  of  tbe  non- 
appearance of  Tidd :  they  were  surprised  that 
he  had  not  come,  and  became  alarmed  and 
agitated.  But  Brunt,  who  knew  him  well, 
stepped  forward  at  this  juncture,  and  said  he 
would  answer  for  Tidd  that  he  would  not  for- 
sake the  cause.  Shortly  afterwards,  Tidd, 
accompanied  by  a  person  of  the  name  of 
Monument,  whom  we  shall  call  as  witness, 
entered  the  rooen.  Still  there  were  many  of 
the  persons  present  who,  looking  round,  and 
cslculating  Uieir  force,  and  at  the  same  time 
considering  the  object  to  which  it  was  to  be 
directed,  mlt  that  it  was  inadequate  to  the 
purpose.  They  betrayed  symptoms  of  uneasi- 
ness and  doubt.  Thistlewood,  who  saw  what 
was  going  on,  and  who  was  apprehensive  lest 
the  scheme  should  be  abandoned,  said  they 
were  too  far  advanced  to  recede ;  that  if  it  was 
now  given  up,  it  would  be  another  Despard's 
job;  and  begged  them  not  to  abandon  the 
cause.  Their  numbers,  he  said,  were  abundantly 
suffideilt:  '^  we  shall  take  them  by  surprise; 
though  they  may  have  many  servants,  they 
will  be  unarmed :  we  are  now  five  and  twenty, 
fourteen  will  be  sufficient  to  enter  the  room, 
and  the  rest  may'guard  the  entrance."  Brunt, 
who  was  always  eager  and  zealous  in  tbe  cause, 
then  stepped  forwaid,  and  said,  ^  I  presume 
those  who.  betray  alarm  are  not  aware  of  the 
instramenis  we  have  prepared,''  and  he  then 
pointed  to  a  grenadeof  very  large  oonstnictioD, 
tntepdcd  to  be  thrown  into  iie  room,  and 
whieh  would  at  once  have  effected  the  destruc- 
tion of  all  the  persons  there  assembled.  Ings, 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  also  declared  that  if 
they  did  ppt  proceed  to  the  accomplishment  of 
the  object,  he  would  either  hang  himself  or 
,  cut  his  throat  inamediately.  After*  this  scene, 
it  was  put  to  the  vote  whether  they  should  pro- 
ceed,  and   they  were   unaatmous   in   their 


967] 


I  GEORGE  IV. 


TrM  qfjai^et  /«tg( 


[968 


determination  to  go  on  with  the  enterprise.  It 
xnras  then  fixed  that  fourteen  should  be  selected 
for  the  purpose  of  entering  the  room,  and 
those  who  were  willing  to  engage  in  that  part 
•of  the  design,  were  desired  to  pass  across  the 
room,  and  to  take  a  particular  position.  Im* 
mediately  the  prisoner  at  the  har  and  several 
others,  in  -conseqtience  of  this  notification, 
went  to  the  spot  assigned. 

At  this  moment  an  alarm  was  giren  below — 
^  look  out  above  there/*  was  shouted.  This- 
tlewood  immediately  went  to  the  ladder  (for 
there  was,  a  communication  only  by  a  ladder 
with  the  stable  below),  and,  looking  down,  he 
saw  persons  coming  up  with  considerable  acti- 
vity. They  were  police  oflicers,  Ruthven  at 
the  head,  Ellis  second,  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Smithers  third.  When  Ruthven  mounted  the 
ladder,  he  looked  round  the  room,  and  saw 
the  persons  there  assembled  armed  in  the 
manner  I  have  described,  desperate  in  their 
appearance,  a  kind  of  bench  crossing  tiie  room 
covered  with  arms  of  various  descriptions — 
aome  of  the  parties  endeavouring  to  retreat 
into  a  small  a^oiningroom— Thistlewood  seiz- 
ing a  sword  and  following  them  into  this  apart- 
ment. Ruthven  made  'good  his  landing;  he 
was  followed  by  Ellis,  ai^  by  Smithers,  a  man 
of  great  spirit,  who  immediately  sprung  for- 
ward. Thistlewood  drew  back  his  arm,  and 
«s  Smithers  approached  him  he  plunged  the 
sword  into  his  heart.  Smithers  fell  dead  upon 
the  spot.  There  was  a  cry — "  put  out  the 
lights,^  and  the  lights  were  put  out;  and  there 
was  a  cry — **  kill  the  thieves,  throw  them  down 
stairs ;"  upon  this  there  was  a  general  rush  to 
the  ladder,  Thistlewood  descended  in  the  con- 
fusion, he  discharged  a  pistol  at  an  officer  near 
the  door,  escaped,  and  was  not  then  taken. 

Hie  prisoner  was  first  seized  in  the  stable 
below.  The  knife  I  have  described  was  taken 
from  his  bosom,  but  in  the  confusion,  in  some 
way  or  other,  as  you  will  hear  from  the  wit- 
nessesy  he  made  his  escape.  He  was  pursued 
into  a  contiguous  street --John-street ;  finding 
that  he  was  not  likely  to  escape  from  his  pur- 
suer, he  turned  round  and  firea  a  pistol  at  him 
— ^the  ball  grazed  his  neck.  The  prisoner  still 
contioued  to  run,  but  was  stopped  by  the 
watchman.  When  he  was  brought  back,  he 
was  asked  his  motive  for  firing,  he  said — ^^  I 
know  the  upshot  of  it,  I  wish  I  had  killed  you. 
I  know  what  I  have  done."  He  was  then 
secured.  Davidson,  the  black,  who  will  be 
produced  at  the  bar,  was  also  apprehended  in 
endeavouring  to  make  his  escape.  He  was 
taken  to  a  public  house;  and,  as  a  further 
proof  of  the  object  of  this  meeting,  and  of  the 
projects  which  the  parties  had  in  view,  you 
will  find  that  he  immediatelv  began  to  swear 
that  the  man  deserved  to  be  damned  who 
would  not  die  in  the  cause  of  liberty.  Brunt, 
one  of  the  most  active  of  the  party,  eflected 
his  escape.  He  returned  to  his  own  lodging 
about  nine  o'clock.  His  apprentice  was  there, 
whom  we  shall  call  as  a  witness.  He  came  in 
jsded  and  dirty.    Be  said  t»  hit  wilt.-.<«  it  is 


all  over ;  we  were  attacked  by  a  great  nimiber 
of  officers.  I  have  saved  my  life,  that  is  all  s*' 
— ^however,  recollecting  himself,  he  went  out 
shortly  afterwards  with  another  person,  sayings 
'*  no,  there  is  something  to  be  done  yet,**  ie» 
ferring,  no  doubt,  to  the  other  parts  of  the 
plan ;  namely,  the  setting  fire  to  the  town, 
seizing  the  cannon,  and  the  other  particulars 
whidi  I  have  already  stated.  He  returned  in 
about  two  hours,  and  went  to  bed,  first  desir* 
ing  his  apprentice  to  clean  his  boots  eariy  in 
the  morning ;  when  he  arose,  he  called  hie  ap- 
prentice into  the  adjoining  room,  took  out  of  a 
cupboard  a  number  of  hand-grenades,  a  num« 
her  of  bags  filled  with  powdery  so  oonstnicteA 
as  to  serve  for  cartridges  for  the  cannon,  and 
a  number  of  fire-balls.  They  were  pot  into 
two  baskett,  one  of  them  covered  up  with  the 
apron  of  Brant's  wife,  which  had  been  used  as 
a  blind  to  the  window  of  the  room  in  whi^ 
the  parties  had  held  their  meeting.  He  de- 
sired his  apprentice  immediately  to  take  the 
two  baskets  to  a  place  called' SnoVs-fields,  i» 
the  house  of  a  person  of  the  name  of  Potter—  • 
Potter  being  one  of  the  conspirators  who  had 
been  in  the  habit  of  meeting  at  Foz->oourt. 

Just  at  this  moment,  Taunton,  the  Bowi- 
street  officer,  ascended  the  stairs.  He  searched 
the  room  of  Brunt,  and  fbond  nothing ;  bnt 
going  into  the  back  room,  he  discovered  tlw 
two  baskets,  prepared  in  the  way  I  have  de^ 
scribed.  Turning  to  Brunt,  he  asked  him 
whose  room  that  was,— he  replied  he  did  not 
know — a  man  whom  he  had  met  accidentally 
at  a  public  house  had  taken  it.  He  was  asked 
to  give  an  account  of  the  baskets, — he  said  he 
knew  nothing  of  them.  Taunton  then  took 
him  into  custody,  and  proceeded  immediately 
to  Tidd's  lodgings,  which  I  have  described  as 
the  d^pdt,  and  there  he  found  a  trank  contain- 
ing* 965  rounds  of  ball-cartridge  prepared  lor 
service ;  he  found  separate  parcels  of  cartridges, 
amounting  to  between  two  and  three  hundred; 
he  found  several  hand-grenades,  and  several 
cartridges  prepared  for  cannon,  and  several 
fire-balls,  showing  that  the  project  the  parties 
contemplated  was  not  confined  to  the  assassi- 
nation of  his  majesty's  ministers,  but  had  a 
more  extensive  range,  and  was  of  the  character 
I  have  described. 

I  have  now  stated  to  you  thb  case,  as  I 
know  it  will  be  proved  in  evidence.  I  have 
given  jrou  the  whole  history  of  the  transaction, 
from  its  commencement  in  the  middle  of 
January,  to  its  termination  on  the  23rd  of 
February,  when  the  prisoners  were  apprehended 
in  Cato*street.  You  must  of  course  be  aware 
that  in  a  case  of  this  kind— a  secret  conspiracy 
carried  on  in  the  manner  I  have  describe — 
the  minute  details  can  only  be  proved  by  some 
of  the  conspirators  themselves;  I  therdbre 
must  call  before  you^  for  that  purpose,  one  or 
more  accomplices.  According  to  the  law  of 
England,  and  according  to  the  law,  I  beliesie, 
of  every  country  in  the  worid,  an  accomplice^ 
nnder  such  ciicumstanoes,  is  a  witness  compe* 
tent  to  be  heasd  in  a  cooit  of  jnstice :  ir  it 


960] 


Jot  High  Treason. 


A.  D/ 1820. 


C970 


/ 


were  not  so,  the  consequence  must  be  most 
ruinous  to  the  interests  of  society ;  for  the 
great  cbedL  upon  combinations  of  this  nature 
is»  that  the  parties  feel  they  cannot  trust  each 
other;  that  tliey  are  in  the  power  of  their  as- 
sociates, and  that  those  very  associates  may  be 
eaXied  to  give  evi^nce  against  them :  put  an 
end  to  this,  and  let  it  be  laid  down  as  law,  or 
as  a  practical  course  to  be  pursued  by  juries, 
ihat  accomplices,  when  they  come  forward  as 
witnesses,  are  not  to  be  considered  as  entitled 
to  credit ;  and  you  offer  an  encouragement  to 
secret  and  dark  oonspiracies  of  this  kind,  for  you 
hold  out  complete  indenmity  and  impunity. 

But  when  1  say  that  an  accomplice  is  to  be 
heard  in  a  court  of  justice,  do  not  understand 
me  ta  say  that  his  evidence  is  not  to  be  watched 
with  the  utmost  jealousy  and  oaution.  You 
will,  in  the  first  place,  inquire  what  has  been 
the  previous  character  of  the  roan,  and  if  you 
ifind  it  to  be  untainted,  this  circumstance  will 
add  to  the  reliance  you  will  be  -disposed  to 
^lace  upon  his  evidence. 

You  will  in  the  second  place  ask  yourselves 
what  interest  he  has  in  perv^ting  the  truth. 
AVhen  an  accomplice  appears  as  a  witness,  in 
a  court  of  justice,  he  may  possibly  be  desirous 
of  lessening  his  own  guilt  at  the  expense  of 
those  with  whom  he  has  associated ;  but  he 
has  no  interest  in  stating  that  the  crime  which 
the  parties  combined  to  commit  was  of  a  dif- 
ferent nature  from  what  it  really  was :  he  has 
no  interest  in  aggravating  the  character  of  the 
offence.  Although  no  express  promise  has 
been  made,  he  must  know,  from  the  course 
pursued  on  these  occasiona,  that  if  he  comes 
forward  and  states  fairly  and  honestly  all  that 
he  knows  of  the  transaction,  the  vengeance 
of  the  law  will  not  fall  upon  him.  But  this 
can  be  no  motive  to  induce  him  to  &lsify  the 
facts,  and  to  represent  the  case  as  being  of  a 
xnore  atrocious  character  than  it  really  was ; 
and  I  adc  you,  therefore,  when  I  call  the  per- 
son to  whom  I  am  alluding  before  you,  in 
examining  his  evidence,  to  put  this  question 
to  yourselves:— what  interest  has  this  indi- 
vidual in  misrepresenting  the  nature  and  cha- 
racter of  the  crime  ? 

You  will  in  the  third  place  inquire,  whether 
in  the  story  he  is  telling,  he  is  exposing  him- 
.self  to  be  contradicted  if  he  tells  that  which  is 
fidse.  If  he  says  that  there  were  such  and 
such  persons  present  at  the  transactions  he 
describes,  you  will  see  that  he  must  know  that 
those  persons  may  be  called  for  the  purpose 
of  giving  evidence  against  him ;  you  will  in- 
quire whether  this  must  not  of  necessity  be  a 
^arantee  of  his  truth,  and  prevent  his  stating 
that  which  is  false ;  and  you  will  then  observe 
whether  those  particular  witnesses  are  called 
on  the  other  side,  for  the  purpose  of  contra- 
dicting him. 

You  will  in  the  fourth  place  inquire,  whether 
he  is  confirmed  in  the  story  he  is  telling; 
which  is  J^e  great  principle  to  be  applied  in 
the  admimstration  of  justice  on  occasions  of 
"''"'sort.    When  you  inquire  into  tibe«ciedit 


due  to  an  accomplice,  is  he  confirmed  in  those 
parts  of  his  story,  where,  from  the  ciroum* 
stances  of  the  transaction  he  can  be  confirmed 
— not  in  collateral  and  trivial  particulars, 
which  have  no  relation  to  the  essence  of  the 
crime— -but  is  he,  in  the  main  current  of  his 
story,  confirmed  in  those  particulars  which 
lirom  the  nature  of  the  case  admit  of  con* 
firmation.  I  beg  you,  after  you  shall  have 
all  the  evidence  laid  before  you,  to  apply  those 
tests  to  the  evidence  of  the  accomplice,  and 
say,  whether  or  not  you  think  him  entitled  to 
credit. 

But  this  case  does  not  depend  upon  the 
credit  due  to  an  accomplice ;  it  may  be  neces* 
■sary  for  the  purpose  of  proving  a  particular 
fact,  of  making  out  some  of  the  detail,  to  odl 
an  accomplice;  but  we  have  many  other 
witnesses.  I  have  told  you  of  the  communica* 
tion  made  to  Hiden,  a  man  of  unimpeached  and 
unimpeachable  character ;  a  man  who  on  the 
communication  being  made  to  him,  instanUy 
did  that  which  every  honest  man  would  do, 
revealed  it  to  the  officers  of  government, 
that  so  foul  and  desperate  a  conspiracy  might 
be  defeated.  But  it  does  not  depend  even 
upon  this  evidence,  for  there  are  the  facts  them^ 
selves,  which  speak  emphatically  on  the 
case.  These  parties  were  assembled:  for 
what  purpose  were  they  assembled?  for  no  - 
ordinary  purpose ;  the  veijr  arms  and  prepar- 
ations negative  such  an  inference,  is  any 
assignable  cause  given  or  can  be  given,  for 
this  meeting,  except  that  spoken  to  by  die 
witnesses?  I/H>k  at  the  nature  of  the  arms 
that  are  prepared;  they  were  not  prepered 
solely  for  the  purpose  of  executing  this  pro-* 
ject  of  assassination,  because  yon  will  nnd» 
that  at  the  d^pdt— At  a  distance  from  the  place 
where  the  project  of  assassination  was  to  be 
executed,  smd  after  all  the  preparations  were 
oomplete  for  the  purpose — there  was  found 
that  quantity  of  arms  and  ammunition  which 
I  have  mentioned;  those  illumination  balls, 
as  they  were  lightly  called  by  the  parties,  and 
the  preparations  for  loading  the  cannon,  which 
shew  to  demonstration,  that  the  case,  as  stated 
by  the  accomplices,  is  in  the  whole  of  it  corv 
xect.  It  appears  to  me,  that  from  the  evidence 
a%  it  will  come  before  you,  it  is  impossible  to 
entertain  a  doubt  upon  the  sul^ect.  But  it  is 
not  for  me  to  determine  it,  it  is  for  you  when 
you  have  heard  the  evidence  dispassionately 
to  judge. 

It  may  be  said  that  this  was  a  wild  and 
visionary  project ;  and  because  it  was  a  wild 
and  visionary  project,  yon  vrill  probably  be 
told  that  no  such  project  was  formed.  The 
question  is  not  wnether  you  or  any  othef 
prudent  and  sober  man,  eten  if  his  heart 
would  allow  him,  would  have  embarked  in  a 
design  of  this  nature.  It  is  impossible  to  ex« 
.amine  the  history  of  the  plots  and  conspiracies 
by  which  any  country  in  the  world  has  in  its 
turn  been  agitated,  and  not  to  say  that,  in- 
dependently of  other  considerations,  there  is 
not  one  in  a  hundred  in  whidi  any  prudent 


071J 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


TritU  qJT  James  I«g* 


[97a 


tnan  wouU  liMc  embariMd.  Yon  wiU  AdA 
them  im  fMeittl  tU-^imniged,  wHd,  fend  eHlm- 
iraganty  leandnf  ewty  thing  to  haiHrdy  formed 
with  inad«quliie  twatM,  like  thst  whidi  is  now 
llie  subyaet  of  ^otir  iKniiidtmtion.  But  mta 
becovie  oattauauMB  in  coks  of  tkie  nakiwe; 
Ifao^ftie  Ulina  to  the  inmediatediflfeuhioB; 
they  look  to  tiie  eitaimnoat  of  the  ultimle 
•Igect,  and,  in  so  doing,  oreridok  the  impedi- 
aents  in  their  way.  Bat  let  sm  only  at^te 
one  obeerration  to  you^  and  you  wiU  cease  at 
Mme  to  eonsider  that  any  arpmient  oan  he 
founded  apon  the  Tisionary  nature  of  this  ftoi, 
when  you  ca«e  to  spp^  the  ease  to  these 
partioolar  iodividiiahi.  They  had  eoosideiod 
•-^fidseky  I  know,  but  they  had  eodsidtred*-^ 
HMtllie  gnsai  'naas  of  the  hiboving  part  of 
the  covtitry  was  ripe  for  insorreetien ;  they 
oomdoved  them  as  radically  disaffected  to  tibe 
yweimnent  of  the  ooantry ;  they  ihoiiqi^ht  thete* 
me  dial  if  they  oould  stnhe  this  sort  of  stoiK- 
ming  blow,  tey  might  at  once  eommenoe  an 
iMuneeliODaad  sbtoU  that  would  enable  them 
io  lobe  poBMisiofi  of  the  goyemment  of  the 
«nmtiy.  If  they  wove  right  hi  the  suspicion 
Hiey  bad  foimodi  that  disaffhotion  had  spread 
00  widaly,  and  had  assaosed  sodh  a  eharaeter, 
the  progeet  ceased  to  be  wiM  aad  Tisumaiy.; 
mad  it  is  tfpon  that  opiniouy  and  thai  opinion 
alone,  ibat  the  whole  df  this  pkm  appears  to 
have  been  boilt.  But  the  qaeition  is  aot 
wisether  the  pejeot  was  itmvgimt,  but  whe- 
ther the  pwQeec  was  fomed;  end  yon  witt 
look  to  the  #»e»eetbiit  will  be  laid  before  yon, 
for  Aeputpoee%fiBSo«rtihiitig  Ihatfoet;  and 
however  ^iM,  bowefffr^ztrnvasantitiiiay  ap- 
ftm  to  yemr  sober  jmJgmnma,  if  yon  find  it 
psof  ed  by  the  tesiimoAy  of  tvitnesees,  and  by 
em  cppoal  to  faels  wlneh*eaiiiiot  he  pet?  oited 
m  deaMy  that  oaeh  a  prijeot  was  fonswd, 
then  howover  wild  «id  mmmajy  it  may  be  in 
yo«T'esii*atioii,  it  will  he  yaur  iiuty.lo|w»> 
«««ice  aceordiMly. 

I  hate  laid  mis  case  simply  befose  ysoti. 
My  leanmd  IHend  who  sits  near  aoe,  and  I, 
iMeno  intflvest  to  answer  upon  Has  oeosaion, 
iMt  ID  brittg  tfiis  esse  simply,  distfoeOy^inielli- 
•fildy  befose  a  jury  of  the  oountiy;  ^m^ij  owe 
»f  9P«a  is  as  mudh  interested  in  die  fesult  of 
^is  in^piiy  as  we  can  be :  for  myself  I  speak 
sieet  since^sly,  when  I  say  thai  I  am  desBPoos 
mAf  that  jastieef  vhould  be  foirly  administered 
dpon  this  emasien.  I  entreat  yoa,  if  any  rea^ 
iloDable  doubt  should  exist  in  your  minds  tmon 
ibis  cioestioB,  to  remember  the  beBerileDt 
ffrinoipleoftbelawofSoglaiid,  sad  give  tbe 
piisoner  the  benefit  of  thai  donbt;  but  if  After 
you  hA«e  oeusiderod  the  whole  ^estiOD,-«4f 
Mer  yov  ba?e  heard  the  whole  eraidenee,  it 
shall  «arry  ooaviciien  iivesistxl%  to  yoor 
iniads  ^  hopwerer  paiafal  it  may  be,  yet  I  am 
-sore  wta  ^svll  ^floharge  yoar  doty,  whaterer 
fwy  be  the  eonteyiiaoe,  with  firmness  and 
iaitegiify« 


CtlDEVCft  VO%  THE  CBOWN. 


'Rtkiri  Adams  sworn. — Enoninad  by 
Mr.  AUem^  Gtntnd, 

Yon  ale  now «  prisoner  in  custody,  I  be*^ 
lieve  ?— -Yes. 

Before  you  were  apprehended,  did  yoaiei. 
side  at  Holeaaithe>wall  passage  ? — ¥ee. 

ThiLt  is  near  Brook'oimmtet  ?-«Yes. 

Weie  yoa  acquainted  with  a  pemon  of  Ike 
name  of  Brunt  f — I  was. 

When  did  you  first  beeome  aoqaaimed  wiili 
him  l-^The  iist  of  my  aeipisaatance  with  Bramt 
was  at  Cambray  in  France ;  at  tet  time  ka 
pitfsed  l^  tbe  naase  of  Thomas  Morton. 

I  beliere  sone  yearn  mgo  yon  were  a  soldier 
in  the  Oafovd-^blues  f-^I  was. 

How  many  3ftBars  agol— Aboot  ^htaea 
years  ago  list  Chriscmas. 

You  were  dischaeged  from  iUnessf — ^Yea. 

Wliat  has  been  your  trade  or  employmewt 
«inoe  f  «-«<!hiefly  dhoem^ing. 

When  you  were  in  J'ranoe  were  yoa  poaM»- 
ing  that  trade  with  tbe  £aglish  army  that  'was 
tbeve  ?— *I  was. 

When  did  you  senewyomraoquaintaace  with 
•him  in  this  country  ? — ^I  cannot  pretead  to  st^ 
the  atonth,  but  some  few  months  aflerl  re- 
taraed. 

Where  did  Bmnt  lire  for  the  ksi  few 
months  ? — He  lived  in  Fox- court,  Oray's-inn* 
laae. 

Do  yon  know  a  pesson  si  the  nasoe  of 
ThisUewood  ?— ^Eomemely  weU. 

When  did  you  ftrst  beoorae  aequaioted  with 
him  ?-^n  the  19th  of  January,  a  Wedneedaj, 
thiak. 

In  this  yeii?«^Y«s,  it  waaon  a  Wedneedsy  ; 
I  think  Sunday  was  tbe  Dlh. 

Who  iDirodaced  yoa  to  him  l-^Bniad  and 

logB. 

The  prisoner  at  tbe  bar,  Ings  ? — ^Yes. 

How  long-  bad  you  known  logs  before  that  ? 
"—About  five  or  six  days. 

Where  w^re  you  inttodnced  to  Thisllewood  T 
— At  his  lodgings  in  Oompton-etreet,  Chura- 
market ;  Staldiopo^treety  I  asean. 

Had  you  a  conversation  at  that  time  with 
Tlastlewood^Mi  te  preseneeof  Brunt  and  Ings  ? 
«--Ihad. 

Tell  ns  what  passed  npon  that  occasion  ?— 
Ob  finmt  introdneiog  me  into  the  room  to 
ThisUetiood  he  said,  ^  Here,  Mr.  Thisaewood, 
is  the  Bsdn  that  I  was  speaking  to  yoa  about.  ^ 
<<  Oh,  is  lUs  the  ma*  ?"  says  TUsdewood, ««  you 
helODged  to  tbe  Lifei^asds,  did  you  not  ^  I 
said  no,  that  I  befanged  to  the  Blues,  the 
mpernameofthe  vegimeat  was  the  Bqyal- 
norse«gaaid8.  <^  I  beU^e,"  ss^  he,  ^  yon  are  a 
g6od  soldier,  and  can  ase  a  sword  welC"  I  told 
him  i  onto  waa  a'cood  soldier,  and  I  once  ooaU 
use  a  sword  well ;  I  told  him  I  could  use  a 
swwrd/fntffiflwmtly  todefeud  myself,  if  oaeasion 
shocAd  sequin  it.  XJpsn  this  he  tamed  the 
sufai^ct  sespectiag  the  difierent  sfiopkeepen  of 
London,  saving  they  were  alia  set  of  aristo- 
trats^ and aaworhinguadjsroae system;  that 


9731 


far  H^h  "TwHon.' 


A.  D.  ISSQ. 


t9T4 


he  should  gloiy  I0  see  the  day  thel  their  diops 
weie  all  &it  m,  and  well  pluodened.  He 
liezt  turaed  his  diflsoujiere«peettAg  Mr.  Hunt, 
saying  that  Hunt  was  a  damned  ceward,  and 
he  was  no  friend  to  the  people ;  that  he  had  no 
douht  ia  his  nhnd,  eoalo  be  get  into  Whitehall 
to  overlook  tlie  books  there^  he  sheald  find  his 
name  upon:  the  porerameBit  hooks  as  a  spy  fm 
goveniment.  Upon  Ihia  he  turned  his  dts»> 
coarse  to  Mr.  Cobhetty  that  he  had  no  donbC 
he  was  as  had ;  that  with  aH  hts  writings,  he 
waa  not  a  naa  fin  the  good  of  the  ooaatry  at 

Did  any  tiwag  move  pass  ?«— There  was 
nothing  more  passed  at  this  time,  further  than 
tiiat  Brant  saia,  he  had  two  men  \o  call  upon 
in  Careahy-maiket;  he  asked  Mr.  Thistlewood 
whether  he  woold  odi  epea  them  Amt  the  pur- 
pose of  seeing  those  men ;  this  I  did  not  men* 
tion  hefom; 

Lord  ChirfJu$tke  IXdla$.^-^ev&  mind  what 
you  mentioned  before. 

Wiinm^^Mr.  Thistlewood  declined  it,  and 
apon  that  we  left  the  room. 
With  Brant  and  Ings  ?— Yes. 

Mr.  Attornw  GeneraL — I  believe  you  went 
to  prison  on  the  17th  of  January,  for  debt? — 
Yes. 

Had  you,  previous  to  this»  other  interviews 
with  the  prisoner  and  Thistlewood  7--rI  had 
an  interview  with  him  on  Sunday  the  16tb. 

Where  was  that?— At  the  White-Hart  in 
BrookVnarket. 

Whereabouts  did  you  meet  P  In  what  part 
of  the  house  or  premises  t — We  first  or  all 
met  in  the  tap-room,  and  proceeded  from  the 
tap-room  to  the  room  we  had  taken. 

Where  was  that  room  f— In  the  back  yard 
on  the  ground  floor. 

Behind  the  White  Hart?— Yes, 

Who  were  present  at  that  meeting  ? — ^Tbere 
were  Thistlewood,  Ings,  H(iU,  Brunt,  Tidd, 
that  was  all,  besides  myself. 

On  the  following  day,  the  17tb>  you  were 
taken  to  prison  ?-^Yes,  I  was. 

How  long  did  you  remain  there  ? — I  remain- 
ed there  until  the  day  a^r  the  dealh  of  the 
late  king. 

That  was  the  .90th  of  January,  I  beUeve  ? 
When  did  you  next  meet  the  prisoner  at  the 
bar,  Ings  P— ](  saw  him  the  d«j  after  at  the 
White  Hart. 

That  would  be  the  Sift  then  f-rYes. 

Did  jfm  go  with  him  to  any  other  place,  or 
ii^eet  him  at  any  other  place  but  the  White 
Ilart?^!  believe  I  saw  dim  at  Brunt's  room. 

Whereabouts  was  Bruat'a  rooiUf  of  which 
you  are  now  speaking  ?<— The  room  thet  Brant 
oceopM  was  a  firpal  room  on  the  second  floor, 
and  4e  io«m  Uk^  fi>r  the  meetings  waa  a 
Back  roQW  pn  the  same  floor. 

Do  yon  recollect  who  weire  at  Bnmt^s  room 
on  the  sight  of  the  3|st,  when  you  went  there  ? 
—I  saw  Tnistlewood* 

Lotd  €kkfJm$k€  JOtOw^About  what  hoar 


f  wBsii^^ThiswlaabetweeasiaMd8fivefto*ek)ck 
in  the  eveoJBg^ 

Mr.  Attorney  General, — Had  you  ever  met 
in  that  room  before  you  went  to  prison  ? — No, 
never. 

This  vras  the  first  time  you  had  been  in  thai 
room  ? — The  first  time  I  had-  known  of  its  hav- 
ing been  taken. 

Mention  whom  you  recoUect  to  have  been 
there  on  the  evening  of  the  31sf,  when  you  sav 
you  went  there  between  six  and  seven  o'clock  r 
-—I  will  mention  as  far  as  my  recollection  en*- 
ables  me.  I  saw  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings,' 
Hall,  ILdwards :  t  cannot  charge  my  memory 
vrith  any  other  at  present. 

Did  any  thing  particular  pass  on  that  evening, 
in  that  room,  that  you  recollect  I — ^Nothing  par- 
ticular that  1  recollect. 

When  were  you  next  at  that  room  ?*— I  be-* 
Heve  it  might  he  about  the  Wednesday  nighty 
to  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

M  what  time  on  the  Wednesday  were  you 
there  ?--^About  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening. 

Who  were  there  on  this  Wednesday  erenin^; 
thai  you  recollectf-^I  saw  Ings,  Hall,  Harrison^ 
and  Davidson. 

Any  other  persons'that  yon  recollect?— Hiia-. 
tlewood.  Brunt,  and  Edwards. 

Dayoa  itmetaber  any  thhif  paesing  en  ttat 
evening  T^^Tbese  was  a  oeaveraatiea  betwettt 
them  respecting  prodaimiog  of  the  new  king  ; 
the  indisposition  of  the  new  king  brought  up 
a  copvarsation,  a  few  words  were  said  upoa  it. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  in  that  room  that 
evening  ? — I  did. 

What  did  you  see  ? — ^I  saw  seme  pike  stinres.. 

Did  any  thing  pass  on  the  subject  of  those 
pike  stares  ? — Mr.  Thistlewood  made  a  remarl( 
that  he  wished  those  pike  staves  were  HI  ^r- 
raled,  and  holes  bored  at  the  end  of  them  in 
order  to  admit  the  pikes ;  that  they  might  be 
taken  to  a  place  of  safety,  which  he  called  the 
d^p6t,  as  he  did  not  consider  ^em  tp  he  safe 
there. 

Did  you  know  at  that  time  where  that  d^| 
was  ?— Not  at  that  time. 

Did  you  afterwards  know  f — ^I  didi 

Where  was  it  f— At  Tidd's. 

At  the  houfe  of  a  map  of  the  name  of  Uddf 
—Yes. 

Where  did  Tidd  live?— In  the  Hole-ip^fee- 
wall  passage,  an  adjoining  house  t6  that  where 
I  lived  at  that  time. 

Thistlewooff*  remarking  that  those  stavee 
should  be  remored  to  the  d^p6t ;  did  any  thing 
more  pass  upon  the  subject  of  them  at  that 
timet — ^No  farther  than  leaving  word  with  Mr. 
9runt,  that  he  hoped  they  woukl  be  taken  then 
when  they  were  done,  but  they  were  not 
flnished  at  that  time. 

What  sort  of  staves  were  tfiey  ?— Tbey  wefe 
green  sticks,  thd  substance  of  my  wrist,  some 
lerger>  some  not  %q  large;  they  were  quite 
green,  they  were  brought  from  the  other  side 
of  the  vraterr  I  did  npt  see  them  brought,  hut 
I  heard  Ings  say  that  he  brought  tbcm  there  ; 
they  were  fresh  cut. 


9753 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


TrM  qfJamet  Ingt 


f97« 


Do  you  recollect  any  thing  more  happening 
or  passing  that  evening  ? — Yes  ;  this  evening 
U  has  come  to  my  recollection :  I  saw,  after 
the  conversation  that  had  pas:ted  respecting  the 
new  king,  Ings  himself  pull  a  pistol  from  his 
pocket 

On  that  evening  ? — Yes,  on  that  evening. 

Was  any  observation  made  ? — ^Yes,  from 
the  discourse ;  it  being  said  that  it  was  likely 
he  would  die,  it  was  remarked  by  Thistlewood, 
he  said  he  hoped  he  would  not  die  in  conse- 
quence of  the  duke  of  York  coming  to  the 
crown.  On  this,  Mr.  Thistlewood  said  he  had 
rather  the  new  king  would  lire  for  a  little 
while  longer,  as  it  way  not  their  intention  that 
he  should  ever  wear  the  crown.  On  this,  Ings 
alluded  to  the  people  of  the  country  in  general, 
saying  they  were  all  a  set  of  damned  cowards ; 
that  the  day  the  prince  regent,  at  that  time 
when  he  was  prince,  opened  the  parliament, 
^  I,  myselP  says  he,  ''  went  into  the  park  that 
▼ery  day,  and  took  a  pistol  in  my  pocket,  with 
the  sole  intention  to  shoot  the  prince  regent ;'' 
on  his  makine  use  of  that  expression,  he  takes 
his  right  hand,  pulls  the  pistol  from  Ins  pocket, 
and,  to  convince  them  of  the  sincerity  of  what 
he  bad  said,  *^  There,''  says  he,  "  is  the  pistol 
'that  I  took." 

Foreman  of  the  Jtary, — On  what  day  did  this 
take  place  was  it  the  2nd  of  Februaiy  ? 

Mr.  Attorney  Genend^-^-YeSf  we  are  still 
upon  that  evening. 

WUneu. — ^Regretting  with  himself  that  he 
had  not  an  opportunity  to  do  what  he  had 
intended,  saying,  had  he  done  it,  he  bad  not 
cared  a  damn  for  his  own  life.  I  cannot  bring 
to  my  rkoUection  any  thing  further  that  passed 
tibat  night. 

How  often  did  you  meet  at  this  room  ? — The 
appointed  time  was  twice  a-dav,  eleven  o'clock 
in  tbe  morning,  and  seven  in  the  evening. 

Was  there  any  furniture  in  this  room  ? — 'So* 
thin^  but  a  stove  fixed  in  the  room. 

Did  you  learn  from  the  prisoner,  or  any  of 
(hose  persons  whose  names  you  bare  mention- 
ed, for  what  purpose  the  room  was  taken  P — 
I  learnt  th^t  the  room  was  taken  for  the  pur- 
pose of  Mr.  Ings,  taken  for  him ;  but  for  what 
furpose  the  room  was  taken,  I  cannot  say,  for 
was  not  present 

Did  vou  attend  many  of  those  meetines  be- 
tween the  day  you  have  mentioned  and  Satur- 
day the  19th  ? — I  did,  but  not  so  regularly  as 
I  did  afterwards. 

At  those  meetings  at  which  you  were  pre- 
sent, between  the  2nd  of  February  and  the 
19th,  did  you  at  all  or  any  of  them  see  the 
prisoner  Ings  ? — I  saw  him  at  every  meeting  I 
was  at. 

Do  you  recollect  any  meeting  in  the  interval 
between  the  2nd  and  the  19th,  shortly  before, 
or  about  the  time  of  the  king's  funeral  ? — I 
cannot  speak  positively  to  the  date,  I  can  come 
within  a  few  oavs. 

Do  you  recollect  a  meeting  before  the  time 
of  the  king's  funeral  P— Yes. 


9 

At  that  time,  whom  did  yon  find  in  the  room 
when  you  came  in  ? — I  found  Thistlewood 
there,  and  Brant,  Ings,  and  Hall,  Harriaon, 
Davidson,  and  Bradbum. 

Were  they  all  there  when  you  first  came  in  ? 
— ^They  came  in,  some  of  them,  afterwards. 

Who  were  there  when  you  first  came  in,  ac- 
cording to  the  best  of  your  recollection  .^«— To 
the  best  of  my  recollection  there  were  Brad- 
bum,  and  Edwards,  and  Brunt. 

Was  Harrison  there  P — Yes. 

Harrison  had  been  in  the  life-guards  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  any  conversation  about 
what  might  be  done  at  the  time  of  the  king's 
funeral  ? — ^Yes. 

By  whon^?— Harrison.  At  the  time  Har- 
rison began  this  subject,  I  was  close  by  him  ; 
he  had  been  communicating  this  to  Thistle* 
wood. 

Tell  us  what  passed  after  you  came  in? — 
Thistlewood  began  to  tell  me  of  the  proposi- 
tion Harrison  had  been  making  to  them. 

What  did  Thistlewood  tell  you?-— That  Har- 
rison should  say  be  had  seen  one  of  the  life 
guards,  and  that  the  life-guardsman  should 
tell  him,  Harrison,  that  on  the  night  of  the 
funeral  of  the  king,  every  man  in  the  life- 
guards in  both  regiments  that  could  be  mountCMi 
were  to  attend  the  funeral  of  the  king,  and  tbe 
foot-guards  as  well,  all  that  could  be  spared, 
were  to  attend  the  funeral,  and  the  police  ofii- 
cers  as  well  that  could  be  spared  from  London. 
This  was  the  conversation  that  passed  between 
Harrison  and  the  life-guardsman ;  that  after  he 
left  the  life-guardsman,  it  struck  him  that 
would  be  a  favourable  opportunity  to  collect 
their  men  together. 

To  do  what? — For  the  sole  purpose  of 
having  a  riot  in  London  that  night,  and  to  pnt 
themselves  in  possession  of  Uie  cannon  in 
Gray's-inn-lane,  two  pieces  there^  the  six 
pieces  of  cannon  at  tbe  Artiller)'- ground.  It 
was  thought  by  this  time,  when  they  had  got 
these  cannon,  they  should  be  able  to  proceed 
by  means  of  the  people  who  would  turn  OTer 
>  to  them.  They  thought  it  would  be  best  to 
send  a  party  of  men  to  Hyde-patk-comer,  in 
order  to  stop  any  orderly  of  his  majesu's  ser- 
vice proceeaing  from  London  to  Windsor,  to 
EVe  information  of  what  was  going  on  in 
radon.  At  the  same  time  it  was  proposed, 
that  the  telegraph  on  the  other  side  of  the 
water  should  be  seized,  to  put  a  stop  to  it,  in 
order  to  prevent  that  communicating  any 
transaction  that  was  going  on  in  London  to 
Woolwich :  at  the  same  time  it  was  thought 
necessary  to  dig  entrenchments  across  the  ends 
of  the  roads  that  led  to  difierent  parts  of  Lon- 
don, to  stop  the  artillery  passing  to  those  parts 
of  London. 

Was  any  thing  more  said  about  their  planT 
— It  was  thougpt  by  Thistlewood  as  well  as- 
Harrison ;  he  agreed  in  his  ideas  on  this  head,. 
that  in  case  the  soldiers  at  Windsor  got  anj 
accounts  that  there  was  a  disturbance  in  Lon- 
don, th^  would  be  so  over-tired  on  their  ai^ 
rival  in  London,  that  they  would  not  be  fit  fi>r 


k 


0771 


far  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[978 


anj  d^iy.  Daring  this  discourse,  Brunt  and 
ings  -were  not  present  »t  the  time  this  was 
talked  of. 

But  they  came  in? — Yes,  at  the  conclusion 
of  the  observation  I  have  just  been  repeating. 
Upon  [ngs  and  Brunt  ooming  in,  what  pass- 
ed then  ? — On  Ings  and  Brunt  coming  into  the 
room*  Xhistlewood  goes  to  them,  and  com- 
municates to  them  the  plan  that  Harrison  had 
proposed,  and  what  he  had  laid  down  by  way 
•f  amendment,  what  be  thought  was  necessary 
er  might  be  done.  ' 

Did  he  communicate  to  them  that  which  you 
have  been  stating  to  tlie  court  ? — In  short. 

What  did  Brant  or  Ings  say  to  that? — Tlie 
observation  that  Mr.  Thistlewood  had  made  to 
them  did  not  meet  with  their  approbation. 

What  did  they  say  ? — There  is  nothing  short 

of  the  assassination  or  murder  of  the  ministers. 

I  will  not  be  sure  which  was  their  expression  : 

'l)ut  there  was  nothing  short  of  that  should 

Mitisfy  th.em. 

Had  you  before  this  meeting  heard  either 
firom^Brunt  or  Ings,  or  any  of  the  others,  that 
there  was  any  intention  to  assassinate  or  murder 
liis  ra^esty's  roinistefs  ? — ^Yes. 

From  which  ? — From  Brunt  and  Ings  both. 

Do  you  recollect  any  thing  more  passing  at 
Ibat  meeting? — I  do  not  recollect  any  thing 
particular  that  night,  but  I  can  recollect  a  cic- 
pumstance  between  that  and  the  19tb. 

What  was  that  cifcumstance  ? — ^Ings  was  in 
tiie  room ;  his  blood  was  all  on  the  boil  to 
think  that  he  could  not  get  to  do  that  which  he 
Wanted  to  do. 

'  Never  mind  that,  what  did  he  do  or  say  ?^ 
Hesaid,  we  must  have  the  ministers,  if  possible, 
^fore  the  parliament  dissolves. 

On  jStttorday  the  19lh  were  yoU  at  Brunt's 
foom  ? — ^I  was. 

At  what  hour  of  the  day  ?— Between  eleven 
fund  twelve. 

In  the  forenoon  ? — Yes. 

Were  any  persons  there  when  you  went  in  ? 
— ^Ycs. 

Who  were  there  ? — I  saw  Thistlewood,  Wil- 
son, Davidson,  Harrison,  Ings,  and  Hall ;  I  do 
BOt  recollect  any  body  else. 

What  passed  upon  yonr  coming  into  the 
XDom? — On  my  entering  into  the  rpom  they 
aeemed  to  i>e  in  a  deep  study -betwefn  them- 
selves; all  on  a  sudden  they  got  up,  aayi^f  that  it 
was  agreed  on,  that  if  in  case  iK>tliing.pt«urred 
between  this  and  next  Wednesday  liight,  that 
Wednesday  night  should  be  afteed  <m  to  go 
to  work,  for  they  were  all  so  poor  Ch«y«ofdd 
BOt  wait  any  longer. 

Was  any  thing  proved  or  settled  ?— This- 
tlewood at  that  time  proposed  there  should  be  a 
meeting  the  following  morning,  at  nine  o'clock, 
in  order  to  form  a  committee. 

For  what  purpose  ?--^The  purpose  of  draw- 
ing out  a  plan  to  act  npon ;  on  this  they  were 
goia|r  to  separate.  Thistlewood  all  on  a  sud- 
den said,  "  Oh,  Brunt,  if  you  go  round  to  any 
of  your  ^en,  give  them  orders  to  come  armed." 

W|i9  Brunt  present  at  this  meeting  ?*— Yes. 

VOL.  xxxijr. 


You  have  not  mentioned  his  name  ? — Brunt 
turns  himself  round,  and  says,  "  Damn  my 
eyes  I  are  you  afraid  of  any  officei-s  coming 
into  the  room,  if  auy  officers  enter  the  room 
now,  as  time  gets  so  neai*,  I  will  take  damned 
good  care  they  shall  not  go  out  alive." 

In  pursuance  of  this  proposition  did  you  go 
there  again  on  the  Sunday  morning  ? — Yes,  I 
did. 

About  what  time  in  the  morning  ? — Just  at 
the  turn  of  eleven. 

Tell  us  whom  you  found  in  the  room  when 
you  went  there  on  Sunday  morning  ? — When 
I  went,  there  were  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings, 
Harrison,  Davidson,  Hall,  Bradburn,  Wilson, 
Cook,  Tidd,  Edwards,  and  myself. 

What  passed  after  you  entered  the  room  ? — 
I  had  not  been  in  the  room  long  before  Mr. 
Thistlewood  thought  it  highly  necessary,  as 
there  werr;  twelve  men  in  the  room,  which  was 
enough  to  form  a  committee,  for  some  one 
to  take  the  chair  and  enter  into  business ;  on 
this  he  proposed  Tidd  to  take  the  chair. 

Did  Tidd  take  the  chair?— Tidd  took  the 
chair,  with  a  pike  in  his  hand  at  the  same  time. 

Afier  that  what  was  proposed  or  what  was 
said  ] — After  the  chair  was  taken,  Thistlewood 
standing  on  his  left  and  Bmnt  on  the  right  of 
Tidd  ;  Thistlewood  proposed  tliat  as  they  had 
been  waiting  so  long,  and  were  all  out  of  pa- 
tience, and  there  was  no  likelihood  of  the  min- 
isters meeting  all  together;  it  was  agreed,  he 
said,  between  themselves,  that  if  nothing  oc- 
curred between  this  and  next  Wednesday 
night,  the  ministers  should  be  taken  off  sepa- 
rately at  their  own  houses ;  he  said,  during 
this,  they  should  not  have  so  favourable  an  op« 
portunity  in  destroying  so  many  of  them  as 
they  intended  to  have  done^  but  as  there  was 
no  signs  of  their  coming  aU  together,  they 
must  put  up  with  what  ithey  could  get :  he 
thought  within  himself  that  three  would  be  as^ 
many  as  they  would  be  likely  to  kilL 

Three  of  the  ministers  P — Yes;  he  proposed 
that  this  ^^hould  be  done  on  Wednesday  night ; 
it  was  proposed  that,  on  the  same  evening, 
the  two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray  Vinn-lane, 
and  the  six  at  the  Artillery-ground,  should  be 
taken,  and  that  Cook  should  be  the  person 
intrusted  with  that  command ;  that  Cook  should 
be  at  the  head  of  that  party. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Dallas, — Do  you  meun 
that  Cook  was  to  be  at  the  head  of  the  party  to 
take  the  two  knd  the  six,  or  the  six  only  ? — ^The 
six  at  the  Artillery-ground  only. 

Mr.  Attorney  Gcfiem/.— Was  any  fhinqj  srfid 
as  to  what  was  to  be  done  vnth  this  artillery  ? 
— ^After  he  had  got  the  cannon,  it  was  pro- 
posed that  these  cannon  should  be  loaded  on 
the  ground  before  they  were  brought  out  to 
bring  them  into  the  street;  after  that  was 
done,  and  if  any  body  interrupted*  them,  these 
cannon  were  to  be  in  readinesi  to  fire  on  those 
persons  that  interrupted  them  directly ;  but  if 
Cook  found  himself  so  situated  by  people 
coming  orer  to  him,  that  ha  would  find  him- 

3  R 


9791 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  James  Ingt 


[980 


9elf  able  to  make  a  movement,  he  was  to  move 
ffom  there  to  the  Mansion-house. 

What  was  to  be  dooe  there  ? — ^The  Mansion- 
house  was  to  be  beset  on  both  sides  ;  the  six 
cannon  they  were  to  take  there  were  to  be 
divided  into  two  divisions^  three  on  each  side : 
Cook  was  to  go  to  the  Mansion-house,  make 
a  demand  of  it;  if  the  Mansion-house  was 
refused,  he  was  to  withdraw  directly,  go  to 
his  cannon,  and  give  orders  to  fire  on  both 
sides ;  on  doing  this,  it  was  thought  they  would 
soon  give  up  the  house  to  them. 

What  was  to  be  done  with  the  Mansion- 
house? — ^The  Mansion-house  was  to  be  the 
seat  of  the  provisional  government.  After 
they  had  secured  the  Mansion-house,  it  was 
thought  that  they  might,  with  the  two  pieces 
of  cannon  that  would  be  brought  from  uray's- 
inn--lane,  attack  the  Bank  of  England.  After 
they  had  attacked  the  Bank  of  England,  it  was 
proposed  to  plunder  it,  provided  they  succeed- 
ed, which  they  made  no  doubt  of:  but  they 
did  not  intend  to  destroy  the  books ;  Thistle- 
wood  thought  it  was  necessary  to  keep  the 
books,  as  that  would  be  a  means  of  bringing 
to  light  some  of  the  proceedings  of  govern- 
ment, they  had  not  yet  got  possession  of. 

Did  any  thing  more  pass?  —  There  was 
something  more  belonging  to  this  plan,  but  it 
was  not  proposed  on  this  day. 

Confine  yourself  to  this  day? — Mr.  Palin 
was  then  proposed  by  Thistlewood. 

Was  Palin  present  ? — ^No,  he  was  not  then. 

What  was  said  about  Palin,  at  that  time, 
by  Thistlewood  ?— Palin  should  be  the  man 
to  set  fire  to  the  difierent  buildings  that  were 
proposed.  As  to  the  time,  Thistlewood  said 
they  could  not  come  to  any  particular  set  time 
at  the  moment,  but  as  there  would  be  time 
between  that  and  the  Wednesday  night,  he 
thought  it  better  to  leare  that  to  a  future  op- 
portunity. 

After  Thistlewood  had  made  this*  proposal, 
tell  us  what  passed  ?~After  Thistlewood  had 
made  this  proposal,  he  said,  he  had  nothing 
more  to  say  at  that  time  upon  it,  but  that 
Brunt,  or  his  friend  Brunt,  had  a  proposition 
to  make,  respecting  the  assassination  of  the 
ministers — how  it  was  to  be  done;  on  this 
Tliistlewood  declined;  and  Brunt  came  for- 
ward directly  with  a  view  to  propose  what  he 
bad  to  say,  and  was  beginning  to  speak ;  This- 
tlewood said,  "  Stop,  you  had  better  let  the  pro- 
posals I  have  made  be  put  from  the  chair,  to 
see  whether  every  one  in  the  room  is  agree- 
able." * 

Was  it  put  to  the  vote  ?— He  put  it  to  the 
men,  *•  If  any  one  likes  to  speak  or  say  any 
thing  on  that  which  has  been  dropped,  they 
are  at  liberty  to  speak." 

Was  the  proposal  put  from  the  chair  ?— Yes, 
it  was  put  from  the  ctiair,  and  was  assented  to 
by  all  that  were  in  the  room. 

Being  assented  to,  did  Brunt  say  any  thiny  ? 
—Brunt  came  forward,  saying,  that  the  pro- 
posal he  had  to  make  was  respecting  the  as- 
sassination of  the  ministers ;  he  said  it  should 


I 


be  done  in  this  way,*that  as  many  men  as  tliej 
could  get  together  for  that  job,  should  be  di- 
vided into  as  many  parts  as  they  thought  thej 
should  be  able  to  kill  ministers,  he  supposed 
three  or  four. 

Was  that  agreed  to  ?•>— Brunt  had  more  to 
say  before  that  was  put;  he  said,  after  these 
men  were  so  lotted  out  for  the  killiug  of  each 
of  those  ministers,  that  there  should  be  ooe 
man  from  each  lot  riiould  be  drawn,  and  that 
man  that  it  fell  upon,  should  be  the  man  that 
should  murder  the  gentleman  or  the  lord  that 
they  had  to  kill.  The  man  that  was  appointed 
to  do  this,  if  he  made  an  attempt  and  there 
was  the  least  signs  of  cowardice  seen  in  the 
man,  that  man,  if  he  did  not  do  tliat,  was  to  be 
run  through  upon  the  spot. 

Was  that  proposal  agreed  to  ? — ^This  propo- 
sal vras  agreed  to. 

After  that,  do  you  recollect  any  other  per- 
sons coming  into  Uie  room  ? — Yes. 

Who  came  in  after  that?— Palin,  Potter, 
and  Strange. 

Before  they  came  in,  and  after  this  proposal 
had  been  made  by  Brunt,  do  you  remember 
any  thing  being  said  by  any  other  person  upon 
this  subject?  did  Ings  say  any  thing? — He 
did  not. 

Did  Thistlewood  communicate  to  Palia 
Potter,  and  Strange,  the  plan? — ^Thej  were 
communicated  to  them  both ;  Thistlewood  his^ 
and  Brunt  his ;  and  they  agreed  to  them. 

Did  any  thing  pass  after  they  had  agreed 
to  them? — ^Mr,  Palin  had  something  to  say 
upon  it. 

What  did  Palin  say? — Palin  got  up  and 
said  **  Mr.  Chairman,  I  wish  to  speak  a  few 
words  upon  what  has  been  dropped  by  Mr« 
Thistlewood  and  Mr.  Brunt.  I  have  paid 
perfect  attention  to  what  has  been  said,  asd 
nave  been  one  that  has  assented  to  it,  agreeing 
as  I  do  within  myself  to  the  propositions  thai 
have  been  made,  if  in  case  they  can  be  car- 
ried, I  consider  it  will  be  a  great  acquisition 
to  what  we  have  in  riew ;  but  this  is  what  I 
want  to  know*' — **  you  talk  of  from  forty  to 
fifty  men  for  the  west-end  job,'*  as  it  was  call- 
ed by  Thistlewood ;  "  you  talk  of  taking  the 
two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray  VintKlane — the 
six  pieces  of  cannon  from  the  Artillery-ground^ 
and  for  myself  to  act  my  part,  and  all  this  to 
be  done  at  one  time."  This  was  what  he 
wished  to  be  satisfied  upon— how  it  was  to  be 
done. — **  You  ought  to  know  better  than  I  do 
what  men  you  have  to  depend  upon.  I,  for 
my  own  part,  can  give  no  satisnction  with 
respect  to  the  men  I  may  bring  forward,  un- 
less  I  could  be  intrusted  from  the  committee 
that  was  there  sitting  to  communicate  to  them 
in  part,  if  not  in  full,  what  their  plan  was,  and 
what  they  were  going  to  do,  and  when  they 
would  l>e  wanted/'  1\  was  thought  that  Mr. 
Palin  knew  what  kind  of  men  he  had,  and  it 
was  hoped  he  would  be  able  to  trust  theoA. 

Was  that  said  ?-'Yes. 

Who  said  that  ? — It  was  said  bv  Tldd  in  the 
chair,  and  Mr.  Thistlewood  and  Bmnt;  this 


981] 


Jor  High  Treason* 


A.D.  1820. 


[982 


confersatioQ  passed  between  them — if  Mr. 
Palin  had  got  such.meoy  as  be  thought  he 
could  depend  upon  to  intrust  them  with  what 
was  in  nand,  they  did  not  conceive  where 
th«  harm  could  be  of  Mr.  Palin  haying  that 
liberty. 

Did  any  thing  more  pass  at  that  meeting 
that  you  recollect  ? — No,  not  at  that  time ;  on 
this  the  chair  was  left ;  just  after  this,  the  chair 
being  left,  they  were  walking  about  the  room, 
and  Thistlewood  turned  round  *^  Well  thought 
o(,  Brunt,  as  my  friend  Palin  is  here,  you  may 
as  well  take  him  to  the  place,  which  is  just  by 
here,"  that  was  Fumival's-inn -buildings;  **  let 
him  look  at  the  place,  and  pass  his  opinion 
UDon  it,  to  see  whether  it  is  practicable  to  do 
Wnat  we  think  of.'' 

Did  Palin  and  Brunt  then  go  away  toge- 
ther ?— They  did. 

How  long  were  thev  absent  ? — I  do  not  sup- 
pose ten  minutes,  to  the  best  of  my  calculation. 
Fox-court  is  near  at  the  back  of  Fumival's- 
inn  ? — It  is  not  at  the  back  of  it,  it  is  at  one 
end  of  it. 
It  is  behind  it?— Yes. 
Did  they  return  again  ? — They  did. 
Upon  their  return,  did  either  of  them,  and 
which,  say  any  thing  T — It  was  given  in  to  the 
committee,  that  Palin  thought  it  a  very  easy 
job,  and  it  would  make  a  good  fire. 

Did  they  then  separate  ? — No,  upon  this 
Brunt  renewed  the  subject  of  the  assassination 
again ;  he  said  he  had  not  an  idea  upon  his 
mind  that  there  would  be  any  difficulty  in  re- 
^rd  to  fixing  upon  the  men  who  should  be 
the  men  that  murdered  their  different  lordships, 
logs  was  the  man  that  said,  whoever  had  the 
lot  to  murder  lord  Castlereagh,  I  am  the  man 
tint  will  turn  out  to  murder  that  thief. 

When  did  you  meet  again? — On  the  Monday 
morning. 

This  being  on  the  Sunday  P — Yes. 
About  what  hour  did  you  go  to  Brunt's  on 
the  Monday  morning  ? — ^To  the  best  of  my  re- 
collection about  ten. 

Who  were  in  the  room  when  you  got  there  ? 
—I  saw  Brunt,  Harrison,  and  Thistlewood. 

Was  Ings  there  then  do  you  recollect? — 
Y«s,  he  was. 

Were  any  other  persons  there  that  you  re- 
coillect  ? — I  cannot  say  that  I  can  charge  my 
memory  whether  they  were  then,  they  were  in 
the  course  of  the  morning. 

Tell  us  what  passed  on  your  going  to  tlie 
room  on  that  Monday  morning? — On  going 
into  the  room  on  the  Monday  morning  they 
seemed  to  be  rather  cast  down. 

Tell  us  what  passed  ? — ^The  principal  that 
{Missed  in  the  morning  was  in  consequence  of  a 
report  which  had  been  heard  out  of  doors,  and 
which  I  communicated  to  them. 

What  was  that  report  which  you  communi- 
cated to  them,  state  it  shortly  ? — It  was  what 
Mr.  Hobbs  had  told  me  the  preceding  night. 

You  must  not  refer  to  what  you  were  told 
ainl^  you  communicated  it  f— That  there 
jwere  two  officers  had  been  there  from  Halton« 


garden  and  Bow-street,  from  which  it  appeared 
that  there  was  an  information  at  Bow-street, 
and  likewise  at  lord  Sidmouth's  office,  of  what 
was  going  on. 

What  did  they  say  to  you? — Harrison  turns 
himself  round  upon  me,  and  says,  '*  You  have 
acted  damned  wrong."  I  said  "  Why  ?*'  Brunt 
turned  round  directly,  and  said,  '*  You  have 
acted  wrong,  Adams,"  I  do  not  know,  indeed, 
whether  he  mentioned  my  name,  **  if  you  have 
any  tiling  to  communicate,  whatever  you  may 
hear  out  of  the  room,  it  is  your  place  to  speak 
either  to  me  or  to  Thistlewood.;^'  I  told  him  I 
did  not  conceive  I  had  any  right  to  speak  to 
either  him  or  Thistlewood,  I  thought  it  was 
my  duty  to  mention  it  to  the  whole,  as  it  con- 
cerned the  whole. 

After  this,  did  they  go  from  the  room  for 
any  purpose  to  separate? — They  began  to 
think  of  separating,  to  call  on  their  different 
men,  and  to  call  on  the  Mary-le-bone  Union. 

Was  there  to  be  any  meeting  again  tha^ 
evenins? — Not  on  that  evening. 

On  the  following  day,  the  Tuesday,  did  you 
go  again  to  Brunt  s  in  the  morning  ? — Yes,  I 
did. 

About  the  same  hour  ?— About  ten  pVlock 
as  nearly  as  I  can  guess,  they  began  to  meet 
earlier  after  the  19th. 

Whom  did  you  find  there  on  the  Tuesday 
morning  when  you  got  there  ? — I  found  This- 
tlewood in  the  room,  I  found  Brunt  in  the 
room,  I  found  Tidd  there. 

Was  Ings  there  ?-— Yes,  and  Hall ;  I  had  not 
been  in  the  room  long  before  I  saw  Ings  pull 
out  three  daggers  from  out  of  his  pocket;  he 
was  asked  the  intention  of  those  daggers,  he 
takes  one  in  his  hand  and  makes  a  rush,  in 
that  kind  of  way  [describing  it],  "  with  a  view," 
says  he,  "  to  run  into  their  bodies,"  with  an 
expression  which  I  will  not  repeat,  unless  it  is 
necessary ;  those  being  hanaed  about  they 
were  put  into  his  pocket ;  just  at  tliis  juncture 
of  time,  just  afterwards,  in  came  Edwards, 
Edwards  goes  up  to  Thistlewood  to  tell  him  he 
had  seen  it  in  the  paper  that  the  minbters 
were  to  dine  together,  on  the  Wednesday 
evening,  at  lord  Harrowby's. 

Upon  that  being  coQamunicated,  was  any 
thing  done  P — ^Thistlewood  rather  doubted  it, 
having  seen  a  paper  in  the  morning  and  not 
having  seen  that ;  and  he  proposed,  in  .order 
to  satisfy  every  one,  that  the  paper  should  be 
sent  for. 

Was  the  paper  sent  for  F^—It  was. 

On  its  being  brought  back,  was  it  read  ? — It 
was  read  by  Thistlewood  himself. 

Upon  that,  was  any  thing  said  by  any  of 
the  party? — When  the  paragraph  was  read, 
and  appeared  to  be  true.  Brunt  jumped  about 
the  room,  and  ran  backwards  and  forwards, 
'*  Now  damn  my  eyes  I  believe  there  is  a  God ; 
it  has  often  been  my  pmyer  that  God  would 
call  those  villains  together;  now  he  has  an- 
swered my  prayer." 

What  further  passed  ? — Ings  was  equally  as 
pleased  as  Brunt, 


983] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  cfjamei  Ivga 


C964 


What  did  he  say?— He  said  that  would 
give  a  better  opportunity,  he  should  have  an 
opportunity  nov?  of  cutting  lord  Castlereagh's 
bead  off. 

Did  Thistlewood  propose  any  thing  then? — 
Thistlewood  proposed  then  that  there  should 
be  a  committee  sit  in  order  to  enter  into  an- 
other plan  of  assassination  of  the  ministers 
altogether. 

Was  the  comnoittee  formed  ? — ^The  commit- 
tee was  formed ;  I  was  appointed  myself  to 
take  the  chair  first :  I  took  the  chair  and  called 
to  order.  Thistlewood  was  going  to  proceed 
in  his  business,  I  having  something  that  I 
wished  to  say,  put  a  stop  to  him. 

What  did  you  say  when  you  stopped  him? 
—Before  they  proceeded  any  further  in  the 
business  I  hoped  that  every  man  that  heard 
*vhat  fell  from  my  mouth  yesterday  morning 
had  given  it  a  due  consideration. 

What  passed  upon  that  ? — ^On  my  saying 
this  they  were  all  like  a  set  of  mad  devils  more 
than  any  thing  else.  Harrison  was  walking 
about  the  room  like  a  madman  ;  he  looks  at 
me  like  a  madman,  with  his  arm  going  all  the 
while. 

What  did  he  say? — He  said  any  man  that 
threw  cold  water  upon  what  they  had  then  in 
view,  he  would  run  that  man  through  directly 
with  a  sword. 

In  consequence  of  this  confusion  did  you 
remain  in  the  chair?— In  consequence  of  this 
confusion,  I  was  considered  not  nt  to  keep  the 
chair. 

Who  was  put  into  the  chair  ? — ^Tidd. 

Was  any  thing  then  proposed  or  said  by  any 
other  person? — ^There  was  a  proposition  by 
Mr.  Thistlewood  respecting  a  plan  that  was  to 
be  proceeded  in  by  the  taking  the  ministers 
all  together. 

In  consequence  of  your  leaving  the  chair,  was 
any  thing  proposed  by  any  body  ?  did  Brunt 
propose  any  thing? — ^Yes. 

What  did  he  propose? — As  Thistlewood 
was  going  to  speak,  Palin  — ^ 

Palin  was  tliere  then? — Yes,  he  was,  he 
said,  "  No,  as  there  has  something  fell  from 
Mr.  Adams's  mouth  yesterday  morning,  and 
he  has  made  an  allusion  to  it  again  this  morn- 
ing, I  want  to  know  what  it  is  Adams  has 
alluded  to." 

Was  any  thin?:  further  said  by  any  body 
upon  this  ?— Upon  this  Bruirt  jumps  up  direct- 
ly, "  Damn  my  eyes  I  will  tell  you  what  it  is ;" 
upon,  that  he  got  up  and  communicated  to 
Palin  the  same  as  I  had  communicated  to 
them. 

Did  Brunt  make  any  proposition? — He 
proposed  from  what  had  been  said,  that  there 
should  be  a  watch  put  upon  earl  Harrowby's 
house. 

When  was  that  watch  to  be  put  ? — At  six 
o^clock  in  the  eyening  to  a  minute  of  time. 

What  were  they  to  watch'  for. 

They  were  to  take  particular  notice  who 
went  into  the  house,  if  any  body  went  in  that 
they   thought  had  the  appearance  of  police 


officers  or  any  soldiers  sudi  wts  to  be  common 

nicated  to  the  comnstttee. 

What  was  said  upon  that  by  any  oAer  pev^ 

soi^? — This  was  agreed  to;   but  Brunt  said 
'  further,  that  if  in  case  there  should  be  ho* 

body  found  to  enter  the  house,  such  as  was 

likely  to  give  us  any  obstruction,  the  busiaeas 

should  be  proceeded  on ;  this  beine  done,  it 
•  was  looked  out  who  should  go  on  we  watch  * 

they  were  picked  out  by  Brunt,  on  a  proposW 

tion  made  by  him. 
I      Were  their  plans  forther  talked  of  ?— This 

plan  was  dropped  regarding  Brunt ;  Hustle- 

wood  then  came  forward  to  address  the  cob>* 
'  mittee. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Dotios.— What  do  yo« 
mean  by  dropped  ? 

I      Mr.  Attorney  General. — Do  yon  mean  am 

I  end  put  to  the  conversation  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  it  agreed  that  there  should  be  a  watc^ 

.  or  not?— >It  was  determined  that  there  should 
be  a  watch  set,  and  then  it  was  dropped. 

I  Then  Thistlewood  came  forward  ?— -Yes. 
What  did  Thistlewood  say  upon  that  occa^i 
sion  ? — ^Thistlewood  came  forwards  saying,  it 
was  a  much  more  favourable  opportunity  in 
the  ministers  all  meeting  together  than  what 
it  would  be  to  take  them  separately  at  their 
houses :  *'  In  taking  them  separately  at  their 
houses,  we  shall  stand  a  chance  to  have  but 
two  or  three ;  in  taking  them  all  together  at  the 
dinner  we  may  have  from  fourteen  to  sixteen 
of  thcra,  which  will  be  a  rare  haul :  I  think. 
forty  men  will  be  sufficient :  I  will  go  with  a 
note  to  the  door,  to  be  presented  to  lord  Har- 
rowby  by  th%  servant^  telling  him  I  must  have 
an  answer.*'  On  going  in  he  proposed  that 
he  should  be  followed  by  men  supplied  M#lh 
pistols  and  different  things,  pikes,  and  so  on, 
to  see  if  there  were  servants  about,  and  to  pre- 
sent pistols  to  their  breasts ;  if  the  servants 
offered  to  make  the  least  resistance,  they  were 
to  be  shot  upon  the  spot ;  when  this  was  done 
the  men  that  were  appointed  to  take  care  ef 
the  house  were  to  rusn  in  after  Thistlewood, 
take  possession  of  ^e  stairs  leading  to  the 
upper  part  of  the  house;  two  men  to  do  that; 
two  men  to  take  the  command  of  the  stairs 
leading  to  the  bottom  part  of  the  house; 
each  of  these  men  was  to  have  a  hand-grenade 
in  his  hand,  in  order  to  put  a  stop  to  any  body 
making  any  retreat  from  the  upper  pan  of  the 
house,  and  as  well  from  the  lower  part  of  the 
house ;  if  any  person  attempted  a  retreat,  if 
there  yas  an  attempt  of  the  people,  such  as 
the  servants  in  the  house,  to  make  their  escape, 
a  man  was  to  clap  fire  to  this  hand-grenade 
and  send  it  in  amongst  them,  with  a  view  to 
destroy  them  all  together;  two  men  at  the 
same  time  were  proposed  to  take  the  command 
of  the  area,  one  with  a  blunderbas9,  die  other 
with  a  hand-grenade;  if  any  attempt  was 
made  from  the  lower  part  of  the  house,  horn 
tfie  area,  they  were  to  be  served  in  the  sane 
way  as  th^  persons  in  the  upper  part  of  the 
house.    In  the  time  of  doing  this  the  men 


085] 


for  High  Treason* 


A.  D.  1890. 


[986 


that  were  to  enter  the  room,  after  the  sertaots 
were  secured,  and  the  stairs  secured  too,  were 
to  be  led  by  f  ngs,  at  bis  own  proposal. 

What  did  Incs  sayF — Ings  said  be  would 
go  to  their  lordships'  door,  aud  particularly 
mentioned  the  description  of  thing  he  would 
take,  in  order  for  his  defence ;  that  he  would 
hare  a  brace  of  pistols ;  he  would  have  a  knife 
iStaX  be  bad  prepared  for  the  sole  purpose,  to 
cut  the  heads  ot  them  off  a«  he  came  at  them ; 
the  bead  of  lord  Cattlereagh  and  lord  Sid- 
motftb,  he  was  determined  to  bring  away  in  a 
bag  be  bad  got  for  the  purpose,  and  one  hand 
of  lord  Castiereagh  he  was  determined  to  bring 
iKway ;  in  a  future  day  that  would  be  thought 
a  great  de^l  of. 

l>id  be  say  any  thing  about  what  he  was  to 
say  when  be  entered  £e  room  i — ^iie  said  be 
should  say  on  entering  the  room,  that  he 
would  go  in  this  way,  '*  Weli,  my  lords,  I  have 
got  as  good  men  here  as  the  Manchester  Yeo- 
manry ;  Snter  citizens  and  do  your  duty." 

Who  were  to  go  into  the  room  with  him  ? — 
He  was  to  be  succeeded  by  the  two  swords- 
men that  were  appointed  for  the  purpose. 

Who  were  tneyf — ^Harrison  ana  myself 
were  appointed. 

'  Was  it  stated  what  was  to  be  done  after  this 
was  accomplished  at  lord  Harrowby's  ? — ^They 
were  to  make  their  retreat  from  the  house  in 
Ae  quickest  manner  they  could,  with  Harri- 
ton,  going  to  the  horse-barracks,  in  King- 
street,  with  illumination  b^b,  a&  they  called 
Ibem,  and  fling  tbem  into  a  stranf^ed,  with  a 
▼iew  to  setting  fire  to  tbe  barracks. 

What  was  he  to  do  with  ibe  fire-balls  ?•— To 
put  them  into  the  window  where  the  straw  is 
Kept  to  set  fire  to  them, 

^hat  more  was  to  be  done  ? — The  others 
were  to  proceed,  after  they  bad  left  the  house, 
to  Gray's-inn-lane,  with  a  view  to  take  the  two 
cannon  there :  on  the  road  to  GrayVinn-lane 
if  they  met  any  body  that  offered  to  give  tbem 
ittiy  tntermption,  it  was  agreed  that  they 
should  be  shot  or  run  through  with  a  pike  that 
diey  might  have. 

You  say  a  party  was  to  go  to  Gray  Vinn- 
lane :  was  any  thing  else  proposed  to  be  done 
dian  taking  the  cannon  in  Gray*s-inn-lane  ? — 
It  was  proposed  to  take  tlie  cannon  as  I  have 
before  described. 

What  cannon  i — ^The  two  cannon  in  Gray's- 
inn-lane,  and  the  cannon  at  the  Artillery- 
ground. 

Was  it  proposed  or  agreed  who  were  to  take 
the  cannon  at  the  Artillery-ground  ?— Cook  was 
the  man  appointed  for  that  purpose. 

Oo  you  remember  whether  any  thing  else 
was  j^i'opot^' — bigs  still  repeated  that  he 
Mt  rejoiced  that  he  should  have  an  opportu- 
nity of  cutting  the  heads  of  them  off. 

Harrisou,  1  think  you  say^  was  there? — 
Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  any  thing  else  being  stated 
by  the  parties  present  f — ^Efarrison,  after  diis 
business  was  done,  proposed  that  there  should 
be  a  countersign,  and  tnose  men  that  had  to 


go  round  to  inform  the  men  that  they  had  to 
call  upon  to  come  forward  to-morrow  night  to 
their  assistance,  this  countersign  was  to  be 
communicated  to  them. 

What  was  the  countersign  t—Tbe  coun- 
tersign that  was  proposed  was  button ;  it  was 
to  be  pronouncea  separately;  the  man  that 
came  up  to  the  man  that  was  to  be  appoint- 
ed at  the  top  of  Oxford-road,  the  person  ap« 
proaching  was  to  say  b,  u,  t,  the  one  that  was 
mere  in  waiting  to  receive  him  was  to  pro- 
nounce tfO^n;  on  ^this  being  done,  he  was 
to  be  conveyed  to  the  place  that  was  to  be 
appointed  afterwards  by  Harrison. 

That  being  repeated  by  the  man,  the  person 
was  to  be  taken  to  the  place  that  was  i^f^int* 
ed  ?— Yes,  he  was. 

Did  you  go  again  to  BrunV's  that  day  f -»I 
did. 

At  what  time  did  you  go  again  ? — ^I  called 
in  the  afternoon. 

About  what  hour  f — It  might  be  three  o'clock. 
On  going  up  stairs,  I  perceived  a  Strang^ 
smelT;  on  my  entering  the  room  I  saw  the 
cause  of  it. 

.  Who  were  in  the  room? — ^Ings,  Hall, and 
Edwards.  Ings  waS  making  tbe  fire-balls  for 
the  purpose  of  setting  fire  to  the  different 
building^.  Edwards  was  making  fbses  for  the 
hand-grenades. 

Was  Hall  about  any  thing  7— -Hall  was  oc- 
cppied  in  layins  sheets  of  paper  down  in  order 
to  prevent  the  nre-balls  sticking  to  the  hand, 
after  they  had  been  dipped  into  an  iron  pot. 

Did  you  stay  there  at  that  time,  or  did  you 
go  away  and  come  again? — I  went  away 
almost  immediately. 

,  Did  you  call  at  Brunt's  again  that  evening? 
—I  did,  between  six  and  seven. 

Whom  did  you  find  there,  when  you  returned 
in  the  evening  ? — ^I  found  Thistlewood  in  the 
room.    I  saw  two  strange  men  in  tbe  room. 

Two  men  whom  you  had  not  seen  before  P«- 
Yes. 

.  Do  you  know  the  name  of  either  of  those 
men  ?^'I  can  tell  the  name  of  one ;  tbe  other  I 
cannot. 

What  was  the  name  of  that  man? — The 
name  of  that  man  was  Harris ;  but  I  did  not 
know  it  then. 

Whilst  you  were  there,  did  Tidd  come  ? — 
Tidd  came  about  half  past  eisht  o'clock. 

Did  you  remain  lliere ? — ^les,  I  did. 

Upon  Tidd's  coming,  what  passed  ? — On 
Tidd's  coming  into  the  room,  be  being 
one  that  was  appointed  in  the  morning  by 
Brunt,  and  Brunt  nimself>  to  go  on  watdi  at 
nine  at  lord  Harrowby'b  house — 

Who  had  been  appointed  to  go  at  six  ?— 
Davidson  vras  one,  tne  other  I  cannot  tell'. 

Davidson  is  tbe  man  of  colour  ? — ^Yes. 

At  nine  Tidd  and  Brunt  were  to  go  f-— Yes. 
On  Tidd  entering  the  room,  he  expressed  him- 
self dissatisfied  in  being  disappointed  in  not 
meeting  a  man  that  had  promisea  to  meet  him 
that  night  Brunt  said  after  this,  **  It  is  time 
for  us  to  go  on  the  watch,  to  relieve  the  men 


987] 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  James  Ings 


[988 


at  the  proper  time/'  Brant  and  Tidd  started 
for  the  purpose  of  going  to  lord  Harrowby's : 
in  about  fi?e  minutes  Brunt  returned  back 
again,  saying  that  they  had  called  at  the  house 
where  the  man  was  appointed,  and  had  found 
the  man,  and  that  be  was  likely  to  be  a  man 
of  great  consequence  to  them,  and  that  Tidd 
could  not  go  and  leave  him.  Inss  said,  then 
somebody  else  could  go  with  nim.  Brunt 
looked  round  the  room  and  said,  ^' Adams, 
there  is  nobody  can  go  except  yourself."  I 
consented,  to  go :  just  as  I  was  going  out,  in 
came  Edwards :  he  had  been  a  kind  of  aide-de- 
camp to  go  backwards  and  forwards,  and  see 
that  the  men  were  on  duty. 

Did  you  go  with  Brunt  ? — ^Yes,  I  went  with 
Brunt.  On  JBdwaids  coming  into  the  room,  I 
asked  him  whether  there  had  been  any  thing 
seen,  he  said,  ''  what  I  have  seen  or  heard  I 
shall  communicate  to  Thistlewood,''  then  Brunt 
and  myself  proceeded  to  Grosvenor-square. 

When  you  came  there,  did  you  see  David- 
son ? — I  saw  Davidson. 

Was  there  any  person  with  Davidson? — 
There  was  another  man,  but  he  was  not  near 
enough  for  me  to  notice  him ;  he  went  off. 

How  long  did  you  stav  in  Grosyenor-square  ? 
—After  we  had  relieved  Davidson,  we  stopped 
a  very  little  while,  we  went  to  refresh  our- 
selves. 

Where  did  you  go  to?— I  do  not  know  the 
same  of  the  house,  but  it  is  at  the  comer  of  the 
Mews  directly  at  the  back  of  lord  Harrowby's 
house. 

Whilst  you  were  there,  did  any  thing 
happen  ?— Nothing  occurred  there  except  that 
Bnmt  got  playing  at  dominos  after  we  had 
refreshed  ourselves. 

With  some  person  there  ?— Yes.  We  stopped 
there  till  vei^  near  eleven  o'clock,  witn  my 
^ing  out  twice  by  the  desire  of  Brunt,  at 
intervals. 

To  watch  ?— Yes. 

Brunt  remaining  during  that  time  in  the 
public-house  7 — Yes. 

How  lonff  did  you  stay  in,  and  in  the  neigh- 
bourhood of  Groivenor^uare? — ^Till  the  time 
of  twelve. 

That  was  the  time  to  which  you  were  ap- 
pointed to  watch  ? — Yes. 

Then  did  you  return  home? — I  left  the 
square,  and  came  directly  home ;  the  watch  was 
to  commence  the  next  morning  at  four  o'clock. 
Ings  and  Hall  were  to  besin  at  four  o'clock. 

The  next  day  was  Wednesday  the  23rd  ?— 
It  was. 

At  what  time  did  you  go  to  Brunt's  on  that 
day  ? — ^At  about  two  o'cIm^. 

You  did  not  go  there  till  two  o'clock? — ^I 
called  up  there  occasionaUy  earlier,  but  did  not 
stop. 

Upon  your  going  at  two  o'clock  in  the  aftei^ 
noon  did  you  find  Brunt  f — I  found  Brunt  in 
his  own  room. 

Not  in  the  room  in  which  you  met,  but  in  his 
own  room  ? — In  his  own  room. 

Were  there  any  persons  there  when  you  came 


in? — There  were  no  persons  in  the  room  bat 
himself,  his  wife  followed  me  in. 

Whilst  you  were  in  the  room  with  Bnmt  did 
any  persons  come  in  ? — Strange. 

Any  other  persons? — ^There  were  two  or 
three  whom  I  had  not  seen  before. 

Did  you  see  anv  thing  in  Brunt's  room  ? — 
There  were  several  pistols  that  I  saw  lying  on 
the  top  of  the  drawers,  but  the  exact  number  I 
cannot  state. 

Was  any  thing  done  by  Brunt  or  Strange,  or 
any  other  persons  in  that  room  ? — ^They  begaa 
to  put  their  flints  into  the  pistols ;  on  Strango 
coming  into  the  room  and  those  strange  men. 
Brunt  directly  proposed  they  should  go  into 
the  other  room. 

What  did  they  do  to  the  flints  ?— They  put  a 
bit  of  leather  round  them,  to  secure  them. 

What  did  you  see  on  going  into  the  back 
room  ?— On  goine  into  the  back  room  I  saw 
arms  of  different  descriptions. 

What  were  they? — Cutlasses,  pistols,  a 
blunderbuss  with  a  brass-barrel. 

Did  any  persons  come  into  the  room  while 
you  were  there, besides  those  you  have  mentioii- 
ed  ? — Yes,  just  after  that  came  Thistlewood, 
and  not  long  after  him  Ings  and  Hall  came, 
and  a  very  little  while  sfter  that  anoth^ 
stranger  or  two  came  in. 

What  passed  on  their  coming  in? — ^They 
began,  as  they  came  in,  to  prepare  themselves 
with  the  different  arms  they  wanted  to  take 
with  them,  such  as  fixing  the  flints,  and  fixing 
slings  to  the  cutlasses ;  on  Thistlewood*s 
coming  into  the  room  he  looks  round  him  aod 
says,  **  Well,  my  lads,  this  looks  something  like 
as  if  you  were  going  to  do  something."  He 
came  up  to  me,  laying  his  hand  upon  my 
shoulder,  and  said,  "  Well,  Mr.  Adams,  how 
do  you  do  ?"  I  told  him  I  was  very  low  in 
spirits ;  he  wanted  to  know  what  was  the  mat- 
ter. I  told  him  I  wanted  some  refreshment, 
as  I  had  not  had  any  thing  to  drink  that  day  ; 
he  directly  proposed  to  Brunt  to  fetch  some- 
thing to  put  me  in  spirits. 

Was  any  thing  brought? — ^Yes;  on  this 
being  said.  Thistle  wood  proposed  to  fetch  some 
paper,  in  order  to  write  some  bilb. 

What  was  done  upon  that? — ^Thistlewood 
produced  the  money  to  Brunt,  and  Brunt  sent. 

Did  any  thing  pass  before  that,  when  he  pn>> 
posed  to  fetch  some  paper,  what  paper  ?— lie 
said  he  should  like  the  same  kind  of  paper  as 
the  newspapers  were  printed  upon.  1  said  to 
him,  *'  Aj  you  do  not  know  the  name  of  the 
paper,  you  had  better  get  some  cartridge  paper, 
which  will  answer  the  purpose  equally  as  well.** 
The  cartridge  paper  was  sent  for. 

Who  sent  for  it  ? — Brunt. 

Whom  did  he  send?— He  said  be  would 
send  for  it  either  his  apprentice  or  his  boy. 

Was  any  money  given  ? — Yes. 

By  whom  ? — ^By  Thistlewood ;  Tbistlewood 
produced  the  money  to  Brunt. 

Did  Brunt  go  out  of  the  room  in  order  to 
get  the  paper  ? — ^He  went  out  to  the  door. 

Did  he  bring  back  the  paper  ? — ^I  cannot  say 


9891 


for  High  Treason^ 


A.  D.  1820. 


[990 


who  brought  the  paper,  btit  I  saw  it  in  the 
room.  • 

What  sort  of  paper  waa  it  ? — ^Cartridge 
paper. 

Upon  the  paper  being  brought  what  occur- 
red } — Upon  the  paper  being  brought,  Thistle- 
wood  sat  down  to  write ;  he  wrote  three  bills 
out ;  in  writing  the  last  bill  he  expressed  him- 
self Tery  tired,  he  did  not  know  what  was  the 
matter  with  him,  but  he  could  not  write  any 
longer. 

Were  those  bills  which  he  first  wrote  read 
to  the  people  in  the  room  ? — ^They  were  read 
by  himself. 

Did  he  read  them  aloud? — ^Yes. 

What  was  it  that  he  read  ? 

Mr.  Ado^fthm, — I  must  object  to  that. 

Mr.  Attorney  GeneraL—rAfier  he  had  finished 
those  three  bills  he  appeared  tired  ? — Yes,  he 
did.    Am  I  to  state  the  contents  of  the  bills  f 

What  became  of  those  three  bills  which  he 
wrote  f — Those  three  bills  that  he  wrote,  the 
first  thing  that  was  to  be  done  with  them,  after 
he  had  done  with  them,  was  to  lay  them  down 
in  the  room,  in  order  to  dry :  after  they  were 
dried  they  were  doubled  up;  I  saw  one  in  lug's 
hand,  and  I  saw  one  in  Thistlewood's  hand ; 
but  what  became  of  them  after  that,  I  cannot 
tell. 

Mr.  Addpkm.'-^l  only  wish  to  see  the  thing 
done  regularly. 

tAuAttometf  General, — ^Then,  now  tell  us 
what  Thistlewood  wrote  upon  those  bills?— 
**  Your  Tyrants  are  destroyed — the  friends  of 
'liberty  are  called  upon,  as  the  provisional 
government  is  now  sitting.  James  Ings, 
Secretary.    February  23rd,  1820.'' 

Mr.  Attorney  General, — I  will  not  ask  as  to 
the  other  bills,  my  lord.  I  believe  some  other 
persoh  was  desired  to  take  the  pen  to  write 
the  fourth  bill } — Hall  was  called  upon,  and  be 
refused  it ;  and  another  person,  a  stranger  to 
me  by  name,  whom  I  never  saw  before,  was 
called  on,  and  ha  at  first  refused « 

We  will  not  go  into  that ;  was  Ings  in  the 
room  at  this  time  ?-»Yes. 

What  was  Ings  doing  ? — Ings  was  very  busy 
in  preparing  himself  for  action. 

iiow  did  he  prepare  himself  ?— He  put  a 
black  belt  round  his  waist,  in  order  to  contain 
a  brace  of  pistols;  another  black  belt  he  hanged 
upon  his  shoulder,  to  support  a  cutlass;  he 
next  placed  on  each  shoulder  a  large  bag,  in 
the  rorm  of  a  soldier's  haversack.  When  he 
had  done  this,  he  viewed  himself  and  he 
said  **  I  have  not  got  my  steel,  I  am  not  com- 

Slete  I"  he  said  **  never  mind ;"  he  directly 
ravfs  a  great  knife  from  his  podiet  and  begins 
to  brandish  it  about,  swearing  at  the  same  time 
that  was  the  knife  he  procured  to  cut  off  the 
head  of  lord  Castlereagh  and  the  rest,  as  he 
came  at  them.  On  being  asked  what  he  in- 
tended them  bags  for  that  he  had  about  him, 
he  positively  swore  that  he  intended  to  bring 


away  the  heads  of  lord  Castlereagh  and  Sid- 
mbuthin  them. 

You  say  he  brandished  the  knife  ;  what  sort 
of  a  kpife  was  it  ?— It  was  a  large  broad  knife 
that  he  said  he  had  prepared  for  the  purpose, 
and  bound  round  the  handle  with  wax  end  to 
preventit  slipping  in  his  hand,  when,  he  said,  he 
should  be  at  work. 

•  After  this,  did  any  other  persons  come,  or  did 
those  persons  go  away? — After  this,  Thistle- 
wood  and  Brunt  were  out  of  the  room. 

Who  came  into  the  room  ? — Palin  came  into 
the  room. 

On  Palin  coming  into  the  room,  did  any 
thing  pass? — ^At  the  time  Palin  was  in  the 
room,  perceiving  that  Thistlewood  and  Brunt 
were  not  present,  he  takes  upon  himself  to 
address  what  were  in  the  room  :  he  said  he 
hoped  all  that  were  in  the  room  knew  what' 
they  had  met  there  for;  if  such,  he  hoped  they 
would  give  it  a  proper  consideration ;  in  the 
first  place,  to  see  whether  the  assassination 
was  likely  to  be .  a  thing  that  would  be  ap- 

§  roved  of  by  the  country,  and  whether  m 
oing  that  the  country  would  turn  on  tiieir 
side. 

Was  any  thing 'observed  upon  that  f — Just 
after. 

By  whom  ? — ^There  was  a  tall  man  in  the 
room  made  some  few  remarks  on  what  was 
dropped,  after  Mr.  Palin  went  a  little  further 
on. 

What  did  he  say  ?— He  said,  **  you  seem  to 
speak  as  if  all  in  the  room  knew  ^  what  was 

Oto  be  done ;  this  is  what  some  of  us  have 
,  but  wish  to  be  satisfied.  I,  for  mypwa 
part,  from  what  you  have  said  respecting 
coming  to  an  agreement  to  stick  true  to  each 
other,  am  not  afraid  of  myself,  nor  do  I  con- 
ceive that  any  man  who  turns  out  in  a  case 
like  this  ought  to  value  his  life.'^ 

Upon  his  sa^ng  tliis,  do  you  recollect  any 
thing  being  said  by  Brunt  ?--Just  at  the  con* 
elusion  of  this,  Brunt  enters  the  room  again : 
seeing  the  alteration  in  the  countenances  of 
what  were  in  the  room,  he  wanted  to  know 
the  cause ;  he  was  told  by  this  tall  man  again, 
that  there  was  some  in  the  room  that  wished 
to  know  what  they  were  met  there' for. 

What  answer  did  Brunt  makeP — ^^This  is 
not  the  place,''  savs  Brunt,  ^  where  you  are  to 
be  informed;  go  along  with  me  to  the  Edgware* 
road,  there  you  shall  know  what^ou  are  going 
about,  and  all  that  goes  along  with  me  i  wiU 
take  care  they  shall  have  a  drop  of  something 
to  drink  to  put  them  in  spirits.^ 

Was  any  thing  said  to  you  ?  or  did  you  take 
any  ^ing  yourself  to  carry  to  the  Bdgware- 
load  P — I  es. 

What  was  given  to  you  P— This  blunderbuss 
with  the  brass  barrel  was  fixed  vnth  a  b^lt 
round  my  shoulder,  and  hung  to  it,  and  put 
under  my  great  coat,  that  I  had  then  on,  to 
carry  to  Cato-stteet. 

Any  thing  else  ? — After  this,  there  was  a 
broomstick  which  had  been  prepared  for  the 
reception  of  a  bayonet  at  one  end,  this  was 


991] 


1  GEORGB  IV. 


Trial  of  Jama  Ings 


T892 


Bmntfs :  I  was  to  take  this  broomstick  in  my  .  band  sid^  alWr  you  have  passed  throagh  Um 
hand  as  a  walking-stick/ there  was.pothing,  archway  ?-^Yes. 

iirther  communicated,  or,  at-  least,  done  in  the  |  When  you  got  into  this  stahle  whom  did  yoa 
loom  at  this  present  any  way  particular,  except  •  find  there  ? — I  found  Davidson  sitting,  and  a 
that  Brant  said,  it  was  time  K>r  us  to  begin  to  ;  person  etanding  apparently  as  if  ihey  were 
prepare  us  to  go,  as  tiie  room  where  we  were  doing  something  with  the  pikes;  I  passed  thev 
would  be  wanted  by  Palin's  men  in  the  even-  in  the  stable  and  went  up  the  kdder  into  ths 
ing.  I  loft  above. 

You  told  us  in  the  early  part  of  your  evi-  {    ^Weie  Uiere  any  persons  in  the  loft,  over  tlie 
dence  that  some  pike  staves  had  been  pro-  \  stable,  when  you  got  there  ?— Yes ;  I  foaad 


cured  and  were  to  hava  some  ferrules  put  upon 
them ;  had  they  had,  to  your  knowledge,  fer- 
rules pot  upon  them  ? — ^Yes  I  saw  ferrules  piA 
iqpon  some  of  them. 

Where,  and  by  whom? — ^lu  the  room  at 
Brunts,  I  saw  a  doxen  of  them  fnruled  by 
Bradbum* 

Was  there  any  cupboard  iu  that  room  P — 
Thefe  was. 

Had  you  ever  seen  that  cupboard  open  ? — 
Yes. 

What  was  that  cupboard  used  for  ?— It  was 
used  for  the  reception,  for  the  purpose  of  put- 
ting, swords;  I  saw  soBM  tallow  there;  I  saw 
some  pitch  there ;  I  saw  some  of  those  small 
hand-grenades  in  it,  those  were  the  principal 
things  I  have  seen  there. 

Had  you  ever  seen  any  gun-powder  pre« 
MCred  thever? — ^I  had  seen  gun-povnder^  a  mus- 
Mi,  belt,  aqd  the  hand-grenades  laid  tbepe. 


Ings  and  Hall  there. 

Any  other  persons  ?->Yes,Bradlmm, 

Wliat  were  those  persons  about  when  yon 
got  into  the  loft?-— They  were  taking  tbe  dif- 
ferent arms. 

Where  were  those  arms  ?  —  Lyiag  on  tk 
bench  that  was  in  the  room. 

There  was  a  bench  in  the  room  on  vtidi 
the  arms  were? — ^Yes. 

Was  Tidd  there  when  you  arrived  ?— No,  bi 
was  not. 

Do  you  recollect  anv  thing  passing  in  con- 
sequence of  Tidd's  not  being  there ?— Yes;  is 
consequence  of  Tidd  not  being  there,  Tbis* 
tlewood  and  Brunt  were  talking  about  it,  This- 
tlewood  began  to  be  rather  agitated  for  feir 
Tidd  should  not  come. 

What  said  Brunt? — Brunt  seeing  themes 
rather  confused,  for  it  ^was  pretty  general,  ssid 
there  was  no  occasioa  for  any  uneasiness  re- 


What  had  you  seen  done  wHh  powdet  in  that ;  specting  the  arrival  of  Tidd,  for  he  woald  ven- 


room? — I  saw  the  powder  put  into  some  of 
thoae  hand-grenades  to  complete  themi 

Did  you  ever  see  the  powder  put  into  v/f 
Ainf  elie  ?;— Not  to  my  kuowledge. 

Btfure  yeii  ever  seen  any  bags  of  any  desedpA 


ture  to  forfeit  his  existence  that  Tidd  woald  be 
forthcoming.  About  this  time,  in  consequence 
of  what  had  appeared  in  the  faces  of  the  men, 
Ings  began  to  show  himself  mad,  quite  U^ 
rified,  he  began  to  stamp  and  to  swear,  to  tak^ 


tiouUiere? — ^I  saw  tbe  powder  chat  was  brought  both  his  hands  up  in  this  way  against  his  hair, 
i»  a  brown  pup«  bag  there,  and  I  haye  seen  j  as  if  he  would  tear  it  off,  and  said,  *<  Damn  my 
Brant  take  a  bag  to  carry  the  hand-grenades  \  eyes,  if  you  begin  to  taUc  of  dropping  the  con 


there. 

What  time  did  you  go  away  from  Brant's 
that  evening  for  Cato-street  ? — A»  nearly  as  I 
can  calculate^  it  was  dravring  very  near  to  six, 
or  it  might  be  six. 

With  whom  did  you.  go  away  in  company  ? 


cern  now,  I  will  either  cut  my  throat  or  shoot 
myself."     . 

Did  Thistlewood  say  any  thing? — *•*» 
Thistlewood  then  said  **  for  God*8  sake  do  &o& 
think  of  dropping  the  business  now;  if  you  do 
it  will  turn  out  a  second    Despard's  job. 


— I  went  by  mvsel£^  and  was  to  be  followed  by  Thistlewood,  looking  round,  said, ''  you  se^ 
Strange  and  this  taU  mui,  and  two  or  three  to  think  there  are  not  men  sufficient."  »^ 
Others  whose  names  I  did  not  know,  and  Brant  cast  up  the.  number  of  men  that  were  ia  the 
was  to  follow.  I  room :  ^  let  us  see,  Uiere  are  eigM^BD  hett 

Did  you  go  en  towards  the  Edgware-voad  ?  and  two  below,  that  makea  twenty,  that  isqnite 
«-I  went  right  up  Holborn,  aad  right  up  Ox.  sufficient  i^  says  he  **  suppose  there  tobe  fS' 
ford-street ;  in  going  up  Holborn,  \  teen  servants  in  lord  Harrewby's  house,  ^ 

We  need  not  go  through  the  particulars, of  are  not  armed ;  we  eball  go  pr^Kued,  aa<}  ^ 
your  journey  to  Cato -street,  did  you  afterwarids  will  not  take  us,  from  cmtering  thehoase^ 
go  to  Cato-street  ?-^Yes,  I  didU  aoming  out  above  ten  minutes.'* 

Who  went  with. you  finally  to  Cato-»tr0et?  '  Was  any  thing  done  in  respect  to  the  M 
— Thistlewood,  Brunt,  and  a  strange  man,  who  wsfre  to  enter  the  house  f— He  proposed 
whom  I  do  not  know.  that.t^re  i^uld  be  fourteen  men  ojatoftbe 

Where  did  you  meet  Thistlewood  beforayofi  tsentv  that  should  outer  the  room;  tbatbt 
got  to  Cato«stBS«t?— In  the  fidgware  raad^       |  thov^ht  six  vroi^  be  ^ufficieBt  to  take  caie  of 

When  you  got  to  Cata*street  where  did -yeift    the  servants, 
go?  into  what  building  or  house  ?— -I  t^tAsed  ;      When  did  Tidd  eeme  ia?-^He  eatto  i9 
into  a  stabling,  a  kind  of  stable.  j  about  twenty  minutes^  to  the  best  of  my  reee^ 

That  is  near  the  end  of  Cato-street,  by  Johjs-   lection,  before  the  offieera  eaiered  the  roOB»« 


stracitP — Yes. 
You  went  under  an  archway  ?-^Yes^ 
This  stahle  is  the  first  building  on  the  right- 


i 


Did  Tidd  bring  ua^  persons  with  him  ?-:^ 
did  not  see  him  enter  |be  room^  but  I  saw  hitf 
after  he  was  there* 


993J 


fi/r  High  Treason* 


A.  D.  1820- 


[994 


Yon  my  he  proposed  fbuvteeii  p«nons  sboald 
enttr.lord  Hamwby*s  hoiiM? — Y«8,  on  seeing 
Tidd  in  the  room  (for  he  was  in  ^e  room  at 
the  time  Tbistlewood  was  talking  of  this),  seeing 
Tidd  in  the  room,  Tbistlewood  fixed  his  eye 
upon  him.  I  looked  at  him,  and  This tlewood, 
upon  seeing  this,  turned  his  eye  away  directly. 
I  saidy  **  do  not  yo«  think  it  is  a  pretty  set  ont? 
do  you  think  they  will  be  able  to  ao  this  thing?'' 
he  said,  •*  Never." 

You  say  fourteen  were  to  go  into  the  house  ? 
—Fourteen  were  to  be  selected  to  go  into  the 
room  ;  it  was  first  proposed  to  be  pnt  to  them 
to  see  if  they  were  all  willing  to  go :  this  was 
put,  and  it  was  agreed  to,  at  the  time  the  men 
were  called  out,  the  fourteen  men  that  were 
to  enter  the  room.  Brunt  produces  a  gin  bot- 
tle from  his  pocket.  Shall  I  state  the  men 
that  were  picked  out  to  go  into  the  room) 

Was  Ings  one  of  those  ?— Yes,  he  was. 

Were  you  one  of  them  ? — Certainly^ 

Was  Harrison  one  P— He  was  one  }  this 
being  done,  thinking  to  get  myself  in  readiness 
to  go,  I  heard  somebody  in  the  stable. 

What  did  you  hear  ? — I  heard  something  be- 
low, and  directly  there  was  said,  **  hollo,  and 
Tbistlewood  directly  takes  a  candle,  and  looks 
to  see  who  it  is;  upon  that,  he  sets  the  candle 
on  the  bench  directly  again,  in  quite  a  confused 
state.    I  never  beard  him  spealL 

Did  any  persons  come  up  the  ladder?— 
There  were  two  officers  directly  entered  the 
room. 

What  became  of  Tbistlewood  ? — He  sidled 
off  from  the  place  where  he  was,  into  a  little 
room. 

Was  that  the  little  room  nearest  the  street  ? 
—It  was  the  room,  as  the  officers  came  up,  on 
the  right-hand  side. 

There  were  two  rooms  there,  we  understand  ? 
— ^I  do  not  know  that ;  I  had  never  seen  it  till 
the  officers  came  up. 

Did  any  other  persons  go  into  that  little 
room  besides  Tbistlewood  ? — ^There  were  Ings 
and  Brunt  I  saw  in,  and  Harrison. 

What  happened  upon  the  officers  coming 
up  1 — On  the  officers  coming  up  into  the  room, 
thej  stood  in  the  room  at  the  top  of  the  ladder, 
as  It  were,  with  a  small  pistol  presented,  say- 
ing, **  holloa,  here  is  a  pretty  nest  of  you ;" 
looking  round,  and  seeing  the  arms  of  different 
descriptions  lying  on  the  bench,  and  some  of 
them  with  arms  about  them,  they  said,  **  Gen- 
tlemen, we  have  a  warrant  to  apprehend  von 
all,  and  I  hope  as  such  you  will  go  quietly.'* 
On  this,  Smitbers,  who  was  behind,  cried, 
^  make  room,  let  me  come  up :"  on  Smitbers 
coming  into  die  room,  between  the  two  officers 
that  were  making  way  for  him,  at  this  moment 
of  time,  those  that  were  in  this  little  room 
nade  towards  the  door,  a  group  of  them ;  at 
that  instant  of  time,  I  saw  a  man  rush  forward 
firom  the  group  of  them ;  at  the  same  time, 
pother  hand  presented  itself  with  a  pistol ; 
at  that  moment  a  pistol  was  fired  off,,  out  went 
the  candle,  and  I  ooold  not  see  what  went  on 
afterwards. 

VOL.  xxxm. 


Did  you  see  Smitbers  fall  ?— I  did  not  see 
him  fall. 

In  consequence  of  this,  was  there  consider-* 
able  confusion  in  the  room  ? — Great  confusion ;; 
the  officers,  as  soon  as  they  perceived  their 
brother  officer  was  killed,  ran  down  stairs,  and 
gave  the  alarm  of  murder. 

What  became  of  you?— I  kept  my  standing^ 
where  I  was. 

In  what  part  of  the  room  were  you  ? — At 
the  end  of  the  bench^  at  the  further  end  of  the 
room. 

Did  you  get  out  of  the  room  ? — I  came  out 
of  the  room  after  this. 

Down  the  ladder? — ^Yes,  through  the  stable^ 
and  out  under  the  archway,  the  same  as  I  got 
in. 

And  made  youT  escape  off? — ^Yes,  I  got  out 
into  Cato-etreet,  and  turned  my  head  on  one 
side,  and  there  was  a  pistol  fired  out  at  the 
window  at  me.  I  thought  it  was  at  me,  for 
there  was  not  a  soul  besides. 

You  got  out  under  the  archway,,  and  got  off?* 
— Yes ;  as  I  was  under  the  archway  the  sol-* 
diers  were  coming  through. 

When  were  you  yourself  apprehended  ? — Oi> 
the  Friday. 

Ingi, — Am  I  allowed  to  ask  any  qnestion^ 
my  lord  ? 

Lord  Chief  JiuHeB  Dallas. — ^You  may  ask  any 
question,  but  you  will  consider  whether  to 
put  it  yourself,  or  to  leave  it  to  your  counsel. 

Mr.  Ado^^hus. — ^If  you  will  write  down  an^ 
question  you  wish  to  propose,  if  I  think  it 
proper  I  will  put  it  for  you. 

Mr.  Attorney  General. — ^You  have  been  m 
custody  ever  since  ?— Yes,  I  have. 

Robert  Adams  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Addphust, 

You  were  examined  here  on  Monday,  I 
think  ?— Yes. 

I  should  like  to  know  a  fittle  move  of  you^ 
are  you  an  Englishman  ?^Yes. 

liom  in  what  part  of  the  country  ? — Ipswich^ 
in  Sufiblk. 

Educated  as  a  Christian  ?— Yes. 

You  profess  that  religion,  do  you,  now  ?— ^ 
Yes,  I  do  now. 

Did  you  ever  cease  to  profess  it? — Yes. 

What  mode  of  faith,  or  disbelief,  did  ^ott 
take  up  while  vou  disbelieved  Christianity? 
what  were  you  then  ? — ^I  was  induced. 

Never  mind  what  you  were  induced ;  answer' 
my  question  first,,  and  you  shall  tell  your  in*, 
ducement  afterwards.    W^at  were  you  when 
yon  were  not  a  Christian  ?-— A  man^  certainly, 
in  the  same  form  as  I  am  now. 

What  faith  or  persuasion  had  you  when  you 
were  not  a  Christian  I — ^If  I  must  answer  that 
question. 

You  shall  answer  the  question. — Then  I  wilL 
I  was  in  faith  what  they  termed  a  Deist. 

Did  you  believe  in  God  when  you  were  a 
Deist? — They  strove  to  make  me, 

Did  you  believe  in  God  when  you  were  a 
Deist  P — ^Yes. 

3S 


^953 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Then  joa  renottoeed  Cbrittiaiiity  to  be  a 
Deist,  aad  believed  only  in  God?-— Yes,  thai 
Was  the  case. 

•  How  long  may  yon  bave  embraced  Cfaris- 
tiaoity  again  ? — I  consider  myself  to  have  em- 
biaced  Christianity  again  ever  since  I  first  re- 
ceived conviction  that  I  was  in  the  wrong. 

Give  ns  the  day  and  month  ? — I  cannot. 

Was  it  before  the  23rd  of  Febmary  last  ?— 
t  was  convinced  even  before  I  was  taken,  and 
my  conviction  grew  stronger  after  that. 

Was  it  before  or  after  &e  23rd  of  Febmaiy 
last  yon  called  yonrself  a  Christian  again  ? — 
After  the  23Td. 

So  mnch  for  yoor  religion.  How  long  might 
von  remain  in  tiie  fa«ppy  conviction  of  Deism  f 
Low  maqy  vears  ?— Or  a  Deist? 

When  did  you  renounce  faith  in  our  Savionr  ? 
—It  first  happened  since  last  August. 

Since  last  August  jrbu  renounced  faith  in 
our  Saviour,  and  since  last  February  you  have 
taken  it  up  again  ?-^Yes. 

In  your  progress  downwards,  you  say  you 
had  got  down  from  Christianity  to  Deism. 
Did  you  ever  get  to  the  point  of  Atheism  ?— * 
Never. 

Did  you  ever  profess  yourself  a  Deist? — 
Never. 

Did  vott  ever  deny  your  belief  in  a  God  at 
all,  and  that  the  Scriptures  were  all  a  fable  ? — 
I  never  denied  a  God,  though  I  was  brought 
by  that  aecursed  work  of  Paine*s  to  deny  Sie 
Scriptures. 

And  now  you  are  brought  to  call  the  Bible 
a  good  book,  and  Paiae's  accursed.  How 
long  did  you  serve  the  king  ? — Five  years. 

Where  did  you  serve,  in  England  or  abroad  ? 
—In  England. 

In  the  Blues  ?— Yes,  property  speaking,  the 
Royal  Horse  Guards. 

We  among  tlie  illiterate  call  it  the  Blues. 
Had  you  any  allowance  or  pension  on  your 
Mtiring  from  the  army? — ^None  at  all. 

You  have  retired  again  to  your  trade  of  a 
shoemaker  ?-*Yes. 

Is  that  yoor  hand-writing  ?  [ihewmg  a  small 
piece  of  paper  to  the  wUness.] — Yes,  it  is. 

You  were  examined  here  on  Monday? — 
Yes,  I  was. 

Where  have  you  been  since  f — I  have  been 
in  the  same  custody  as  I  was  bi^fore* 

Where  was  it  ? — In  the  House  of  Correction. 

Cold  Bath-fields  P— Yes. 

In  solitary  confinement,  or  have  you  seen 
tny  body  ?-^I  have  not  been  in  solitary  con- 
finement, but  I  have  not  had  commuification 
with  any  body,  nor  have  not  had  since  I  was 
taken. 

Have  yon  been  in  solitary  confinement  or 
^t  ?— I  liave  a  it)om  in  the  house  of  tile 
gpveriior. 

Have  yoo  been  icOifary  or  seto  any  body  ? 
—I  may  say  solitary,  for  when  I  reflected  with 
nyself, 

I  do  not  ask  as  to  your  reflections.  Have 
yon  seen  any  persons  or  been  alone  ? — ^I  have 
certainly  seen  those  that  have  attended  me. 


witfi 


Tfiai  cfJamei  Imp  [gM 

Have  yon  seen  any  body  who  told  yom  any 
thing  that  passed  in  th»  Com  aftv  yon  left 
it  ?— No,  I  have  not. 

That  yon  swear  ? — I  have  sol  seen  any  bo^ 
who  told  me  any  thing  that  pMMid  na  this 
Court. 

Have  yon  seen  any  body  who  told  yoa  any 
pan  of  what  passed  in  thb  Conrt  after  yw 
left  it  ?— No,  I  have  not. 

Have  you  had  any  writing,  printing,  or  any 
other  thing  eonteyed  to  yoo,  *'*— ■■"■Haiiiig 
it?^I  have  had  no  writing  whatever  coamm- 
nicated  U>  me. 

Then  yon  do  not  know  any  thing  abevt 
what  passed  ?-— No ;  I  heard  the  day  belbre  I 
went  ofi^,  the  day  the  verdict  was  given  against 
Thistlewood,  that  he  was  found  gniMy. 

Where  were  yon  da^  by  day  f — I  was  kept 
in  a  room  by  myself,  becaase  I  wrndd  ham 
conraranication  vrith  no  person. 

You  were  guarded? — I  had  two 
me. 

Did  you  hear  any  thing  of  the 
upon  your  evidence  f-*No. 

Not  a  word  ? — No. 

Now  I  vrili  tell  you  why  I  ask  yon  that 
question :  you  have  altered  yoor  endenee  a 
good  deal  since  that?— I  do  not  know  tiknt 
I  have. 

Then  I  will  bring  it  to  your  raemoiy,  that 
you  have,  without  going  through  the  whole 
couTM  of  your  evidence  the  other  day :  how 
long  have  you  known  Edwards?— I  have 
known  Edv^unds  ever  since  the  eariypaitof 
January. 

How  long  have  you  known  Ings,  was  that 
by  Brunt  introducing  him  U>  you  ? — ^Yes; 

And  you  became  acquainted  with  Brunt,  on 
the  continent  three  or  tour  yean  ago  ?*~Yes. 

From  the  time.you  began  to  hc4d  any  conw 
munication  or  correspondence  with  Bruv^ 
with  Ings,  and  Thbtlewood,  was  it  year 
intention  to  execute  the  project  they  pro* 
posed  to  you,  or  did  you  intend  to  give  in- 
formation against  them  ?-*-!  never  intended ; 
it  wds  no  inward  intention  of  mine  to  commit 
murder,  nor  I  never  had  any  intention  to  give 
information  against  them ;  after  I  got  into  the 
knowledge  of  what  was  in  hand,  I  waited  dir 
opportunity  to  get  out  of  it. 

You  never  intended  to  commit  murder,  nor 
to  give  information,  but  you  waited  for  the 
opportunity  to  creep  out  of  it  ? — ^Yes. 

What  hindered  your  creeping  oat  of  it  at 
any  time  ?— From  threats  that  had  been  held  out. 

Let  ns  see  how  that  is.  Early  in  Januaiy, 
Thistlewood  had  a  conversation  with  yon,  in 
which  he  said  that  the  shop-keepers  weire  all 
aristocrats,  and  he  should  like  to  see  tlMr 
ihops  !(hnt  np  and  plundered  ?— Yes. 

Were  you  dfqp!osed  to  go  ihat  leq^t 


should  you  like  to  shut  up  their 
plunder  them?— 'I  should  not  widi  tc^go 
length. 

Moderate  your  action  a  Httle  V«I  aa  pes* 
fecUy  collected.  1' on  stand  hetn  If  yoa 
desire  it  till  to-moirow  momiiig. 


mm 


far  High  T/ii0«M« 


A,  D«  1820i 


I90a 


Wen  you  ditpoted  to  ahvl  op  tb«  shops 
iBd  plunder  them? — ^I  was  not. 

Bat  yoa  were  in  the  society  of  men  who 
tvd  they  were? — ^That  society  I  was  just 
entering. 

There  were  no  threats  held  out  in  that  con-< 
▼ersation  7 — Not  at  that  time,  Ihat  I  admit. 

You  had  the  benefit  of  a  recess  of  fburtecn 
days  in  White-cross-street  prison?— But  I 
had  had  threats  before  I  went  into  the  White- 
cross-street  prison. 

Had  you  nad  threats  before  any  thing  was 
communicated  to  you  ? — ^Yes ;  before  I  went 
to  prison. 

'  Your  first  conversation  with  him  was  in 
January  ? — Yes. 

What  sort  of  threats  were  they  ? — ^Tbis  was 
the  yery  day  before  I  went  into  prison.  I  was 
asking  Mr.  Brunt,  in  the  presence  of  Thistle- 
wood,  for  the  plan  that,  I  was  told  by  Brunt, 
first  of  all  was  drawn  up.  I  wanted  to  know 
what  it  was;  I  wanted  to  see  it.  Brunt  said 
directly  that  there  would  be  nothing  commu- 
nicated  or  given  till  the  day  of  acting.  This- 
tlewood  answered  this  directly,  ^By  no 
means,  there  shall  be  nothing  given,  and  the 
yery  day  that  we  think  of  going  to  work,''  then 
gays  he,  ^  we  will  have  ue  men  all  together, 
gire  them  a  treat,  and  then  we  shall  teU  them 
what  is  to  be  done ;  and  after  that  we  will 
sever  lose^  sight  of  them.''  Upon  this  Brunt 
said  he  would  take  damned  good  care  that 
there  shonld  be  no  writings  kept  in  the  room 
where  tfaey  were,  that  would  put  them  into 
danger,  '*  But,"  says  he,  'Mf  any  roan  I  have 
ever  spoken  to  concerning  this  will  give  me 
reason  to  suppose  he  will  give  information,  I 
will  run  him  through  and  put  a  stop  to  it." 

I  wonder  you  were  not  afraid  to  come  out 
of  prison ;  that  would  have  been  the  safest 
place  ?— I  certainly  was,  I  am  sony  I  did  come 
oat. 

How  much  were  you  imprisoned  forP— 
Twenty-three  shillings  and  eight>pence. 

And  these  discoveries  were  made  to  you 
before  you  went  to  prison,  on  the  16th  of 
January  ? — Yes. 

Had  you  been  at  any  meeting  with  those 
gentlemen  then? — ^I  had  met  them  several 
tines  At  this  public-house. 

Whom  had  you  met? — ^I  had  aeeo  Bmnl,  I 
had  seeft  Ings. 

Do  you  remember  on  what  day  you  were 
iotrodueed  to  Brunt  ?-~On  the  2nd  of  January. 

To  Thistlewood  ?-^n  the  Wednesday,  I 
believe  Sunday  was  the  9th,  then  it  must  be 
the  12th. 

You  told  na  the  other  day  the  13th,  I  do 
not  want  to  fix  you  particularly? — ^If  I  said 
tbe  13th,  it  must  be  a  mistake ;  I  know  it  was 
the  We^esday. 

Iliatvrasthe  first  time  you  ever  saw  Thia*- 
tlewood  P-^Yes. 

HiM#  many  times  betweeii  that  and  the  time 
when  yon  went  to  Thistlewood's  did  yon  hedr 
ftlM>8e  thmatt7*7l  have  stated  to  yon  the  ftsst 
time  I  heard  threats  thrown  out. 


When  was  that  ?— On  the  16th. 

Who  held  them  oot  then?— Mr.  BrunU 

What  day  of  the  week  was  the  16th,  do  you 
recollect  ?>-0n  a  Sunday^ 

You  not  being  particularly  incumbered  with 
Christianity,  thought  that  a  good  day  to  meet 
those  people? — Yes,  that  was  the  first  day 
we  met  in  the  room  we  were  then  in. 

What  room  was  that  ?-~The  White  Hart. 

It  so  intimidated  you  that  when  you  came 
out  again  you  sought  those  persons,  and  went 
on  with  their  plots  ? — ^I  had  a  right  to  be  in- 
timidated with  such  a  man  as  Mr.  Ings;  when 
any  thing  occurred  his  whole  blood  and  soul 
boiled  for  murder. 

You  had  not  seen  Ings  at  that  time  ? — God 
bless  me  are  you  going  to  reason  me  out  of  my 
Christian  name  ?  I  have  told  you  I  saw  Inga 
between  the  2nd  and  the  0th. 

Then  I  have  mistaken  you ;  oh  it  is  so  to-day 
I  see  ;  then  on  the  30th,  when  you  had  been  im- 
prisoned fifteen  days,  yon  joined  those  parties 
again  ? — ^I  did. 

Had  the  thing  then  got  a  great  deal  forwarder 
in  your  absence  ? — Yes. 

The  room  had  been  taken,  I  think  P— Yes, 
the  room  at  the  White  Hart  had  been  given 
up,  which  I  did  not  know  on  the  Monday 
morning,  cor  did  I  know  of  the  room  having 
been  taken  at  Brunt's  ?  I  did  not  go  to  that 
room,  but  to  speak  to  Brunt's  wife. 

You  have  told  us  of  a  meeting  on  the  3rd  of 
February,  you  call  it  the  2nd  to-day ;  was  £d« 
wards  at  that?  I  do  not  wish  to  raise  any  thing 
on  the  difference  of  date;  the  other  day  when 
you  were  examined  did  you  say  any  thing  about 
Ings  pulling  a  pistol  from  his  pocket  and  say- 
ing, he  h<^ped  tne  king  would  not  die  then,  and 
that  the  duke  of  York  would  not  come  to  the 
crown  ? — I  did  not;  if  you  question  me  here' 
you  will  bring  a  number  more  things  to  my 
mind ;  as  I  have  pledged  myself  to  my  Maker 
to  divulge  all  I  know,  I  will  tell  it. 

And  the  more  you  are  asked  the  more  yon 
will  know  ? — ^Undoubtedly. 

You  have  told  more  to-4ay  than  yon  did  the 
day  before  ? — I  told  all  I  recollected. 

But  this  curious  idea  of  Ings,  saying  he  hoped 
the  king  would  not  die  then,  but  would  live  a^ 
little  longer;  and  that  the  duke  of  York  would 
not  come  to  the  crown,  and  that  the  king  shouldL 
never  wear  the  crown,  you  did  not  state  ? — No^ 
I  did  not  recollect  it. 

You  have  told  us  that  Ings,  who  happens  to 
be  the  man  before  the  jury,  said  they  were  aH 
a  damned  set  of  cowards ;  lliat  he  took  a  pistol 
in  his  pocket  when  the  prince  regent  went  tb 
pariiament,  with  the  sole  intention  to  shoot 
him  ;  diat  on  hisjnaking  use  of  that  expression, 
he  took  the  pistol  from  his  pocket  to  convince 
them  of  the  sincerity  of  what  he  had  said,  and 
exclaimed,  ^  There  is  the  pistol  that  I  took," 
and  that  he  regretted  he  had  not  done  it,  say- 
ing, had  he  done  it  he  had  not  cared  u  damn 
for  his  own  life ;  all  that  remarkable  fact  you 
kept  to  yourself  on  Monday  last  P— The  reason 
Why  I  kept  it  to  myself  was,  that  it  did  not 


990] 


1  GEORGE  lY. 


Trial  afJawm  Inp 


come  to  ny  recollection :  the  words  I  bave 
said  this  moniing  were  all  fact. 

The  reason  yoa  did  not  state  it  on  Monday 
was,  that  it  did  not  come  to  yoor  recoUection  f 
— It  did  not. 

I  think  yon  told  ns  some  things  then,  that 
did  not  come  to  your  recoUection  to-day? — 
That  may  be.  I  will  not  pretend  to  say,  that 
the  next  time  I  come  up  here  I  can  oommnni- 
cate  erery  thing  as  I  haTe  done  to-day. 

Certainly  not ;  there  are  people  thtt  pro- 
verbially ought  to  have  a  good  memory  f — Vesy 
certainly. 

Yon  told  us  of  their  being  to  go  to  Brighton 
and  Margate  and  Dover,  and  take  possession 
of  the  ootports;  yo«  hare  not  toM  us  that  to- 
day ? — I  do  not  consider  it  necessary :  if  it 
had  struck  me,  I  would  have  mentioned  it. 

You  make  your  evidence  a  little  longer  or 
shorter,  according  as  the  occasion  suits  ?— Yes, 
I  mention  the  circumstances  as  they  come  to 
my  recollection. 

On  one  day  it  is,  that  the  king  is  to  live  a 
little  longer,  and  on  another  day  the  ports  are 
to  be  taken  possession  of? 

Mr.  Gtiniry.— That  is  observation,  and  not 
question. 

Mr.  Adotphm, — I  am  asking  him  a  question. 

Mr.  Cumey.'^Bai  that  is  not  a  question. 

Lord  Chief  JuUke  JMbt.— You  should  not 
now  observe  on  the  evidence. 

Mr.  Gvm^» — ^Your  lordship  knows  that  we 
shortened  his  evidence  the  other  day,  and  pass- 
ed over  various  circumstances. 

Mr.  Adolphus, — You  could  not  stop  him; 
yoo  tried  several  times.  This  about  the  digving 
entrenchments  you  did  not  state  on  Monday  r 
—No,  I  forgot  that. 

The  next  time  there  will  be  a  new  stoiy  ? 

Mr,  Gutnof, — ^I  must  interpose,  my  lord. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  PoOm.— All  diese  obseir- 
ations  are  certainly  incorrect. 

Mr.  Adoiphta. — ^He  has  said  it  himself; 
**  when  next  I  come  into  the  box,  I  shall  recol- 
lect other  things,'*  and  upon  that  I  put  the 
question,  wheUier  he  would  tell  ^another  story 
the  next  time  he  comes. 

Lord  Chief  Jtatice  DaUai,  —  Ask  him  the 
•question  if  you  wish  it. 

Mr.  Adolphm. — Shall  you  teU  ns  a  new  story 
the  next  time? — No.  If  any  thing  new  occurs 
to  my  mind  when  I  come  to  stand  hcve,  I  will 
state  it. 

There  is  another  little  fact  you  had  not  men- 
tioned before,  that  the  assassination  must  take 
$lace  before  the  parliament  was  dissolved  ?«- 

That  did  not  occur  to  you  on  the  former  oc- 
casion ? — No,  it  did  not.  I  recollect  it  perfectly 
well.  ^        ^ 

You  have  omitted  something  you  told  vs  last 


riteo 

Monday,  that  at  the  neetiaf  on  Wednwday 
the  3rd  of  February,  Brant  said  be  had  wotk  to 
finish,  and  ooold  not  go  abont  the  amassiualiuu 
the  next  day  ?—l  stated  that  oo  the  19ili  of 
February. 

Did  you  not  sute  that  that  happened  oa  the 
2nd  or  the  3rd  of  Febraaiy  which  ever  vraa  the 
day? 

Lord  Chief  Jmtice  BoU^.— What  do  jtm 
refer  to? 

Mr.  Adoiphm.^Bnni  saying  he  had  busi- 
ness to  finidi,  and  could  not  go  the  next  day. 
Upon  voor  oath,  did  you  or  not  say  that  thai 
took  place  on  the  2nd  of  February  ? — I  stand 
here  upon  my  oath  already.  I  conceive  that 
as  such,  I  said,  and  I  say  now,  that  Brunt 
being  asked  by  Thistlewood  to  call  on  his  men, 
said,  he  had  woik  to  do,  and  did  not  know  diat 
he  should  be  able  to  attend ;  this  was  on  the 
19th. 

Did  he  or  did  he  not  say  so  on  the  2ndt— . 
I  do  not  remember  his  saying  so. 

Did  you  say  on  Monday  last,  upon  your 
oath,  that  he  said  so  on  the  2nd  ?~If  snch  a 
word  dropped  from  my  mouth,  it  is  past  my 
recollection. 


Mr.  Adoi^fkn.^^1  am  convinced  I 
taken  in  that,  the  date  was  written  narrowly 
in  the  margin,  and  I  overiooked  it.  This  meet- 
ing on  the  19th  was  when  twelve  penoos  weM 
present  f — ^No. 

That  was  the  SOth,  the  Sunday  ?-^Od  the 
20th ;  before  they  all  left  there  were  fifteen. 

That  was  at  the  time  Tidd  look  the  diair 
with  a  pike  in  his  hand  ?— Yes. 

They  did  not  then  know  of  the  dinner  at 
lord  Harrowby's? — No. 

Their  plan  then  was,  to  go  to  the  houses  of 
cabinet  ministers,  and  kill  two  or  three,  or  four 
of  them? — ^Yes. 

And  then  they  vrere  to  take  the  cannon  and 
do  all  the  rest  of  the  work  ? — Yes. 

You  have  given  us  this  addition  to-day,  dMt 
the  cannon  were  to  be  loaded  on  the  ground, 
and  biought  out  to  fire  on  any  who  opposed 
them  'y  but  that  if  Cook  found  himself  strong 
enough,  he  was  to  make  for  the  Mansion-house, 
and  to  secure  that  for  the  provisional  govern- 
ment ;  all  that  you  have  told  us  for  the  fiiit 
time  to  day  ? — If  I  recollect  right,  the  major 
part  of  that  was  stated  by  me  on  Monday. 

Was  there  any  thing  about  the  cannon  being 
loaded  on  the  Artillery-ground  ? — ^I  will  not 
go  so  for  as  to  swear  that  I  did  state  that. 

Did  you  say  any  thing  about  Cook  summon- 
ing the  Mansion-house,  and  demanding  it  to 
be  given  up  ? — ^If  I  did  not,  I  forgot  it 

Bless  me,  cannot  you  rememl>tf  from  Mon- 
day ?  Those  things  you  are  speaking  of  wers 
three  months  ago ;  is  your  memory  worse  since 
you  took  to  GImstianity  ?^No,  my  memoiy  is 
strengthened. 

Did  you  state  that  on  Monday  9—I  stated 
that  Cook  was  to  demand  the  Mansioa-houBC^ 
and  in  case  it  was  not  given  vp^  ht  was  to  firs 
upon  it. 


1001]  f^  ^'MI*  Trmmm. 

OrdidydttSfl^itwMto  b«  suiniiKmed,  or 
demanded  to  be  gi^en  up,  or  not? — Certaanly. 

You  seid  that  as  haWng  happened  then,  did 
you  \ — I  oonsider  summon  and  demanding  as 
two  similar  things.  I  do  not  know  whether  I 
am  right  or  wrong. 

I  mean  them  as  the  same  thing:  to  pass 
that  we  will  come  to  the  meeting  on  the  22nd ; 
was  that  the  time  when  Ings  puUed  three  dag- 
gers oat  of  his  pocket  ? — Yes. 

He  said  they  were  to  ran  into  one  of  their 
bodies,  using  an  expression  tiiat  you  very 
properly  kept  back  ? — ^Yes. 

Why  did  you  not  tell  us  that  on  Monday  ? — 
When  I  was  here  on  Monday,  if  I  was  to  state 
the  whole,  and  give  the  whole,  I  should  be  able 
to  state  it;  but  for  me  to  come  here  and  select 
one  single  inditidual  out  of  thirteen,  it  con- 
fuses me,  it  put  a  stop  to  my  recollection. 

logs  was  at  the  bar  on  Monday,  though  he 
was  not  on  trial  on  Monday ;  why  did  you  not 
tell  us  that  then  ?»If  I  had  thought  of  it  at  the 
time  I  would  have  mentioned  it. 

It  was  then  that  the  watch  was  agreed  on  P 
—Yes. 

To  be  on  duty  from  six  in  the  evening  till 
midnight  ? — ^Yes. 

And  a  committee  was  to  sit  twice  a-day ;  at 
eleven  in  the  morning,  and  seven  in  the  even- 
ing \ — ^Yes ;  on  the  Sitarday  it  was  eight  that 
they  met,  at  nine  o'clock  on  the  Monday. 

How  long  did  your  committee  meetings 
last  P^There  was  never  no  regular  time. 

Did  they  ever  sit  till  12  o'clock  at  night  P — > 
X  never  saw  them  sitting  at  12  o'clock  at  nighti 

You  have  told  us  further  that  at  the  meeting 
on  the  23rd  or  22nd,  Brunt  said  he  had  left 
Tidd  to  meet  a  man  tlmt  would  be  of  great  eon- 
seqoence,  and  therefore  he  could  not  go  to  the 
watch,  and  you  were  to  go,  and  Brunt  and 
Edwuds  and  you  preceded  to  Grosvenor. 
square,  and  these  saw  Davidson? — ^Yes. 

Why  did  not  you  tell  us  that  on  Monday  ? 
— -I  did  not  consider,  according  to  the  dictation 
of  counsel  I  had,  that  I  had  a  right  to  tell  that. 

^  I  did  not  consider  according  to  the  dic- 
tates of  the  counsel"  that  examined  me,  how 
am  I  to  understand  that  \ — There  were  things 
that  tmnspired  on  the  22nd,  that  I  have  not 
stated  either  last  Monday  or  to-day. 

This  was  one  of  those  you  did  not  state  last 
Monday,  but  havestated  to-day  ?— Those  things 
I  ha%'e  not  stated  to-day. 

But  this  as  to  Brunt's  meeting  a  man  you 
knew  last  Monday  P — ^That  was  not  in  Mr. 
Thistlewood's  proceedings. 

You  mentioned  as  Mug  parties  to  that. 
Brunt  and  Tidd,  and  Edwards,  and  yourself, 
and  Davidson? — This  was  proposed  on  the 
Monday  morning,  the  Tuesday  morning  I  mean, 
the  question  was  asked'  whether  Tidd, — 

Did  ^ou  state  that  on  Monday  or  did  you 
not?  Did  you  say  on  Monday  that  Brant  said 
be  had  left  Tidd  to  meet  a  man  that  would  be 
of  great  coBsequence,  and  therefore  he  could 
«ot  go  on  the  watch?— Brunt  said  that  on 
Tuesday. 


A.  D.  1^. 


[1003 


Did  you  say  that  on  Monday  last  here  F-- 
That  I  will  not  pretend  to  sav. 

We  will  go  over  a  good  deal  at  once:  you 
are  quite  sure  that  when  you  came  to  Cato* 
street,  twenty  was  the  number  of  men  there  ? 
—I  took  that  from  the  statement  of  Thistle- 
wood,  I  did  not  count  them  myself. 

That  there  were  eighteen  above  and  two 
below  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  know  a  gentleman  of  the  name  of 
Monument? — I  never  saw  Monument  at  all, 
not  to  my  recollection,  not  to  know  him  by  name. 

Perhaps  you  can  tell  me  the  room  is  fifteen 
feet  one  way  and  ten  the  other? — I  do  not 
know  the  width. 

Is  that  about  a  trae  description  of  it  ? — I 
should  suppose  it  might. 

Were  you  all  pretty  close  together  in  thai 
room,  all  yon  eighteen  ?-— Not  at  the  time  the 
accident  happened,  the  murder,  I  kept  my 
standing  wbere  I  was. 

Where  was  that  P — At  the  end  of  the  bendi 
under  the  vrindow. 

Was  that  nearest  or  ftirthest  ftom  the  door  ? 
— ^Furthest  from  the  door. 

Was  that  nearest  to  the  smaller  room  where 
those  parties  retired  into?— That  I  cannot 
positively  say,  fori  never  observed  the  door 
till  that  moment. 

You  said  you  sawthe  party  come,  in  a  gtoup, 
from  .that  room  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  it  near  thatP-^That  door  appeared  to 
me  to  be  in  the  middle  of  the  room. 

Therefore  the  bench  would  be  near  it? — No, 
the  door  is  in  the  side  of  the  room,  the  bench 
stands  lengthways. 

Were  you  at  the  end  nearest  to  or  furthest 
from  that  room? — I  never  pretended  to  say 
the  distance  of  Uiat  door  from  vrhere  I  stood, 
and  cannot. 

Then  you  were  nearly  in  the  middle  of  the 
room  P — ^I  was  at  the  end  of  the  room. 

The  end  nearest  to  the  ladder,  or  the  other  7 
— Nearest  to  the  street. 

You  could  see  all  that  was  in  the  room?— 
Do  you  mean  to  ask  me  every  thing  that  was 
in  the  room  ? 

I  do  not  ask  you  for  an  inventory  of  the 
things  in  the  room,  but  you  could  see  every 
thing  ? — ^Yes. 

How  many  candles  were  there  in  the  room  P 
—One. 

Only  one  P— One  I  will  be  answerable  for ; 
whether  there  were  more  I  will  not  take  upon 
myself  to  say. 

Were  there  three  or  four  ? — ^I  can  be  answer- 
able for  one,  I  can  be  answerable  for  no  more. 

You  can  answer  whether  they  were  there  or 
not? — I  did  not  see  them. 

At  any  time  were  there  four  candles  lighted  \ 
— I  never  saw  but  one. 

You  can  tell  whether  there  were  more  or 
not  ? — I  did  not  see  them.    . 

Were  there  mora  than  one  candte  in  the 
room  at  anyone  time  during  the  time  you 
were  there? — If  there  were  it  was  the  time 
when  I  was  out  of  the  recmi. 


10081         1  OBO&GB  IV. 

Hhm  stable  with  ThisUftmrad. 
Waittkem  mora   than  omF — ^nare  was 


E1004 


If  any  «aa  twean.  thcie  wan  aigbt,  ha 
awtaiB  that  which  is  falaa?^If  he  qieaka 
the  tnith. 

And  n  iMii  that  speaks  the  tntth  will  not 
sagr  there  wen  eight  candles  in  the  room  f— If 
any  man  swore  there  were  eidit  caadka  in  the 
room,  I  will  swear  he  was  a  nlse  man. 

That  one  candle  was  put  out,  and  it  was  all 
daih  then  ?*-As  soon  as  e? er  the  pistol  fired  it 
was  all  in  a  stale  of  daikaess. 

Very  good.  I  want  to  know  which  of  the 
officers  made  a  speech  oa  ooming  into  the  room  ^ 
— ^Ijfot  knowing  the  offioem  by  naoM,  I  canaol 
say. 

ShonU  you  know  the  gentleman  again  if  yon 
•aw  him  I — ^I  do  not  know  that  I  should. 

But  it  was  one  of  the  first  men  that  oame  in^ 
«-Yes. 

He  need  those  words  ?— Yes. 

And  to  Umse  words  yon  are  quite  poeiliTe  P 
•-To  the  best  of  my  reeoUectiott  those  were 
the  words. 

I  do  not  want  h>  trap  yon  in  one  word,  or 
the  tons  of  a  word^  hot  that  one  of  the  officers 
w.ho  came  in  said,  ^  Here  is  a  pret^  nest  of 
yon  f— To  the  best  of  my  reoouection  those 
were  the  words. 

Or»  **  here  is  a  fine  nest  of  you,''  or  something 
of  that  kindy  **  pretty"  or  ''  fine,"  oar  whate?er 
it  might  be?— Yes. 

You  are  ooite  sue  a  phrase  of  that  kind  was 
used?— Yes. 

You  are  quite  sure  that  this  same  officer 
eatdy  **  GentlesMn,  we  have  got  a  warrant  lo 
appnhend  you  all?"— Yes,  that  was  the  ex- 
pression. 

And  that  you  swear  to  ? — ^I  will  be  answer- 
able for  an  expression  of  that  kind. 

^  ClenUemen,  I  have  a  warrant  to  take  you 
all,  or  u>  commit  you  all/'  or  something  of  that 
kind  ?— Yes. 

That  you  swear  ? — ^Yes. 

And  added  **  as  such  you  will  go  peaceably^ 
we  hope  ?" — Yes. 

Those  were  the  woids  that  were  used  by  ttie 
officer  ? — ^Yes. 

If  any  man  has  said  that  th«nr  only  said  ^  We 
are  officers,  seiie  their  arms,"  that  man  must 
be  a  fidse  man,  must  not  he  ?— If  such  a  word 
as  that  passed,  I  cannot  chaige  my  memory 
with  it. 

If  any  ooe  has  said  Aat  passed,  and  that 
only,  he  asust  be  a  fiJae  man  ?— Do  yon  su|^ 
poee  it  is  possible  fiir  meto  stand  here  and  sav 
I  will  be  answerable  lor  ereiy  weed  that  passed, 
or  even  every  transaction  f 

No,  certaioljf';  that  is  not  my  qneslion ;  but 
you  are  eertam  that  those  wonis  yon  have 
spoken  to  did  pi^  ?— Yes. 

Mr.  Bdvards  was  the  aya^de^mnp  lo  this 
business  ?-*I  ahmya  found  Mr.  EdmA  snem- 
ud  lo  be  vmy  deep  iu  it,'aMl  vary  amdh  in  ceu- 
venation  with  Uu  BonAaad  llallnrood. 


And  you  fate  Urn  the  ItHe  of 
just  now? — [  gmre  him  the  title  pemaps^ 
that  was  not  the  word  thai  passed  at  the  tiaae. 

No,  so  I  understood,  that  that  was  a  tana 
you  yourself  applied  to  him.  Yon  used  tlM 
expression.  You  went  home  after  this  aiaix^ 
as  quietly,  as  unabashed,  as  if  aotlung  was  tlie 
matter?— To  outward  appaamnee. 

You  did  not  tell  us  hsit  tisM  of  the  piafeol 
being  fired  f — I  did  not  think  of  it  at  the  timMi 
nor  when  I  was  taken  did  I  think  of  it  thai  it 
was  fired  at  ase,  but  in  the  coat  I  had  ol^ 
was  a  hole  where  the  ball  went. 

But  you  did  not  think  of  that  when  voo 

teken  into  custody,  nor  on  Monday  7— Thurc 
were  several  thiop  that  I  have  noc  stated  to* 
day ;  when  I  eome  up  acain  I  will  state  theua 
if  they  ooonr  to.  me,  and  if  they  eoncem  the 

Siisoner.  There  are  things  I  have  stated  to* 
ay  that  did  not  exactly  concern  the  prisoour 
on  trial :  those  are  the  very  grounds  on  whacb 
I  omitted  stating  some  things.  I  do  not  wmnt 
to  fix  the  guilt  <M  another  man  on  the  piisoiicv 
on  trial. 

Certainly  not,  therefore  I  suppose  he  was  th* 
man  that  fired  the  pistol  at  yon  ? — ^I  do  not  kncrw. 

You  have  mentioned  it  to^ay,  and  not  om 
the  fintaer  day :  vou  are  cautions  of  fixing  uny 
one,  1  see.  Is  that  the  great  coat  you  httd  om 
at  the  tiaie  f — ^No,  it  is  in  the  room  I  sleep  ao. 

Has  that  ever  been  piodnoed  to  shov  tW 
shot-hole  ?— No,  I  did  not  find  it  out  myaeir  at 
first,  but  Maidment,  the  officer. 

Do  you  know  a  peison  of  the  naase  of  Cham- 
bers ? — ^No,  not  that  I  recoUeet. 

Tboams  Chamben.  Did  you  ever  call  on 
such  a  man,  in  company  with  Bdwards,  am 
Heathcock-oourt  ? — ^No,  never  in  my  hie. 

That  you  swear  ?^Yes,  that  I  swear:  nor  dQ 
I  know  where  it  is. 

Yon  never  caUed  on  any  person  of  tfaal 
name,  nor  do  not  know  that  person  ? — tio. 

Did  vou  call  on  any  person  in  company  with 
Edwards,  about  three  or  fimr  days  before  ttiiu 
afiair  in  Cato-street  took  place?— Ed warda  w<emt 
akmg  with  me  in  order  to  buy  a  pair  of  boots 
that  a  woman  had  to  sell ;  that  was  th«  only 
time  of  my  beins  in  his  company  pdratdyy 
that  was  on  the  Monday. 

Where  did  yon  meet?— He  caUed  on  ne  nt 
my  lodgings* 

Did  you  call  on  any  body  7— No,  we  caUcd 
in  at  a  wine*vaults  at  the  comer  of  Newport^ 
market,  and  he  treated  me  with  a  ssBeU  ^nan 
of  rum. 

Did  vou  ever  call  on  any  penon  along  witli 
Edwaads  to  solicit  him  lo  jinin  a  party  to  kill 
his  mnesty's  ministenf  ^Never  in  my  life. 

And  say  that  you  would  have  blood  and 
wine  for  your  supper  ?— Never :  if  any  pecsom 
comes  to  swear  that,  they  will  paoure  thusn* 
selves. 

Whether  they  are  oopvurted  to  Chriatianilsr 
or  not  r— Yes. 

Did  you  eall  on  mA  a  penon  *wicn!^l 
never  ^kllod  OB  aaty  ^^ 

Edwaids. 


looftT 


Jbr  Higk  IVmwor. 


A.O.  laaOL 


ctoos 


Do  yon  know  a  peiton  of  tlit  nuno  of  Stephen 
Whatman  1—1  do  not. 

I  am  going  back  three  yean :  did  yon  know 
such  a  person  at  that  period  ? — I  do  not  know 
that  ever  I  did  in  my  life. 

Three  years  ago,  that  would  he  1817  ?— -I 
waa  then  in  Ffaoce. 

How  long  have  yon  been  letnrtied  fton. 
thence? — ^Two  years  the  lOtb  of  next  month 
to  London. 

Had  youy  at  any  time,  a  conversation  with  a 
man  living  in  Ringsland-road  about  the  Tower, 
and  using  Cashman  as  a  watch-woid  ?•=—!  had 
nothing  to  do  with  Cashman's  concerp. 

JDid  you  ever  tell  any  person  to  speak  about 
the  Tower,  and  to  use  Uashnan  as  a  watch- 
weid  ? — Never  in  my  life. 

After  this  a/Fair  was  over  in  Cato-street,  did 

Jou  take  any  ammnnitioa  back  any  where  ? — 
To,  after  I  left  the  room ;  I  will  tell  you  the 
last  time  I  had  any  ammunition  in  my  hand. 
I  am  going  tp  state  a  thing  I  have  not  told  be- 
fore. Hall  was  the  man  that  brought  me  a 
pistol,  and  brought  me  five  rounds  of  ball-car- 
tridges. I  loaded  thd  pistol,  and  laid  it  on  the 
end  of  the  bench  next  to  me,  and  there  lay  the 

fistol  when  the  officers  camci  into  the  room, 
have  never  handled  a  pistol  since ;  and  the 
fan  rounds  of  ball-caTtndges  I  had  left,  after 
I  loaded  the  pistol,  I  throwed  them  away  in  the 
room  as  I  came  out. 

•  Had  you  to  carry  the  large  grenade?— I 
never  had  it  in  my  hand.    I  saw  it. 

Did  you  carry  it  back  to  TIdd's  the  day 
srfier  ?— If  you  will  believe  me  what  I  am  about 
to  say,  here  is  the  fact.  I  went  home  on  the 
Wednesday  night.  I  got  home  about  nine 
o'clock ;  never  did  I  lay  my  hand  on  the  latch 
of  the  dioor  to  go  out  of  it  till  I  was  taken  by 
the  officers. 

Did  you  ever  earry  that  hand-grenade  anj 
where  ? — ^I  never  took  it  up,  nor  saw  it  any 
where  but  at  Brant's.  I  can  tell  you  as  far  as 
this ;  I  believe  I  carried  some  pikes  from  that 
loom  of  Brunt's  up  to  Tidd's,  this  thing  has 
never  come  out  yet;  there  are  a  number  of 
things  I  ha^^  not  stated  yet. 

You  never  carried  the  hand-grenade  at  all  t 
•>— Ko ;  if  you  wish  to  know  the  principal  part 
of  them,  I  can  tell  you. 

I  d&  not  wish  to  know.  Mn  Edwards^  I 
thi0k,-wa8  the  enaineer  ?  he  made  the  fuses  1— 
He  was  making  {he  tpuch-papet  fbr.theiuses 
that  were  put  in ;  he  was  drying  them  by  the 
five ;  my  time  was  too  short  in  the  room  at  that 
time  to  see  more. 

You  have  not  told  us  what  Edwards  said  at 
any  of  those ;  meetings ;  one  said  one  thing, 
smd  one  anodier  ^  wthat  did  Edwards  aayT— I 
cannot  pretend  to  charge  my  memory  that  Mr. 
Sdararda  wts  a  man  that  1  ever  can  -chaige  my 
memory  with  a  score  of  words  that  the  man 
mtd ;  he  had  v«ry  little  to  say,  and  what  he 
IhrI  to  sa^  to  Mr.  Thiatlewood  and  Mr.  Bront, 
and  Harrison,  it  was  always  in  a  side-winded 
kind  of  wuf  whispered  to  them. 

You  never. heard  from  Edwaida  aape^ 
have  been  in  confinement  I^-Never. 


Y6u  foigot  to  tell  ua  the  story  abont  the 
one-pound  note  to  treat  the  mett|  you  told  ,na 
on  Monday  ? — ^I  had  nothing  to  do  with  thai 
to-day ;  it  does  not  belong  to  this  man's  crime; 
I  suppose  I  shall  not  &Lve  to  state  all  dier 
things  every  time ;  if  I  thought  I  should  I 
would  prepare  myself. 

You  told  us  about  six  shillings,  and  one 
shillings  and  seven-|>enoe ;  that  waa  all  the 
mon^  you  ever  saw:  by  whom  were  they* 
given } — The  six  shillings  was  given  by  Thia- 
tlewood  to  Brunt. 

What  was  the  one  shilling  done  with  !•— I 
have  not  stated  that  to  my  knowledge. 

The  paper  that  Edwards  mentioned  th» 
dinner  in  was  the  New  Times,  was  not  it  F-— ^ 
Yes  it  was. 

That  was  the  paper  that  was  brought  and 
contained  the  article  ? — ^Yes,  I  dare  say  you 
will  find  it  in  the  New  llmea  <tf  Februaiy  the. 
22ttd. 

I  see  the  last  question  pat  you  on  croes-' 
examination'  was,  whether  you  knew  who  put 
the  candle  out,  and  you  said  you  did  not  P— I 
do  not. 

There  was  but  one  candle? — ^There  was  but 
one  candle;  and  that  candle^  ae  soon  at  ever 
the  pistol  was  fired,  went  bat ;  and,  as  I  said, 
whether  the  candle  was  put  out  mtentionallyy 
or  the  report  of  the  pistol  put  it  co^  I  cannot 
tell. 

EUaaor  Walker  swotn^ — Examined  by 

Mr.  Ginuy. 

« 

I  believe  you  are  the'  niece  and  the  servant 
of  Mrs.  Rogers,  No.  4,  Fox-court,  Gny^s^nn- 
lane  ? — ^Yes.  , 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner  Brunt?-— Vea. 

Did  he  lodge  at  your  master's  house? — Yes. 

Had  he  lodged  there  many  months  beCbre 
last  January  ?-tHq  had  lodged  there  alboat  #, 
twelvemonm  as  nearly  as  I  can  recollect. 

Wh^  rooms  did  he  occupy  ?— -Two  -front 
rooms. 

On  the  two  pair  of  stairs  floor  ?— Yes* 

In  the  month  of  January  last  do  you  rememrr 
her  his  introducing  to  you  any  other  person  to 
take  a  lodging? — ^Yes. 

Who  was  that?—He  did  i^ot  tell  nt  the. 
name* 

Did  you  afterwards  find  what  the  nana  was  f ; 
•^-^0^  t  ^d  not  knomf  it  tHl  I  saw  his  naaM  in 
the  paper ;  then  I  found  it  to  be  lugs.  .  ■/ 

WsB  that  the  mim  at  the.batr— I  ctoaot 

•ay.  / 

Do  yod  beHAve  that  to  be  Ihe  man?— He 
appears  to  be  eometfaing  tike  him,.hnt  I  cann«r 
swear  to  him. 

Did  Brunt  tell  you  ift  tie  pies^naawhat  be 
was  ? — No,  he  did  not.  i 

Did  he  tell  yon  aAwt  liet  was  ?--l7o,  neither 
of  them. 

What  aras  the  lent  a£  the  room  F-^Thiea. 
shillings  a^^week. 

Unfundshcd  ^^Yea• 

Do  yooa  jv^memiber  Ibr  how  many  wieek#.W 
had  toe  room  ?W!l  noAth  or  five  jreeltf.  .  u.j. 


•  « 


UMTl        1  GEORGE  IV. 

'  Wlieahe  took  it^  did  lio-n3r  aoy  tiling  about 
ftmitttre  ?•— He  said  he  perbaf^s- migbl  bnagin* 
his  (coods  in  about  a  week  or  better. 

Was  this  tho  two-pair  of  stairs  back  room  T — 
Yes. 

'Eleanor  Walker  cross-examined  by 
Mt.Cvnoood. 

'  What  part  of  the  house*  did  you  live  io  ? — 
The  lower  part. 

Was  that  far  from  the  staircase? — ^It  was 
near  the  staircase,  but  the  door  was  always 
shut. 

Could  ten  or  twelve  men  meet  once  or  twice 
a  day  witliout  your  knowing  it  ? — I  did  not 
know  it. 

Was  it  likely  ten  or  twelve  men  could  go  up 
once  or  twice  a  day  without  voor  hearing  it  ? — 
I  miffht  hear  it ;  I  have  heard  persons  come  up 
and  down  stairs,  but  I  did  not  see  them. 

As  many  as  ten  or  twelve  at  a  time  ?-t-No, 
I  never  heard  that. 

Ten  or  twelve  in  the  morning? — ^There might 
have  been,  but  I  did  not  hear  them. 

Eleww  Walker  re-eiamined  by  Mr.  Gtmey* 

Is  there  a  door  by  which  the  lodgers  go  up 
without  going  through  your  shop? — Yes. 

Is  that  a  trout  door  into  the  court  f — ^The 
'  shop  door  .is  in  the  court,  and  the  private  door 
in  a  passage. 

And  that  leads  to  the  staircase? — ^Yes. 

Is  there  any  back  door  besides? — ^There  is 
only  one  back  doorJ 

Is  there  a  back  door  ?— Yes. 
'  Bo  you  call  the  door  at  which  the  lodgers 
come  in,  the  back  door  f— Yes. 

That  is  a  door  coming  out  of  a  passage  on 
to  the  stairs? — ^Yes. 

And  they  came  in  at  that  door  without  com- 
ing'into  your  shop  at  all?— Yes. 

Mofy  Rogert  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey. 

Eleanor  Walker  isyonr  niece -and  servant 
we  understand  ?— Yes,  she  is. 

Yoo  remember  the  circumstance  pf  her  let-' 
ting  your  two  pair  of  stairs  back  room  in 
January  last  P«-I  do. 

How  many  weeks  did  this  person  occupy 
it  ?— Four  or  five. 

How  many  did  he  pay  for  ? — Four,  and  there  - 
was  one  left  unpaid. 

Waicthe  lodging  kept  till  Brant  was  taken 
up? — ^Yes. 

"  During  the  four  or  five  vreeks  did  you  ask 
.'  Brunt  any  question  as  to.  who  the  lodger  was  f 
— I  did. 

^  Did  he-.tell^ou  of  what  business  he  was  ?— 
He  told  me  he  was  a  butcher  joai  of  employ. 
'  Did  he  tell  you  what  heLknew  of  him  ?-^He 
said  he  knew  nothing  of  him,  only  seeing  him 
-At the  publio*hoii8e,  aod.heaiing  him  inquire 
for  a  lodging. 
Po  you  remember  one  evening. when  you 
'  'W«re.puttiQg;your  chUdnsn  to  bed.  steing  any 
wenttpott-thettaircwef—Ido.  . 


TruUafJimm  lagi 


[MM 


'  How  ma»y  men  did  joo  see?— Three. 

Were  they  going  up  stain  or  going  down  ?«— 
Groing  np  stairs. 

AVaa  tbere  any  thing  remaikable  in  the  per« 
son  of  either  of  the  three  ? — ^The  middle  matt 
was  a  bhck  maD« 

I  do  not  know  whether  you  took,  snfficiant 
notice  of  him  to  identify  him  ? — No. 

Joeqfh  Bale  sston. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gtmuy. 

Are  you  wprentice  to  Brunt  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  live  with  him  at  his  lodging  ur 
Fox-court? — ^Yes. 

We  understand  he  had  the  two  front  rooms, 
two  pair  of  stairs? — ^Yes* 

One  to  live  in  and  the  other  to  work  in?*- 
Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner,  Ings?^Yes. 

Do  you  remember  his  taking  any  room. ia 
that  house  as  a  lodging  ? — ^Yes. 

What  room  was  that  ?— A  two-pair  of  stakn 
back  room. 

Had  you  seen  him  in  company- with  Braat 
before  the  day  on  which  he  took  that  lodging  ^ 
— Yes. 

Where  had  you  seen  him?— >-In  Bnmi!s 
workshop. 

How  long  before  he  took  the  room  ? — ^Abo«t 
a  fortnight ;  the  first  time  I  saw  him  in  Binai'a 
room. 

H[ad  you  seen  him  more  than  once  befwe 
he  took  the  room  ?— I  .b^eve  I  had. 

At  the  time  the  room  was  taken,  did  Ings 
look  at  the  nam  alone,  or  did  any  person  look 
at  it  with  him  I — Brunt  looked  at  it  with.  him. 

Did  you  hear  either  of  them  say  any  tbi^g 
while  they  were  looking  at  the  room  ?^Wheft 
they  came  out  of  it,  I  heard  Brunt  say  to  Ings, 
^  It  will  do,  go  and  give  them  a  shilling." 

Do  you  remember  what  day  of  the  week  that 
^•■s?— On  the  Monday. 

That  evening  did  Ings  come  there  I — ^Yes. 

Did  any  person  come  with  him  ? — Yes.  - 

Who  was  that? — ^A  man<  of  the  name  of 
HalU  a  tailor. 

How  did  Ings  .get  into  the  room? — He 
came  and  asked  Mrs.  Brunt  for  the  key. 

Did. she  give  him  the  keyf — ^I  believe  she 
did. 

Did  he  and  Hall  .go  into  the  room  ?— Yes. 

Did  you  hear  any  other  persons  oome  into 
the  room  -  that  evening  ?— Y^   there .  were 
.  others. 

From  that  t^me,  until  your  master  was  taken 
up,  did  persons  use  to  come  to  that  room  ?•— 
Yes. 

.  At  what  part  of  the  day  had  you  an  oppor-  ~ 
tonit^  of  observing  that  they,  came?— ^In  the 
evening. 

Had  yott  done  .work  genaialhrat  di&ttime? 
—No. 

Can  you  give  me  the  names  of  the  pecsosa 
who-,  used  to  oome  to  those  meetings  in  tk^ 
evening  F*-Ye8;   Thistlewood,  Ings»  DttiiU 
son,  Bradbum,  Tidd,  Edwards,  Adams. 
;.  Dq  yoU  remember  HaU?'p-Yes. 


MKO] 


^r  H^  'ff^aton. 


A.  D.  1820. 


ElOlO 


Did  bi  com  ?-*-¥«■• 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  nam^  of  PoUer  ? 
—Yoi. 

Did  ko  uto  to  oonot>-«*Yes. 

Do  70a  know  Strange  ?"-^Yea« 

Did  be  use  to  ooae  ? — ^Yee. 

Waf  them  any  {unkaie  in  the  room  ?•— No. 

How  did  they  manage  fer  iUrnitiiif  when 
Ih^oame  to  thoee  meetin^i?— 'They  need  to 
bont>w  Brant's  ebain  to  fit  o»» 

Did  your  matter  go  in  in  the  Of^ninge  too 
when  they  were  there?-— Yeiu 

Did  you  see  theee  penoni>  or  any  of  them> 
in  yomr  maater^a  room,  besidef  eeeing  them  in 
this  room  ? — ^Yes* 

Did  they  eail  eaoh  other  by  their  names?— 
Sometimeik 

^'  wihal  name  did  tbjnr  genemUy  call 
Thistlewoodf— ^ometimei  2;  and  sometimes 
ArOmr. 

Do  yon  remember^  any  day,  seeing  the  door 
open,  and  observing  any  thing  in  the  room  l-— 

What  did  yon  see  in  the  loomt — ^I  saw 
eome  long  poles  like  the  branebes  of  trees. 

Hare  you  at  any  times  heard  any  work  going 
on  in  tile  room  T — Yea. 

What  kind  of  work  ? — I  have  heard  them 
hammering  and  sawing. 

Yonr  master  was  taken  up,  I  btdiore,  on 
Thursday  the  24th  of  February  f — >Yes«  he  was. 

On  tl^  Sunday  morning  before  that,  was 
there  any  meeting  in  that  room  ?--*Yes. 

Wwe  the  persons  whom  you  have  now  named 
to  me  present  at  that  meeting  ?-»Yes. 

Were  there  any  others  there  beeides  those  ?— 
Yes. 

Was  thai  a  large  or  a  Bmall  meeting  to  the 
beat  of  yourreooUeetionf^A  laiger  meeting 
than  what  there  usually  vraa. 

Did  they  go  away  all  together  or  one  or  two 
at  a  time  r---<)ne  or  two  at  a  time. 

Was  your  muter  in  the  room  with  them  ?-^ 
Yes  he  was. 

After  the  meeting  was  over,  did  you  see  any 
body  in  your  master's  room  in  company  with 
your  master?^- Yes ;  Strange. 

Had  he  been  at  the  roeetfng?-^Yes,  he  had. 

On  Monday  evening  was  there  a  meeting? 
— ^Yes.  , 

On  Tuesday  evening  was  there  another  ?-— 
Yes. 

In  the  course  of  Wednesday  did  any  number 
of  persons  oome } — There  were  several  persons 
came  op  at  difTerent  times. 

At  the  different  tiroes,  bow  many  persons 
fan  you  speek  to  having  seen  or  heard  oome 
up?-^I  cannot  say  how  miany ;  there  were  se- 
veral, but  I  cannot  say  how  many^ 

At  what  time  in  th0  dey  did  they  come  ? — 
Some  in  the  morning  and  some  in  the  afternoon. 

Do  you  remember  any  of  them  coming  into 
your  workshop  P«-Yes. 

¥rho  were  they  ?--^trange,  and  a  man  that 
.  I  do  not  know. 

At  about  what  time  of  the  da^  was  that  ?*— 
Al  etomi  two  o'clock* 

VOL  xxxm. 


What  did  Strange  and  thii  other  man  do  ?.- 
They  were  fiintine  some  pistols. 

How  many  f— 'rive  or  six. 

Did  they  finish  flinting  them  ?— No. 

What  prevented  their  finishing  themi — One 
of  the  men  said  there  were  persona  overlooking 
them,  and  Brunt  told  them  to  go  into  the  back 
room. 

Peraons  overlookinff  them  ftom  what  ph^e  ? 
—From  the  opposite  nouses. 

Frote  the  windows  of  the  opposite  bouses  f 
— ^Yes. 

Did  they  then  go  into  the  back  room? — 
Yes,  they  did. 

Was  Brunt  in  the  bade  room  much  of  that 
day  ?— Yes,  he  waa  in  several  times. 

Did  you  see  Thistlewood  there .' — Yes. 

At  about  what  time  ?-^About  four  o'clock. 

Did  he  ask  you  for  any  thing? — Yes. 

For  what  ? — For  a  piece  of  writing  paper. 

Did  you  give  him  scmieP— -Yes. 

To  what  place  did  he  take  it?^Into  the 
back  room. 

After  that  did  any  person  oome  out  of  the 
back  room  and  tell  you  to  do  any  thingf — 
Yes. 

Who  was  that  ?— Brant. 

What  did  Brant  tell  you  to  do  ?-^To  go  and 
get  some  cartridge  paper. 

How  much  ?— ^s  sneets. 

What  money  did  he  give  you  to  pay  for  it? 
-^Six  pence. 

Did  you  go  and  buy  six  sheets  }'^Ytm, 

To  whom  did  you  give  them  ?**^o  Bnmt. 

To  whom  did  he  tske  them  ?-*-Into  the  back 
room. 

After  this  did  any  of  them  go  away  ?i-Ye8. 

Did  any  of  them  go  into  your  master's  room 
before  they  went  away  that  you  remember  f — 
Yes. 

Who  was  that  ?— I  do  not  know  the  man's 
name. 

Did  your  master  go  away  ?-**Yes. 

About  what  timer—  At  about  six  o'clodc. 

After  Brant  your  master  was  gone,  did  you 
do  any  thing  respecting  your  mistresses  tea ?-f^ 
Yes. 

What  did  she  want  for  the  purpose  of  mak- 
ing tea  ? — She  wanted  the  table. 

where  was  that  table  ?*-In  the  back  room. 

Did  you,  at  her  desire,  knock  at  the  back 
room  door  and  ask  for  it  ?— •Yes. 

Who  answered  you  ? — A  man  by  the  name 
of  Potter. 

Did  he  give  you  out  the  table } — Yes. 

Upon  the  opening  of  the  door  did  you  see 
whether  there  were  other  men  in  the  room  be* 
sides  Potter? — Yes, 

How  many  P — ^foor  dr  fL'^e^  I  cannot  be  cer- 
tain which. 

Was  there  a  fire  there  P-^Yes. 

In  the  course  of  that  evening,  did  you  see 
the  prisoner  Tidd  ?**Yes. 

where  did  you  see  him  ?— He  came  to  Mrs. 
Brant's  room. 

Upon  his  coming  there,  what  passed  be- 
tween him  and  Mrs.  Brant  ?— She  took  him  to 

3T 


I01I3        I  OEOflGE-  IV. 

the  cupboard  and  showed  him  a  ptka  head  and 

a  swora. 

What  did  she  say  ? — She  asked  him  what 
she  could  do  with  them. 

What  did  he  say  P — He  told  her  to  give  them 
to  him,  and  he  would  take  them  away* 

Did  he  take  them  away  ?^4ie  did. 

I  do  not  know  whether  you  ha?e  told  me 
about  what  time  that  wasr-i-Between  seven 
and  eight. 

Did  you  see  where  he  went  to  f — ^He  went 
into  the  back  room. 

After  that,  did  you  hear  any  persons  go  down 
stairs  ?— Yes. 

Did  any  .person  come  into  yonr  mistress's 
room  and  deliver  any  message  to  her  ?— Yes. 

What  message? — A  person  came  and  said 
if  any  persons  came  and  inquired  they  were 
to  be  sent  to  the  White  Hart. 

Shortly  after,  did  any  persons  come  ? — ^Yes. 

How  many  ? — ^Three. 

Did  your  mistress  direct  them  to  the  White 
Hart? — ^They  did  not  know  the  way  to  the 
White  Hart)  and  I  went  and  showed  them  the 
way.  When  you  came  back  from  the  White 
Hart,  did  you  find  Potter  there? — He  came 
while  I  stood  at  the  door. 

Did  you  tell  him  the  same  ?*-Yes,  I  did. 

Did  he  go,  on  your  telling  him  ?— or  did 
you  show  him  the  way? — ^He  went,  on  my 
telling  him. 

He  did  not  require  you  to  assist. him  in 
finding  it  ? — ^No. 

At  about  what  time  did  your  master  come 
home  f — About  nine  o'clock. 

Was  there  any  difference  in  the  condition 
of  his  dress  from  what  it  had  been  when  he 
went  out  P — Yes. 

What  was  the  difference  P— His  boots  were 
▼erv  muddy  and  the  tail  of  his  coat. 

"bid  he  apnear  composed,  or  otherwise  P — 
Noy  he  seemed  rather  confused. 

Did  you  hear  him  say  any  Uiing  to  his  wife 
about  what  had  happened  ?~Ye8. 

What  did  he  say  ?— He  told  his  wife.it  was 
all  up,  or  words  to  that  effect. 

Wbat  more  did  be  say  P — He  said  that  where 
he  had  been  there  were  a  lot  of  officers  came 
in. 

What  more  did  he  say?— Just  as  he  was 
sayine  that,  a  man  came  in. 

Did  be  say  any  thing  about  his  lifSe  ?— He 
said  he  had  saved  his  life  and  that  was  all. 

Do  you  know  the  name  of  that  person  who 
came  in  ? — No,  I  do  not. 

What  passed  between  them?— He  shook 
hands  with  him,  and  asked  him  if  he  knew  who 
had  informed. 

What  answer,  did  the  man  give?— He  said 
no. 

Did  the  man  say  whether  any  thing  had 
happened  to  himself? — ^Yes. 

^  What  did  he  say  7 — He  said  he  had  had  a  ter- 
rible blow  on  the  side,  and  was  knocked  down. 

Did  you  judge  from  the  maoer  in  which  they 
spoke- to  each  other  where  they  had  been  to- 
gether?—Yes. 


Trki  of  James  Ings 


(101^ 


After  that  did  Brunt  say  «ny  thing  t— -Ho 

went  away. 

As  he  was  going  away,  do  you  remember 
what  Brunt  said? — He  said  there  was  some- 
thing to  be  done  yet. 

And  they  went  away  together  ? — Yes. 

When  they  were  gone,  did  your  mtstres 
and' you  go  into  the  wxk  room  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  you  find  there  ? — ^Tbere  were 
several  things  in  the  cupboard. 

Was  there  any  thing  that  was  not  in  the 
cupboard  ? — Yes,  there  was  a  long  pole  thai 
stood  in  the  comer  of  the  room. 

What  was  there  in  the  cupboard? — Several 
rolls  of  brown  paper  and  tar. 

Any  other  things? — ^Yes,  some  nmnd'  baDs 
made  with  string  and  tar  all  over  then. 

What  do  you  underatand  them  to  be? — ^I 
have  heard  since  that  they  are  hand-greoades. 

They  are  tied  over  with  rope-vam  r-^Yes.  - 

Were  they  the  things  ^icn  the  officers 
found  the  next  morning  ? — Yes. 

Mr.  Qwmty. — ^You- will  see  them  hereafter, 
gentlemen.  Was  there  any  Iron  pot  in  the 
room? — ^Yes. 

To  whom  did  that  Iron  pot  belong? — Ta 
Brunt. 

Any  flannel  bagsP — ^Yes. 

FttU  or  empty  P-^There  were  two  of  ^em 
full  of  something. 

Were  the  things  left  there  ?— Yes. 

Did  your  master  come  home  again  ? — Tea. 

At  about  what  time? — About  eleven  o*clock. 

Did  he  give  you  any  directions  what  to  do 
in  the  morning?-- Yes. 

What  were  they? — He  told  me  to  gel  ap  as 
soon  as  I  could,  and  clean  his  boots. 

In  the  morning  did  you  do  so  P — ^Yes. 

After  you  had  done  tbat,  did  your  master 
ask  you  any  question  ?— Yes. 

What?— He  asked  me  if  I  knew  the 
Borough.  I  told  him  yes.  He  asked  me  if  I 
knew  SnowVfields.    I  told  him  no. 

Did  he  then  give  you  any  directions  hovr  to 
find  Soow's-fields  ?— Yes. 

Did  he  tell  yon  to  whom  he  wanted  yon  to 

?[>  there  P — ^Yes,  he  told  me  I  was  to  90  to 
otter,  Kirby-street,  Snow*s-fields. 

After  that|»  did  he  take  you  into  the  back 
room  ? — Yes. 

Did  he  desire  you  to  bring  any  thing  there  ? 
— Yes,  a  rush  basket. 

Was  there  any  other  besides  theone  you  took? 
— Yes, 

Who  took  that  ?— Brunt. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  to  do  vrith  respect  to 
those  baskets  T — Yes,  to  put  those  things  into 
the  baskets. 

The  things  you  had  seen  the  night  before  f 
— ^Yes. 

Did  vou  put  the  things  which  yon  had 
the  night  before  into  the  two  baskets  P — ^ 

Was  any  thing  then  done  with  respect  toeitber 
of  the  baskets  P — ^Yes,  one  of  them  was  tied  up 
in  a  blue  apron  of  Mrs;  Brunt's. 

To  wbat  use  had  that  blue  apron  beea  bcfere 


1013] 


Jar  Hi[{A  ZVeoMm. 


A.  D.  1890. 


L1014 


applied  ? — ^It  had  been^uwd  as  a  eurtain  to  the 
window  of  the  back  room. 
•  Was  the  other  tied  up  ?— No- 

How  happened  that?-*Brttnt  went  into  hit 
own  room  to  look  for  something  to  tie  it  up  in, 
and  two  officers  came  in. 

TWo  police  officers  ? — Yes. 

And  they  apprehended  him  ?•— Yes. 
.  I  am  not  sure  whether  I  asked  yon  as  to  the 
number  who  met  there  on  the  Sunday:  can 
you  speak  to  the  number  P — There  were  about 
twenty,  I  think. 

5iMfh  Hale  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  CunoootL 

I  think  yoti  told  us  on  Monday  or  Tuesday, 
that  when  yon  found  the  brown  paper,  you  found 
some  pieces  of  cartridge-paper  along  with  it  ? 
-—One  piece  of  cartridge  paper. 

IVere  not  you  surprised  at  those  meetings  ? 
—Not  particularly. 

Of  course,  perhaps  you  knew  what  they 
were  about? — ^No. 

Were  not  you  surprised  when  you  found 
meetings,  and  their  haying  arms  together 
there  f — I  never  saw  any  arms  except  in 
Brunt's  room. 

You  saw  them  putting  some  flints  into  pis- 
tols there  ?— Yes. 

Had  not  you  any  knowledge  what  that  was 
for?— No. 

You  knew  nothing  about  it  ? — ^No. 

Were  you  ever  in  a  court  of  justice  before  ? 
—No. 

Were  you  ever  before  a  magistrate  T^Nerer 
till  I  was  examined  about  this  business. 

Never  about  any  business  of  your  own  ?— ' 
No,  never. 

2%osMi  Snmrt  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  LUtledale. 

I  believe  you  are  one  of  the  ^watchmen  of 
die  night  in  the  parish  of  St.  George,  Han- 
orer-square  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  remember,  on  the  night, of  Tuesday 
the  22nd  February  last,  being  on  watch? — 
Yes,  perfectly  well. 

Were  yon  on  watch  in  Grosvenoi^uare  f — 
Yes. 

Did  you  see  any  people  there  that  attracted 
your  atteotion  ?-^i  saw  four  pec^le,  rery  sus- 
picious characters.  f 

At  what  time  ?— About  half-past. eight,  or  a 
quarter  befota  nine. 

Was  one  of  those  people  a  man  of  colour  P — 
One  man  was  a  man  of  colour,  and  there  was 
ft  tall  man  along  with  him. 

You  say  they  were  suspicious  looking  peo- 
ple, what  were  they  apparently  doing  ? — Peep- 
ing down  the  areas,  and  watching  as  if  they 
were  about  no  good. 

What  time  did  you  leave  your  watch? — 
Seven  o'clodc  in  the  morning. 

Was  Bissixa  watchman  at  the  time  with 
you  T— Yes,  he  and  I  met  every  half-hour  s^t 
the  end  of  our  round,  and  I  told  him  there 
were  fourauspicioua  charfKrters,  and  to  keep  a 
loo)BOQtaft«ithem. 


CharUt  Bmix  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  UUkdalt. 

Are  you  one  of  the  watchmen  of  St,  George, 
Hanover- square  ? — ^Yes,  in  Grosirenop^quare. 

Do  you  remember  seeing  any  bodV  that 
attracted  your  attention  on  the  22nd  of  Feb- 
ruary P — On  the  22nd,  as  I  was  calling  ^  half- 
past  eight,''  being  then  at  the  end  of  my  call, 
and  therefore  about  a  quarter  before  hine,  on 
the  same  side  on  which  lord  Harrowby  lives, 
there  were  two  men  passed  me,  one  a  dark 
man. 

Do  you  mean  a  man  of  colour  ? — Yes,  it 
was  a  uttle  darkish,  within  about  a  quarter  of 
nine,  and  he  asked  ''watchman,  is  it  almost 
nine  o'dock,"  that  is  the  dark  roan,  I  said,  ^  it 
is  not  nine  yet,  but  within  a  few  minutes  of 
it;''  that  was  the  answer  I  made. 

Emry  Oilian  sworn.— Examined  by 
TAr.BoUand. 

Do  you  live  at  No,  15  Mount-street, 
Berkeley-square  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  ever  use  the  Rising  Sun  public- 
house  ?^ — ^Yes. 

Where  is  that? — ^The  corner  of  Charles- 
street,  and  Adams-mews. 

Do  you  recollect  being  there  any  night,  and 
playing  at  dopiinos  ? — ^Yes. 

When  was  that?— On  Tuesday  the  22nd  of 
Februaiy. 

Witb  whom4id  you  play  ? — ^With  Brunt 

What  time  of  the  evening  was  it  when  you 
first  saw  him?— Between  nine  and  ten  o'clock. 

Had  you  been  in  the  public-house .  before 
became? — ^Yes. 

He  came  in  between  nine  and  ten  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  he  alone  or  in  company  ? — ^There  was 
another  man  with  him. 

Had  they  any  refreshment } — Yes. 

What  ?— ^me  bread  and  cheese  and  some 
porter. 

How  long  did  you  play  at  dominoe  ? — ^Abont 
half  an  houc 

Did  you  leave  the  public-house  before  they 
went,  or  did  they  go  first  P— I  left  first. 

What  time  did  y<»i  go  ? — About  ten  o'clock 
I  think  it  might  be. 

Semy  Oilian  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Curwood. 

How  do  you  know  it  was  the  22nd  ? — By 
the  list  I  have  when  I  carry  out  medicines. 

Have  you  that  list  with  you  now  ? — ^No. 

That  is  the  only  recollection  you  have  of  it  ? 
— ^Yes,  it  is. 

John  Hector  Moriton  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.BoUand. 

Are  you  journeyman  to  Mr.  Henry  Thomas 
Underwood  P — ^Yes. 

He  is  a  cutler  ?*-Yes. 

Where  does  he  live  ? — In  Dniiy-lane. 

Were  you  with  him  at  Christmas  last  P — 
Yes. 

Do  you  remember  at  Christmas  last  anv 
person  bringing  you  a  swoid  to  sharpen?— A 


10151       1  GEORGE  IV. 

penon  brought  one  od  Christmts-evie  tQ  be 
ground. 

How  was  he  dressed  ?— -He  was  dressed  like 
a  botcher. 

Should  you  know  the  person  of  the  man  ?— • 
Yes. 

Look  at  the  piisoner,  and  say  whether  he 
was  the  man  ? — ^That  is  the  man. 

Did  he  call  again  for  the  sword  ? — ^He  call- 
ed three  days  afterwards  for  the  sword^  and 
paid  me  nine-pence  for  doing  it. 

Did  he  give  yon  any  pftrticiilar  ditections 
about  the  first  ? — Yes,  to  grind  the  point  par* 
ticularly  sharp,  and  to  make  it  otit  both  back 
and  edge. 

Do  yott  mean  the  point  F — ^Yes. 

Was  that  a  cut  ana  thrust  sword|  or  a  sabre  ? 
->->A  TeiT  short  sabre. 

You  did  according  to  the  directions  t — ^Yes. 

Did  he  brinj^  you  any  other  work? — Yes, 
about  a  fortnight  after  another  sword,  a  very 
long  one,  ^abre ;  he  told  me  to  grind  that 
as  I  had  done  the  first. 

Did  he  give  any  name?— It  is  cuetomary 
for  us  to  ask  the  name,  and  to  the  best  of  my 
recollection  he  said  Eames ;  it  might  be  Ings. 

Edward  Smpton  sworn. — Examined  by 
m.Boliand. 

Are  you  a  oorporaUmiyor  in  the  eeoond  lifo- 
guards  ?-«-*Yee. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Har« 
risoD,  one  of  the  prisoners  ?«-I^know  a  nan  of 
the  name  of  John  Harrison. 

Was  he  formerly  in  your  regiment?—- Yes, 
he  was. 

Do  you  know  whether  Harrison  was  ever  on 
duty  at  Ring-street  barracks  ?— ^Yes,  I  am  cer- 
tain he  was. 

How  long  was  he  there? — ^In  the  regiment? 

No;  at  those  barracks  ?-~I  cannot  say  exactly. 

Was  he  there  tine  enough  to  know  the  state 
of  them,  and  where  the  different  things  were 
kept  in  the  rooms  ? — Yes. 

Would  his  duty  make  him  well  acquainted 
with  them? — ^Yes,  perfectly  acquainted  with 
them. 

Do  they  join  upon  Glotteester'-niews  ?— Part 
of  them  do. 

Are  there  any  windows  looking  to  the  Mews  ? 
—There  were  formerly. 

How  long  have  those  windows  been  slopped 
up? — ^They  were  stopped  up  two  or  three 
days  after  the  aflhir  or  Cato*street. 

Was  there  an^  straw  or  hay  or  other  com- 
bustible matter  in  any  rooms  communicating 
with  those  windows  7«-There  was  straw  in  the 
room  communicating  with  the  window  and 
hay  likewise. 

If  fire  had  been  thrown  into  those  windows 
and  communicated  with  the  straw,  would  tlie 
consequence  have  been  the  destractien  of  the 
barracks  ?— M ost  undoubtedly  it  vntM, 

James  Aldout  sworn. — Examined  by 
I  beKete  you  are  a  pawnhroker  ?^Yel. 


TrM  qfJmim  Tnp 


[*»» 


Whart  do  yeu  cany  oa  your  bu&Mtsl-^Iii 
Berwick-street,  Soho. 

Do  Tou  know  the  prisonar,  Davidsony  Ibe 
man  of  oohiiir^««Yes. 

Did  be,  at  any  time,  pledge  with  vovnbiasa 
barrelled  blunderbuss? — ^Yes,  he  did. 

Did  he  leave  it  with  you,  of  take  it  ovt  of 
pawn  7 — He  redeemed  it. 

When  was  that?— On  the  38id  of  Febniaiy. 

At  what  time  of  the  day  ?— In  the  morning. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  to  yon  at  the  tinae  he 
took  it  out  ? — No,  he  did  not. 

Yon  have'  seen  that  bkmdeibuis  again  ? — ^I 
have. 

Did  you  see  it  in  court  the  other  day  I — 
No,  I  have  not. 

You  have  seen  it  at  Bow-street? — ^No^  I  saw 
it  at  Portman-street  barracks. 

Who  showed  it  you  ? — ^Mr.  Ruthven. 

Thomat  Wdm  sworn.— Biamiaed  by 
He.  Anwy. 

I  believe  you  have  carried  on  the  business 
of  a  cow-keeper  and  dairyman  in  Manchealer* 
mews  ? — ^Yes,  I  have. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Wilson  ! 
—I  do. 

Hie  prisoner? — Yes,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar. 

Had  you  known  him  some  months  before 
last  Febraary  ? — I  had. 

Shortly  before  the  23rd  of  February^  did  he 
make  any  proposition  to  you  ? — He  did  ;  be 
met  me  ana  asked  me  if  I  would  be  one  of 
a  party  who  were  going  to  meet  to  desteoy 
his  majesty's  ministers. 

To  destroy  them  where  ? — ^He  told  me  tbey 
had  got  such  things  as  I  never  saw,  and  thai 
they  had  got  all  ready  and  were  waiting  for  a 
cabinet  dinner. 

Did  he  say  what  those  things  you  had  never 
seen  were  ?--^e  said  that  some  of  them  were 
made  of  tarpaulin,  and  some  of  tin,  bound 
round  with  cord,  and  thtft  their  strength  was 
such,  that  if  it  was  set  fire  to,  it  would  heave 
up  the  walls  in  ftont  of  the  houses  where  we 
were  walking. 

Did  he  say  what  they  were  for?— -He  said  it 
was  to  destroy  his  majesty's  ministers;  that 
they  were  waiting  for  a  cabinet  dinner,  and 
when  there  was  a  eabiael  dinner  they  vroekt 
let  me  know ;  and  he  said  they  were  to  lighl 
np  some  fires. 

Did  he  say  where  ? — He  said  I  had  nocanaa 
to  be  farmed. 

Did  he  mention  anT  names  of  persons? — 
He  mentioned  some  houses,  he  mentioned 
lord  Haifowb/s,  the  duke  of  Wellington^  lord 
Sidmouth's,  lord  Oaatlaroagh's^  tiie  bishop  eff 
Ixmdon'S)  and  one  more  Sat  I  do  not  know ; 
he  told  me  that  I  had  no  ooenston  to  be  afraid^ 
that  there  fins  a  genllemaa's  servmrt  who  had 
furnished  them  with  a  certain  turn  of  money, 
and  if  they  would  net  upon  the  anlgect  be 
would  give  them  a  oonsideiable  snm  uMyie. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  as  to  what  woidd  be 
4lin«ieel  of  Hgb&ig  up  te  fires  ?-*He  said, 
'from  the  lighting  up  of  the  iaea^  il 


10171 


Jiir  H^  IVcMon. 


A.D.  1890c 


[1018 


tke  town  in  t  state  of  confiniov,  and  io  a  few 
days  it  would  become  geDeral. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  was  to  be  the  use  of 
those  things  such  as  you  bad  never  seen  ? — 
He  told  me  they  were  to  be  lighted  with  a 
ftise  and  thrown  into  the  room,  and  all  that 
escaped  the  explosion  were  to  die  by  the  edge 
of  the  sword  or  some  other  weapon. 

Did  he  mention  to  you  the  name  of  any 
person,  or  offef  to  introduce  you  to  any  person  ? 
-^He  told  me,  if  I  would  make  one  of  the 

Srty  which  they  depended  upon  me  for,  that 
r.  ThisUewood  would  be  gtad  to  see  me.  ^ 

Did  YOU  promise  to  make  one?— I  told  him 
I  would  make  one. 

Can  yon  tell  me  bow  many  daye  Ibis  was 
before  the  discovery  in  Cato-street  ? — I  cannot 

Did  you  go,  before  that  discovery  in  Cato- 
street«  and  give  information  to  any  person  ? — 
I  wrote  a  note  to  try  to  see  lord  Harrowbyand 
lord  Castlereasfa. 

To  whom  did  you  address  your  letter?— I 
wrote  to  lord  Castlereagh. 

How  soon  was  that,  do  you  think,  after  you 
had  seen  Wilson  ? — It  might  be  two  or  three 
days. 

Did  you  deliver  your  letter  to  lord  Castle- 
reagh or  not? — ^I  did  not;  I  went,  but  could 
net  see  him. 

Did  you  deliver  it  to  lord  Harrowby? — I 
did. 

Where  did  yon  deliver  it  to  him? — I  de- 
livered it  to  him  in  Hyde-park,  at  Grosvenor- 
gate. 

Do  you  remember  the  day? — ^I  do  not. 

On  the  day  of  the  discoverjr  of  the  persons 
in  Cato-street,  did  yon  see  this  man,  Wilson, 
again  ? — I  did  ;  he  met  me  in  Manchester- 
street,  as  I  was  going  home,  with  a  little  girl 
in  my  hand. 

What  did  Wilson  say  to  you  ? — He  met  me 
and  said,  ^Hiden,  you  are  the  very  man  I 
want  to  see.**  I  sSdd,  **  Wilson,  what  is  there 
going  to  be?''  He  said,  ^  To-night  there  is  a 
cabinet  dinner  at  lord  Harrowby's,  Grosvenor- 
sqnare." 

What  more  did  he  say  f — ^He  said  I  was  to 
be  sure  to  come :  I  asked  him  v?here  I  should 
come,  and  he  said  I  vras  to  come  up  to  John- 
street  to  the  Horse  and  Groom. 

What  were  you  to  do  then  ? — He  told  me 
I  vras  to  go  into  die  public  house,  the  Horse 
and  Groom,  or  to  stand  at  the  comer  of  Cato- 
street  till  I  was  shoved  into  a  stable.  I  was 
to  meet  him  at  a  quarter  before  six,  or  by 
six  o'clock. 

Did  yon  ask  him  any  question  as  Io  num- 
bers f«— I  asked  him  how  many  there  were 
going  to  be :  he  said,  about  twenty  or  thirty 
there :  I  asked  him  if  that  vras  alt  that  was 
going  to  be :  he  said,  it  was  not  all,  there  vrere 
to  be  four  divisions  ;  there  was  a  party  in 
the  Borough,  another  in  GrayVinn-Janey 
another  in  the  City,  or  in  Gee's-court,  I  am 
not  certain  which. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more  respecting  Gee^s- 
coiirit*«*He  said  all  Giee's-oooft  was  in  ii^  but 


they  vrould  not  act  unless  the  Englisk  began 
first,  for  they  had  been  deceived  so  many 
times,  they  would  not  begin  unless  the  English 
began  first. 

What  countrymen  do  you  wsderstaiid  in- 
habited Gee's-eourt  ? — I  understand  Irishmen  ; 
he  told  me  Irishmen;  he  said  all  the  Irisb 
were  in  it. 

That  they  would  not  act  unless  the  English 
began  l-^No^  for  they  had  been  deosived  so 
many  times  before. 

Did  he  tell  you  any  thing  aboot  any  place 
in  the  city  ?--He  said,  after  they  had  been 
at  Grosvenor-square,  they  meant  to  retreat  to 
somewhere  about  the  Mansioa-honse  ;  that  was 
vibere  all  parties  were  to  meet. 

Did  he  tell  you  any  Ihing  about  what  wae 
to  be  dene  in  other  places  ?— He  said  there 
were  some  cannon  they  oould  get  very  easi^, 
two  pieces  in  Grayyina-lane^  by  kneddng  in 
of  a  small  door. 

Any  thing  more  than  knocking  in  a  deorf 
— Nothing  more  than  breaking  in  a  smaHdoor. 

Did  be  mention  any  other?— He  said  that 
there  were  four  pieces  at  another  Artillery- 
ground,  which  they  coold  get  by  ooljp  kiHins^ 
the  sentiy,  but  I  forget  where  mat  Artillnry- 
ground  was. 

Did  you  promise  him  to  come  ?^-4  toM 
him  I  wouhi  come;  I  was  to  be  sure  to  be 
there  by  six,  or  a  quarter  before  six. 

Did  you  go  to  John-street  tiMt  eveninff  P— • 
I  vrent  to  John-stveet.  but  I  vras  behind  my 
time  in  conse^iuenoe  of  budneas. 

At  what  time  did  you  go  there?— I  think 
it  was  nearly  seven  o'clock. 

Did  you  see  the  prisoner,  WilsoB)  there? 
— ^I  saw  Wilson  and  Davidsco. 

Davidson  is  the  man  of  colour  P— Yes,  he  is. 

Where  ware  they  standing? — ^They  were 
standing  at  the  post,  the  comer  of  Cato-streef . 

Do  you  know  Davidson  again  I— Yes,  I  had 
knovrn  him  a  long  ttme  before. 

When  you  met  there  what  passed  ? — They 
said  ^  you  are  behind  your  time.*  I  said,  yes, 
I  could  not  keep  it. 

Pass  over  that ;  what  furAer  did  he  say  f — 
He  asked  if  I  vras  going  in,  saying  Mr. 
Thistlewood  was  there. 

What  answer  did  you  give? — I  told  him  I 
could  not  go  in,  for  I  must  go  and  get  some 
cream  where  I  could.  I  asked  him  what  time 
they  vfould  go  away  from  thetOb 

What  did  he  say?— He  told  metheyvroiM 
go  away  from  dieie  about  eight  o'clo^,  and  if 
Uiey  were  gone  away  from  there  I  was  to 
follow  them  down  into  Grosvenop-square. 

Did  he  describe  the  house  to  yonl — He 
said  the  lower  side,  the  fourth  house  from  the 
forlher  comer,  that  I  should  find  them. 

Was  any  thing  more  said?— Davidse» said 
^  eomci  you  dog,  eome,  it  is  the  beat  Aing  you 
were  ever  in  in  yourKfo.'* 

Is  that  the  tetter  you  delivered    te   ford 

Hanowby  [[slewing  i^  to  Ms  tc»liiMi]3* — ^^  i* 
is. 


10103        1  GEORGE  IV. 

'  Thamat  Hiden  cross-eiamined  by 
Mr.  AMphm. 

Ii  this  your  own  writing  ? — ^Tes,  it  is. 

How  long  hare  you  been  a  cow-keeper  ? — I 
have  been  a  cow-keeper  these  four  or  fire  years, 
I  have  been  a  milk-man  longer  than  that 

How  long? — About  five  years. 

Before  tlMt  you  were  a  shoe-maker  ? — ^No. 
.  I  tboui^t  you  said  you  belonged  to  a  shoe- 
maker's club.    I  thought  by  that  you  were  a 
shoe-maker  ?— -No,  I  never  was. 

In  what  trade  were  you  originally  ? — ^I  am 
so  trade  at  all. 

What  were  you  before  that  ? — I  ha?e  been 
a  gentleman's  servant,  and  was  brought  up 
to  farming  in  the  coun^. 

Five  years  ago,  were  you  a  gentleman*s 
servant  r — More  than  five  years  ago. 

What  gentleman's  serv^e  were  you  last  in  f 
— ^Thelast  place  I  lived  in  was  colonel  Bridges, 
in  South  Audley-street. 

How  long  ago  ? — I  cannot  tell. 

Yon  must  tell  me  a  little  better  than  that  ? — 
I  dare  say  it  is  six  years  i^. 

Cannot  you  speak  more  precisely  ? — It  may 
be  seven  years. 

What  number  in  South  Audley-street? — I 
believe  it  is  69. 

Did  he  keep  house  there,  or  was  he  a  lodger  ? 
—A  lodginff<)iouse  I  believe  it  was,  but  he  had 
the  whole  of  the  house. 

Whether  it  was  a  hired  house,  furnished  by 
him,  or  taken  furnished  you  do  not  know  f — 
No. 

How  long  did  yon  live  with  him  ? — ^No  great 
time ;  I  cannot  say  exactly. 

How  long  ?— It  might  be  a  month,  or  it  might 
be  two  or  three  months. 

Will  you  swear  it  was  a  fortnight  ? — Yes,  it 
was  more  than  a  fortnight. 

Was  it  three  weeks  T — ^Ye»^it  was. 

Was  it  more  than  a  month  ? — I  cannot  say ; 
this  was  my  last  place  of  service. 

Whom  hare  you  ever  served  for  any  length  of 
time  f  I  should  like  to  know  some  place  where 
you  had  some  settlement  of  abode  ? — ^I  lived 
with  major  Dive,  in  Tavistock-street,  Bedford- 
square,  a  year  and  three  months. 

In  what  year? — I  think  the  year  1810* 

Is  he  alive  or  dead  ? — ^He  was  alive  a  little 
while  affo. 

As  v^t  ?  In  what  capacity  ? — As  footman, 
there  was  only  me  there. 

Did  you  go  directly  from  him  to  colonel 
Bridges?— No,  I  did  not. 

Where  did  you  go  to  then  P— I  went  and 
lived  a  little  while  with  agentleman  in  Stratton- 
street,  a  gentleman  of  the  name  of  Brioe. 

For  the  last  five  years  you  have  been  either  a 
milk-man  or  a  cowkeeperY—Yes. 

How  long  have  you  lived  in  Manchester*- 
mews?— Going  on  of  three  years. 

Have  you  always  lived  there  the  whole  of 
that  time  f-^My  family  have  lived  there. 

Hare  you  always  lived  there  the  whole  of 
that  time? — My  family  have  lived  there;  I 
have  not  been  at  home  all  the  time  myself. 


Trial  ^Jame$  Ings 


[1030 


How  much  of  the  time  have  you  been  awty 
from  home?— I  cannot  justly  say;  two,  or  three, 
or  four  months. 

Where  do  you  live  nowi^I  am  over  in  the 
Bench  now,  that  is  .my  home  now :  I  am  not 
actually  in  the  place. 

Where  have  you  lived  ?  in  the  Rules -of  the 
Bench  ?— I  am  not  in  the  Rules  of  the  Bench, 
I  am  in  the  Marshalsea. 

In  the  prison  of  the  Marshalsea? — Yes. 

You  are  not  in  the  Bench,  but  in  the  Mar- 
shalsea ;  how  came  you  to  say  the  Bench  ? — 
No ;  I  did  not  say  in  the  Ben(£,  to  my  know- 
ledge ;  I  did  not  mean  it,  however. 

Did  you  not  say,  just  now,  that  you  were  in 
the  Bench  ?  look  at  the  jniy,  and  answer  ? — 
If  I  said  so,  I  meant  to  say  m  the  Marshalsea. 

Did  you  say  so  or  not,  I  want  no  ifs.— I  am 
in  the  Marshalsea. 

Did  you  not  say,  just  this  minute,  that  you 
were  in  the  Bench  ?— I  cannot  say  that  I  did. 

Will  you,  upon  your  oath,  deny  that  yon 
said  so  ?•— No,  I  cannot  say. 
•  You  cannot  say  upon  your  oath,  vdiether 
you  did  or  not  ? — No. 

You  are  in  the  Marshalsea  ? — Yes. 

For  how  much  ? — ^For  about  1 8/.  3s.  and  odd. 

Due  to  whom  ? — ^To  Mr.  Powell. 

What  is  he  ? — He  is  a  milkman  and  cow- 
keeper,  I  believe. 

How  long  have  you  been  in  the  Marshalsea 
at  his  suit? — I  went  in  last  Saturday. 

Are  you  there  in  execution,  or  on  a  .bailable 
writ  ? — I  went  in  in  execution. 

How  long  before  that  had  you  been  sued  by 
Mr.  Powell  ? — It  is  some  time  ago,  some  time 
the  beginninj^  of  last  summer ;  f  do  not  know 
exactly  the  time. 

How  did  you  keep  off  going  in  so  long? — I 
was  out  of  the  way  for  about  two  months,  or 
from  that  to  three  months. 

At  what  period  of  the  year  was  that  ? — I  do 
not  know  at  what  time  of  the  year  it  was. 

The  jury  will  not  be  satisfied  with  thiU,  yon 
must  brinff  your  faculties  with  you  ? — a  may 
be  about  June,  July,  or  August. 

Was  it  July  or  August  ? — It  might  be  about 
June,  or  July,  or  August,  or  the  beginning  of 
September. 

Was  it  so  late  as  October  ?— No,  I  think  not, 
I  was  home  before  October. 

Upon  your  oath,  were  you  at  your  house  in 
Manchester-mews,  as  you  call  it,  at  any  time 
in  July  or  August,  except  Sundays? — ^Yes,  I 
was  at  different  times  besides  Sundays. 

Who  carried  on  your  business  for  you? — 
My  wife  and  my  sister. 

Do  they  live  there  and  carry  on  the  business 
now?*— I  do  not  know  that  they  are  living 
there  now,  but  they  carry  on  the  business 
there? 

Mr.  Gtemey.— -And  my  question  was,  was  be 
living  there  in  February  last  f 

Mr.  Adolphui.'— Did  not  you  swear  on -Mon- 
day that  you  lived  in  Manchester-mews  ?— 'I  or 
my  fomily  live  therCf 


10311 


ybr  High  Treason* 


Did  not  you  ttftte  to>day,  or  on  Monday, 
that  you  li?ed  in  Manchester-mews? — My  &- 
mily. 

Do  they  li?e  there  then? — They  do  live 
there»  ot  did  when  I  left  them. 

Did  not  yon  say,  both  on  Monday  and  to- 
day, that  yoa  lived  in  Manchester-mews? — I 
did  live  in. Manchester-mews. 

Upon  yoar  oath,  did  you  or  not  say,  in  that 

Slace,  on  IViesday  last,  that  you  lived  on  that 
ay,  in  Manchester-mews  ?— I  did  not  name 
the  day,  but  I  said  that  day  I  lived  in  Man- 
chester-mews. 

Did  not  you  answer,  being  asked  where  you 
lived,  **  In  Manchester*mews  f — I  am  tiviag 
now  in  this  place  where  I  stand,  my  fismily 
lived  in  Manchester-mews,  me  and  my  family 
when  I  was  taken  away. 

Did  YOU  not  say  on  Tuesday  morning,  that 
your  place  of  residence  was  in  Manchester- 
mews  r — So  it  was ;  my  family  was  there. 

Will  you  swear  your  family  or  you  lived 
in  Manchester-mews  on  Tuesday  morning? 
— I  will  swear  that  my  fiunily  live  there  now, 
for  aught  I  know. 

When  did  you  last  see  any  of  them  ? — ^I  saw 
some  of  my  &roily  there  when  I  left. 

Where  are  they  living? — ^They  are  living 
there  now ;  they  have  the  premises ;  they  go 
backwards  and  forwards  to  them. 

W*ho  told  you  so  ? — My  sister  told  me  so  to- 
day, that  they  go  there  two  or  three  times 
a-day,  but  I  do  not^  know  that  they  may  be 
there  at  this  present  time. 

You. mean  to  refer  to  the  present  moment 
when  you  give  this  answer  ? — ^x ou  put  me  to  it. 

And  you  live  where  yoii  stand,  and  you  lived 
at  Manchester-mews,  except  during  the  time 
you  are. standing  here,  and  ths  time  you  are  in 
the  Marshalsea? — ^Yes. 

Bat  whether  you  have  any  home  or  abode 
there  at  this  present  moment  you  do  not  know  ? 
—No. 

How  kmg  hare  you  known  Mr.  Davidson,  as 
you  spoke  of  him  f— I  have  known  Mr.  David- 
son for  these  three  or  four  months. 

Do  you  know  a  Mr.  Edwards  at  all  7 — ^I  do 
not  know  Mr.  Edwards. 

You  do  not  know  any  such  person  ? — ^No. 

Aecollect  now,  try  to  recollect  yourself,  do 
you  know  Mr.  Edwards  ?<*-!  do  not  know  him. 

You  know  no  person  of  that  name  ?  —  I 
know  a  person  of  tnat  name. 

Then  why  do -you  say  you  do  not  know  him? 
— I  know  a  good  many  persons,  but  they  are 
many  miles  in  the  country. 

How  do  you  know  that  I  am  .notinquiring 
for  the  very  Mr.  Edwards  you  know  ?— >lt  may 
be  so. 

How  came  you  to  answer  that  you  do  not 
know  Mr.  Edwards,  and  then  that  you  do 
know  Mr.  Edwards  ? — ^I  know  a  Mr.  Edwards 
•200  miles  in  the  country,  but  I  should  not  sup- 
pose you  meant  that  Mr.  Edwards. 

Whom  should  yoa  suppose  I  mean  ? — I  do 
not  kdow. 

Where  did  you  carry  on  your  Irosiness  a9  a. 


A.  D.  ISaO.  [1038 

milkman  before  you  wentto  Manchetter«mews? 
— In  little  Durweston-street,  by  the  Gdgware- 
road. 

Have  you  ever  frequented  the  Scotch  Arms? 
— ^I  have  been  to  it  twice. 

Where  is  the  Scotch  Arms  ?— It  is  in  a  smaH 
court  somewhere  down  by  the  Strand. 

Did  you  attend  any  club  or  meeting  there  ? — 
I  attended  to  what  they  call  a  club ;  I  was 
there  twice. 

With  whom  ? — ^I  went  with  a  friend. 

Has  that  friend  a  name  ?>— He  is  a  master 
tailor  by  the  name  of  Clark. 

Why  is  it  called  the  shoemaker's  dub? — I 
do  not  know,  it  was  called  so  to  me. 

It  was  not  a  radical  meeting,  was  it? — ^I  do 
not  know  what  meeting  it  was,  it  was  reported 
as  a  shoemaker's  club. 

Did  politics  and  afiairs  of  state  appear  to  be 
the  subject  of  conversation  there  ? — ^1  am  sure 
it  is  so  long  ago  I  do  not  particularly  re- 
member. 

How  long  might  it  be? — Seven  or  eight 
months,  but  I  am  not  certain  to  a  month. 

As  you  swear  so  iMirticularly  to  conversations, 
was  politics  the  subject  of  conversation  there  ? 
—I  cannot  say,  for  I  am  not  used  to  those 
matters. 

Was  it,  or  not?— •!  cannot  say,  whedier  it 
was  or  not. 

You  never  saw  any  of  those  gentlemen  at 
the  bar,  except  Mr.  Davidson  and  Mr.  Wilson  ? 
—No. 

And  you  had  no  conversation  about  thoae 
matters,  except  with  Wilson?-*!  had  some 
conversation  witb  Davidson. 

Where  was  that  t  in  John-street  ? — ^Yes.  : 

Tbat  was  when  you  went  and  were  so  anxious 
to  get  your  cream? — ^Yes,  1  had  seen  Mr. 
Davidson  repeatedly  before  that. 

Had  you  conversed  with  him  about  these  par- 
ticular affairs  before  that? — ^Yes. 

How  long  was'the  last  time  before  that  you 
had  seen  him  ? — I  do  not  know  exactly,  it  might 
be  a  week  or  a  fortnight. 

Will  yon  swear  it  vras  not  more  than  a  fort- 
night?—I  believe  I  can. 

Had  you  been  at  any  of  the  meetings  at 
Fox-court,  or  any  thing  of  that  kind  ? — No,  I 
never  was. 

Then  you  did  not  know  any  tiring  of  this 
particular  affair  till  Wilson  told  you? — ^Not  of 
that,  I  did  not  till  he  told  me. 

The  cream  was,  of  course,  a  thing  of  great 
profitvto  you  ? — It  was. 

How  mudi  did  you  get  by  it  ?— I  do  not 
know. 

A  shilling  ? — Oh,  yes. 

Half  a  crown  ? — ^More  than  a  shilling. 

By  that  particular  order  ?— Perhaps,  I  might 
gain  two  or  three. 

For  whom  was  it?— It  was  for  a  family,  but 
I<  could  not  state  the -name* 

What  family  was  it?— -A  &mily  in  Princes* 
•  street. 

Name  them  ? — I  do  not  know  their  names, 
but  I  have  served.them  for  three  or  four  years* 


1608]        1  OeOROE  IV. 


Trml  qfJmm  fngi 


[1034 


Wkst  ttwtobw  in  Pfkon  ■UmI|*-I  bditve 
Princes -street     where  ?  — Princes  -  ttnety 


Are  thej  house-keepeis,  or  lodfen,  or  what  7 
— They  kxTt  the  honaey  I  believtt. 

You  have  serrad  then,  how  loog?—- Three 
jFeeft  1  beUere,  it  may  be  sooMliung  mon*  or 
MmgfjitA  besoioDf;  I  bdicTe  it  is  9bo^i 
three  years. 

Youdoaot  knowlUr  Bain«af--1  4o  not 
knew  their  names. 

And  you  had  an  eider  from  Ihemi  te  eeemn 
ihii  afternoon  which  yen  coiiUL  not  eiMCttie  7 — 
Repeatedly  I  haw  h«d« 

You  had  an  osder  from  them  for  eseam  that 
aftenaeoB  ? — Yea. 

What  servant  ga?e  yoa  the  order?  a  female 
or  a  oraie  servant  ?— <>Br  people  broaght  home 
the  order,  I  did  not  see  tton. 

What  people  f-^Mj  wife. 

Did  you  see  anv  person  at  the  house  on  ike 
airfnect  of  itf  «-I  dia  not  go  to  the  house. 

Who  infonned  them  yon  ooald  sot  get  it  ?— 
My  wife,  or  my  sister  £d. 

Vott  do  not  know  the  namoT-^Noy  I  do 


Whom  do  you  see  when  you  go  there  ? — I 
do  not  senro  them,  my  wife  dioesy  I  believe  they 
do  not  keep  a  man  servant. 

Were  7o«  ever  at  tiie  house  in  your  life  f — 
Manvatime. 

What  servant  have  you  seen  there  f — ^I  have 
«een  maid  servants. 

Whan  wftveyon  there  last  ?— I  cannot  aay. 

How  long  befbm  the  SSii  of  Fobnmry  ) — I 
am  not  able  to  say. 

Do  jmoL  serve  them  daily  l«~-Yea< 

Tfatt  is  the  ihroily  at  namber  aii,  Princes- 
street,  €avendish.«qoare?— Yes. 

Whsft  cmanti^  of  cream  was  oideaed  isr  that 
night? — I  really  do  not  knov^  I  have  forgoL 

And  yet  yen  know  that  yoa  were  to  get  two 
or  thme  shillings  hy  it  7--Wo  ga  a  mating  a 
pint. 

You  am  not  able  to  say  what  was  te  qnan- 
tityJ-No. 

That  will  sot  do;  we  ehall  probalfly  send 
them  to  inquiveP-^Yon  may  oo  so  il  you 
please. 

Howwiudi  eieam  was  oideied  for  that  night  ? 
— ^It  has  slipped  my  memory. 

You  can  only  leiuember  that  yon  wen  to 
get  some  two  or  three  shiHings  by  it?-— I  only 
know  I  went  for  creanu 

Was  it  more  Unn  a  onaM?— I  believe  it 
was. 

I  ask  you  again,  was  it  or  not  more  than  a 
quart?— I  am  not  able  to  si^  indeed. 

You  will  not  indulge  me  with  the  name  of 
any  servant  in  that  house  ?<-^  am  not  able. 

Do  you  catt  tim  servants  Mary,  MoUVp  or 
^tty,  or  what?w.I  eanndt  say  indeed,  we 
bave  a  many  wsAout  any  bill  evoiy  vfmk. 

Was  it  the  first  time  or  second  time  yon  met 
with  Wilson  that  Ae  cxptession  was  natdf  you 
bad  nooocsaisB  to  be  alanoed,  fer  tkeit  WM  a 


gentleman's  servant  sHppliad  money! — ^It 
the  first  time. 

Upon  your  oath,  did  you  not  as  poaitinBly 
swear,  on  Taesdav  last,  it  was  the  seoiMid  time, 
on  the  23rd  of  Febmaiyl-^No,  I  did  not  s^ 
it  was  the  fiiator  eeoond  time  last  Tbeaday. 

Upon  your  oath,  wse  not  it  part  of  yonr 
namtive  of  the  23ni  of  February,  that  be  said 
there  was  n  gentleman's  servant  eopplied 
money  1— ^e  repeated  it  more  than  onoe  or 
twioe* 

At  two  separata  iaterviewsT— At  two  dif^ 
ferent  times. 

At  two  dtierent interviews;  you  aset  him 
but  twice  (--I  had  aean  him  many  times. 

How  long  bad  yon  been  aoqaainied  widi 
him  befem  tMs?— I  have  been  acqaainted 
with  him  this  long  time. 

How  long  J — ^A  great  while ;  I  met  him  nt  a 
taikNr*a  vrhere  I  ns^  to  go  repeatedly. 

How  long  had  yon  aot  seen  him  before  yon 
Bset  ban  the  ficst  tisw,  when  yon  talked  to 
him  on  this  busiaess  ?*-I  saw  him  agmat  nun»- 
ber  of  times  befbra,  long  befitre. 

Was  it  at  any  of  those  tiroes  that  bs  told  yon 
a  geatleasan's  servant  aopplied  them  with 
money  ?-— He  told  mo  when  I  met  him  in  tlte 
street  on  the  iSid. 

Had  be  ever  told  you  ao  before?.^!  do  not 
remember  that  ho  had :  he  said  his  msater  was 
a  mtnisleiial  man. 

Had  he  ever  told  yon  so  before  those  two 
times  ? — I  cannot  ssrear  that  he  had  or  bad  not. 

Why  did  not  yoa  tdl  us  on  Tuesday  that  be 
laid  you  so  at  the  first  iaterview  7—1  told  yon 
that  he  said  so. 

That  would  have  'been  something  mwe  to 
have  told  lord  Harrowby  7*-'I  do  not  know. 

^  Why  did  not  yon  tell  us  that  Uat  T^msdagr  ? 
— ^He  told  me  so  repeatedly. 

How  many  times  do  yiou  uMan  by  repeated- 
ly 7— He  told  me  so  twice. 

That  you  call  repeatedly  ? — Yes. 

Did  yoa  go  up  into  the  room  in  Cato-street^ 
or  ooiy  speak  to  Davidson  at  tibe  door? — I 
never  went  into  €at»«treet,  only  toihe  eomor 
of  John*street. 

,Tkomat 


re-examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey, 


Did  you  eontimio  to  carry  on  your 
at  Mancbestcr-mews  till  laist  Saturday  7*-My 
femily. 

Were  yon  than  airested  and  taken  to  the 
Mamhalsea  7--I  was. 

Have  you  remained  in  onstody  over  snoe, 
except  on  yonr  coming^  here  wkh  an  oAcer?. 
"""X  es* 

As  fer  as  you  know,  do  your  family  reaiain 
there  stiU  7 — They  have  got  Ibe  premiaea  now. 

About  this  house,  in  Prine^s-street,  yaoL 
said,  to  te  beat  of  your  recoUecllQa  it  is  No. 
'  six;areyou|MSitivaof  thator  iiet?-:4  thiafc 
it  is  No.  six. 

Your  wife  generaOy  oenrfs  ^--^Shedoes. 

Sometimes  you  nave  gone  then  7-«- Yiap> 
somctiaDiesIhavo. 


loas] 


f<A  Hif^  TreatoH, 


A.  D.  1820. 


Um9 


Mr,  Ad0ljiAut.''My  lord,  I  understood  him 
to  My  positively  it  was  No.  six. 

Mr.  Gvm^. — No,  he  did  not. 

Mr.  Adofyhui. — ^Will  your  lordship  have  the 
goodness  to  permit  me  to  ask  as  to  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  housed  if  he  will  not  swear  positive* 
ly  to  the  number  ? 

\  Mr.  Gumey.— I  will  ask  those  questions 
with  pleasure :  how  does  the  house  stand  ? — I 
think  it  is  the  first  door  on  the  left  hand  side 
IrOm  the  square  going  down  to  Oxford-street. 
Is  there  any  name  on  the  door  that  you  re- 
member f — I  do  not  remember. 
.  The  first  door  from  whence  ? — Going  from 
Cavendish-square  down  into  Oxford-street,  on 
She  left  hand-side* 

The  j&r/of  Harrowby  sworn.— Examined  by 

Mr.  Gvrney» 

Your  lordship  is  president  of  his  majesty's 
f  rivy  council? — I  am. 

Is  it  usual  for  the  members  of  his  majesty's 
privy  council^  who  form  what  is  commonly 
called  the  cabioet,  to  have  dinners  at  each 
other's  houses  ?— It  is. 

In  the  month  of  February  last  had  those 
dinners  been  interrupted  by  the  death  of  bis 
late  majesty  ? — ^They  nad. 

Did  your  lordship  cause  cards  to  be  issued 
inviting  the  members  of  the  cabiqet  council  to 
dine  with  you  on  Wednesday  the  23rd  of 
February  ?— I  did,  the  latter  end  of  the  pre- 
ceding week. 

If  nothing  had  occurred  would  that  dinner 
Jiave  taken  place  P — Certainly. 

Will  your  lordship  have  the  goodness  to 
enumerate  the  company  who  would  then  have 
been  assembled ?—ahe  lord  Chancellor;  the 
•«ail  of  Liverpool,  first  lord  of  the  Treasury ; 
Jdr.  Vansittart,  chancellor  of  the  Exchequer; 
earl  Batburst,  secretary  of  State  for  the  Colo- 
iiial  Department;  lord  Castlereagh,  secretary 
cf  State  for  the  Foreign  Department;  lord 
Sidmouth,  secretary  of  State  for  the  Home 
Department ;  lord  Melville,  first  lord  of  the 
Admiralty;  the  earl  of  Westmorland,  lord 
Pdvy  Seal :  the  duke  of  Wellington,  master  of 
the  Ordnance ;  Mr.  Canning,  president  of  the 
India  .Board ;  Mr.  Bathurst,  chancellor  of  the 
Duchy  of  .Lancaster;  Mr.  Wellesley  Pole, 
master  of  the  Mint ;  the  earl  of  Mulgrave ;  and 
Mr.  Robinson,  president  of  the  Board  of 
Jr^e. 

Fourteen  besides  yopr  lordship  ? — Yes. 

Are  all  those  whom  you  have  named,  my 
lord,  members  of  the  privy  council  P-rTLey 


Yout  lordship's  house  we  have  beard  is  situ-* 
ateinGrosvenor^oare? — On  the  South  side  of 
Grosvenor-^quare.  next  door  to  the  Archbishop 
^f  Yolk's. 

On  Tuesday  the  22nd  of  February  wasyoar 
Jofdship  riding  in  the  Park  ?— I  was. 

Were  you  accosted  by  a  person  of  the  name 
of  Hiden  ? — I  was  accosted  by  a  person  #hose 

VOL.  xxxin. 


name  I  did  not  know,  but  now  know  it  to  be 
Hiden. 

Did  he  deliver  that  letter  to  your  lordship, 
addressed  to  my  lord  Castlereagh  [handing  U 
Uf  hU  i4jrdthip^  1 — He  did. 

Did  he  speak  to  you  of  it  as  of  business  of 
immediate  importance  ?— *He  spoke  to  me  of 
it  as  of  business  materially  importing  lord 
Castlereagh  as  well  as  myself,  and  some 
others,  and  wished  it  to  be  delivered  immedi* 
ately  lo  my  lord  Castlereagh. 

I  believe  your  lordship  was  going  at  that 
moment  to  the  couocil,  and  delivered  it  to  lord 
Castlereagh  shortly  after  ? — I  was  going  home 
to  dress  for  a  council  at  Carlton  Palace,  and 
not  findinglord  Castlereagh  there,  I  despatched 
it  with  a  note  from  myself  to  lord  Castlereagh, 

Did  Hiden,  at  your  lordship*s  desire,  give 
you  his  card  ? — He  did. 

Did  you  meet  him  the  next  morning  in 
Hyde-park, by  some  appointment  you  made  ? — 
I  aid. 

In  the  plantation  in  the  park  ?~I  met  him 
in  the  plantation  in  the  place  which  is  called 
the  ring.  , 

I  am  not  at  liberty  to  ask  your  lordship  the 
particulars  of  the  communication  he  raaae  tQ 
you,  but  did  he  communicate  to  you,  that  there 
was  any  plan  of  atmcking  the  cabinet  ministers 
at  your  house  ?— That  communication  is  con- 
tained in  tho  letter :  he  made  a  communication 
in  more  general  terms. 

In  consequence  of  the  information  you  re- 
ceived, did  your  lordship  end  the  other  mem- 
bers of  the  cabinet  alter  the  plan  of  the  din- 
ner ? — ^The  plaii  of  the  dinner  was  given  up 
for  that  da^. 

Your  lordship  dined  at  Fife-house,  at  lord 
Liverpoors  ? — I  did. 

Dia  the  preparations  at  your  lordship'a 
house  proceed  as  if  the  company  had  been  to 
dine  there  P — lliey  proceeded  as  if  the  com^ 
pany  had  been  to  dine  there,  till  they  were 
stopped  by  a  note  I  sent  from  lord  Liver-* 
pool  s»  to  inform  my  servant  that  they  would 
not  dine  there,  which,  being  despatched  be- 
tween seven  and  eight  from  Fife-house,  I  con* 
ceived  reached  my  own  hosue  about  eight 
o'clock. 

You  had  concealed  from  your  servant  the 
alteration  of  the  plan  ? — ^Yes. 

The  'Earl  of  Harrcwby  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Curwood. 

I  must  ask  your  lordship  a  question :  you 
said  before,  I  believe,  that  you  had  some  in- 
timation of  this  before  that  letter  was  delivered 
to  WOL !  — ^Yes,  I  did. 

Did  not  your  lordship  know,  or  had  not  you 
regular  communicatiqns  of.  all  that  passed  at 
those  meetings? — I  had  no  communication  of 
what  passed  at  any  of  those  meetings  personal  ly. 

You  had  intimation  that  something  of  the 
kind  was  in  contemplation  ? — We  had  an  in* 
timation  at  a  period  antecedent  to  this,  of  a 
design  somewhat  of  this  kind  being  in  Qon» 
temptation* 

3U 


1CMI7]       1  GEORGE  iV. 

Mr.  Gimi^.— 1  beg  yottt  lordAipV  Mrdott» 
but  I  omitted  to  point  out  to  you  Hioeta ;  U 
that  the  person  who  made  the  comnkimscatioQ 
to  your  lordship  ? — He  i9. 

John  Bakar  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gymof, 

Are  yon  lord  Harrowby's  butler? — ^Yes. 

Did  you,  by  hia  knrdahip's  directioB»  istne 
carda  of  invitation  for  a  cabinet  dinner,  on 
Wednesday  the  23rd  of  Febiukiy?--!  did. 

1ng». — ^My  lord,  here  are  thme  or  four  of  the 
witnesses  in  court,  giving  eadi  other  their 
evidence. 

Mr.  Gwmey, — ^They  nay  go  out  of  court, 
they  will  not  be  wanted  again.  On  what  day 
did  you  issue  the  cards  ?— Either  the  18th  or 
19th ;  I  betiere  Saturday  the  19th. 

We  have  understood  that  the  preparations 
^ent  on  till  a  late  hour  in  the  evening  f— They 
did  till  about  eight. 

When  did  yon  receive  notice  from  his  lord* 
ship  that  the  dinner  would  not  take  place  ? — 
It  might  be  about  eight  o'clock,  or  ten  minutes 
after. 

To  that  period  neither  you  nor  any  of  the 
serranls  knew  it  would  not  take  place  ? — ^No, 
they  did  not. 


John  Mcmaneni  swora^ — EzamiDed  by 
Mr.  SolieUor  GeneniL 

I  believe  you  come  here  in  custody  T-^I  do. 

Yon  are  a  prisoner  in  the  Tower? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  remember  at  any  time  meeting  This- 
tlewood  at  the  bouse  of  a  person  of  the  name 
of  Ford  ?— Yes. 

As  nearly  as  you  can  recollect  hoMr  long  is 
Ihat  ago  ?— I  suppose  it  was  between  two  and 
three  months  before  the  meeting  id  Cato* 
street. 

After  YOU  bad  so  met  him,  did  he  call  upon 
you? — ^Yes. 

How  soon  afterwards  T^I  suppose  about  a 
fortnight  or  three  weeks. 

Did  he  call  alone,  or  was  there  any  person 
in  company  with  him  ?— The  prisoner  Brunt 
Was  in  company  with  him. 

Was  any  petsdn  in  the  room  besides  your- 
self, when  be  called? — ^Yes,  my  mother  and 
iay  brother. 

How  long  did  he  stay  with  yon?— I  suppose 
be  was  in  die  room  about  &fe  minutes,  when 
be  called  me  to  the  outside  of  the  door,  saying 
be  wished  to  speak  with  me. 

When  you^went  outside  the  door  with  him 
did  Brunt  go  with  him  or  notf— N&,  he  did 
ttot. 

You  apd  he  went  outside  the  door?-— Yes. 

What  did  he;  then  say  to  you?-^e  said 
ihat  great  'events  were  at  band ;  that  people 
were  erery  Where  anxious  foracbange;  that 
he  bad  beiSn  ()»>iiltsed  mppoit  hy  toany  peo- 
I^le  ^o  had  deeeited  bim,  but  lioW  he  had 
got  inen  that  would  stand  by  bim. 

What  did  he  say  ficftther  in  that  c6mrei%a- 
tibh?— He  asked  me  whether  I  bad  akfy  arms. 

What  did  you  say  ?— I  told  him,  no. 


Trid  of  Jama  lOgi  CUMt 

Wtat^ASd  he  ails#«rtd  (tmtt-^rSe  said  iaX 
no  man  should  be  wi^«Qt  anns;  beisiid  eMf 
man  that  belonged  to  him  had  got  some ;  some 
had  got  a  sabre,  some  had  got  a  pistol,  and 
•ome  a  jpike :  he  sasd  that  I  mi^t  bay  a  pis- 
tol for  about  four  or  fire  sbiUings.  1  said  I 
had  no  money  to  b«y  pistols;  he  then  ssad  he 
would  see  what  he  could  do. 

Do  you  recollect  whether  any  further  ocm- 
versation  took  place  at  that  time  ? — ^No,  I  do 
bot  think  there  did. 

After  that  conversatioii  t>assed  dU  yon 
return  again  into  the  room  ? — Yes. 

Did  Brunt  and  Thistlewood  go  away  toge- 
ther?—Yes,  they  did. 

After  this  interview  did  Bruiit  call  upon  yoa 
by  himself  ?~Yes,  he  did. 

How  soon  afterwards  did  lie  call  ?^»Aboak 
two  or  three  days,  I  believe. 

Did  any  thing  particular  pass  at  that  in- 
tenriewP — ^No,  1  oo  not  recollect  that  there 
did :  he  said  he  was  in  a  huity,  ibat  there 
were  several  people  down  stairs  waiting  lor 
him,  and  he  was  ffoing  to  call  on  several  nen, 
people  in  our  trade. 

Do  you  remember  Blunt  calUog  i^PcMs  yen 
on  Tuesday  the  22nd  of  F^ruary  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  he  ckll  alone,  or  in  company  Witb  any 
person  ?^In  company  with  Tidd. 

As  nearly  as  you  can  recollect,  al  What  tiasi 
bftbeday.'— I  think  it  was  between  twneand 
three  o^dook. 

When  he  called,  at  tbat  time  wifl  yo«  teH 
us  what  passed  ?— Y0»;  I  kaid  I  thobght  I  bai 
lost  you :  he  said  the  king's  dealh  taid  Mida 
ttn  uteratiott  in  thefar  plans.  I  adked  llim 
what  plans :  he  said  there  would  be  a  m^eiikiig^ 
on  tbe  following  ev^ng,  at  Xybuni-tonptke, 
Where  I  should  know  all  the  partieuMfs.  ^ 

What  did  he  sar  fbrlher  ?--^«  tairaed  iMbI 
to  Tidd,  and  asked  wb^tber  he  should  gi^evie 
the  word :  and  Tidd  said,  yes,  he  Mppobed 
there  was  no  danger. 

Upon  that,  what  did  he  sayt-^He  HM  me  if 
I  saw  aUT  people  about,  I  wtB*to  goto  dicfti 
and  say  (,  «,  /,  and  if  they  wetift  fsiewli  ihiy 
would  answer  f,  e,  n. 

Making  the  word  hci«Ai?-^Teii;  Ike  tbUi 
said  he  would  be  at  otnr  house  the  fb'&<9Wteg 
morning  and  tell  me  further  pafticnlafs. 

Did  any  thing  more  pass  at  £hat  ttee^af  t-^ 
No :  he  and  Tidd  then  Went  aWay. 

On  the  followiag  day  did  finmt  call  vfNA 
you,  on  the  Wednesday? — ^Yea. 

About  what  hour? — Between  four  and  fN«. 

Did  he  call  alone  or  in  coinptiir|[>^AIi>ne. 

Wkit  did  be  sKyI— He  cilted  'SSe  d^wn 
stairs. 

Was  any  body  in  the  room  abpve  staitsf>^ 
Yes,  my  mother:  be  teld  me  liewttMi'M  to 
go  in  half  an  hour  with  him.  ^ 

What  sad  you  Co  tbat  ?-^I  teW^fat-I  coM 
not,  that  I  had  got  some  work  to  do  th«t1BQlt  be 
finished,  and  that  I  eould  ncK  ^  at  Itat  tilde. 

What  did  he  th^ni  say  ?^He  Ittked  me  whiii 
time  the  work  would  be  ddfae;  I  Ibid  bim  nol 
before  six  o'dddc. 


lOM] 


Jm  Hif^  Tktauo*, 


A,  0.  1990; 


[1039 


I^B^n  your  ttUiD|  bim  not  before  six,  what 
did  ne  say  to  you?~{Ie  said  I  must  go  to 
Tidd*8  liojise»  and  he  told  me  when)  Tidd 
lived. 

Where  was  that  ? — In  the  Hole»in-the-waiU 
passage,  Brook's-market. 

After  he  had  told  you  thisi  did  he  go  away  ? 
—Yes. 

Did  yooi  in  pursuance  of  the  directions  he 
had  giren  you,  go  to  Xidd's  house? — Yes, 
about  half-past  six. 

Did  you  find  him  at  hoae  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  he  s^  to  youP — He  said  that  h^ 
was  waiting  tot  some  mora  men,  and  they  had 
not  come ;  and  he  said  that  he  would  not  wait 
later  than  seven  o'clock. 

Did  any  persons  arrive  before  seven  ? — No* 

When  seven  o'dopk  came,  what  did  Tidd 
do?— He  went  to  a  box  in  a  comer  of  the 
room,  and  took  out  a  pistol. 

What  did  he  do  with  it  P — ^H^  put  it  into  a 
belt  which  he  had  got  round  his  body,  under  a 
ffreat  coat. 

What  else  did  he  do? — He  took  a  bundle  of 
pikei,  I  suppose  about  six  or  eight,  wrapped 
jn  a  piece  of  brown  paper. 

Fixes,  or  the  heads  of  pikes  ?— rTh^  heads  of 
inkes,  about  six  or  eight. 

What  did  he  do  ivith  them  f — |Ie  took  them 
in  hb  hand. 

Did  he  take  any  thing  farther? — Yes,  a 
staff  about  four  feet  long. 

Did  you  take  notice  of  that? — ^Yes,  it  had  a 
liole  to  receive  something  at  the  end. 

Where  did  he  then  go? — He  went  down 
stairs,  and  through  Brook-street,  into  Holbpm. 

Did  you  accompanv  him  ? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

And  up  H^bom,  i  suppose  ? — ^Ves. 

While  you  were  going  alpng  Holbom,  did 
lie  state  any  thing  to  you,  or  had  jron  any  con- 
versation wilib  him  as  to  the  business  he  vi9fi 
going  on  ?— No,  in  Holbom  he  gave  me  the 
•tick  to  cany. 

Where  had  you  conversation  with  him  as  to 
ftke  obiect? — ^I  think  as  we  were  going  along 
X>xford-street. 

Will  yon  state  what  that  conversajtjon  was? 
—I  asked  him  what  we  were  going  about,  and 
tm  eaid  I  should  know  when  we  got  there.  I 
jtfked  him  .whether  we  were  going  to  the 
liaiiist  of  Commons. 

What  did  hie  say  ?•— He  said  no,  there  were 
too  many  soldiers  about  there.  J  jthen  asked 
Iw  Again,  and  he  toM  me  they  were  going  to 
.GiMvenor-iquare. 

(DM  bo  say  whesa  in  Grosvenor-aqunnet— - 
Ko,  he  did  not.  I  asked  bim  whether  any  one 
in  particular  lived  tb^e,  and  hs  Mid  there  was 
n.oabinet  diriner  there  that  evening. 

Did  any  thiuj;  further  pass  f— No,  I  do  AOt 
^•ocillect  any  thing  further. 

Where  did  he  conduct  you  to  ? — ^To  CatiO- 
•Uveet. 

to  what  pl^oe  in  Cato-street  ?—Through  a 
gateway,  and  on  the  right-hand  side  there  was 
a  stable. 

When  you  got  to  Cato-street  to  the  gateway. 


what  liappened? — There  were  two  peoplf 
standing  under  the  gateway. 

Do  you  know  who  they  were  ? — ^Noj^  it  was 
quite  dark,  and  I  did  not  stand  close  to  ^m 
myself}  I  stood  a  few  atepa  behind  hiqi. 

H^  he  any  conversation  with  those  peov* 
pie  ? — Ye99  be  spoke  a  few  words  to  them. 

After  that,  dul  you  go  into  the  stable  7--r 
Yes. 

What  did  ypu  observe  on  your  first  entrance 
into  the  stable  ? — ^There  were  three  or  four 
men  there,  and  there  w^  a  light,  and  he  asked 
whether  Mr.  Thistlewood  was  up  stairs. 

What  was  the  .answer  7 — ^Yes,  they  told  hli||i 
he  was. 

Did  you  go  up  stairs  P — Yes. 

Was  there  any  body  in  the  room  up  stairs  ? 
—Yes,  I  suppose  about  one,  or  two,  or  three- 
and<«tw9nty  peopl^i  according  to  what  I  could 
tell. 

Was  Thistlewood  of  the  number  ? — Yes. 

Was  there  anv  table,  or  any  tl^ipg  like  ft 
table  there  ? — ^A  bench. 

What  kind  of  a  bench?— It  seemed  tp  me 
like  a  carpen^r^s  bench. 

Was  there  any  thing  upon  it?— Yes,  ^  grea^ 
inany  swords  and  pistols. 

Did  Tidd  go  up  stairs  P — Yes. 

When  you  got  up  stairs,  after  you  were  there, 
¥ras  any  thing  said  as  to  what  they  were  going 
to  do? — Yes,  there  was  a  man  in  a  brown 
great  coat  sitting  on  a  low  bench  on  the  oppo- 
site side  from  where  I  entered,  and  he  spoke 
abpift  the  impropriety  o^  going  with  so  small 
a  party  as  five-and-twenty  men  to  Iprd  Harrow- 
h/s,  and  Thistlewood  said  that  that  number 
was  quite  sufficient,  fi))r,  supposing  lord  H^s- 
rowhy  bad  sixteen  men  servants,  he  only  want- 
ed fourteen  men  to  go  into  the  room,  and 
therefore  th^t  number  was  quitj^  si^^cient.  Hp 
then  said  what  should  they  do  when  the  busi- 
ness was  done,  when  they  caipe  out  of  the 
room,  because  most  likely  a  crowd  would  bp 
about  the  door,  and  how  should  they  escape. 

That  was  the  man  th^t  was  addressing 
Thistlewood  ? — ^Yes ;  Thistlewood  said  *'  You 
Hnoiw  this  is  the  smallef  t  bpdy ; — th^  largest 
body  is  already  ^way;"  the  prisoner  David- 
son then  told  him  not  to  throw  cold  wfiter  uppp 
their  proceedings. 

To  whom  dia  he  say  this  ? — To  tfie  man  in 
the  h9xwn  coat,  for  if  he  was  afiracid  of  his  lite 
he  n^ight  go,  as  tjbiey  could  do  without  him. 

By  Davidson  do  you  mean  the  man  qf 
colour f— Yes;  prunt  tlvsn  said,  that  sooner 
than  tfi€v  ihoojld  leave  the  business  they  werjs 

going  about,  he  would  go  into  tCe  room  by 
imself,  and  blow  tjhem  all  up,  if  he  penshea 
with  thepi ;  h^  faid,  ''you  know  we  h^ve  got 
ihat  that  cap  doit,*'  or  words  tp  that  affect; 
the  man  in  ihe  brown  gresU  coat  said,  though 
he  did  not  Ijjce  going  with  ^ o  sm^i  a  number, 
yet  as  they  w^ere  aU  for  i^  he  would'  not  be 
againft.it ;  he  tjien  proposed  that  they  f^hould 
put  thepiselves  under  the  orders  of  Jnr.  This- 
tlewood ;  Thistlewood  said,  that  every  one  en- 
gaged in  that  business  would  have  the  san^ 


103  i]       1  GEOKGE  IV. 

boDoar  as  himself;  he  then  proposed  that  the 
fourteen  men  to  go  into  the  room  should 
volunteer  from  among  the  persons  that  were  in 
the  room. 

After  Thistlewood  had  soproposed,  what 
\na  done  ? — A  few  minutes  atlerwards,  I  sup- 
pose about  eleven  or  twelve  or  thirteen  out  of 
the  fourteen,  ranged  themselves  on  the  other 
side  of  the  room,  and  one  of  them,  Udd,  came 
out  to  speak  to  me  to  say  that  I  might  choose 
my  situation,  and  Thistlewood  put  lum  back, 
flaying,  **  you  all  know  your  places."  I  could 
not  understand  all  that  Tidd  said  to  me,  I  do 
not  recollect  any  thing  partictklar  passing 
after  that,  till  the  officers  came  into  the  room. 

How  soon  afterwards  did  the  officers  come 
into  the  room  r — I  should  suppose  about  five 
miotttes. 

What  happened  when  they  came  into  the 
room  ?— There  seemed  to  be  two  or  Uiree  got 
up  stairs  before  those  in  the  room  knew  it, 
and  one  of  those  said  they  were  officers,  and 
told  them  to  surrender,  and  sud  there  was  a 
guard  of  soldiers  below. 

Were  you  afterwards  taken  into  custody  in 
the  room  ? — Yes. 

And  you  ha?e  been  in  confinement  erer 
since  ? — Yes. 

John  Mmuunent  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Curwood. 

Mr.  Thistlewood  said,  that  every  man  would 
liave  equal  honour  vrith  himself? — ^Yes. 

What  was  to  be  your  honourable  post  ? — 
Indeed  I  do  not  know. 

What  led  you  there?  was  it  the  love  of 
honour  f — ^No,  it  was  fear  principally  that  led 
me  there. 

Wliat  fear  conld  take  you  there  ?~-The  day 
t>efore,  when  Mr.  Brunt  was  at  my  house  ac- 
companied by  Tidd,  he  said  that  any  one  that 
had  eneaged  in  that,  and  who  did  not  come 
forward  at  die  time  would  be  destroyed. 

Had  you  then  engaged  ?— I  had  not  engaged ; 
he  bad  not  asked  me  no  further  than  to  go  to 
the  place. 

2>0  you  go  to  a  place  at  the  request  of  any 
man  to  do  you  do  not  know  what  ? — ^It  was 
foolishy  1)Ut  1  certainly  did. 

You  were  foojish  ? — ^Yes,  I  cannot  chaise 
myself  with  any  crime. 

You  asked,  as  they  were  going  along  Oxford- 
street,  whether  they  were  {oing  lo  the  House 
of  Commons  P— Yes. 

Why  did  you  aric  that  ?  did  you  suppose 
they  were  going  there  ?^I  was  afraid  it  was 
something  bad  when  I  saw  him  take  the  arms. 

What  made  you  suspect  they  were  going  to 
the  House  of  Commons  ?*-I  do  not  know  any 
thing  particular  that  made  me  suspect  that. 

To  hear  the  debates  perhaps  ?— ^o. 

He  told  you  it  was  a  cabinet  dinner  ?— Yes. 

I  think  you  used  these  words  on  Tuesday, 
And  then  I  fully  understood  what  Ihey  were 
going  about  ?»'— Yes. 

Then  what  did  you  fully  understand  they 
Jjrere  goin|;  about?— I ^o  not  know  that  I  said 


Trial  ofjamti  Ingi 


11033 


Al 


that  exactly;  but  that  I  asked  no  further 
question,  because  I  was  certain  whai  it  was.  ' 

What  did  yon  then  suppose  they  wer^ 
going  for  ? — I  could  not  see  that-thc^  could  bt 
going  for  any  thing  but  to  destroy  the  persons 
there  assembled. 

And  you  would  very  readily  join  in  any 
thing  df  this  sort  ?~No,  I  would  not. 

Had  you  belonged  to  none  of  those  meetings 
before  ?  —  To  the  private  meeting  do  yo« 
mean  ? 

Yes,  to  the  private  meetings  ? — No,  I  did 
not. 

How  should  those  wicked  men  come  to  ask 
you,  so  honest  a  man,  to  join  in  this  ? — ^I  de 
not  know ;  I  had  first  seen  Mr.  Hustlewood  at 
Mr.  Ford's  house. 

That  was  just  after  the  Manchester  business  P 
— No,  about  a  week  before  the  meeting  in 
Finsbury-  market. 

When  was  the  Finsbury  meeting  ? — ^I  cannot 
say. 

It  was  after  the  Manchester  meeting?  ^- 
Yes. 

Then  it  was  that  Mr.  Thistlewood  told  yon 
that  he  thought  all  his  friends  should  have 
arms  ? — ^Yes. 

When  Brunt  called  upon  you,  yon  told  him 
you  were  not  ready  to  go  because  you  had  got 
some  work  to  do  ? — ^Yes. 

What  took  you  to  Tidd's  if  you  did  not 
like  this  business  ?~Becauae  I  was  afraid. 

Why  did  not  you  go  to  a  magistrate  and  tell 
him  your  fears  P — ^Xhat  was  a  thing  I  ahould 
not  like  to  have  done. 

He  told  you  there  vras  a  by-word,  a  pas» 
word  ?— Yes. 

And  you  very  readily  agreed  to  go  with 
him  ? — ^Wot  very  readily. 

Yon  expressed  a  great  deal  of  reluctance?— 
I  cannot  say  I  did,  I  was  afraid  to  do  that. 

When  you  found  yourself  in  a  trap  and 
taken,  then  your  conscience  came  to  you,  did 
it  P — It  was  to  me  before,  for  I  never  intended 
to  do  anv  thing,  though  I  was  obliged  to  go ; 
when  I  found  what  Uiey  were  upon,  my  io^ 
tention  was,  when  I  got  out,  to  hare  got  away 
from  them. 

I  think  you  told  us  of  a  conversation  in 
which  Thistlewood  or  somebody  told  a  man  in 
a  brown  coat,  if  he  was  afraid  to  join  them  he 
might  go  away,  for  they  wanted  no  cowards 
there  ?— Yes. 

Why  did  not  you  take  advantage  of  that? 
— I  wished,  at  the  time,  he  had  said  so  to  meu 

You  thought  it  was  only  the  man  in  the 
brown  coat  thai  might  go  P-^-Yes. 

You  joined  Uiem  from  fear? — ^Yes» 

You  proceeded  from  fear? — I  did  not  know 
what  their  proceedings  were  at  first. 

You  did  it  at  a  hazard  P— I  certainly  actfii 
ttxy  foolishly. 

That  is  very 'tender,  do  not  you  think  yom 
acted ,  very  infamously  ?  -*  No,  I  caimot  saj 
that.  ' 


10331 


Jw  High  Tmawii 


A.  D. 189a 


WHQi 


Thmat  MomimetU  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  SoUcUor-GeneraL 

'    I  betieve  the  last  witness  is  your  brother  ? 
—Yes. 

Did  you  know  of  Yonr  brother  having  seen 
Thistlewood  at  Ford's?— Yes,  I  had  heard 
him  mention  it. 

Did  Thistlewood  afterwards  call  npon  him 
mt  his  lodgings  T — ^Yes,  he  did. 

Do  you  live  with  your  brother  ?— <Yes. 
'    Did  Thistlewood  call  alone,  or  in  company 
with  any  person  ? — He  called  in  company  with 
Brunt. 

Did  Thistlewood  and  yonr  brother  remain 
in  the  room  all  Uie  time  f  or  what  occurred  ? — 
They  remained  in  the  room  some  time,  I  sup- 
pose about  ten  minutes,  and  then  Thistlewood 
asked  my  brother  if  he  could  speak  to  him. 

Upon  Thistlewood  adding  this  of  your  bro- 
ther, what  happened  ? — They  went  outside  the 
door. . 

Did  they  afterwards  letuminto  the  room? 
—Yes. 

Do  you  remember  Brunt  calling  upon  your 
brother,  on  Tuesday  the  22nd  of  February? — 
Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  the  conversation  that  pass* 
ed  at  that  time  ? — ^Yes,  I  do ;  Brunt  brought 
a  man  of  the  name  of  Tidd  with  him ;  when 
ibey  came  into  the  room,  my  brother  said  to 
Brunt,  "  I  thought  I  had  lost  you ;''  there  was 
something  said  concerning  the  king's  death. 

By  whom  P— My  brother,  I  thiok,  said  the 
king  is  dead  since  I  saw  you. 

Do  you  recollect  distinctly  what  was  said 
ftbout  tiie  king's  death  ? — ^No,  I  cannot  recol- 
lect exactly ;  Brunt  said  the  king's  death  had 
made  some  alteration  in  their  plans ;  my  bro- 
ther said  ''what  plan?**  he  said  their  plans 
were  different,  they  had  different  objects  in 
▼iew ;  then  Brant  said  to  Tidd, ''  suppose  we 
give  them  the  outline  of  the  plan :"  but  I  do 
not  know  whether  Tidd  made  any  answer,  and 
Brunt  told  us  we  were  to  meet  up  a^  Tybum- 
tumpike,  on  the  following  evening  at  six 
o'clock ;  then  thev  give  us  the  pass  word. 

What  was  that  f — It  consisted  of  the  letters 

Who  were  to  say  the  letters  ft,  «,  <  ?— We 
were,  and  if  any  of  their  party  were  there,  they 
would  answer  tfO,n;  and  by  that,  we  should 
know  them. 

Was  that  all  that  passed  at  that  time,  that 
yon  recollect } — ^Yes,  they  went  away  then. 

Do  you  remember  Brunt  coming  the  next 
day? — ^Yes,  it  vras  near  five  o'clock  in  the 
evening. 

What  did  he  say  ? — He  asked  my  brother  if 
he  was  ready  to  go ;  he  said,  he  could  not  go 
jitstthen,  for  we  were  about  finishing  some 
work ;  he  told  him  if  he  called  upon  Tidd  in 
llole-in-the-wall*passage,  he  woula  take  him. 

What  time  did  your  brother  go,  ns  yearly  as 
yoo  can  recollect  ?— >It  was  within  a  very  few 
^linutes  of  seven  o'clock,  when  he  left  off. 

ypu  .did  not  see  him  again  that  night  ? — I 


never  saw  him  afterwards^  till  1  saw  him  in 
custody. 

George  (Mock  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  LUtUdale. 

Where  do  yon  live  ?-*AtNo.  2,  Cato-street^ 

Do  you  remember  on  the  23rd  of  February 
last,  seeing  any  person  that  attracted  your  at- 
tention in  Cato«street  ? — ^Yes. 

Who  was  it  ? — Mr.  Harrison. 

Yon  had  known  him  before  i — ^Yes,  I  had. 

Do  you  see  him  in  court  ?— Yes,  he  is  ihe 
gentleman  ihatis  standing  there  [pob^kig  to 
the  bar]. 

Where  did  you  see  himP — ^He  was  goinr 
into  the  stable,  I  asked  him  how  he  did,  and 
he  the  same  to  me. 

Did  you  ask  him  what  he  was  going  there, 
for? — ^zes,  he  said  he  had  taken  two  chambers, 
and  was  going  to  clean  them  up. 

Had  you  any  further  conversation  with  him  ? 
—No,  none. 

In  the  course  of  the  same  evening,  did  you 
see  any  persons  going  into  and  coming  out  of 
the  stable?— Yes. 

At  what  time  ? — From  five  to  seven,  I  saw 
different  persons  going  in  and  out. 

Lord  Chief  Juttice  Dallas. — There  is  no 
doubt  that  persons  were  going  in  and  out ;  they 
were  found  there. 

Mr.  SoUeUor  OeneraL — It  is  immaterial,  cer- 
tainly, my  lord.    I  will  call  Ruthven. 

Gtorge  ThamoM  Jotepk  Bulhven  sworn. — Exai> 
mined  by  Mr.  BoUantL 

You  are  a  constable  at  Bow-street  ?— I  am. 
.  In  consequence  of  information,  did  you  go 
to  Cato-street  on  the  23rd  of  Februaiy  with  ft 
party  of  the  officers  ? — I  did. 

At  what  time  did  yon  get  there?— About 
six. 

Where  did  you  muster  ?— The  first  informa- 
tion I  had  of  goine  to  the  stable  was  about 
half-past  eight;  then  we  mustered  mt  the 
comer. 

What  time  did  you  enter  the  stable?— ^ 
About  half-past  eight,  as  near  as  could  be. 

Whom  did  you  observe  on  going  in?— I 
observed  a  man  walking  backwards  and  fbfw 
wards  with  a  gun  on  his  shoulder,  and  a  sword 
by  his  side,  as  a  sentinel. 

What  sort  of  a  man  was  that  ?— I  cannot 
say,  for  I  did  not  stop  one  instant.  I  said  to 
the  party  with  me,  **  secure  that  man,"  and 
went  up  stairs. 

There  was  a  ladder? — ^Yes. 

Who  proceeded  with  you  up  stairs  ? — ^My-^ 
self,  then  next  Ellis,  and  then  Smithers  and 
Gibbs,  as  I  have  been  since  told,  but  I  did 
not  see  him. 

When  you  got  into  the  loft,  what  did  von 
observe?— I  observed  several  men  standing 
round  a  bench. 

What  do  you  mean  by  a  bench?— There 
was  a  carpeuttt^s  bench  in  the  room. 

How  many  men  might  there  be  in  the  Mom^ 


lOa^l       ^  GBORGB  IV, 

M  «wHj«i  yoD  cfuiftate^-^Abpolfionr  or  ftiw 
aiad  tweoty. 

Did  you  perceive  any  thing  on  the  bendi  ? 
^-Tbere  -was ;  I  heard  ^  clattering  of  arms, 
and  saw  some  persons  apparently  sorting  the 
anns  pu  the  h^ndi. 

Did  ypQ  or  Ellin  s^  any  thing  ?<^  said, 
<<  W«  tie  ottwri;  m^  their  anas.'' 

Before  you  got  up  the  et«ii«9  befeie  yo» 
gained  the  loft,  had  mytoing  heea  said  by 
any  pffrfon  below  ?— I  am  PQt  Mtms  of  it|  I 
cannot  «all  it  to  my  raooUeotiaii. 

Upon  yoQrsi^i9|  this,  whaldid^nyonedo? 
— Thistlewood  looked  up,  caught  up  a  sword, 
ao4  JVptired  i«IO  a  little  ivofi ;  I  think  there 
ivere  Jlbree  or  four  retiosd  ifite  tlit  littlf  rofNn 
and  the  others  into  the  back  part. 

Wm  theie  ft  little  room  going  out  of  fhe 
hiqper  Hioiatf^There  was,  pd  the  right  of  the 
bench  as  we  went  up. 

Lord  CA%f  Bflr0n.^Whidi  of  the  two  side 
rooms  ? — ^The  further  one|  my  lord,  ne^^t  tfie 
street. 

Mr.  BMoid. — Did  you  know  the  psison  of 
Uikaewood  7-^1  did,  well. 

How  long  bed  yon  bew  eoqminted  with 
him  ? — ^From  the  time  of  the  state  trials  before, 
two  or  three  years  ago. 

Where  was  SmlthersT — Smith^vs  thep  ap- 
peared on  my  right  hand. 

Did  you  MWr  BHis  «f  eoy  ihiiig  to  |he 
pvty  ?— I  did  n«l. 

What  did  Smithers  doT— I9  approa^ing  th^ 
door  where  Hiistlewood  bad  reared, 

Did  he  then  approach  the  doorf — Yes. 

Did  he  |»is  yon  fr^He  did. 

Upon  his  appnmdiiag  thatdooTf  ares  uny 
iUk^  done  by  any  «^  the  uirties  wi|hi«  thai 
room?— -Thistlewood  ttebbed him  with  a  fword; 
ho  ^mM  tenoing,  to  pur^Ml  Mgr  PMMu  Ap- 
proaching that  door. 

You  saw  him  fencing  htfom  9Wthfln  tp- 
pooaohed  him  ^i-Yes,  and  ob  his  appiuafhing 
bm*  h«  pui  hii  aim  forward  in  tfaif  way* 

Was  any  thing  else  done  from  that  room  Jtf^ 
No^tttfUlsaar. 

Did  ym  heer  any  thing7-^A  pistol  was  lired 
^Imm  iaataatly  on  Smitheai  being  Mabbed, 
aad  the  lights  were  put  out* 

Whei  happened  when  daiknew  cane  on  7»^ 
I  then  heard  nom  that  oonier  of  the  room  irhere 
Ae  little  room  fwas,  sosnp  yoice  crying  ^  Kill 
the  bi»--T*r8,  ihaow  them  down  ataim.'* 

Did  4he  paities  keep  their  pngioal  etafioDs 
in  the  room,  or  withdraw  themselsses  to  the  end 
of  it  r— On  their  saying  thet^  I  hewd  »  rash 
towards  Uie  otaJHPcase. 

Did  jrov  jein  in  that  rqah  f-^  did. 

Did  you  aagr  any  thiagft-J  did,  upon  Iheir 
saying  ^Kill  the  b— rs,  throw  diem  down 
stain^  I  and,  ^  Aye  damn  dunn  iUttthem,'' 
ar  ^  Ape  kill  Iheav'^ar  soaMthingof  that  kind. 

Did  you  get  down  the  ladder .?i^  did. 

When  )M  001  dawn  was  4hera  aayliglvt  in 
tiie  sUbleMoifli^ThMivitf  wHartaiJfei 
damn* 


Trial  ^Jmnes  lugi 


[1030 


Where  did  yon  then  goT— I  got  mto  John* 
street  and  met  the  soldiers. 

Did  you  return  to  the  stiUble  ? — ^I  did. 

Upon  getting  to  the  alabledid  yoneat  aiiber 
of  the  prisoners  ? — ^I  did ;  Tidd. 

Whare  did  m  aae  Tidd  r.^  saw  him  cam- 
ing  from  the  door. 

Do  you  mean  onW  coming  from  the  doai^  Of 
eomiiig  oat  of  tha  daar  ^f-iMiog  out  of  the 
door;  the  door  wm  apan»  and  ha  was  oacmg 
from  it* 

Was  he  widkiog  or  mnnhig  ^Batween  the 
%w%  a  soft  of  shuffle. 

Had  he  any  thing  in  his  hand  f — I  did  aaH 
ohserfie  that  at  that  time. 

What  did  yott dot— I  caUed  to  lomabady 
folloniqg  me  lo  lay  hold  of  him,  and  imaia- 
difttely  npon  my  spring  thai  be  lifted  hia  ana, 
and  I  saw  a  pietoL 

Upon  yow  iecing  thai  did  you  aeiie  him  ! — 
I  dio ;  I  &Ut  and  puUed  bim  ^i^a  we  na  Iha 

dung  heap. 

Did  the  soldieni  eame  ap  and  egtrioata  you  ? 
—They  did. 

Who  aicukatad  yoa?-r<S9i3c«nt  X^egg  and 
some  of  the  rnant 

Did  you  take  Tidd  any  where  ?— I  did  to  a 
pabUobanasaalled  the  Sorae  and  Cfooni^  the 
corner  of  Cato-stieet. 

Was  he  sean^ed  ?-i-I  seaapbad  him. 

What  did  yofi  fiikdnpoa  him?— Two  baQ 
cartridges. 

Where  ware  tbay?*r4n  Us  bieadias  pocket 

Wm  h^  acoontred  al  aU  ?T-4ie  had  a  belt 
round  his  waist. 

Was  anv  oth«r  prisoner  brought  in,  wbOe 
poa  wens  tbare  F-^Ibere  wet  Budbnra. 

Did  you  seaidi  btmt-*I  did. 

What  did  you  dnd  upon  hia>? — In  hi« 
breeches  podt^el  I  found  eia  ball  oartndgeiy  and 
three  loose  balls. 

Was  he  accoutrad  at  aU  ? — ^Roond  Ins  waisl 
there  was  a  string  fire  or  six  times  ronnd. 

Would  thai  string  have  answered  the  pw^ 
pose  of  a  belt  far  a  pistol  F— It  would- 

Was  any  oUiar  priaoner  brought  in  ? — David* 
son. 

What  arms  did  he  axhtbit  ?— When  he  came 
in  he  began  to  sing  a  song,  **  Scots  wha  ha'  wT 
Wallace  bled,''  lod  damned  any  man  that 
would  not  diain  liberty's  canse*  that  be  gloried 
in  it. 

Was  he  at  all  accoutred  ?— Idid  not  observa 
it. 

Did  yen  leaiab  |iim?^l  beliava  he  was 
aeaacbad  by  anathee* 

Ww  Wilson  bro«|^  in  wlula  you  ^a«m 
there?— He  was. 

I  do  not  teopr  vfaethar  yfu  aaaiched  him  or 
notl^I  did  nau 

After  tbifl  bad  Mised  at  ibe  pnbUo^oosi^ 
did  yon  ntnm'ta  flie  left  7-7-1  diif. 

In  wbal  anae  was  tba  loft,  on  vom  satni*^ 
'-^Ther^  anexa  iseattsal  soldieis  and  Isur  .of  the 
paeoners  attebar  iatbeaoom>  and  soma  of 
the  officeia. 

I      Lord  Chief  Jtofjce  Didbi.— What  happened 


10673 


Jhr  High  Treiiion*, 


A^D*  IMO. 


tioes 


wbett  9aill)iefai  rtedvad  Mb  ihratt  with  the 
sword  f — Ha  fell  back  and  said,  "  Oh,  my 
God/'  or  ^  Oh,  I  am  doiie>"  1  do  not  kubw 
whiih« 

Mr.  6oUdnd.—tie  very  soon  died?— tRrfectly, 
t  heard  no  tnore. 

When  you  returned  to  the  loft,  did  you  find 
Imyanns? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

What  aftnd  did  you  And  f— Two  swords. 

We  have  now  a  list  of  all  the  arms  which 
were  found,  fltod  by  whom ;  have  you  made  an 
Inventory  of  those  arms  T — ^I  have. 

Look  at  that,  and  say,  whether  it  is  an  ac- 
curate account  i  did  you  make  that  yourself 
[handing  a  piper  to  the  loiAiesi].— I  did,  I  found 
two  swords  and  one  buUet,  ten  hand-grenades, 
fmd  two  fire  balls. 

These,  you  personally  found  ? — Yes. 

Is  that  a  list  of  all  the  things  in  your  cnslbdy, 
stating  the  respective  places  where  they  were 
found  ?— Yes. 

Co  on  with  your  Hst. 

Mr.  AdoMun^*-itBAe  the  places  idiere  tlMBf 
Were  found.  *^Iikewise  ope  lav^e  oYie  that  I 
found,  and  which  has  beet  in  my  ciufeodj^  ef  itf 
since. 

Mr.  BottHid.'^What  is  that  r--A  dbftig  €XM 
with  powder;  it  is  eomelhing  tiailarlo  the 
othen,  only  nraeh  Im^K 

Hat  it  a  ftise  to  H  ?<^Y^ 

Read  that  list.— Thirty^eigfat  btU  cattmlgM^ 
found  by seijeaut  Loll ;  sfiretok  and  a  bi^ouet, 
by 'corporal  StrioklaBd;  one  ipcwder  iksk,  b^ 
Jnaes  Edgaor;  tfavee  pistob  and  o«e  swm^ 
wiA  six  bi^enel  spikes  sHlmisftothbelt;  one 
blflnderbusi ;  o«e  ^tol;  foutteen:  li^eHMt 
spikes  and  three  pointed  files ;  one  bayonet} 
0tt  baronet  spdLe  ted  one  sw^id  ieaMard ; 
ooe  -carbine  and  bayonet:;  l^vo  sweids;  one 
bullet  $  ten  faaBd>«renades ;  two  ttre  balls ;  otie 
Urge  gmMide  flM  bayon A ;  the  onfe  I  spoldb 
^  aiKl  that  was  foond  in  Wiy  pMsenoe,  dnd 
tbat  has  been  in  ny  oastody  ever  sinoe ;  la  icfp€ 
hMai;  one  K^ord  ttiok ;  folrW  bidl  oaHndg^M^ 
one  bayonet  and  three  loose  oalls ;  tMese  weitt 
alHeitnd  iv4heloft{  lA'die  pookel  df  BrfadblWn, 
«K  balbctatridgas;  three  bttUs  vnd  soaodtring 
put  round  him  to  act  as  a  belt ;  one  pi^lel  iial 
TMd^t^'^  a  pistol  thai  Wiladn  attempted  to 

Lord  Chief  Jmiice  DdUsi.— Yon  had  not 
mentioned  that  Tidd  fired.r— The  pistol  that 
Tidd  lifted  his  arm  to  fire  he  did  fire,  after  he 
was  partly  lying  on  me  on  the  ground.  There 
were  found  in  the  stable,  a  blundeibuss;  a 
sword,  belt,  and  scabb^;  one  pistol;  one 
ditto  and  one  sword ;  twelve  sticks  with  fer- 
rules :  in  the  pocket  of  Tidd,  two  ball  cart* 
^ridges,  and  roundhim  a  leathern  belt     ■ 

Mf.  Bol2anef.-**-Wh«t  sort  of  sififcks  w^ 
those  ?--They  are  long  sticks,  I  should  Ihink 
tfhc  or  seVdn  foet  loog^'perfaa]»  eight,  I  am  not 
qaitiB  nose;  in  the  eno  there  is  a  hole;  two- 
ball  cartridges  found  facing  the  stable,  and  ten 


ball  cartridges  found  thrown  away  in  Newn. 
ham-street:  one  musket  cut  dcTwn,  and  one 
sword  taken  from  Davidson :  one  haversack ; 
cross  belts;  oae  nrieker;  bayonet  scabbaird; 
cartouche  box,  ana  a  belt  round  %is  b^y^  Ihoile 
were  On  Davideon :  two  havenacks  ^  6ne  belt 
and  tin  powder  olee  tdien  froln  Ingss  font 
pistol  balls ;  one  pistol  key,  and  a  knife  dase 
from  IngB :  a  oese  to  receive  a  large  knife ; 
one  haversaek^  6Mitaining  sevebteen  ball  eact- 
ridges }  tbi^  ballsj  One  pistol  flint;  one 
pricker;  one  worm  for  drawing  etotrkigai^ 
one  knifo  MA  a  tmm  strew*  I  aleo  got  »ifick 
which  was  left  in  the  public-house. 

Before  yow  kUk  the  publie^bonsrwbev^  Da- 
vidson and  Bmdbom  etpreised  tfaeinaelves  as 
yon  have  stated,  did  WUson^bcpvessany  tkingf 
*^Yefe ;  he  said  he  did  not  caie  a  damti^  be 
knew  it  was  all  ov«r,  they  flight  a*  well  kiU 
hiforaow  ns  another  tiinow 

Before  yon  went  to  the  stable  did  ywi  go  I* 
llm  Hofse  and*  Oroom?*-'!  didi 

While  you  were  there  did  either  of  the  pin* 
s6n0rs  obne  teite  T-^-XZioopir  and  Oiiefeist 
came  in. 

Had  CJoepir  or  Gilcfatttt  aay  ttaog  with 
Ihem  ^--Coofker  bfll  a  aMk 

What  feoft'of  n  itink  wae  ilN^^A  mopKtidt 
or  broomstick. 

Did  lie  leiMe  ft  id  *•'  honib  or  take  it«mt 
with  him  !-^fi»leit  it  in  the^wise. 

Did  yoir  tiiM  possMioiror  iir;t--4fo«  dft- 
}mt^4  I  did  s(toi  wwds»  thai  night»  aid  i>H» 
it  now. 

Did  either  of  Aio  prisooers  eonn  hmit  for 
thAt«lMk  T-*GihMst^iii. 

Yo««iy  k  is  a  moptddkl^it  m 

is  thete^aay  thing  pasticolu'.  about  it  ^«*tiilr 
the  end  it  is  o«t  rtfnUd  that  deptiif  lib»4isiiij^ 
as  if  td  reeeive  tile  seohet  <aimaf  tmog. 

6eorse  l^iomat  JmoA  Ibahveu  crois-euminet^ 
by  Mr.  AdolphM, 

Yon  sat  ^^  ^^  ^*K  P<^  ^"^  I  kowWteny 
liglits  wete  there  f-^^flAsiMarly  as  I  can-  tel^ 
in  the  two  rooms,  about  eight*  I  tMnb  ifoMI 
fohs  i]fr  fkf  e  iif  the  flmitioii,  tMeio^  nnd'  tw(^ 
or  three  in  the  end  room  where  they  leihii 
td^  bottUsIiguemedlhna  tfao.glai«  of  fight 
ikAtnpriealied^ 

Vbe  fourier'fiveinlheMt,  or^irtftiodfl^yM 
eitald  sec  ?^I' (Amid* 

You  have  no  doubt  there  were  four  or  fif» 
ligUls  ?(-^I  have  no  doubt. 

The  words  you  said  were  veryphyperty  tMi 
oomintt  up  ^We  are  dffieen;  seise  their 
annsi*-*-ies. 

Nothmgelse?  did  Elfis eay  any  Oong  else f 
—Not  that  I  heaitf . 

Did  Smithers^sa^  eny  Aing  moie  tiiAn  ^  Let 
me  oome  forward,^  and  when  he  leceived  ite 
bl<iw,  «OhmyGodr  or,  '^Ohl^m^dene?'^ 
—No. 

lliose  were  ftll  the  w^idi  thu  paiiedf— 
Yefe,  all  that  I  beaid. 


1039}       1  GEORGE  iV. 

Jamet  EUU  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Otcnaey. 

Youy  I  beliere,  are  one  of  the  condncton  of 
the  patrol  at  Bow-street  ?— I  am. 

On  the  eyening  of  Wednesday,  the  23rd  of 
Febmaryy  did  you  go  with  other  officers  to  a 
•table  in  Cato-street? — I  did. 

Did  you  enter  the  stable  close  to  Rathven  f 
— ^As  close  as  I  possibly  coold  enter. 

Did  you  find  a  light  in  the  stable  f—There 
was  a  light. 

Did  you  find  any  men  in  the  stable  ? — ^There 
were  two. 

'Where  was  the  man  standing  whom  yoa 
obserted  first? — ^The  first  man  I  observed  was 
standing  aboat  half-way  between  the  door  at 
which  we  entered,  and  the  foot  of  the  ladder 
whidi  goes  up  into  the  loft. 

Is  that  ladder  placed  at  the  fiirther  end  of 
the  stable  ? — ^At  the  further  end,  in  the  Teiy 
comer,  opposite  the  door  at  whidiwewent 
in. 

VHu)  was  that  man  ?^I  belieTc  him  to  be 
Davidson. 

The  man  of  colour  ?— Yes ;  I  look  him  by 
the  collar,  and  turned  him  half  round,  and 
looked  in  his  fiu^e,  and  I  beliere  him  to  be 
Davidson. 

How  was  he  accoutred? — He  had  got  a 
short  gun.  or  carbine,  in  his  hand,  cari3ring  it 
In  somewhat  of  this  manner  [de9artbmg  ir],  and 
at  Us  left-hand  side  a  long  sword  banging,  and 
two  white  belts  across  his  shoulden.  . 
-  You  say  you  took  him  by  the  collar,  and 
turned  him  half  round? — Yes,  and  I  looked  in 
hts  foce,  and  saw  he  was  a  man  of  colour ;  I 
immediately  d^red  some  of  the  others  who 
were  with  me  to  secure  that  man. 

Did  you  observe  any  other  man?— Yes, 
there  was  another  man  in  the  further  stall  of 
the  stable,  near  the  ladder;  he  appeared  to  be 
a  shorter  man. 

How  was  he  dressed  ? — ^I  believe  he  had  got 
A  dark  coloured  coat  on,  but  I  tock  but  Teiy 
little  notice  of  him. 

Did  you  follow  Ruthven  up  the  ladder? — 
I  did. 

Did  you  hear  Davidson  say  any  thing  to  (he 

Eirsons  above  ?— I  heard  somebody  from  bfr> 
w  call  out  something — **  men,'*  the  last  word 
was  ^  men,''  but  I  could  not  understand  the 
jrest. 

Did  you  understand  it  to  be  a  signal  to  those 
above  ? — ^I  did. 

You  say  you  followed  Rulhven  up  the  lad- 
der, who  followed  you  ?— Richard  Smithers. 

As  ^ou  ascended  the  ladder,  did  you  hear 
any  noise  in  the  lofl  ? — I  did. 

Wliat  did  you  hear  ? — I  heard  a  noise,  which 
appeared  to  me  to  be  a  rattling  of  swords. 
'    When   you   got  up  the  ladder  who  then 
spoke  ? — Ruthven. 

What  did  he  say  to  the  best  of  your  recol- 
lection?—He  called  out,  '<We  are  officers, 
seize  their  arms,"  or,  •'we  are  officers,  sur- 
render your  arms,"  or  to  that  efiect. 


Trial  of  James  lags 


[1040 


Were  tfiere  lights  in  the  toft?— Yes,  there 
were. 

What  were  they  ?— •There  were  candies. 

How  many  do  you  remember  seeing  ? — I  ear 
positive  there  were  three  or  more,  but  I  can- 
not speak  to  how  many  there  were ;  there  were 
three  lights  or  more  in  the  loft;  there  were 
lights  in  the  little  room,  from  the  shade  vrhich 
I  saw,  but  I  could  not  see  what  lights  they 
were. 

Where  were  those  candles  placed? — Ap« 
parently  on  the  carpenter's  bench  whidi  stood 
across  the  room. 

Upon  Ruthven,  and  yourself,  and  Smithers 
getting  into  the  loft,  what  did  you  observe 
take  place  ? — ^The  moment  I  gained  the  top  of 
the  ladder,  I  observed  a  number  of  men  fall- 
ing back  to  the  back  pert  of  the  loft,  with  their 
backs  to  the  wall,  placing  themselves  against 
the  wall. 

Did  you  see  Thistlewood  ? — I  did. 

What  did  he  do  ?  —There  were  Thistlewood, 
and  two  or  three  others  between  the  end  of 
the  carpenter's  bench,  and  the  door  of  the 
little  room ;  and  immediately  on  my  gaining 
the  top  of  the  laddd^,  Tliistlewood  presented 
his  sword  at  me,  and  shook  lus  hand  in  this 
manner,  as  if  to  make  a  stab.  I  immediately 
desired  him  to  desist,  or  I  would  fire  at  him. 

Had  you  a  pistol  in  your  hand  ? — ^I  had  a 
pistol  in  my  rignt  hand,  and  my  truncheoo  or 
staff  in  my  left  hand,  which  I  held  out  iu  this 
manner  [de$cribmg  Uy 

Upon  that  what  did  Thistlewood  do? — 
Upon  that  he  retreated,  backing  into  the  Uttle 
room,  through  the  little  door ;  at  that  moment 
Smithers  having  gained  the  top  of  the  ladder, 
rushed  forward  to  enter  the  door  of  the  little 
room. 

What  did  Thistlewood  do  upon  his  approach- 
ing the  door  P— At  the  moment  that  he  reach* 
ed  the  jamb  of  the  door,  Thistlewood  made  a 
thrust  and  stabbed  him  in  the  right  breast. 

Upon  Uiat  what  did  Smithers  say  or  do?— 
He  held  np  his  hands  in  this  way  oyer  his  head, 
and  exdaimed,  ^'Oh  my  God  r'  or  words  of 
that  kind. 

Did  he  &11  immediate  afterwards  P— He 
fell  almost  immediately,  he  staggersd  past  ase 
and  fell. 

Upon  this  what  did  yon  do?— At  the  mo« 
ment  that  he  threw  up  his  hands  and  exdairn* 
ed  <<  Oh  my  God  T  1  fired. 

At  whom  ? — At  Thistlewood. 

You  fired  your  pistol? — ^I  did. 

As  soon  as  you  nad  done  that,  what  became 
of  the  lights? — ^The  lights  were  all  put  out  ihe- 
moinent  that  I  fired,  the  flash  of  my  own 
pistol  was  the  last  light  I  saw. 

I  presume  great  confusion  took  place  imme- 
diately ? — ^Tbere  was  a  great  confusion. 

Were  you  forced  down  the  ladder  into  the 
stable  ?— By  the  rush  made  against  me  I  was 
thrown  down  the  ladder. 

Were  there  any  other  shoU  find?—Ther» 
were  several  fired  in  the  lofl  while  I  was  upon 
the  ladder. 


104i]  J^  High  Treason, 

bid  you  get  to  th^  Abor  of  the  stable?— 
'Upon  recovering  myself  in  the  stable  I  got  to 
the  door. 

Were  any  shots  fiVe'd  then  ? — ^There  \vere  fwo 
or  three  shots  filled  then;  two,  I  think,  passed 
mb  hi  the  door. 

•  From  whence  do  you  think  they  were  fired  ? 
■ — I  cooJd  not  dfetinctiy  tell.  ' 

Did  you  perceive  any  fired  from  the  window 
of  the  little  room? — ^There  was  another  shot 
fired  in  the  stable  by  a  man  who  stood  near  ttte 
bottom  of  the  ladder;  he  fired  up  the  manger. 

Wh^n  yon  got  to  the  door  did  you  observe 
anyfiring  from  the  window  of  the  room  above  P 
— ^There  were  some  shots  fired  from  the  win- 
doi^  of  the  little  room  above. 

That  room  looks  into  Cato-street  ? — It  does. 

•  While  you  were  at  that  door  did  you  observe 
any  ihan  in  Cato-street  ? — I  heard  the  ciy  of 
^*  IStop  him/'  and  I  observed  a  man  running  away. 

Was  he  runirtrtg  down  Cato-street  ?— Yes, 
running  towards  Queen-street. 
'    What  did  ybd  observe  upon  himf— I  ob- 
served he  had  got  white  belts.  i 

•  Ob  yon  mean  cross  beljs  P — ^Yes. 

•  Did  Von  pursue  him  ? — I  pursued  him. 
bid  you  catch  him  T—^I  caught  him  in  C&to- 

st^eet. 

Whom  did  he  turn  out  to  be  t — Davidson, 
the  man  of  colour. 

\5p6t  your  laying  hold  of  him  what  did  he 
do  to  you  ? — He  made  something  of  a  cut  with 
bift  swbrj. 

too  yda  mean  a  cut  at  you  ? — I  believe  it 
Was  intended  at  me. 

Did  any  other  persons  come  up  and  assist 
Jroti  in  sfecuring  bini  ?— Yes,  they  did. 

Who  were  they  ?— One  of  out  people  of  (he 
t»xDe  bf  t>lll,  and  another  of  thig  name  of 
Chapman.  . 

'  Did  Vou  Icftve  him  in  the  'cust(5dy  of  your 
liroth^bfircerS,  and  return  to  the  stable  T—| 
did,  as  soon  as  I  had  secured  him  I  returned 
as  quitk  §S  p<5sslble. 

Did  you. then  find  lieutenant  Fitzclar^nce 
ind  the  Soldiers  there  ?— I  found  the  soldiers 
ftere.  t  do  not  kfa6#  whether  lieUtienant  Fitz- 
6Tamit<6  wfui  ill  th&.pMce. 

Did  you  find  any  of  the  prisoners  who  hsfd 
HeAi  tidcetf  tit  ibfe  lof^  or  the  stable  ?— There 
were  four  men ;  they  were  not  in  actual  tus- 
tody,  but  they  could  do  do  harm ;  they  were  in 
the  loft  among  the  soldiers.    • 

Who  were  they  ? — I  cannot  speak  very  po- 
sitively; Monument  was  one,  and  I  believe 
WiUoh  was  another,  I  think  Strange  was  an- 
other^ but  I  am  not  positive. 

I  believe  you  fetched  Davidson  to  the  loft  ? 
— As  soqn  as  they  were  secured  I  fetched  him 
hiftf  th(£  loft  fd  (hem. 

.  Then  they  were  taken  away  to  Bow-street  ? 
— Tes. 

•I   WUUam  WtOcoatt  sworn.— Eounhined  by 

Mr.  Gufntg. 

Tdb'  arS  aU o  a  conductor  of  (he  patrol  at 
Bow-^reet? — lam. 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


A.  D.  18^.  I*^b4& 

•  •  • 

Lord  Chief  Justice  DMti. — Are  you  gbfng  ta 
fresh  facts? 

Mr.  G»rw^.— Yes,  my  lord,  I  am.;  did  yon 
accompany  Ruthvcn  and  Fllis  and  the  other 
officers  of  Ihe  stable  in  Cato-street  ? — I  did. 

Yon,  I  believe,  did  not  go  up  into  the  loft 
at  first  ? — No,  I  did  not. 

When  they  had  gone  up  did  you  hear  any 
noise  of  firing,  or  any  confusion  above  ? — I  did. 
Did  you  observe  any  person  in  the  stable  ? 
-^I  did. 

Whom  did  you  observe? — Ings. 
Tlie  prisoner  Ings  ? — Yes. 
At  the  first  moment  that  you  observed  him 
what  wis  he  doing  or  attempting  to  do  ? — I  did 
not  see  him  attempt  to  do  any  thing ;  he  rushed 
towards  me  as  if  attempting  to  get  out  of  th^ 
stable.  .  " 

What  did  you  do? — I  seized  him  by  the 
collar. 

And  did  what? — And  shoved  him  back 
against  the  wall,  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder.  • 

What  did  he  then  do  ? — He  went  to  put  his 
hand  of  his  right  side ;  upon  that  I  hit  him  a 
blow. 
As  you  thought  to  get  a  weapon  ? — Yes. 
Upon  that  you  hit  him  a  blow  ? — Yes,  upon  the 
right  side  of  the  head,  and  knocked  him  down^ 
then  they  came  tumbling  down  the  ladder. 

Then  the  officers  came  tumbling  down  the 
ladder? — Yes,  they  did. 
Did  you  hear  the  firing  above  ? — O  yes. 
After  you  had  heard  that  firing  above,  and 
they  had  tumbled  down,  did  you  see  the  fiash 
of  any  pistol  any  where?—!  did,  from  the 
bottom  of  the  ladder. 

.  Where  did  it  appear  to  you  "that  pbtol  was 
fired  into  7 — A  s  it  appeared  to  me,  it  was  fired 
int6  the  stable. 

Did  you  then  observe  any  person  come  down 
whom  you  knew  ? — I  did. 

Where  was  that? — When  the  man  came 
from  the  ladder  into  the  stable,  I  saw  it  waa 
Thistle  wood. 

Did  that  appear  to  you  to  be  Ihe  man  .who 
bad  fired  that  pistol  ? — Me  did. 

What  did  Thistlewood  do  ? — When  he  came 
into  the  stable  he  tiiined  round  and  presented 
a  pistol  to  my  head,  but  I  released  Ings,  and  I 
put  n)y  hand  up  to  save  myself,  aiid  the  ball 
came  here  [poirUi?'ig  to  his  arm]. 

Did  the  pistol  go  off? — Yes  it  did ;  t  put, 
my  hand  up  to  save  my  bead,  and  found  my-' 
self  wounded. 

Did  the  pistol  go  off? — ^Yes,  it  did. 
You  left  Ings  to  protect  yourself? — Yes.      ^ 
You  found  a  pistol  presented  at  you  and  it 
went  off  f— Yes. 

And  weiil  where  ? — I  found  it  had  wounded, 
niy  hand,  and  there  were  three  holes  in  my 
hat,  and  one  on  tlie  right  side  did  not  come 
through.    I  received  then  a  violent  blow  on  the 
right  side  of  my  headr  ^^^  I  ^^^^' 
Did  il  hurt  your  hand  ?— Yes. 
Did  it  perforate  the  sleeve?— Yes,  it  went' 
right  through. 
And  through  the  ha"(? — Tes.' 
3X 


*  *      ■• 


10481        ^  GEORGE  IV. 

As  yoa  fell  did  you  observe  Thistlewood  do  i 
any  thing? — He  immediately  cut  at  me  with  a 
sword. 

And  what  did  he  do  then  ? — He  rushed  out 
at  the  stable  door. 

I  omitted  to  ask  you  whether  when  Ruthven, 
ElliSy  and  Smithers  went  up  the  ladder,  you 
heard  either  of  them  say  any  tning  to  the  persons 
in  the  loft  ?— 'I  heard  somebody  say  something, 
but  who  it  was  I  cannot  say  :  I  heard  some- 
body say  something,  but  I  cannot  say  what. 

A  Juryman* — What  became  of  Ings  when  he 
knocked  you  down  ? — He  made  his  escape  out 
of  the  stable. 

When  you  raised  your  arm  to  ward  off  the 
blow  that  was  aimed  from  a  musket  or  pistol, 
by  Thistlewood,  you  let  Ings  go? — Yes. 

And  he  made  bis  escape  ? — Yes. 

Luke  ifixon  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Qumey, 

Are  yoa  a  Bow-street  patrol? — Yes. 

Did  you  go  with  the  other  officers  to  this 
stable  in  Cato-street? — Yes,  I  did. 

Did  you  see  Westcoatt  in  conflict  with  any 
person  there  in  the  stable  ? — ^Yes. 

With  whom?— With  that  man  there. 

Which,  Ings  r— Yes. 

Did  you  see  Ings  leave  the  stable  ? — I  did, 
I  made  a  snatch  at  him  to  catch  him,  but  missed 
him. 

Was  that  after  Thistlewood  had  got  away  ? 
—No,  I  do  not  think  he  had  got  away  then. 

You  made  a  snatch  at  him  to  catch  him  ? — 
Yes,  and  he  got  out;  1  ran  after  him  up  John- 
street,  but  he  was  got  so  far. 

Did  you  meet  him  in  custody.'— As  I  was 
going  up  John*street,  I  heard  a  pistol  fired,  or 
something  of  that  kind. 

You  heard  a  pistol  fired  ? — Yes. 

Did  you  find  nim  in  custody  of  any  persons  ? 
— I  found  him  in  the  custody  of  Brooks  and 
Champion. 

Joieph  CAoinpiofi  sworn.— -Examined 
by  Mr.  Solkiior  General, 

You  are  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrol? — 
Yes. 

Did  yott  go  to  this  place,  Cato-street,  on  the 
erening  of  Uie  23rd  of  February  P — Yes. 

Do  yoa  remembV*  Ruthven  going  into  the 
stabler— I  do. 

Did  you  follow  hi^  to  the  foot  of  the 
ladder } — I  was  about  the  sixth  or  seventh  man 
behind  him ;  I  was  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder 
when  he  was  at  the  top. 

Whom  did  you  see  at  the  bottom  ?-^Ings. 

Did  he  cry  out  any  thing? — He  held  up  his 
head  towards  the  top  of  the  ladder,  and  said, 
*  *  Look  out,  look  out  above/' 

Was  any  attempt  made  at  that  time  to 
secure  him,  that  you  know  of? — Yes ;  West- 
coatt was  at  that  time  in  front  of  him,  en- 
deavouring to  secure  him. 

Do  you  know  whether  he  made  his  escape  ? 
-*Ite  did ;  I  turned  to  the  top  of  the  ladder, 


Trial  of  James  Ings 


[1044 


and  as  I  was  going  up  I  saw .  the  lower  part  of 
a  man's  body  in  the  rack.  I  proceeded  ink- 
mediately  to  strike  him  on  the  legs,  and 
endeavoured  to  force  him  back,  and  when  I 
tamed  round,  Ings  was  gone. 

You  heard  Ings  cry  out,  and  went  up  the 
ladder  part  of  the  way,  you  heard  a  contest 
with  Westcoatt,  and  Ings  made  his  escape  ? — 
Yes. 

Was  be  afterwards  taken  into  custody?—* 
He  was. 

Where  ? — In  the  Edgware-road. 

Did  yon  go  to  the  spot? — Yes,  I  laid  hold 
of  him  immediately  after  the  watchman. 

You  found  him  m  custody,  and  Brooks  was 
one  of  the  persons  who  had  him  in  cnstody  ? — 
Yes. 

Did  you  search  him? — We  took  him  to 
Mary-le-bone  watch*house,  and  searched  himu 

What  did  you  find  upon  him  P — ^Four  pistol 
ball:},  the  key  of  a  pistol,  and  a  knife-case  made 
of  blue  cloth. 

What  kind  of  knife,  small  or  large  ? — ^Pretty 
large. 

Hare  you  seen  the  knife  produced  here  tbv 
other  day  ? — ^Yes,  I  have,  it  fits  it  exactly.       • 

There  was  no  knife  about  him  ? — ^No,  not  al 
the  time  we  searched  him. 

The  knife-case  fitted  the  botcher's  knife  that 
was  produced  the  other  day  ? — ^Yes. 

Had  the  knife  any  wax-end  about  the 
handle?— It  had. 

In  addition  to  that  did  you  find  any  thing 
else  about  him,  any  bags  ? — Brooks  did ;  I 
saw  them  taken  from  his  person ;  he  took  his 
great  coat  off,  and  there  were  two  baversadLSt 
one  under  each  arm,  and  in  one  there  was  a 
tin  case  nearly  full  of  loose  powder;  he  had 
idso  a  cloth  bdt  round  his  body,  with  pistol 
hobters. 

In  addition  to  the  haTcrsacks  there  was  a 
cloth  belt  round  his  waist  ? — ^Yes,  wbich  Brooks 
took  firom  him. 

Was  that  adapted  to  receire  pistols?— It 
was. 

Was  that  all  that  was  found  upon  him  that 
you  know  of  P— There  was  a  paoer  relating  to 
some  club,  which  I  believe  Brooks  returned  to 
him. 

Mr.  SolkUar  Genera/.— Do  yoa  ask  this  wiu 
ness  any  qaestions? 

Mr.  Adobkm^Vo. 

John  Wright  sworn  .^-Examined  by 
Mr.  Solidtor  general. 

You  also  are  one  of  the  Aow-street patrol?—^ 
Yes. 

Were  you  at  this  stable  on  the  23ni  of 
February  r-^-Yes. 

Did  you  go  to  the  foot  of  the  ladder  ? — ^Yes^ 
I  did. 

Whom  did  yon  see  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder  P 
— I  saw  a  man  in  the  further  stall  in  the  stable. 

Do  you  know  whether  or  not  it  was  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar,  Ings  P— I  do  not. 

Was  it  a  man  of  about  the  same  size 
About  the  same  size. 


10451 


for  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


11046 


Did  you  take  any  thiDg  from  him  ? — I  took 
B  knife  and  a  sword. 

What  kind  of  knife  was  it  you  took  from 
him  P — A  butcher's  knife. 

Was  there  any  thing  twisted  round  the  handle? 
i— Wax-end  tied  round  it. 

What  kind  of  sword  ? — A  sword  about  three 
feet  long,  with  a  brass  handle,  and  a  piece  of 
string  tied  round  it. 

After  this  what  happened  to  yon?— I  re- 
ceived a  blow,  and  was  knocked  down,  and 
Kceived  a  stab  in  my  side. 

Lord  Chief  Jmtke  Dallas.— Yon  did  not 
know  the  man. 


Mr.  SoUcitcr  General, — No,  but  he  says  he 
was  a  roan  in  point  of  size  like  the  prisoner. 

Mr.  Justice  BkAardson, — And  standing  in  a 
sUll  at  Ike  foot  of  the  ladder? 


Witness. — In  the  further  stall. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General^^You  say  you  were 
knocked  down,  and  had  a  stab  in  your  side ; 
after  you  recovered  did  you  find  that  roan 
gone  ?— Yes. 

.  Mr.  Solicitor  GeneraL'^l  shall  not  ask  the 
witness  as  to  the  rest,  I  onlv  ad;:  as  to  that  which 
affects  the  prisoner  at  the  oar ;  did  you  search 
Wilton  ? — Yes,  I  searched  Wilson. 

What  did  Wilson  say  r— He  said  nothiug 
particular^ 

WiUiam  Charles  Brooks  sworn. — Examined  by 
t  Mr.  Solicitor  GeneraL 

Were  you  one  of  the  Bow- street  patrol  ?~ 
Yes. 

Were  you  in  Cato-street? — No,  in  John- 
street. 

What  did  you  perceive  in  John-street? 
-—I  saw  tlie  prisoner  Ings  running  up  the 
street,  and  when  I  crossed  the  street,  there  was 
another  of  my  partners  with  a  cutlass,  and  I 
tiad  a  pistol,  and  when  I  got  on  the  road,  he 
fired  at  me. 

Fired  at  whom  ?~He  fired  at  me,  he  told  me 
he  would  shoot  me. 

Did  the  ball  strike  you  ?— Yes,  I  snatched  at 
the  pistol,  and  the  powder  scorched  my  hand, 
tbe  nail  went  through  the  wrist  of  my  great 
coat,  through  the  collar  of  that  coat,  and 
tlirodgh  the  shoulder  of  my  waistcoat,  it  bruit- 
ed my  shoulder  about  the  space  of  half^a-crown, 
and  went  out  at  the  back  I  believe. 

What  was  the  effect  of  that  ?— It  staggered 
me  to  the  right. 

Did  he  run  on  ? — No,  he  came  into  the  road 
to  avoid  my  partner,  I  suppose,  and  ran  into 
the  £dgware-road,  and  flung  the  pistol  away. 
Wa2i  there  a  watchman  there?— A  little  mr- 
ther  on  there  was. 
•  What  was  his  name  ? — Moay. 
'  Did  he  take  him  f~He  laid  hold  of  him  just 
did. 
Did  you  ever  lose  sight  of  him  ?— No,  I  was 
iibt  further  from  him  than  I  am  to  that  gentle- 
jnan  [a  yord  or  two]. 


You  still  pursued  him  P — Yes. 

And  between  you  he  was  taken? — Yes. 

After  you  had  taken  him,  what  conversation 
passed  between  you? — I  said  to  him,  vou 
rascal,  why  did  you  fire  at  me,  a  man  you  had 
never  seen  before  ?  he  said,  to  kill  you,  and  I 
wish  I  had  done  it. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more? — He  repeated 
it,  both  to  my  partner  and  to  the  soldiers,  he 
told  one  of  the  soldiers  so  afterwards. 

William  Lee  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey. 

Are  you  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrol  ?— 
Yes. 

Did  you  go  to  the  public  house,  the  Horse 
and  Groom,  in  the  evening,  before  the  officer*-- 
went  to  the  stable? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  observe  any  persons  in  the  Horse 
and  Groom,  who  were  afterwards  taken  ? — ^No, 
I  did  not. 

Did  vou  see  Cooper  and  Gilchrist  there  ?— 
I  saw  them  go  in  there. 

Were  they  taken  that  night  among  the  per- 
sons there? — ^They  were. 

And  taken  to  Bow-street  ? — ^Yes. 

UeuUnmt    Frederick    Fitzclarencef  sworn. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  BoUand, 

1  believe  you  are  a  lieutenant  in  his  ma- 
jesty*s  Coldistream  regiment  of  guards  f  —  I 
am. 

Were  you,  on  the  23rd  of  February,  applied 
to  by  the  Magistrates  of  Bow-street,  to  go  to 
Cato-street  ? — I  was. 

Did  you  take  a  picquet  with  you? — I  did. 

What  time  did  you  arrive  there  ? — ^A  few 
minutes  after  eight. 

What  ume  was  it  that  you  entered  the 
stable  ?— I  should  think  three  or  four  minutes 
after  eight. 

What  did  you  observe? — ^The  first  thing  I 
saw,  going  under  the  gateway  leading  into 
the  street,  was  a  police  officer,  who  cried  out 
"  soldiers  I  soldiers  1  stable  doorl  stable  door  I" 
I  went  on  and  met  two  persons  coming  out  of 
the  door-way ;  one  of  whom  presented  a  pistol 
at  me,  I  am  not  sure  that  it  was  a  pistol,  but 
he   presented  something  at  me,  at  the  same 
time  a  sword  made  a  cut  at  me,  which  I  par- 
ried and  seeing  the  body  of  soldiers  coming 
up,  he  ran  into  the  stable ;  I  followed  him,  and 
the  moment  I  got  into  the  stable,  1  ran  up 
against  a  man,  who  surrendered  himself  saying, 
'*  do  not  kill  me,  and  I  will  tell  you  all;''  I  gave 
him  over  to  the  picquet,  and  went  forward 
into  the  stable,  where  I  went  up  into  one  of 
the  stalls,  and  took  another  man  out,  whom 
I  delivered  over  to  the  picquet,  also ;  I  then 
led  my  men  up  the  steps  into  the  loft. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Dallas,— -There  was  only 
room  for  one  at  a  time  ? — No. 

You  headed  your  men? — ^Yes;  the  first 
thing  I  trod  over  was  the  leg  of  poor  Smithert, 
and  in  ascending  the  steps,  I  saw  three,  orfoor^ 
or  five  persons  in  th«  room ;  tlie  light  aftcN 
wards  went  out. 


1047]        1  GEORGE  IV. 

Did  yoa  see  anj  arms  in  Uie  loft  ?— A  large 
quantity. 

^at description  of  arms?— One  blunder- 
buss, or  more,  swords,  pistols,  pikes. 

Were  any  arms  pick^  up  in  the  stable  be- 
low ? — ^Ycs,  there  were. 

They  were  delivered  OTer  by  your  directions 
to  the  soldiers?— Yesy  the  soldiers  took  them 
away. 

Serjeant  WUUam  Le^  sworn.— Examined  by 
Mr.  UUkd4de, 


Trial  qfJMmn  Ings 


[104f 


I  believe  you  are  a  serjeant  in  the  second 
Coldstream  guards  ? — Yes. 

Did  you  go  along  with  the  party  that  was 
commanded  by  lieutenaDl  Fitzclarence  in 
Cato-street  ? — Yes, 

In  consequence  of  any  intimation  that  you 
had,  did  you  direct  your  party  to  advance 
quicker  than  they  bad,  in  double  quick  time  t 
—Yes,  in  double  quick  time. 

Did  you  get  to  the  gateway  which  is  near  a 
public  house,  on  the  left-hand  side  of  the 
street  ? — Yes. 

Just  before  then  had  you  heard  the  report 
of  pistols? — Yes. 

Did  you  perceive  a  man  standing  with  his 
back  against  the  wall,  by  the  suble  in  Cato- 
street  ? — Yes. 
liad  he  a  pistol  in  his  hand  ? — Ye& 
Did  he  level  it  ?— He  levelled  it  at  lioutenant 
Fitzclarence. 

Did  it  go  off  or  was  it  turned  away  ?— It 
vas  turned  away  by  my  pike. 

Did  the  pistol  go  off?— I  then  seized  the 
pistol  with  my  left  hand,  and  a  scuffle  ensued 
between  the  prisoner  and  me 
Who  was  the  prisoner  ? — ^Tidd. 
Did   the  pistol  go  off?— Yes»  after  sOme 

time. 

In  whose  hand  ?— In  both  hands  :  I  had. 
bold  of  the  trigger  at  the  time  it  went  off. 

1  believe  it  tore  your  coat  ?— Yes,  it  did. 

I  believe  you  afterwards  delivered  Tidd  to 
the  police  ? — Yes, 

lUve  you  got  the  pistol  still  ? — ^Yes,  tb« 
pistol  is  here* 

Mr.  Qttmey. — It  will  be  produced  among 
the  other  things. 

Mr.  Ii</ferfc&.— What  other  prisoner  did 
you  take  ? — I  took  no  other  t  after  going  up, 
in  the  loft  I  saw  three  others  who  had  surren- 
dered. 

Whom  did  you  see  in  the  loft  ?— Cooper, 
Momiment,  and  Gilchrist. 

Samuel  Hercules   TaunUm  sworp. — Examined, 
by  Mr.  SolicUor  Generfll. 

I  believe  you  belong  to  the  public  office  at 
Bow-street  ? — Yes,  I  do. 

Did  you  on  Thursday  morning,  the  24th;  of 
February,  go  to  Brunf  s  lodgings'? — I  did. 

Did  you  see  Brunt  there  ?— I  did,  and  ap- 
prehended him. 

Did  you  search  the  apartments  which  are 
bccupied  by  him  ? — I  did,  but  found  noihing;^ 
in  the  front  room. 


Did  yoa  aeaich  the  apttEtBaits  that  were 
occupied  by  him  ? — I  did* 

There  you  found  notbiiig  ^--NothiDg. 

Having  searched  those  apartments,  did  yoi| 
go  into  the  back  room  ? — I  did. 

What  did  you  find  in  the.back  room  ?•— Two 
rush  baskets. 

Were  they  both  done  up?  — Both  packed 
up,  one  tied  up  in  an  apron. 

What  ooloujT,  Uue  ?— Blue. 

Did  you  ask  Brunt  about  those  bas^els  ? — \ 

did-  ^      ,  . 

What  did  you  ask  him?— When  I  went  into 

the  room  there  was  notliiiig  jn  tke  room  but 

two  baskets  and  a  pike  handle. 

Did  you  ask  Brant  anything  about  those 
baskets  ? — ^I  did. 

What  did  you  ask  him  ? — ^He  said  he  knew 

nothing  of  them. 

Were  the  baskets  present  at  the  tiiiie  yo« 
asked  him  that  question?— I  brought  the 
baskets  out  into  the  other  room. 

You  asked  him  what  was  in  the  bas^eta  ^— 

Yes. 

And  he  said  he  knew  nothing  about  them! 
—He  knew  nothing  about  tliem. 

Did  yoa  afterwJds  open  the  baskets  ?— Yes, 

I  did. 

When  you  opened  the  baskeU  what  did  yoik 
find  in  them.?— Nine  papers  of  lope-yan,  and 
tar,  ao4  other  ingredients  in  Mparate  pap«s. 

Were  they  calculated  easily  to  take  fire?— t 
Yes,  I  think  they  were  j  I  tried  some  in  the 
fire,  and  it  burnt. 

Besides  this,  what  else  did  yoa  find  in  the 
l)aakets  ?— There  were  some  steel  filings. 

Were  there  any  hand-grenades? — ^Y^es,  there 


were. 

How  many  ? — ^Ten,  I  think  grenades. 

What  else  were  there  ?-— Three  papera  of 
rope-yarn,  and  other  ingredients. 

Having  that  paper  in  your  hand,  read  what 
was  contained  in  one  basket,  and  what  was 
contained  in  the  other  ?— Nine  papers  of  rope- 
yarn,  and  tar  and  other  ingredients,  some  sted. 
filings,  in  one  basket ;  in  the  second  basket 
there  were  four  grenades,  three  papers  of  rope- 
yarn,  tar,  and  other  ingredient^,  two  bags  of 
powder,  one  pound  each. 

What  kind   of  bags  were   these  ?—WTiile- 
flannel  bags. 

;      About  SIX  inches  long?— Abqut  six  indies 
i  long,  or  rather  longer. 

And  contained  gunpowder  ? — ^Yes.  ; 

Were  there  any  flannel  bags  that  had  no 
powder  in  them  ? — ^Five  flannel  bags  empty. 

Of.  the.  same  form  ? — Of  the  same  sort. 

Any  thing  else  ?— One  small  paper  of  gunr» 

Eowder^  one  leatlier  bag  containin^sixty-threej 
alls. 

Leaden  balls,  bullets  ?— BuUet? ;  that  is.  the. 
whole  that  was  contained  ip.the<secon4V?^ai^ 
Did.  you  fiod  any  thln^  els^  ij^  thetTOoaa/r- 
One  iron  pot.'  i 

Did  it  ]wpear  that  t\iat  iro^^pot.  l^a^.^.  ^ 
boifed!^  in.  it  ?— Yjes,  ▼erV;  re<»ntly, ;   aadj  oijej. 
i  pike  handle  I  ibimd  in  the  a^^iQO% 
1 


10491 


fgrHig^  X^f^fWh 


Was  therea  fivnle  at  tb«^  aa4  in4i  a 
aock^t  ? — V^  these  wa«. 

A  rough  stick  ?— Yea. 

Was  £41  all  that  you  found  sU  the  lodgiogi 
^t  Brunt's  ?— That  ^as  all. 

Did  you  afterwards  go  to  Hole-ia-tiie»waU 
passage  to  TiddV?— Yes,  I  did.. 

How  soon  afterwaids  f — It  might  be  three 
quarters  of  an  hour,  or  an  hour  after ;  it  was 
about  nii^e  o'clpck  in  the^  morning;  1  waa  at 
Tidd's. 

Did  yon  search  Ui^se  lodgings  \ — I  did* 

What  did.  you  $nd  these,  haye  you  got  %  Ijat 
of  thpm  ? — X  es. 

Aead  them  in  ocdex?*^Four  hundred  and 
thirty-four  balls,  in  a  haversack.  On^  huo* 
died  and  seventy-one  baU  cartridges. 

Loose  were  they? — Loose;  Sixty-nine  baU 
cartridges  without  powder  f  a  brown  paper 
parcel  with  three  poonds  of  gun-powder ;  in 
a  brown  paper,  these  was  tea  grenades :  eleven 
bags  of  gun-powder,  one  pound  each. 

Were  the  oags  constructed  in  the  same  way 
'as  the  flannel  bags  that  you  found  at  Brunt's  ? 
—Yes,  the  very  same. 

About  six  inches  long  f — ^Rather  longer. 

With  a.  pound  of  gun-powder  i^  eaph? — 
Yes. 

Any  bags  of  the  same  description  empty  ? — 
Ten  flannel  bags  empty;  a  small  linen  bag 
with  powder,  a  powder-flask  with  some  gun^ 
powder  in  it;  sixty  eight  balls. 

By  that  you  mean  bullets,  I  suppose  ? — Yes* 
Four  ftiqts,  and  twenty-seven  pike-handles. 

Were  t])e  pike-handles  of  Ihe  same  descrip- 
tion as  you  have  already  m9ntioqed?-r-Tne 
very  same. 

Rough  sticks,  fouc  or  ihre  feet  long  ?— lYi^s. 

With  sockets  at  the  end  for  a  pike  ?— Yes. 

Did  you  find  any  box  there  ?— i  found  a  box 
containing  nine  hundred  and  sixty-five  ball- 
cartridges. 

Was  that  all  that  you  found  at  Ttdd's  P— 
That  was  all  I  found. 

Samuel  Bercukt  Taunton  cross-examined  by 
"NLr,  Adalpkus* 

There  has  been  a  person  named  Palin  men-, 
tioned  in  the  course  of  this  cause ;  have  you 
made  any  seanch  after  him  ? — ^Yes,  we  have.' 

There  is  a  le^e  reward  of  500/.  for  appre- 
hending him? — Two  hundred  pounds  reward. 

Palin  and  Cook ;  have  you.  searched  after 
them  too  ? 

Mr,  Solicitor  General. — Haive  ypu  personally 
searched  after  them  ? — Not  I.    I  haye  not. 

Mr.  Adolp/uu. — ^Has  search  been- made  aflUHr- 
them  by  the  ofiicers? — I  do  not  know  what- the 
magistrates  might  have  ordered. 

Samuel  EercuUi  Taunion  re-examined  by 
Mr.  ScikUarOenefaL 

Atows^  Wfi&oiMred  foe.  Palin  T-tRYei^ 
Has  he  absconded  in  conseqviva^  ofi  tlK^ 
pa^  he  took  in  t^is  trf^^sactip^i  ?— Yes« 

Mr.  Oirupp^-^Uphikuti^o^aii^  thc^  is  1^ 


Mr«  iSWM^  Gemral.'^V^  lewurd  vva^  to 
apprehend  him  for  the  p^rt  he  tpfk^  ia  Ihili 
business  ? — ^X^s,  it  was. 

Dante/  Bithop  called. 

Mr.  G«m^.-<-It  is  necessary  now  to  predafi^ 
the  things  found  at  Tid^\  andalsp  at  BmnCs^ 
apd  ijs  Cato-street. 

Mr.  Curwood, — It  is  candle  light,  it  vrtU  do' 
in  the  morning. 

Lord  Chirf  3,u4¥s^  IktUof.-^  V^yifi*  you,  no 
other  witness  ? 

Mr.  GifTfiey. — Only  one  or  two ;  tlwic  ovft«t 
dence  will  be  very  shprt;  we  wiU  produce 
them  in  ^e  morning. 

ford  Chief  JuUice  DqUas, — Gentlemen,  it  is 
quite  impossible  to  conclude  to-night;  we, 
must  now  adjourn  to  nine  to-morrow  morning.' 

S Adjourned    to    to-morrow  morning,   niQ^ 
ock.] 


Jiimes  Ipg^.  was,  sfii  to  the  bar ;  and  Jbhn 
Thomas.  Qroat,  J^cbard  Tidd^  WiUnm! 
Davidson,^  James  William.  Wilson,  Johx^ 
Harrison, '  Ridiard  Bradbum,  John  Shaw 
Strange,  James  Gilchrist,  and  Charles  Cooper 
weva  placed  at  the  bar  behindu 

Baniel  Bi^qp  sworn. — Examined  hj 
Mr.  Gtfmey. 

Did  you  apprehend.  ArUiiirThisllewood?*^ 
I  did,  on  the  i4th  of  Febniaiy^ 

At  what  time  of  the  day  f — Between  ten  and, 
eleven  in  thetforenpon. 

Where  did  you  find  him? — J^i  Vo» 8^  White-, 
street)  Little  Moorfi.elds* 

Wa9  t^^t  hif  owQ  imdm^  Qi  tlie^hp|iee:ofi 
another  person  ?--Tha  apartmemfs- ofi  a»  Mia*. 
Harris. 

I  believe  he  lived  in  Stanhop^^reet^  Glaafrtf 
market? — He  did. 

Did  you  find  .hini  up, .  or.  in  bed  ?<— In  .bed*   * 

With  any  part  of  his  clothes  on^— Ub^ 
breecbea  ana  stockjnga. 

Upon  yoiM^  opeoing'tha  doQr  of  the  ipom  im 
which  he  was  m  bed,  what  took  place  ?^II#< 
juat  held  up  his  head.. 

i[rpm  under  what'/-r-FrQm.^p4te  th^*  bedn: 
clothes.  I  had  got  a  pistol  in  one  hand,  apd  a\ 
staff  ii^  the  othar^.  I  immediately  threw:  myself 
op  the  bed  upon  him  j  L  said,  **  Mr*  Xhistie«« 
vcood>  my  name  is  Bishoj^  aJBoFHrtrfielattcaiv 
I  have  a  warrant  against  yom^ 

Apd  he  surrendered  f— He.  satd»/' I  shaU( 
in^.  no.  rjesis^s^ce*"' 

Were  his  coat  and- waistcoat:  by^  the  bed^ , 
side^-rrlJif^.weEe. 

VMy^iKL^^  anyj thing  to  the>poolcet  qC  thd«. 
wai«|Qpati?-rJ[Qi  thia  pocM. of .  thotaMiitcoatl 
foimdf  ttifee  ImAnh  balli»  a^  balltearUidge^  % 
blank  cartridge  amd?  two  flints^  audi  a  amaU 


1051]        1  GEORGE  IV. 

You  took  him  into  custody,  and  took  him  to 
low-ttreet  P-^I  did. 

Daniel  Bishop  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Adolphut. 

How  did  you  6nd  out  where  he  was  ? — It 
'^ras  in  consequence  of  some  information  that 
was  handed  to  me  and  my  brother  officers. 

Information  that  he  was  not  at  his  own  house 
but  was  there  ? — Yes. 

Was  that  information  from  your  brother  of- 
ficers ? — No,  it  was  not. 
<  Was  it  from  a  Mr.  Bdwards  T — ^No. 

Mr.  Gumey. — I  should  have  objected  to  that 
question. 

'  Lord  Chief  Justice  I>a//ai.~Tbat  is  not  a 
proper  question. 

Witness. — ^I  do  not  know  a  person  of  that 
name. 

Mr.  Adolphus, — I  should  not  hare  asked  it  if 
I  had  considered  it  irregular ;  but  the  moment 
your  lordship  gives  that  intimationi  I  stop. 

Lord  Chi^ Justice  Dallas.^U  these  questions 
are  to  be  asked  it  will  break  down  all  rules. 

'  Mr.  Ado^phm. — I  submit,  my  lord,  to  the 
intimation  of  your  lordship's  opinion. 

George  Thomas  Joseph  Ruthven  called  again. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  Qumey. 

Are  there  now  placed  upon  the  table  the 
things  which  were  taken  in  Cato-street-— Yes. 

You  gave  us  an  enumeration  yesterday  of 
thirty-eight  ball  cartridges,  firelock  and  bayo- 
net, one  powder  flask,  t^ree  pistols,  and  one 
sword,  with  six  bayonet  spikes,  and  cloth  belt, 
one  blunderbuss,  pistol,  fourteen  bayonet 
spikes,  and  three  pointed  files,  one  bayonet, 
one  bayonet  spike^  and  one  sword  scabbard, 
one  carbine  and  bayonet,  two  swords,  one 
ballet,  ten  hand-grenades ;  I  do  not  see  them  ? 
«-^Here  they  are  f  m  a  hag\ 

We  must  have  them  on  the  table,  \jhey 
were  emptied  out,"] 

There  is  one  hand-grenade  much  larger  than 
the  rest ;  that  is  what  you  call  the  large  hand- 
grenade  ?-*Yes. 

Show  the  jury  the  fuse  to  it  ?  [if  was  shown 
to  the  Jwyj] — There  are  some  iron  spikes 
tucked  in. 

Hand  one  of  the  small  hand-grenades  to 
the  jury  with  a  fuse  ?    [it  was  handed  ta  the 

j'^y-l 

Are  there  any  fire  balls  there  ?  [one  was 
shown  to  the  jury] — I  will  give  you  an  account 
gentlemen,  by  another  witness,  of  the  compo- 
sition of  these,  I  observe  here  are  some  bayo- 
nets with  screws  at  the  end,  and  some  sharp- 
ened files  with  screws  at  the  end  ? — ^There  are 
[^h^  toere  shown  to  th^tHy,"], 

Irodttcethe  pike  staves?  —  [they  were  pro- 
duced.] Take  one  of  the  pike  staves  from  the 
rest,  and  show  the  adaptation  of  it,  [Ihe  wit" 
ness  screwed  in  one  of  the  pike  heads\.  They  are 
all  made  to  receive  a  screw  t— Yes. 

Have  they  a  ferrule  at  the  top  ?— They  have. 


Trial  ^Javus  Ingt 


riosi 


Will  you  produce  the  belt  and  the  knife- 
case  found  upon  the  prisoner  7  \ihey  were  pro^ 
dueDd!\  Hand  that  knife  with  the  knife-case 
and  the  belt  to  the  jury :  you  observe,  gentle- 
men, the  knife-case  and  the  belt  are  of  the 
i  same  cloth. 

Jngs. — ^The  knife  was  not  found  upon  me, 
my  lord. 

Mr.  Gumey. — ^You  observe  the  handle  of 
the  knife,  gentlemen,  is  bound  round  with 
wax-end  ?  lit  was  shown  to  the  jury.] — ^Wbere 
are  the  two  naversacks  that  were  found  upon 
the  prisoner  ?  [they  were  handed  to  the  jury.\ 
Show  the  jury  the  brass-barrelled  blunderbuss, 
ft*  was  shown  4o  the  jury.]— '"Which  were  the 

rike  staves  found  inCato-streett—The  bundle 
have  just  shown. 

.  John  Hector  Morison  called  again. — 
£xumned  by  Mr.  Gumty. 

In  whose  service  are  you?  —  Mr.  Henry 
Underwood*s,  in  Drury-laue. 

You  have  spoken  to  a  sword  having  been 
brought  you  by  the  prisoner  to  sharpen? — 
Yes. 

Is  that  one  of  the  two  swords  which  the 
prisoner  brought  to  yon  ?— Yes,  this  is  the  first. 

What  were  the  instructions  you  had  par- 
ticularly respecting  sharpening  that  sword? — 
To  grind  and  set  it  from  the  heel  to  the  point, 
and  to  f^arpen  the  point  particularly  on  both 
sides,  as  sharp  as  a  needle,  he  said. 

And  it  IS  sharp P — Yes;  since  I  ground  it,  it 
appears  to  have  been  rubbed  upon  a  stone  to 
help  the  keenness  of  the  edge. 

Samuel  Hercules  Taunton  called  again. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  Gtmey. 

Have  vou  there  the  things  which  you  found 
at  Brunt^s  room  ? — I  have. 

Produce  them  distinctly  ? — ^This  Imsket  oodh 
tains  nine  papers  of  rope-yam,  tar,  and  other 
ingredients. 

A  Juryman, — ^They  appear  to  be  the  same 
kind  of  things ;  they  are  what  are  called  illo- 
mination  balls. 

Witness. — ^There  are  also  some  steel  filings. 

Mr.  Giirney. — Now  produce  to  us  the  things 
out  of  the  basket  covered  with  the  blue  apron  I 
— ^These  are  flannel  bags  full  of  gunpowder; 
there  are  also  some  empty   [prodwang  them]. 

A  Juryman.  —  There  is  powder  in  those 
bags,  lliere  is.  [One  rf  the  hags  was  opened^ 
and  the  contents  shown  to  the  jury]. 

Mr.  Gumey. — The  bags  contain  one  pound 
each,  I  believe  ? — ^Yes. 

Are  there  four  hand-grenades  f — There  are 
[they  were  handed  to  the  jury], 

A  Juryman. — ^There  appears  to  be  nails  in 
all  dif'ections. 

Mr.  Oumey. — We  will  call  a  witness  who 
will  give  an  account  tif  their  x;ontents«   Will 


1053^ 


Jii*  High  Treatofti 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1054 


yoifr  produce  the  pike^haodle  which  was  fonnd 
there  ?  [ii  wa»  produced.]  Is  that  filed  at  the 
end  so  as  to  receive  a  pi£e?— Yes,  and  it  has 
a  ferrule  oq. 

You  spoke  of  an  iron  pot,  that  had  an  ap- 
pearance of  melted  tar.  [it  wat  produced^]  Is 
there  tar  in  the  bottom  ? — ^There  is. 

You  found  also  sixty-three  bullets  ?^I  did; 
here  they  are.    [jproducmg  them\. 

They  are  in  a  leathern  bag  or  pouch? — 
They  are. 

Produce  the  things  which  you  found  at 
Tidd's  lodgings :  those  were  found  the  same 
morning,  the  Thursday  morning  ? — Yes. 

You  stated  that  in  a  haversack  there  were 
434  balls ;  171  ball  cartridges,  and  69  without 
powder,  [the  wUneu  produced  the  some. J  There 
were  three  poundsV>fguopowder  ?— There  were. 
\jprodudng  them\, ' 

You  have  opened  that  paper? — I  have,  and 
it  contains  gunpowder. 

Mr.  Gumey. — It  shall  be  opened  for  your 
inspection,  if  you  wish  it,  gentlemen. 

Foreman  of  the  Jury,  —  No,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary. 

Mr.  (jurm*-^  Produce  the  coarse  canvass 
cloth,  and  the  grenades  you  found  in  it; 
eleven  bags  of  gunpowder  of  a  pound  each  ; 
ten  empty  bags ;  a  small  bag  with  a  powder 
flask  with  some  powder?— -Yes. 

Those  are  flannel  bags  of  the  same  descrip- 
tion as  the  other  ?^  Yes,  they  are. 

The  full  and  the  empty  are  all  of  the  same 
description  ? — ^They  are. 

You  found  there,  also,  twenty-seven  pike- 
handles  ? — I  did. 

Are  they  of  the  same  description  as  the 
others  ? — ^They  are, 

Mr.  Gumey,  —  You  observe,  gentlemen^ 
they  are  all  ferruled,  and  filed  to  receive  pikes  ? 
T-They  were  all  of  them  ferruled,  but  with 
the  greenness  of  the  wood  some  of  the  ferrules 
have  since  dropped  ofi*. 

Produce  the  box  you  found  with  the  ball 
cartridges  [U  wa$  produced].  There  are  065 
ball  cartridges  in  that  box,  are  there  ? — There 


They  are  in  parcels  of  how  many? — ^In 
parcels  of  five. 

George  Thomas  Joseph  Rutkoen,  called  again. 
—Examined  by  Mr.  Gvmey. 

There  is  one  question  I  omitted  to  ask  yon : 
were  those  fire  arms  found  at  Cato«8treet, 
loaded  ? — ^They  were  most  of  them :  there  were 
one  or  two  of  them  fired  off. 

Most  of  them  you  found  loaded  ? — Yes. 
,   They  were  drawn  last  Monday? — Yes. 

Lord  Chief  Juetke  Dallas. — ^Ask  him  whe- 
ther those  which  were  not  loaded,  appeared  to 
have  been  recently  fired  off. 

Mr.  Gumey, — ^Did  those  which  were  not 
loaded  appear  to  have  been  recently  dis- 
charged ? — I  did  not  examine  that. 


Were  those  that  were  loaded,  loaded  with 
ball?— They  were.  . 

Serjeant  JEdu)ard  Hanson  sworn. — Examined 
by  Mr.  Gumey. 

I  believe  yon  are  a  seijeant  in  the  Royal-* 
artillery  ? — ^Yes. 

Have  the  goodness  to  look  at  those  fire-balls, 
what  do  they  appear  to  be  composed  of  ?-:» 
Tbev  are  oakum,  tar,  and  rosin. 

If  they  were  set  on  fire,  and  thrown  into  any 
buildings,  are  they  well  calculated  to  produce 
conflagration? — Yes,  they  would  set  wood  on 
fire. 

If  they  were  thrown  through  a  window  om 
to  a  floor,  would  they  be  likely  to  set  a  house 
on  fire  ? — There  is. not  a  doubt  of  it. 

If  thrown  into  a  hay-loft,  still  more  likely  f 
— Oh  yes. 

How  long  do  you  suppose  they  wonld  bum  ? 
— ^This  is  a  very  small  one ;  I  have  seen  much 
larger  than  this,  among  those  before  the  court. 

How  long  would  they  bum  ? — ^They  would 
bum  three  or  four  mihutes. 

Look  at  these  flannel  bags  with  gunpowder? 
—That  is  a  flannel  cartridge,  for  a  six-pounder. 

That  is  the  way  in  which  powder  is  made  up, 
for  the  purpose  of  loading  cannon  ? — Yes,  it  is ; 
only  yours  is  a  different  kind  of  flannel,  it  is 
twilled. 

That  will  answer  the  purpose,  though  not  so 
neatlv  ? — Oh  yes,  perfectly. 

Take  one  of  the  hand-ffrenades  ;  you  have 
examined  two  of  them  before  ? — ^Yes,  I  have. 

Take  that  tQ  pieces,  and  show  us  of  what  it 
is  composed  [t^  toas  taken  to  pieces  in  the  pre» 
sence  of  the  Jury],  The  other  prisoners  may 
retire  now,  we  shall  have  no  occasion  for  their 
being  present. 

Lord  Chief  Justice  Dallas. — ^You  may  now 
remove  the  other  prisoners  from  the  batr^ 
\They  were  removed  accordingly,] 

Mr.  Gumey. — Is  that  exterior  tight  binding 
material  to  give  force  to  the  powder  when  it 
explodes  ? — i  es,  verv  material,  it  would  not 
have  half  the  effect  if  it  were  not  tights 

Have  you  come  to  any  thing  different  ? — 
Yes,  here  is  a  bandage  of  woollen  cloth  or 
bombazine. 

Is  that  cemented  on  ? — ^Yes,  very  fast. 

What  do  you  find  that  immediately  to  in- 
close ?-'Four  nails. 

Do  you  mean  nails  used  to  rivet  the  tire  of 
cart  wheels  on? — ^Yes  \it  toas  handed  to  the 
Jujy], 

Supposing  you  found  inside  that  a  tin  case 
containing  powder,  .which  is  lit  by  means  of 
that  fuse;  would  that  explode  and  disperse 
those  nails  about  like  so  many  shot?— Certain-* 
ly  it  would. 

The  binding  you  say  by  the  rope-yarn  would 
give  greater  eflect  to  the  explosion  ?•— Yes,  it 
would  be  a  larger  explosion ;  the  faster  it  is  tied^ 
the  more  strong  that  makes  the  explosion. 

A  Juryman  fMr.  Young), — Could  any  body 
manufacture  a  thing  of  that  kind,  unless  he  is 


toss]       1  GfiORGB  IV. 

tMmdetM  Witk  tW  MTif  T^thtl  Is  QOthinff 
like  our  aitillery-greDades,  thtte  are  filled  with 
pistol  or  musket  balls.  Mid  then  the  vacaocy 
between  the  musket  balls,  is  filled  with  powder. 

.    Mr.  MriM^.— It  is  not  nade  artifiefftlly  like 

the  army-grenade  ?— No. 

J  Jwvman  f  Mr.  Afii^fc^.— Would  it  have  the 
Sftme  effect  ?— Certainty,  t^s  would  be  rety 
dangerous ;  they  would  be  sute  to  bedisttibnted 
tDUdd  wherever  they  were  thrown. 

Mr*  G«nMy.— Supponag  they  were  thrown 
into  a  room,  the  fuse  woiUd  bum,  I  belie?e 
About  hall*a-mili«te?-*~Yes»  diereaboqtii 

These  nails  wb<ild  on  the  explosion,  fly 
about  killing  and  wounding  the  petsens  in  the 
toMB?— Most  assuttdly. 

Take  out  the  nails  and  see  whether  yoife  find 
^  tin  ease  filM  with  gunpowder  ?-^HeM  is 
part  of  a  blanket  cDvering  the  tin  oase. 

The  fhse  is  inserted  in  3ie  tin  case  ?<^Yes,  it 
is  brued  iiiy-add  en4h  end  is  brazed  on. 

We  will  trouble  .you  to  foree  open  diat  tih 
tase.  [ik$wii1m$\rokbufikefim  midp9wrei 
mi  the  powder.'] 

How  much  powder  is  diere  in  it?^->>I  diEire 
^ay  there  is  abont  the  rinme  Quantity  as  thei« 
was  in  the  laat^  Which  I  weighed  i  that  was 
about  three  ounces  and  a  half;  it  appeals  to  be 
the  saMe  si^. 

Is  it  good  gunpowder  T-^Verycood* 

That  WQuki  be  n  quantity  of  gnnpon^der 
tofficifeit  to  Canle  the  exphmon  you  speak  of  ? 
•^Y4S|  there  is  tather  more  Hiuk  We  put  to 
bvrsi  a  nine-inch  shell. 

I  need  scarcely  ask  yoa,  wheAer  tiiat  gre^ 
nade  would  be  a  most  formidable  and  destruct- 
ire  instrument  ? — It  certainly  would. 

Mr«  AttenUy  OeAeittf.^Tbkt,  nty  Iord|  is 
tbcr  case  on  the  part  of  the  Grown. 

DtTtVCt, 

Mr,  Cunoooff.^  Centleroen  of  the  jury ;— I 
know  not  whether  any  of  you  Were  in  court 
diirifkg  the  inqUifjr  which  has  already  taken 
nlace:  but,  Whetheir  yOii  Wete  or  Were  not,  the 
tact  of  the  convictioh  Whidh  has  occurred  can- 
ik6t  be  Unknown  to  yoti.  '  fiideed,  my  learned 
friend  the  Solicitor-General,  when  he  opened 
this  case  to  ycfu,  did  (hat  which  every  man 
would  expect  from  hlni— he  totd  you  that  if 
that  fact  bad  come  to  your  knowledge,  it  ought 
not  to  have  the  slightest  weight  on  your  minds 
hi  the  considenltion  of  the  case  which  is  now 
brought  before  you.  But  notwithstanding  that 
iny  leianied  friend  the  Solicitor-general  has  so 
told  you,  I  do  feel,  or  rather  I  should  feel  un- 
der  other  circumstances,  that  it  Was  a  fact 
Which  Would  W6igh  ^6ry  heatily  upon  me  :  be- 
Wise  I  know  that  howerer  good  your  inten- 
tions may  be,  such  is  the  frame  ana  construc- 
tion of  (he  human  mind,  that  it  cannot  dismiss 
ftbm  its  consideration  matters  which  at  times, 
if  men  were  more  perf^t,  it  ought  to  dismiss. 
Bofl  flet  (hat  fiict  weigliing  less  heaTily  upon 
M,  be«MMe  the  hfte  teTdiet  was  obtatned  by  eti- 


TVM  of  James  Ings 


Ziosfs 


ideaee,  at  I  hope  I  shall  be  able  m  A«w  yM, 
aaterialiy  diilbrent  from  the  evideBce  which  is 
giien  itt  this  due.  For  in  this  caae  th^w  b 
wanting  a  most  material  confirmation  tyf  tka 
evideac^  df  the  acbomplice,  which  Was  given 
by  a  witikees  who  was  called  in  the  last 
and  is  not  cidled  in  the  present :  I  mean 
Dwyfer. 

Mr,  Attorney  Gener^, — My  lord,  I  mnst 
terpose  for  the  sake  of  regularity. 

tjordCli^  JuMee  Dld2!iit.-— We  cannot  go 
into  wh4t  pasded  on  a  fi^rmer  trial.  The  Sdlt- 
citor-general  roost  humanely  and  ttoost  correctly 
began  by  depnecatlng  the  effect  of  that  cOdvie- 
tionln  anyway  uiwil  themlnd^  ofthejurf; 
and  sure  I  ftm,  that  thouah  that  caution  niignt 
be  deemed  by  the  Solicitor-general  to  be 
necessary,  it  was  not  necessaty  with  the  jury, 
fot  they  would  themselves  have  confined  their 
attention  to  the  evidence  in  this  case,  without 
at  idl  regarding  what  pastfbd  upon  a  fortner 
trial  which  is  not  now  before  them,  nor  nnder 
their  consideration ;  and  whether  this  or  that 
witness  Was  then  dall^,  dr  WhfethlK^  ttie  bhwf 
be  now  different,  they  have  no  means  of  jndff- 
ing^  and  into  theM  matters  I  cannol  n<>w  sailer 
counsel  to  go.  The  jury  are  sworn  to  try  the 
case  presenled  tb  them  in  evidence.  I  need 
not  tell  yon,  geBtlomen^  I  am  sufe,  dMi  it  is 
your  duty  to  rorgeC,  eMCpl  so  far  as  it  is  di 
proof,  that  there  is  suoh  a  person  as  Tlaitle- 
wood — at  aU  events  to  forget  his  convidion. 


Mr.  Cunooodl— Gentiemeui  I  receive,  wilh 
all  deference,  the  correction  of  his  k>tdbhip» 
and  I  am  sure  I  need  not  say  to  him,  that  I  did 
not  intentionally  step  beyond  the  line  which  I 
ought  in  correctness  to  pursue.  PeHia|)Sy  in 
the  anxiety  I  feel  on  the  present  occasion  I 
iflay  have  done  that  which,  if  I  had  more  sdf 

Fossession  thtln  I  confess  I  have  at  this  AQinenl^ 
should  not  have  doUe.  But,  when  bis  lerd^ 
ship  has  told  me,  thai  I  have  trespassed  beyond 
the, strict  line  of  my  duty,  k  shall  be  tey  most 
eai^est  endeatour  so  tb  gnard  mf  eondnot, 
tiiilt  I  ihay  not  repeat  Ae  same  faiilt.  fiat  fhS 
ttiich  I  may  Wilb  p«ri(ect  fegnlari^  sijr;  that 
you  will  not  suppose  (having  heard  of  the  forAtf 
f 4rdieO  thitt  it  ptoceedcd  npoti  etidence  ^o> 
cisely  such  as  has  been  given  in  this  casOw  TiM 
will  not  suppose  that  the  evidence  whMh 
vrarrflnted  that  former  conviction  is  pr^cbi^y 
the  same  as  is  now  before  yon.  But  you  wiU 
jodg^  of  this  ^videtoce  is  tfiouffh  y6tt  had  never 
heard  of  thtf t  fortt^v  case. 

My  teamed  fHend,  (he  S6libitof^teiieiiI;M 
told  you  (what  I,  and  I  am  sore  idl  tsM  wn 
readi^  admit)  that  in  the  exAiiMibn  df  the  dttty 
v^ich  hewas  called  upon  tor  peHbHa^  hd  Was 
onfy  aaxipus  to  aisqinf  hiiBself  as  mMhfhl 
servant  of  the  public^  by  presaatiiiig  fiilly  aoA 
fairly  the  circumsta.aces  of  this  ease  for  year 
consideration,  and  that  as  for  as  hit  own 
^itofial  feeling^' Wetft,  vrhea  ha  hajd  dopcT  hii 
dtitt,  be  Was  re|(«iaiMiof  the  njt^ 
men,  I|  eqoalff  #ttti  tf¥&|^  ittaB  WHcrKBo^iMMI^ 


10S7] 


Jia  High  TreauHi 


A.  D.  1880. 


Cio^a 


giTe  him  faVL  credit  fyt  that  assertion ;  I  hope 
yoa  wiU  giTe  me  credit  alio^  by  belieTing 
(though  my  task  is  a  more  irksome  one  than 
bis)  that  I  have  the  same  feeling,  that  I  adf 
anxtoas  to  do  my  duty  to  the  unfortunate  man 
at  the  bar ;  but,  I  am  also  anxious  at  the  same 
time,  to  do  my  duty  to  my  country  and  myself. 
i  am  equally  sure,  that  those  amongst  vou  who 
having  been  on  Uie  former  jury,  and  conse- 
quently having  heard  the  evidence,  and  given 
a  verdict  in  the  former  case,  whatever  may 
have  been  your  previous  feelings  and  impres- 
sions, will  discharge  your  present  duty,  regard* 
less  of  what  may  he  said  by  mankind  upon  an^ 
supposed  contradiction  of  conduct,  ana  Uiat  if 
you  are  not  satisfied  that  the  crime  is  proved 
against  the  prisoner  by  the  present  evidence, 
you  will  gladly  deliver  him  by  a  verdict  of  not 
guilty. 

The  Solicitor-General  also  told  you  that  the 
law  in  this  case  is  so  clear,  that  he  did  not  feel 
it  necessary  to  state  it  to  yon.  The  law  of  this 
oase  is  very  clear,  but  I  think  it  most  material 
that  the  very  precise  point  yon  have  to  try 
should  be  stated  to  you.  fiecause,  the  question 
here  is  not  between  guilt  or  innocence  in  the 
abstract,  for  certainly,  I  must  admit,  there  is  a 
strong  suspicion,  at  least,  if  not  conclusive 
proof,  of  a  certain  degree  of  moral  guilt  against 
these  men ;  but  the  question  you  have  to  decide 
is  whether  their  guih  amounts  to  that  which  is 
charged  upou  this  record  ?  namely,  whether  it 
be  high  treason  ?  and  not  only  whether  it  be 
high  treason,  but  whether  it  be  that  specific  and 
direct  high  treason  which  is  charged  upon  him 
by  this  indictment  ?  In  order,  therefore,  to 
enable  you  to  do  your  duty  fiiirly,  fully,  and 
inpsurtially,  yoa  must  not  onlv  take  into  your 
consideration,  and  understand  distinctly,  what 
k  the  precise  charge  you  have  to  try,  but  you 
must  also  apply  the  evidence  and  see  that  the 
evidence  not  only  makes  out  guilt,  but  makes 
out  that  very  specific  high  treason  which  is 
charaed  upon  these  men. 

I  dare  say,  though  you  are  not  lawyers,  you 
know  enough  of  the  history  of  your  country, 
to  know  that  almost  eveiy  man  who  has  written 
vpon  the  history  of  the  constitution  of  our 
country,  has  stated  thai  the  firmest  bulwark  of 
the  liberties  of  the  subject  is,  that  the  law  of 
high  treason  should  be  well  defined :  and  most 
carefully  was  that  done  by  our  ancestors,  by 
the  statute  of  25  Edward  3rd.  Many  things 
had  before  that  time  grown  up  to  be  thought 
treasons,  many  indistinct  accusations  had  b^n 
adjudged  treasons,  so  that  no  man  could  know 
whether  he  was  safe  or  not  from  the  oppression 
•f  power,  in  his  eondnct  through  Um. — But 
when  that  statute- was  passed,  in  a  few  short 
and  distinct  words,  it  gave  the  subjects  of  the 
country  to  know  what  the  law  of  treason  was, 
and  better  still,  it  informed  them  what  was  not 
treason.  A  statute  which  one  of  the  greatest 
lawven  that  ever  graced  the  English  bench, 
ay  lord  Coke,  has  called  a  blessed  statute ;  and 
blessed  is  the  country  that  has  such  a  statute 
lor  iis4{vidanpe,  for  in  proportion  as  we  lose 
VOL,  XXXIII. 


the  advantages  of  that  statute,  in  that  pro*, 
portion  do  we  recede  from  that  blessed  state  of 
security,  which  it  conferred  upon  us. 

That  statute  says  distinctly  (I  mean  to  stat^ 
as  much  of  it  as  may  apply  to  the  case  under 
consideration),  first,  that  whosoever  shall  com- 
pass or  imagine  the  death  of  the  king,  shall  be 
guilty  of  high  treason : — secondly,  that  whoso- 
ever shall  levy  war  against  the  king  in  his 
realm,  shall  be  guilty  of  high  treason.  Now 
here  are  two  distinct  fiicts  stated  in  a  few  short 
and  distinct  words ;  men  cannot  fail  to  know 
whether  tkev  transgress  these  enactments,  or 
not ;  and,  although,  from  that  period  to  the 
present,  a  number  of  other  treasons  have  grown 
up,  or  rather  a  number  of  other  enactments  of 
treason  have  grown  up  at  diferent  times ;  yet^ 
always,  under  virtuous  administrations,  and  by 
patriotic  governors,  they  have  been  swept  away 
as  noxious  weeds,  poisoning  the  healthy  soil, 
of  our  country,  and  we  have  invariably  returned 
to  that  blessed  statute  in  every  good  and  sound 
^state  of  the  constitution^ 

I  lament  to  say,  that  in  the  reig^  of  his  late 
majesty,  a  statute  passed  which  extended  the 
law  of  treason  ;— Mr.  Attorney-general  seems 
rather  surprised  at  what  I  am  now  saying,  but 
I  repeat  that  I  lament  such  a  statute  ever 
passed ;  I  lament  every  deviation    from    the 
ancient  law  of  treasons;  and  even  if  it  be 
justified  on  the  ground  that  the  necessity  of  the 
times  called  for  it,  tlien  I  lament  that  there 
should  exist  such  a  necessity  in  the  state. — ^The 
latter  statute  to  which  I  allude,  and  upon  which 
a  part  of  the  charges  in  this  indictment  is 
founded,  is  the  statute  of  the  36th  of  his  late 
majesty's  reign,  which  enacted  '*  that  if  any 
person  aAer  the  passing  of  this  act,  during  the 
life  of  the  king,  and  until  the  end  of  the  next 
session  of  parliament,  after  the  demise  of  the 
crown,  shall  within  the  realm  or  without,  com- 
pass, imagine,  invent,  devise,  or  intend  death 
or  destruction,  or  any  bodily  harm  tending  t9 
death  or  destruction,  maim  or  wounding,  im- 
prisonment or  restraint  of  the  person  of  the 
same,  our  sovereign  lord  the  kmg,  his  heirs 
and  successors,  or  to  deprive  or  depose  him^ 
her,  or  them  from  the  style,  honour,  or  kingly 
name  of  the  Imperial  Crown  of  this  realm.'' 
Now  here  is  created  another  new  treason,  and 
which  is  also  diarged  upon  this  indictment ;  by  • 
the  statute  of  Edward  it  was  made  treason  to 
compass  or  imagine  the  death  of  the  king ;  by 
this  statute  it  is  made  treason,  to  cpnspire  or 
attempt  to  dqHue.him  from  his  kingly  office.— 
By  the  statute  of  Edward  it  was  made  treasop, 
actually  to  levy  war  against  his  majesty  within 
his  realm ;  by  this  statute  it  is  made  treason  to 
oofiipire  to  levy  war — and  upon  this  last  treason 
is  founded  another  count  ot  this  indictment ;  so 
that  the  four  questions  you  have  to  try  will  be 
these.~Did  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  compass 
or  imagine  the  death  of  the  king  ?  did  he  con^ 
spire  to  depose  him  from  his  imperial dif^nity  7, 
did  he  actually  levy  war  against  his  majesty  i 
or  lastly,  did  be  compire  to  levy  war  (though  W 
did.  not  actually  levy  war)  with  an  intent  \^ 
3Y 


lOAO] 


1  GEORGB  IV. 


IVifil  ofJamtu  bigt 


nosa 


compel  by  force  his  niajesty  to  change  the  mea- 
sures ef  his  goTemroeiit.  These  are  the  pre- 
cise issues  yoa  have  to  try,  and  whatever  may 
'ht  your  opiDion  of  the  guilt  of  the  prisoner  as 
to  other  roatterSy — however  atrocious  you  may 
ttiink  his  conduct  may  be  in.  a  moral  point  of 
▼iewy — ^however  criminal  he  may  be  in  other 
resoects, — however  he  may  have  brought  him- 
felt  within  the  fangs  of  other  criminal  laws, — 
if  you  do  not  think  he  has  aetaally  oommitted 
one  of  these  four  offences,  charged  upon  him  by 
this  indictment,  you  are  bound  to  find  him  not 
guilty ;  and  to  leave  Mm  to  take  his  trial  upon 
other  indictments,  which  will  reach  him,  ir  he 
bas  been  guilty  of  any  other  offenee.--It  will 
therefore  be  your  bounden  duty,  most  aeoxH 
rately  to  scan  the  evidence  which  has  been 
given  in  this  case,  and  apply  it  to  the  eharge 
of  the  present  indietaieaty  and  not  to  any  other 
offence. 

My  learned  friend,  the  Solicitor- general,  has 
admitted  to  yon,  that  this  case  does  not  come 
proved  to  you  in  all  respects  by  unequivocal 
testimony ;  and  he  apologizes  ibr  this  by  say- 
ing, that  in  all  cases  of  conspiracies  you  must 
of  necessity  call  some  of  the  conspirators,  be- 
cause without  some  of  the  conspirators  you 
cannot  know  what  passed  in  their  dark  con- 
0ultations«  This  is  another  miserable  cons^ 
quence  of  departing  fh>m  the  ancient  and  well- 
oonsidered  statute  of  treasons.  That  admirable 
statute,  amongst  other  things,  enacts,  that 
before  a  man  shtil  be  found  guilty  of  any  of 
the  treasons  there  set  out,  he  shall  be  arovabfy 
convicted  of  the  same.  I  do  not  believe  in 
any  other  statute  of  the  realm,  that  the  same 
guarded  caution  is  enacted,  or  the  same  word 
used ;  and  the  great  lawyer  to  whom  I  have 
referred  you  before,  lord  Coke^  writes  a  whole 
section  upon  the  word  provabfy.  He  says  that 
it  does  not  mean  prooably,  but  that  a  man 
must  be  convict  by  that  clear  and  distinct 
evidence  which  no  man  can  doubt  of.  While 
that  law  remained  unimpaired,  the  result  was, 
that  you  could  have  no  accusations  of  treason, 
bht  such  as  were  capable  of  clear  and  demon- 
strable proof.  Then  men's  Kves  were  safe. 
But  when  you  depart  from  the  spirit  of  that 
ancient  statute,  and  enact  these  new  treasons 
which  depend  upon  supposed  conspiracies  and 
secret  consultations,  you  must  call  in  the  aid 
of  witnesses  such  as  you  have  heard  upon  the 
present  occasion.  Then  it  is  that  men's  lives 
are  no  longer  safe,  but  they  may  bold  their 
existence,  fame,  and  fortune,  upon  the  testi- 
mony of  the  most  worthless  ana  inihmous  of 
mankind. 

Bearing  in  your  minds,  as  1  hope  you  will 
do,  these  preliminary  observations,  examine 
the  facts  tnat  have  been  proved  in  evidence 
before  yoii,  and  say  how  far  you  think  those 
witnesses,  whom  my  learned  fHend  theSoli- 
citor«general  admits  to  be  bad  witnesses,  are 
confiraied  by  purer  testimony ;  because  he  has 
told  VOtt  himself  that  they  are  not  to  be  be- 
lieved unless  they  are  confirmed  in  material 
cifciimstances.    It  is  not  confirming  an  infth 


mous  witness  in  some  trivial  etocimistanees, 
that  will  give  him  credit  to  ai^  infiunoos  tale 
he  may  tell  you :  you,  at  least,  ought  to  have 
IRro  confirmed  as  to  so  much  of  the  important 
matters  which  he  relates,  that  you,  laying  your 
hands  on  your  hearts,  can  say  you  believe  the 
rest  of  his  tale.  And  here  another  difficnliy 
in  this  case  prsseots  itself,  for  it  would  be  io 
vain  for  me  to  stand  up  and  say,  tikese  wit* 
neeses  are  not  oonfimed  in  a  great  deal  of 
important  matter :  but  you  are  to  discrimimtte 
whether  they  are  coafirmed  in  any  of  that 
matter  vthidi  toastimtes  the  crime,  high  tfe»-> 
son.  If  yoa  do  not  find  them  confirmed  in  » 
single  iota  of  that  matter  winch  alone  oonsti- 
ttttes  high  treason,  though  they  are  confirmed 
in  otAer  matters,  it  will  be  your  duty  to  find 
this  man  not  gvJlty.  And  h«re  is  the  danger 
(and  let  me  warn  you  of  it  as  one)  of  not  <us* 
criminatiag  cleany  to  what  extent  they  are 
confirmed.  If  you  shall  be  of  opinion  they 
are  confirmed  to  the  foil  extent  of  the  hoirid 
plan  of  the  assassination  of  his  majesty's  mi- 
nisters, yet,  inasmuch  as  I  do  not  know  of  an^ 
law  which  makes  that  atrocious  plan  of  issas 
sination  of  the  cabinet  conncil  amount  to  high 
treason,  if  yon  do  not  believe  that  there  was 
an  ulterior  intention  to  levy  war  against  his 
maiesty,  then  yon  must  find  the  prisoner  not 
guilty. 

It  is  impossible  for  me  to  deny  that  there  is 
a  great  deal  of  matter  in  evidence  before  yo» 
which  must  make  a  man  shrink  back  with 
horror ;  but  if  it  were  not  for  that  cireumsCanoe  - 
which  throws  a  shade  over  the  whole  of  the 
ease,  I  think  there  never  was  so  ridicnloos  m 
plot  detailed  in  evidence  since  the  records  of 
nistory  began.  It  exceeds  in  absurdity  all 
that  was  ever  recorded  in  real  history,  or 
imagined  in  fiction.  The  plot  vrhieh  has  been 
detailed  to  yon  to-^ay,  and  which  yon  are 
required  to  believe  was  actaaUy  adopted  as  of 
practicable  execution,  for  the  purpose  of  over- 
turning the  existing  government  of  this  oom- 
try,  is  a  plot  so  perfectly  ridiculous,  that  it  is 
wholly  incredible.  I  would  ask  yon  this,  if 
you  had  been  told  of  this  sdieme  of  rebellkMi 

Sa  really  existing  and  adopted  plan; — if  it 
d  been  gravely  related  by  a  man  of  ordinary 
veracity,  in  whom  you  had  ordinary  confidence^ 
unconnected  with  all  the  other  circntnstsnces 
of  assassinatibn,  and  the  murder  of  the  unfisr- 
tunate  man  who  met  his  death  at  Cato  street 
(all  of  which  I  know  must  have  its  efiect  apeit 
your  minds,  and  adds  weight  to  the  nltericr 
charge  of  treasott)^-^r  aric  yon  if  yon  had  bee» 
told  of  this  plot  to  oveclum  the  govemmeBt, 
precisely  in  the  phtase  and  language  of  the 
witness,  with  the  same  exhibition  of  mihiniy 
stores,  would  not  yon  have  reeiived  the  inle 
with  a  smile  of  contemnt  and  inerednHijT 
Then,  if  you  would  not  beKene  a  statement  o» 
the  r^ation  of  a  man  in  whose  general  vein- 
city  you  might  have  some  confidenoOy  wiU  yno 
believe  it  upon  the  testimony  of  a  self*coo«- 
victed  and  most  infiunous  witness?  The  nb*' 
snrditystrikei  ok  ip  fironglyy  notwiatttandioi^ 


1061] 


\fmt  High  TriatoH. 


A.  O.  iBiO. 


[106f 


all  I  have  te«o,  and  all  I  have  haaid,  that  untU  i  ba  ona  Id  this  atrocious  conspiracy,  fully  bent 
you  tell  me  by  your  verdict  you  do  believe  it,  I  to  carry  it  into  effect ;  and  never  does  he  till 
I  will  not  give  credit  to  the  possibility  of  your  the  baiter  is  about  his  neck  recede  from  that 
having  socm  belief.  '  intention.     And  then  he  thinks  to  make  a 

We  will  fissi  see  what  the  alleged  facts  are  ;  merit — by  wha(  f — ^by  still  greater  baseness  1 


as  detailed  to  yon  by  this  man  Adams.  And 
here  let  me  remark,  that  every  witness  is  sup>« 
posed  to  give  hit  testimony  under  the  sanction 
of  an  oath,  the  consequences  of  which  he  at 
least  ought  to  believe  are,  that  according  to 
the  truth  or  falsehood  of  the  circumstances 
which  he  relates  he  will  meet  bis  reward,  not 
only  by  the  sanctions  of  the  law  of  men,  but 
by  the  special  interpositions  of  Providence  in 
this  world,  and  by  Uie  laws  of  God  hereafter. 
To  begin  with  this  witness, — what  does  be 
tell  you  ?*^that  he  has  been  an  apostate  in  re- 
ligion, and  has  forsworn  his  God ;  that  God 
to  whom  he  appeals  for  the  truth  of  his  evi- 
dence !  That  IS  the  first  view  in  which  this 
witness  presents  himself.  Such  is  the  man 
who  has  to  tell  you  a  story,  incredible  in  itself, 
and  upon  whose  testimony  you  are  required  to 
believe  it.  But  to  proceed,  he  says  that  he 
became  acquainted  with  Brunt,  one  oi  the 
other  men  diarged  in  this  indictment,  at  Cam- 
bray,  in  France,  about  three  years  ago ;  that 
on  the  13th  of  January  last  he  wa%  introduced 
to  Thistlewood ;  upon  which  Thistlewood  said 


had  almost  said, — when  I  say,  '*  still  greater 
baseness,*'  I  am  afraid  of  using  an  expression 
that  can  in  tha  least  be  supposed  to  take  off 
from  the  baseness  of  his  nrst  conduct,— I 
hardly  know  how  to  express  myself;— I  was 
going  to  say,  greater  baseness  in  betraying  his 
companions.  I  am  afraid,  in  using  the  ex« 
pression,  of  being  supposed  to  say  that  such 
things  as  these  ought  not  to  be  disclosed :  but 
this  I  say,  that  in  a  man  who  goes  the  whole 
length,  which  he.  states  he  did,  towards  per- 
petrating a  deed  of  unparalleled  wickedness— 
m  him  it  is  the  last  trace  of  baseness  that  ho 
should  be  the  betrayer  of  his  companions; 
low  as  they  may  be  sunk  in  the  pit  of  infamy, 
a  still  lower  deep  is  bis  portion :  and  not  one 
spark  remains  which  can  redeem  him  from 
universal  and  unutterable  abhorrence.  Thus 
it  is,  that  this  men  stands  before  yon,  and  upon 
his  evidence  alone  it  is,  I  say,  that  all  the  facta 
stand  which  constitute  high  treason,  as  I  will 
shew  you  hereafter,  and  it  is  upon  his  evidence 
alone  that  you  must  convict  the  prisoner  of 
high  treason  5  although  I  admit  his  evidence  is 


fo  him :— ^  Oh,  you  are  the  man ;  you  have  I  abundantly  confirmed,  as  to  the  other  parts  of 


been  a  soldier  in  the  Guards.''  We  need  not 
go  thnM(^  the  whole  of  the  conversation,  for 
it  comes  to  this. — ^  I  suppose  you  are  a  good 
swordsman.''-^'' No,  I  am  not  so  good  a 
swordsman  as  I  once  was,  but  I  can  defend 
asyself.''  And  then  comes  the  convenation 
•bout  the  present  state  of  society ;  that  **  the 
people  are  aristocrats,  and  are  all  working 
under  one  system  to  support  the  government.'' 
Now  yon  are  to  take  it  as  a  clear  fact,  that  a 
plot  was  in  agitation  to  overturn  the  govern- 
ment, and  that  so  mnch  was  to  be  expected 
firom  the  hand  of  this  single  swordsman,  that 
Mr.  Thistlewood,**a  man  not  insane,  how- 
ever wicked,-^at  once  unbosoms  himself  to 
bim  at  their  first  interview,  and  tells  him  he 
wants  his  assistance,  as  you  are  to  infer,  though 
lie  did  not  directly  tell  him  so  in  terms :— that 
he  wanted  his  assistance  to  overturn  the  go- 
vernment—-the  powerfcd  assistance  of  him,  a 
single  swordsman  1 

Then  he  gives  you  an  acconnt  of  his  meet* 
log  the  conspirators  several  times  at  the  White 
Hiirt  pnblio-iionse,  and  then  he  goes  to  Brunt's, 
sphere  be  bears  langoage,  sud),  that  if  he  had 
bed  one  spark  of  honesty  or  feeling  in  his 
heart,  be  never  would  have  gone  a  second 
time,  but  srast  have  instantly  disclosed  it  to 
the  magistracy  of  the  country.  He  there 
hears  distinctly,  according  to  his  own  account, 
•  plan  in  agitation  fer  the  destruction,  at  one 
blow,  of  the  whole  of  tiie  cabinet  council  of 
this  country.  Does  he  revest  at  this  7— No  I 
he  goes  on  and  joins  them ;  be  meets  them 
datf  flfter  da^  in  tfaeir  consultations  on  this 
plan-^^-btnMdf  professmg,  and,  if  you  believe 
nis  0sm  wotds^  truly  intending  at  this  time  to 


the  case,  namely,  as  to  the  horrible  plan  of 
assassination. 

You  will  always  bear  in  mind  what  it  is  that 
constitutes  the  treason.    I  have  told  you  that 
every  act  of  levyiog  war  against  the  king,  or 
conspiring  so  to  do,  with  an  intention  by  force 
to  make  him  idter  his  measures  of  government 
is  high  ti-eason.    Now  all  which  you  can  infer 
against  thb  prisoner  of  his  guilt,  with  respect 
to  this  species  of  high  treason,  is  from  certain 
supposed  conversations  on  Tuesday  the  22nd, 
and  Wednesday  the  23rd  of  February.    Adams 
tells  you,  that  in  addition  to  the  plan  to  as- 
sassinate his  majesty's  ministers,  they  had  it 
in  design  to  do  what  ?— to  seize  two  cannon  in 
Gra/s-inn-lane ;  to  seize  six  cannon  in  the 
Artillery-ground;  to  send  to  different  out-ports, 
and  seise  those  out  ports.    But  that  which 
most  distinctly  marks  the  intention  of  high 
treason,    was    a   proclamation  which    he  is 
pleased  to  say  was  fabricated  by  Thistlewood, 
and  of  which  proclamation  there  is  not  a  trace 
of  confirmation  in  any  other  part  of  the  cause. 
Now  I  know  that  the  learned  Attorney-general 
may  say  there  is  confirmation  of  this  by  an 
unsuspected  and  uncontaminated  witness.    He 
will  tell  you  that  Hale,  the  servant  of  Brunt, 
was  called  to  fetch  six  sheets  of  cartridges 
paper;  and  he  will  tell  you  also,  that  the 
witness,  Adams,  said  the  proclamation  was 
written  on  cartridge-paper.     Gentlemen,  is 
that  a  confirmation  of  the  contents  of  this 
supposed  proclamation?    You  do  not  want 
confirmation   of  the  fact  of  six  alieets   of 
paper  being  sent  for ;  consider  what  they  were 
about  at  that  time:— they   were   preparing 
their  arms,  not  for  the  plan  of  high  treason,  as 


10631 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


I  say,  bat  for  other  most  Mfariotis  plans ;  they 
inrere  then  making  cartridges,  and  wkat  so  fit, ' 
and  what  so  likely,  as  that  they  should  want 
cartridge-paper  for  that  purpose  ?— 'And,  in-  ! 
deed,  there  is  a  passage  in  the  testimony  of 
Hale,  which,  as  far  as  it  gives  confirmation 
either  way,  gives  a  confirmation  to  my  state- 
ment, rather  than  to  the  supposition  of  the 
learned  Attorney-general ;  for  Hale  tells  you^ 
that  among  the  articles  in  the  cupboard  they 
found  fragments  of  the  cartridge-paper ;  most 
evidently,   therefore,    they  had    been    using 
this   cartridge-paper,    not   for   the   purpose 
of   fabricating  proclamations,  but  of  fabri- 
cating cartridges.     Take   this   proclamation 
out  of  the  cause,  and  there  is  nothing  that 
can  indicate  that  their  intention  was  levy- 
ing war  against  the  state,  so  as  to  make  their 
mcts  amount  to  high  treason.    There  is  a  great 
deal  in  the  cause  to  lead  one  to  suppose,  that 
they  might  contemplate  a  desperate  riot,  and 
a  dreadful  murder;  that  you  might  perhaps 
fairly  infer,  if  that  were  Uie  matter  tor  your 
consideration ;  but  that  is  not  the  charge  upon 
this  record :  if  you  believe  every  tittle  of  the 
evidence  up  to  that  extent,  yet  you  cannot 
consistently  with  your  duty  to  God,  to  your 
countiy,  and  to  yourselves,  find  the  prisoner 
guilty  of  an  intention  to  lev^  war ;  even  if  yon 
could  believe  the  other  circumstances,  that 
Aey  meant  to  take  the  cannon,    that  they 
meant  to  fire  the  houses,  and  that  they  meant 
other  acts  of  violence,  which  do  not  amount, 
or  may  not  amount  to  a  levying  of  war.    And 
what  you  are  most  particularly  to  guard  your- 
selves against  is  this,  that  you  are  not  to  eon- 
*vict  on  constructive  high  treasons.    I  know 
very  well  that  there  have  been  constructive 
levyings  of  war,  but  still  levying  of  war  is  a 
question  of  f>ict.    You  are  to  consider,  under 
all  the  circumstances,  what  shall  and  what 
shsU  not  amount  to  a  levying  of  war :  there 
are  great  and  dreadful  riots  which  do  not 
amount  to  levying  of  war,  and  if  you  are 
of  opinion  this  would  be  only  riot  and  not 
levying  of  war  then  the  prisoner  is  not  guilty 
'of  the  matter  of  this  Indictment.    When  I  say 
there  may  be  great  and  dreadful  riots  which  do 
not  amount  to  levying  of  war,  and  that  you 
ought  to  be  most  careful  about  extending  the 
law  of  treason  by  construction  and  implication, 
I  would  rather  state  it  you  from  the  language 
of  one  of  the  greatest  judges  that  ever  adorned 
the  English  bench,  aye,  and  one  of  the  best 
of  men ; — I  mean  my  lord  Hale,  whom  bishop 
Burnet  calls  ''that  great  lawver,  and  that 
honest  man  :*'  an  honest  man  he  was  as  yon 
^11  judge  from  this  short  anecddte  I  will 
tell  you  of  him.    During  the  usurpation  of 
'  Cromwell,  so  high  was  his  credit  as  a  lav?yer, 
that  that  great  and  able  man  (for  so  he  was, 
though  an  usurper)  felt  it  for  the  honour  of  his 
government  to  employ  my  lord  Hale ;  though 
my  lord  Hale  had  the  boldness  to  tell  him, 
that  he  doubted  the  legality  of  bis  accession  to 
the  throne  of  power  where  he  had  seated  him- 
self, and  would  act  under  no  commissiop  from 


Trial  ofJomet  Ings  [1064 

him  which  should  require  faim  to  pass  a  sen- 
tence of  death  on  any  man ;  notwiibstanding 
this,  he  was  so  highly  revered  by  that  usurper, 
that  he  was  madeehief  justice  of  his  Court  of 
Common  Pleas.    Still  higher  was  he  honoured 
by  his  legitimate  sovereign,  when  restored  to 
the  throne  of  his  ancestors ;  he  was  placed  in  a 
more  exaltel  station.    But  under  both  govern- 
ments he  was  an  honest  man,  who  never  warped 
the  law  to  serve  the  power  of  the  usurper,  or 
gratify  the  wishes  of  the  dissolute  ministers  of 
d)e  monarch.    He  never  forgot  his  duty  to  his 
country,  but  was  ever  the  firm  friend  of  the 
legal  liberty  of  the  subject.    I  will  tell  yoa 
with  respect  to  constructive  treasons,  what  that 
learned  judge  and  good  man  says.    He  states 
that  the  statute  of  £dward  is  distinit  vrith  re- 
spect to  the  levying  of  war,  but  he  says,  levy- 
ing of  war  may  be  actual  or  etmUnuiwe;  that 
is,  constructive  such  as  great  riots,  or  for  ge- 
neral purposes ;  but  he  shews  what  he  thinks 
of  those  lawyers  who  have  extended  the  simple 
law  of  treason  by  implication  and  constraction. 
And  with  respect  to  constructive  treasons,  I 
will  myself  say,  and  I  am  sorry  to  say  it,  they 
have  been  the  device  of  bad  lawyers  to  further 
the  oppressions  of  wicked  statesmen.    Judges 
of  the  present  day  must  be  bound  by  the  reso- 
lutions of  their  predecessors,  and  take  the  law 
of  treason  as  they  find  it  recorded ;  so  says  hnd 
Hale,  who,  after  having  stated  several  con- 
structive treasons,   says,  ^  These  resolotionB 
being  made  and  settled,  we  must  moquktoe  in 
them,**— he  says  not  a  word  of  their  fnroprietj, 
or  of  his  approbation  of  them,  but  yon  n^ 
see  plainly  what  was  the  bearing  of  bis  owb 
mind. — ^These    resolutions  being   made   and 
settled,  we  must  ne^toesce  in  them ;  **  bat,  ia 
my  opinion,  if  new  cases  happen  for  the  fotnre 
that  have  not  an  express  resolution  in  point, 
nor  are  expresslr  within  the  words  of  the 
statute  of  25th  Edward  3rd,  though  th^  may 
seem  to  have  a  parity  of  reason ;— 'it  is  the  safest 
way,  and  most  agreeable  to  the  wisdom  of  die 
great  act  of  S5th  Edward  3rd,  first  to  oonsoll 
the  parliament,  and  have  their  declaration,  and 
to  be  very  wary  in  multiplying  oonstmctive 
and  interpretative  treasons,  for  we  know  not 
where  it  will  end/'    Thank  God,  gentlemen 
of  the  jury,  it  is  in  your  power  to  pot  a  stop  to 
their  dangerous  progress : — if  you  find  venuets 
on  these  constructive  treasons,  God  only  knows 
where  they  may  end;  but  once  let  Englisli 
juries  oppose  them  firmly  by  their  verdicts,  and 
whenever  they  have  a  case  of  constmctive 
treason  brou^t  before  them,  of  whi^  tke 
Crown  lavvyers  can  shew  no  precedent  exactly 
in  point,  let  them  exert  their  glorious  privilege, 
and  deny  to  them  a  verdict  of  guilty  on  tSch 
constructive  treasons.  Do  this,  gentlemen,  aod 
save  your  country.    You  thus  interpose  mm 
impenetrable  barrier  against  the  progress  of 
power.    I  am  one  of  the  last  men.  in  the  woiM 
to  ask  you  to  do  any  thing  that  should  sfaaka 
the  confidence  all  men  have  in  the  laws;  bttt 
I  do  ask  you,  fselingJthat  I  am  doing  my  duty, 
to  oppose  yourselves  to  this  dangeBous  tiibt  ii 


10651 


Jor  High  Treason* 


constractive  tmsons ;  and  if  my  learned  inend 
4he  AttonKjF^eoeral  caonot  show  yon  an  exact 
precedent  in  point,  rather  than  follow  his  ad- 
▼ice,  follow  the  advice  of  that  great  and  learned 
judge,  oppose  the  constitutional  barrier  of  your 
▼erdict  to  it^  and  rear  up  no  more  oonstructiTe 
treasons. 

•  There  is  in  this  case  so  much  matter  of  grare 
and  serious  import,  that  I  cannot  treat  the 
other  part  of  the  case  which  remains  with  the 
levity  and  ridicule  with  which  it  well  deserves 
to  be  treated,— I  mean  so  much  of  the  plot  as 
relates  to  the  overthrow  of  government.  Good 
God  1  is  it  in  a  British  Court  of  Justice  that  we 
mre  trying  a  plot  for  the  overthrow  of  the  British 
government  with  materials  of  war  such  as  those 
lying  before  you  ?  What  is  the  greatest  uum- 
^r  of  men  that  we  have  it  in  evidence  were  to 
be  brought  into  the  field  for  the  destruction  of 
this  mighty  empire  ? — ^Forty  men  1  What 
were  those  forty  men  to  do  ? — They  were  first 
to  assassinate  the  whole  cabinet  council ;  they 
were  to  send  a  detachment  to  seise  two  pieces 
of  cannon — not  a  single  horse  among  them : 
they  were  to  send  another  detachment  to  seize 
other  six  pieces  of  cannon  1  they  were  to  seize 
on  several  out-ports  I  they  were  more  particu- 
lariy  to  take  Brighton  with  a  force ;  the  de- 
tachment for  this  purpose,  I  presume,  was  to 
Jiave  gone  down  on  the  outside  of  some  one  of 
the  quick  travelling  coaches,  and  to  have  taken 
the  town  by  surprise  I  They  were  to  surround 
London,  as  I  believe  it  is  stated  in  the  evidence 
in  this  cause,  that  the^  were  to  be  so  much  on 
the  alert  with  the  residue  of  their  forty  men, 
ihat  not  even  an  orderiy  was  to  be  allowed  to 
leave  London  for  Windsor ;  but  that  truly  even 
if  an  orderly  were  despatched,  and  were  lucky 
<enough  to  evade  their  vigilance  and  reach 
Windsor,  they  had  nothing  to  fear,  for  the 
troops,  having  been  up  all  night  at  the  funeral 
of  his  majesty,  could  not  return  to  town  time 
enough  to  rescue  London  from  the  hands  of 
this  formidable  band  of  warriors  I  Such  is  the 
-istory  upon  which  you  are  to  find  these  men 
"guilty  of  hiffh  treason  ! 

I  have  told  you  that  there  is  no  confirmation 
^f  that  part  of  the  story  which  relates  to  the 
facts  constituting  high  treason,  and  that  (thongh 
it  may  be  tedious  to  you  to  repeat  it  so  often) 
ia  the  venr  essence  of  this  cause,  and  'which 
you  should  never  dismiss  from  your  minds. 
You  are  to  look  how  far  this  man  is  confirmed ; 
•if  he  is  merely  confirmed  up  to  the  point  of 
the  assassination  (which  perhaps  I  may  admit, 
Ibrwhat  is  found  in  Cato-street,  and  the  oc- 
cnrrences  which  iJiere  took  place,  may  confirm 
him  up  to  that  extent),  there  remains  no  con- 
-ftmation  upon  that  part  of  the  case  which  alone 
you  are  now  callea  upon  to  decide,  and  on 
•wfaidi  alone  yon  oan  say  high  treason  was  in 
-the  contemplation  of  tiiese  men.  But  before 
•I  dismiss  the  evidenco  of  this  man— -(and  I  do 
It  with  the  less  reluctance,  because  my  learned 
fiiend  who  is  to  follow  me,  though  we  came 
lale  tnstrudled  into  the  cause,  yet,  from  the 
Kspite  the  Court  granted  him  the  other  night, 


A.  D.  1820.  ( 1066 

came  so  well  prepared  that  it  relieved  my  mind 
from  the  griet  I  felt  from  not  being  able  to  do 
my  duty  in  the  manner  I  wished  to  have  done  . 
it,  though  I  have  omitted  a  great  deal,  there  is 
but  little  my  learned  friend  will  omit ;  you  will 
hear  from  him  the  evidence  roost  minutely 
dissected  in  every  part). — But,  before  I  quit 
this  man,  let  us  seriously  pause.— Who  is  he 
that  tells  US  this  tale,  and  demands  our  belief 
in  his  testimony?  Who  is  this  man?  Let 
him. answer  for  himself;  he  stands  here  upon 
his  own  confession — a  betrayer  of  his  compar 
nions  1 — a  traitor  to  his  king  !-^a  rebel  against 
his  country  I— an  avowed  intended  murderer 
and  assassin !— an  apostate  from  his  religion ! — 
and  a  denier  of  his  God  1 — Good  heavens  1  Is 
it  in  a  British  court  of  Justice  P — Is  it  here  where 
we  have  met  to  administer  justice  according  to 
the  manner  of  our  forefathers  in  this  her  an* 
cient  sanctuary  ? — Is  it  here  before  a  British 
jury  that  the  lives  of  eleven  men  are  to  be 
sacrificed,  upon  the  evidence  of  such  a  witness^ 
and  not  merely  their  lives,  but— if  the  law  is 
to  be  literally  put  in  force — their  lives  with 
torture?  Can  a  British  jury  condemn  their 
countrymen  to  death  and  torture — their  names 
to  eternal  infamy-Hind  their  families  to  utter 
ruin,  upon  the  evidence  of  such  a  self-convicted 
wretch  as  this  ? 

As  I  prefer,  upon  all  occasions,  the  authority 
of  great  men,  1  would  refer  you,  in  this  case, 
to  what  I  have  heard  fall  from  my  learned 
friend  the  Solicitor-general,  without  alluding 
to  what  cause,  or  when  it  was,  or  how  long 
ago.  But,  upon  an  occasion  when  a  witness 
was  called  to  prove  that  another  witness  was 
not  worthy  of  being  believed  upon  his  oath,  the 
witness  called  to  impeach  the  credit  of  the 
other,  upon  his  cross-examination  stated,  that 
the  man  who  he  said  was  not  worthy  to  be  ber 
lieved  upon  his  oath,  had  made  a  proposition 
to  him  to  go  together  into  the  park,  for  the 
purpose  of  extorting  money  from  others  by 
certain  nefarious  threats,  and  that  he  went 
with  him  but  without  having  committed  any 
guilt  of  that  sort.  When  the  Solicitor-general 
came  to  comment  upon  this  testimony*  the 
natural  feelings  of  his  mind  broke  out,  and  his 
exclamation  was,  **  would  an  honest  man,  en- 
titled to  credit  in  a  court  of  justice,  act  the 
part  that  this  witness  has  acted  ?" — namely : 
would  an  honest  man,  entitled  tp  credit  in  a 
court  of  justice,  for  a  moment  assent  to  a  pro- 
position to  extort  money  from  another?  Then 
let  me  apply  this  reasoning  to  my  learned 
friend. — is  the  witness  that  he  has  produced— 
is  a  man  who  could  act  the  part  he  has  acted, 
entitled  to  credit  in  a  court  of  justice?  Is  an 
apostate  I  a  traitor !  a  rebel  I  a  betrayer  of  his 
companions  1  an  assassin  1  a  murderer  1  all  of 
which  this  witness  Adams  admits  that  he  has 
been,  and  intended.  In  the  language  of  my 
learned  friend,  is  such  a  man  entitled  to  cre- 
dit in  a  court  of  justice  ?  And  yet  my  learned 
friends^  the  officers  of  the  Crown^  put  up  such 

*  See  the  preceding,  case. ,  ■ 


1007]        1  GEORGE  IV. 

A  man  Uusday  (or  at  leait  yesterday)  as  a  laaa 
worthy  of  credit  in  a  court  of  justice.  Can  he 
be  worthy  of  credit,  unless  indeed  (which  I 
think  no  lawyer  will  ever  contend)  he  is 
worthy  of  credit  when  produced  by  the  Grown 
to  seek  men's  lives,  but  not  worthy  of  credit 
when  he  comes  into  a  court  of  justice  to 
give  evidence  on  their  behalf:  unless  my  learn* 
ed  friends,  the  Crown  lawyers,  can  reconcile 
this  contradiction,  out  of  their  own  months  I 
kave  it,  that  such  a  witness  is  unworthy  of 
credit  in  a  British  court  of  justice. 

I  know  what  answer  may  be  attempted  to 
be  given  to  this  observation.  Tliey  will  tell 
yon,  perhaps,  that  this  witness  is  confirmed  by 
other  witnesses.  I  beg  of  vou  to  examine  the 
testimony  throughout,  and  see  whether  you 
can  find  this  witness,  as  to  the  material  point 
which  you  are  to  try,  confirmed  by  any,  aye 
by  even  an  infieunous  witness,  much  less  by 
an  unsuspected  witness.  You  will  not  take 
all  this  paraphernalia  of  war,  if  I  may  so  call 
it,  and  the  bead  roll  of  wijtnesses  you  have 
heard  as  confirming  him  as  to  matters  in  which 
be  ought  to  be  confirmed.  They  mav  confirm 
him  in  insignificant  points,  but  you  will  look  for 
confirmation  in  the  matter  of  the  alleged  tree* 
son,  and  if  you  find  no  confirmation  as  to  that 
point,  I  beg  you,  upon  the  authority  of  the 
teamed  Solicitor-general,  to  dismiss  him  with 
shame  from  this  court  of  justice,  as  a  man  un- 
worthy here  to  be  believed  upon  his  oath.  If 
even  he  were  confirmed  by  other  witnesses  no 
better  than  himself,  as  to  the  plot  of  insurrec- 
tion and  rebellion,  it  is  no  support  to  one  in- 
famous witness  to  confirm  him  by  the  testimony 
of  other  vritnesses  almost  or  equally  infamous 
with  himself.  Look  then  to  the  evidence  care* 
fully,  and  see  whether  you  can  find  a  confir* 
mation  of  this  man  in  any  respect  by  an  un* 
suspected  witness :  look  whether  you  can  find 
a  confirmation  even  by  those  other  witnesses 
who  are  equally  or  nearly  as  devoid  of  credit 
as  himself. 

The  witnesses  who  speak  to  the  actual  trans* 
action,  I  believe,  sm  but  three  in  number. 
Now,  after  you  have  done  with  Adams,  you 
come  to  Hiden.  Let  us  see  what  sort  of  a 
rosn.  Hiden  is.  Hiden  says,  he  was  formerly 
member  of  a  shoemakers'  dub,  that  is,  in  plain 
language,  of  a  seditious  club ;  that  he  met  Wil- 
son a  few  days  before  the  23rd  of  February, 
and  then  what  do  you  find  upon  his  own  tesb 
ttmony  is  the  first  tiling  that  passes  between 
bim  and  Wilson  ?  He  has  the  efirontery  to 
tell  you,  that  the  very  first  proposition  thai 
was  made  to  him,  without  disguise  and  with- 
out reserve,  was,  '<  Will  you  be  one  to  murder 
bis  majesty's  ministers  ?''  Good  heaven  1  what 
must  a  man  be  who  receives  such  a  propo- 
sition,  and  does  not  instantly  revolt  at  it? 
Is  he  a  worse  man,  or  a  better  man,  than  the 
man  who  goes  into  the  park  to  extort  money 
by  threatening  to  accuse  another  of  certain 
offences  ?  Is  a  man  who  can  at  once  assent 
to  a  plot  to  murder  the  whole  of  fats  majesty's 
ministers^  who,  to  ose  the  language  of  my 


3Vm/  of  Jama  Ingi 


[1068 


fly. 


learned  firiend  the  Soliciler-general,  can  bo 
guilty  of  such  conduct,  worthy  of  credit  in  a 
oonrt  of  justice?  The  answer  he  would  giv« 
you  to  that  is,  that  be  is  not.  Iben,  if  ha  be 
not  worthy  of  credit,  what  confirmation  does 
he  give  to  that  ia&mous  witness  Adams  ?  I 
do  not  know  that  it  may  be  necessary  to  go 
through  the  whole  of  the  evidence,  but  be  do- 
tails  a  long  oonvenation  between  himnflf  and 
Wilson  all  tending  to  this  point,  that  they  had 
a  design  in  view  to  murder  his  mijeaty's  nm- 
istera ;  bol  there  is  not  one  word  of  oonfinm^ 
tion  as  to  that  BMtter  which  alone  as  thechmge 
before  you,  and  in  which  you  are  to  decider 
Not  one  word  of  confirmation  of  any  of  those 
fiscts  and  deliberations  which  amonnt  to  h^ 
treason.  It  is  true,  Wilson  teUs  him  (an  be 
says)  that  there  were  some  persons  lo  go  and 
seise  the  cannon  at  the  ArtiHeiy-^^ronnd,  nad 
that  they  were  to  retreat  to  the  Mansion^onse; 
but  all  this  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the 
case  of  a  great  not;  aU  this  is  perfectly  con- 
sistent with  a  case  that  may  be  anoonnec^ 
ed  with  the  charge  of  higli  treason :  it  nxf  be 
true  to  the  whole  extent  of  this  statement,  bot  it 
does  not  prove  the  diarge  of  which  akme  yon 
are  to  find  the  prisoner  guilty.  And  then,  at  the 
close  of  this  grave  matter,  conies  what  ?  why 
this  most  ridiculous  excuse.-^**  No,  I  cannot 
stop  to  help  yon  ;*-I  approve  of  your 
I  wish  you  successful — I  cannot  stop  to 
der  his  majesty's  mimsters  at  present,  ~ 
I  have  got  to  get  a  quart  of  cream  for  a  ft 
by  whidt  I  shall  make  a  profit  of  a 
It  this  statement  is  divested  of  the  horror  we 
must  alt  feel  at  the  recital  of  this  ahoasipable 
proposition  of  assassinatioo ;  if  it  stood  aiB»- 
ply  on  the  plot  to  raise  rebellion,  conld  I  state 
the  fact,  and  the  means  of  its  accomplishment 
without  at  once  exciting  yon  to  broad  laughter? 
But  what  is  the  conduct  of  that  witness  when 
examined  1  According  to  his  own  account, 
be,  without  hesitation,  joined  in  Uiis  nefeiioni 
plan ;  he  shewed  no  horror  or  repugnaiice  st 
It,  but  said  be  would  be  with  theaa;  and  it 
last  merely  excused  hiihself  in  the  way  I  have 
stated. 

The  next  witness  is  Monument — he  states  a 
conversation  he  had  with  Thisdewood.  And 
the  thing  that  presses  most  in  his  evidenee  is 
this ;  'that  Thtstlewood  said  to  him,  he  oogbt 
to  get  arms ;  for  that  all  his  friends  had  aima. 
You  will  attend  lo  the  particular  drmimstencr 
of  the  time,  when  this  was  said — I  cannot,  I  do 
not,  stand  here  to  deny,  that  there  was  a  gieaf 
deal  of  ferment  at  this  lime  in  the  country.  It 
was  shortly  after  a  transaction  took  phwe,  or 
at  least  while  it  was  atill  recent  in  the  aaindB 
of  meoy-'fi  transaction,  ten  wbidi  no  traD»> 
action  that  I  reooUect  in  my  tisse,  faaa  been 
matter  of  more  publie  disciiesJen^*— 4  mean 
the  transaction  which  took  nlaee  at  Manahsa 
ter  in  August  last,  of  whkdil  wiU  speak  itt  tife 

•  Vide  41  Hans.  ParKDeb.  pp.  357, 370^508^ 
887,  1180;  5  Hans.  FtuU  Deb*  N»  &  pffc 
713,719,775. 


lOBOl 


fo/t  High  Treasati^ 


ttrms  indieatiTe  of  way  own  opinion.  Bat 
fins  I  may  ininly  my  to  yon,  t&at  it  was  a 
tianaaction  of  which  many  men  thought  Teiy 
diierently  from  each  other^ — many  who  were 
in  general  warm  friends  to  all  the  measnves  of 
government,  thought  that  a  tiansactioni  where 
sp  many  British  subjects  had  lost  their  Htos, 
l^  an  armed  force  attacking  an  unarmed  mob, 
was  at  least  matter  of  grave  inquiry  and  i»- 
▼cstigation ;  and  that  before  anjr  public  ex« 
pretsion  of  approbation  was  given  to  that 
meatare,  at  least  it  was  fit  first  to  be  inquired 
into.—- Others  again ,  on  the  other  side,  who 
thought  that  the  measure  admitted  of  no  paU 
liation,  did  not  hesitate  to  call  it  in  plain 
language  a  massacre.  Certain  laws  a^nst 
pnmic  meetings  followed  upon  that,  which 
many  men  who  were  violent  in  their  temper 
shewed  a  disposition  to  resist;  and  it  was 
said  among  those,  who  thought  public  meet- 
ings neoessaiT  to  secure  public  liberty,  we 
will  meet,^md  under  these  circumstances  we 
win  go  armed  to  resist  the  attempts  of  the 
soldiery  to  disperse  us.  This  fully  explains 
what  Thistlewood's  meaning  might  be  — 
^  I  and  my  friends  who  have  this  view  of 
the  public  transactions,  are  determined  that 
we  will  have  our  meetings  as  usual ;  and 
as  we  see  that  these  meetings  are  interrupted 
br  an  armed  force,  we  will  have  our  arms 
aiso,  and  will  attend  armed."  I  do  not 
mean  to  deny  that  this  is  a  desperate  re* 
sistance  to  the  taw ;  but  be  it  so*  It  is  not 
high  treason.  And  never  dismiss  from  your 
minds  if  you  think  it  not  high  treason,  you 
must  find  the  prisoner  —  not  guilty,  •—  High 
treason  is  what  alone  you  are  to  try,  and  not 
disobedience  to  and  dissatisfiiction  with  the 
laws.  So  that  even  with  this  part  of  the 
witness's  testimony,  brought  in  confirmation 
of  AdasM,  it  is  no  confirmation  of  that  in 
which  he  ought  to  be  confirmed,  though  it  may 
be  confirms  lion  of  a  very  seditious  and  wicked 
Intention  on  the  part  of  those  people* 

Ibis  witness  Monument,  however,  I  should 
telt  you,  was  at  the  meeting  in  Cato-street,  on 
the  9drd  of  February,  where  the  whole  plan  of 
insurrection,  if  you  believe  Adams,  was  to 
(sommence ;  and  now  I  pray  you,  does  he  con- 
firm that  part  of  Adams  s  evidenoe,  which  goes 
to  shew  they  had  a  design  beyond  the  murder 
of  ministers  f  He  confirms  the  whole  plot  of 
assassination.  The  transactions  in  Cat(^ 
street,  I  do  admit,  confirm  so  much  of  the 
plan  as  detailed  by  Adams ;  but  does  he  con- 
ilnn  that  most  important  fact,  the  existence  of 
a  supposed  proclamation,  which  was  to  give  a 
cbaiacter  to  the  whole  meeting  f  Thistlewood 
'would  probably  have  had  tluit  proclamation 
witli  him,  if  it  had  existence,  lind  would 
mlwaUy  have  stated  it  to  the  conspirators. 
Can  you  believe  that  if  that  had  been  the  ease 
be  would  not  have  eonfirmed  that  important 
ihot  t  Does  he  tell  you  that  any  such^ocla- 
iMUion  was  produced  or  alluded  to  by  Thistle- 
n*M»d  ?  or  that  any  thing  more  was  agitated  at 
that  meethif  I  ^n  a  dtsigo  of  liot,  asd  this 


A.  D«  IBSO.  [107<^ 

inleiided  plan  of  ssurder  or  assassinatioir? 
But  the  same  observation  applies  to  this  wit- 
ness, as  applied  to  Hiden ;  and  here  let-  ma 
call  to  my  aid  the  observation  of  the  learned 
S<diettor-general.  Is  a  witness,  who  could  so- 
conduct  himself,  worthy  of  credit  in  a  court  of 
justice?  Then  here  you  have  one  infamous 
witness,  not  fully  but  partly  confirmed  by 
another  infamdos  witness.  Then  comes  a  third 
infamous  witness.  Is  it  an  aggregate  of  infamy 
that  will  ever  make  truth?  What  was  his 
conduct  in  the  witness-box  to-day,  when  I 
asked  what  he  thought  of  himself  in  joining  in 
this  ne&rious  scheme  ?  —  ^  I  was  very  much 
to  blame/' — ^Do  not  yon  consider  yourself  • 
most  atrocious  villain?  —  ''In  truth  I  Was 
bkuneabk;"  I  think  such  vras  his  very  ex- 
ptession,  but  it  was  some  most  trivial  and  in- 
significant phrase,  expressive  of  no- remorse  of 
conscience,  and  which  shewed  that  his  formeir 
conduct  had  made  no  deep  impression  upon 
his  heart,  and  that  he  contmued  the  same  un* 
fueling  villain  as  when  he  set  out  upon  the' 
cold-blooded  expedition  of  intended  murder. 

It  may  be  argued  (for  I  have  heard  it  S9 
argued  before,  and  it  may  be  so  argued  affain), 
that  there  are  witnesses  who,  if  Adams,  Hiden, 
and  Monument  speak  fidsely,  might  be  called 
to  contradict  them — ^there  is  Palin — there  is 
Cook— and  there  is  some  other  man,  who  it  is 
said  might  be  called  by  the  prisoner  to  con- 
tradict them.  Oeotleraen,is  not  that  illusory? 
I  have  told  you  all  along  these  conspirators 
are  not  innocent  men  devoid  of  all  crime ;  and 
can  you  expect  that  we  can  call  men  here  in 
behidf  of  the  prisoner,  who  vrill  voluntarilr 
come  to  give  evidence  in  his  fiivour  with' 
baiters  round  their  own  necks.  I  might  put  it 
to  the  learned  attorney-general,  if  one  of  them 
were  to  venture  into  this  court  and  place  him- 
self in  that  witnesses  box,  wou^d  he  suff*er  him 
to  depart  the  court  with  impunity.  Then,  if 
men  must  come  under  such  circumstances,  can 
you  suppose  that  they  will  come  at  all  ?  Let 
not  that  argument,  therefore,  have  any  weight 
with  you.  Let  not  it  weigh  against  the  prison- 
ers at  the  bar,  that  they  do  not  call  men,  who 
if  they  were  to  come  here,  though  they  might 
contradict  the  witnesses  for  the  Crown,  as  to 
all  that  part  of  their  evidence  which  relates  to 
the  facts  constituting  treason,  must  confess 
themselves  guilty  of  a  great  deal  which  would 
bring  them  within  the  grasp  of  criminal  law. 
Under  these  circumstances,  therefore,  it  is  not 
to  be  expected  that  any  such  witnesses  can  be 
called. — ^If,  therefore,  Adams  receives  no  con- 
firmation from  his  two  associates  to  wlnnn  I 
have  referred;  see  whether  he  receives  any 
conformation  from  the  other  string  of  witnesses ; 
when  I  say  confirmation,  I  cannot  repeat  it 
too  often,  I  mean  confirmation  as  to  that 
matter  which  makes  the  treason.  Confirma« 
tion,  as  to  other  circumstances,  I  know  there 
is  enough. 

Immediately  after  Adams  has  been  ea»r 
mined,  Eleanor  Walker  and  Mary  Rogers 
are  oaUed.    What  confirmation  do  they  givef 


10711       1  GEORGE  IV. 

They  coftfirm  the  fact,  that  Brunt  took  a 'room' 
— the  back  room  in  bis  own  house,  professedly 
for  logs,  but  r«a11y  for  certain  meetings.  I 
cannot  deny  that  they  had  that  room  nor 
that  they  had  consultations  there,  peihaps 
for  nefarious  purposes;  but  the  question 
is,  did  their  consultations  there  refer  to 
high  treason?  And  you  will  always  bear 
in  view,  as  far  as  the  confirmation  of  those 
witnesses  goes,  it  amounts  to  nothing  at  all  as 
connected  with  the  matters  and  facts  which 
are  necessary  to  eonstitute  the  crime  of  high 
treason. 

After  these,  Hale  is  examined ;  he  confirms 
nothing  further  than  that  they  held  meetings 
io  that  room ;  but  I  think  there  is  a  piece  of 
his  testimonj  important  to  the  prisoner :  He 
found  the  migments  of  the  cartridge-paper, 
unwritten  upon ;  that  cartridge*paper,  whidi 
was  sent  for^  I  say,  for  the  purpose  of  wrap- 
ping up  cartridges,  but  which  Adams 
chooses  to  say  was  sent  for  for  the  purpose  of 
writing  the  proclamations.  Then  they  call 
Smart,  Bissiz,  and  Gillan,  three  unsuspected 
witness^  I  admit,  but  what  do  they  prove? — 
that  they  saw  a  man  watdiinff  in  Grosveoor- 
square,  opposite  lord  Harrowbjr's  house :  that 
is  confirmatory  of  the  charge  of  assassination, 
which  I  do  not  in  the  present  inquiry  dispute ; 
but  as  far  as  respects  high  treasoui  it  carries 
the  eridence  not  one  tittle  further. 

I  shall  pass  over,  or  leave  to  my  learned 
friend,  all  that  passed  at  Cato-street ;  because 
here  I  am  bound  to  admit  to  you,  that  the 
transactions  which  t^ok  place  there  are  so  in- 
eotttestibly  proved,  that  I  should  deserve  very 
little  credit  at  your  hands  if  I  were  to  attempt 
to  deny  any  part  of  them.  But  still  it  comes 
back  to  the  same  question  ^^in :  you  have  to 
ask  yourselves  this  question,  was  any  thing 
done  there  indicative  of  the  ulterior  plan  of 
treason?  Much  may  be  found  there  which 
confirms  the  nefarious  plan  of  assassination  of 
his  majesty's  ministers,  but  nothing  is  found 
there  which  confirms  the  ulterior  plan  alleged 
against  this  man  of  levying  war  against  his 
majesty.  And  you  are  to  be  convinced  that 
these  parties  were  conspiring  not  only  to  kill 
his  majesty's  ministers,  but  to  levy  war  against 
his  majesty ;  and  if  on  a  view  of  the  whole 
case  you  shall  be  of  opinion  4hey  did  not  con- 
spire to  levy  war  against  his  majesty,  although 
you  may  be  satisfied  they  intended  to  kiU  his 
ministers,  it  is  no  proof  to  support  this  in- 
dictment charging  treason. 

Then  comes  the  (question,  what  is  a  levying 
of  war?  because,  if  when  they  had  carried 
their  plan  unto  execution  it  did  not  amount  to 
a  levying  of  war ;  of  course  the  conspiracy  to 
carry  that  plan  into  execution  could  not  be 
a  conspiracy  to  levy  war.  Now,  levying  war 
is  entirely  a  question  of  fact.  I  know  no  tech- 
nicalities which  are  to  guide  you ;  it  is  a  ques* 
tion  you  are  to  put  to  your  own  good  under- 
standings, and  say,  what  is  war  P  War,  in  its 
common  acceptation,  we  know  consists  in  two 
sutes  arrayed  agamM  each  other,^  with  forces 


Trial  of  James  Tags 


1107Z 


organized  and  dtsetplined,  commanded  hf 
officers*  and  supplied  with  all  the  material  oi 
war.  Civil  war  is  but  the  same  thing,  then 
one  part  of  a  state  is  arrayed  against  another 
part  of  the  same  state,— and,  therefore  you  are 
to  consider  whether  if  this  plan  had  been  car* 
ried  into  execution,  you  see  enough  to  say 
there  would  have  beat  a  levying  of  war.  When 
I  say  it  is  a  question  of  fact,  I  state  to  yon  the- 
opinion  of  the  same  great  and  learned  jndise^ 
whom  I  before  quoted*— lord  Hale.  He 
states,  *^  what  shall  be  said  to  be  a  levying  of 
war,"  and  that  is  the  question  for  yim  hm,. 
^  it  is  partly  a  question  of  fact.  For  it  is  Doa 
every  unlawful  or  riotoss  assembly  of  many 
persons  to  do  an  unlawful  act,  though  de/mt» 
they  commit  the  act  they  intend,  that  mdtce 
a  levyint;  of  war,  for  then  every  riot  would  be 
treason."  So  here,  if  you  think  they  had  laid 
a  deep  plan  of  wicked  and  extensive  plunder, 
or  of  riot,  or  of  murder,  if  it  be  not  a  levying 
of  war,  it  is  not  high  treason.  But  to  contiiMie 
the  words  of  the  learned  judge,  he  says,  **  it 
must  be  such  an  assembly  as  carries  vritb  k 
maem  bellif  that  is,  the  appearance  of  war.** 
Now,  let  me  pause  here,  and  ask  you  in  the 
language  of  this  learned  judge,  did  all  thai 
was  proposed  by  this  assembly  carry  with  it 
^  the  appearance  of  war."  Forty  men  I  Cms 
you  say  an  assemblage  of  forty  men,  for  what* 
ever  purpose  assembled,  carries  with  it  the 
appearance  of  war  P  He  goes  on—**  as  if  ^tuer 
nde  or  mareh,  vesiUu  esp&atk^  that  is  "^  vrith 
unforled  banners;''  forty  men  marddng witb 
unfurled  banners  to  taxe  possession  of  two 
cannon^  to  take  the  mansion-house,  and 
overthrow  a  mightv  empire,  is  that  a  levy* 
ing  a  war  P  '*  Or  if  they  be  formed  into  com- 
panies.'' Are  they  formed  into  compantes 
here  ?  I  have  heard  of  no  companies,  nor  ^ 
any  commanders. — **  Or  if  they  are  so  circum- 
stanced that  it  may  be  reasonably  couclnded 
they  are  in  a  posture  of  war,  which  circum- 
stances are  so  various  that  it  is  hard  to  define 
them  all  particularly." — So  says  the  learned 
judge,  and  from  what  I  read  to  you  belbie 
written  by  the  same  great  man,  when  it  is  hmd 
to  define  them  particularly,  er  they  cannot  be 
defined,  then  the  jury  are  to  judge  of  those 
circumstances,  whether  they  amount  to  a  levy* 
ing  of  war  or  not.  And  if  the  learned  Attor- 
ney-general can  shew  you  no  case  preciaely 
like  this,  it  is  safer  not  to  let  in  constructive 
treasons,  but  to  exercise  your  just  power,  and 
to  acquit  the  parties  of  any  such  accusatioa. 

If  my  learned  friend  the  Attomey^general 
can  furnish  you  with  no  parallel  case,  I  think 
your  own  recollections  will  furnish  you  with 
something  like  one.  I  dare  say  you  all  re-^ 
member  Uiree  years  ago,  there  was  an  indict^ 
ment  for  high  treason  something  like  the  pre- 
sent. If  I  remember  the  circumstances  of 
that  case  aright,  all  the  same  atrocities  were 
there  given  in  evidence,  by  a  witness  much 
like  Adams,  and  who  was  disbelieved^  aft 
Adams,  I  trust,  will  be  to^ay.  That  witneaa 
stated  ciitwnitaAces  equal^  atiocious  with  ite 


10731 


Jbr  High  Treasoitt 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1074 


K 


present ;  for  ^ough  the  murder  was  not  then 
directed  against  his  majesty's  ministers,  it  was 
stated  that  the  soldiers  were  to  be  murdered  in 
their  barracks ;  that  the  town  was  to  be  fired ; 
nay,  more,  it  was  in  evidence  there  that  great 
parlies  did  actually  assemble,  and  you  recol« 
lect  that  a  gun-smith's  shop  was  plundered  of 
anns,  and  other  arms  were  found  upon  rioters ; 
they  marched  also  with  flags  and  banners,  and 
yet  with  all  these  circumstances  in  proof^  the 
juiy  then  (judging  justly,  as  I  trust  you  will 
judge  to-day)  did  not  say  that  the  parties  were 
free  of  all  guilt ;  no  1  they  could  not  say  that ;  for 
if  they  had  been  indicted  for  a  great  and  enor- 
mous riot,  no  doubt  they  must  have  been  con- 
victed ;  but  they  said  upon  the  testimony  of 
that  day,  that  which  I  trust  you  will  say  upon 
tbtf  testimony  of  this  day,  that  whatever  that 
case  was,  it  was  not  a  levying  of  war,  and  there- 
fore not  the  high  treason  imputed. 
With  these  observations  I  will  dismiss  this 

Eirt  of  the  case;  only  let  me  once  more  (per- 
ips  I  may  be  tedioust  but  a  man  would  be 
ramer  tedious  than  fail  in  his  duty)  call  your 
minds  to  this  point : — It  is  not  a  question  of 
guilt  or  innocence  of  the  prisoner.    It  is  a 
question  of  treason,  and  no  other  question  you 
liaye  now  to  try.    There  are  other  indictments 
DOW  pending  for  the  other  offences.     The 
question  of  treason,  and  that  alone,  is  the  one 
you  have  to  judge  of  on  the  present  indictment. 
I  do  not  apprehend  the  other  parts  of  the 
charge  will  be  much  relied  upon.    But  I  will 
just  say  a  word  as  to  them.    It  is  charged  in 
two  of  the  counts  of  this  indictment/ that  there 
was  a  compassing  and  imagining  the  death 
of  the  Idog ;  and  also  that  there  was '  a  design 
to  depose  him  from  bis  royal  style  and  dignity. 
As  far  as  you  have  any  evidence  before  you 
(even  putting  out  of  your  consideration  the 
contamination  of  the  material  witnesses),  there 
is  no  evidence  whatever  of  any  hostile  inten- 
tion against  the  person  of  the  king.    And  it  is 
4o«day,  for  the  nrst  time,  that  I  am  to  hear 
(though  I  dare  say  it  is  a  very  convenient  doc- 
trine to  the  ministers)  that  they  consider  them- 
selves so  unalienably  united  to  nis  majesty,  that 
all  conspiracy  against  them  and  their  places 
must  be  considered  as  a  conspiracy  against 
majesty  itself.    To  deprive  them  of  their  places 
certainly  is  not  high  treason,  because  there  al- 
ways has  been,  and  ever  will  be,  parties  who 
think  the  present  administration, — ^when  I  say 
th^  'present  administration,  I  mean  the  exist- 
ing administration  of  the  day, — ^may  be  fairly 
opposedand  removed,  and  that  another  ad- 
xninistration  can  be  formed,  who  will  manage 
the  affiiirs  of  the  country  much  better.    This 
is  the  uniform  hu^age  held  by  some  persons 
in  a  certain  great  assembly  in  this  country. 
Iliere  is  a  constant  endeavour  to  persuade  the 
conntiy  to  that  effect ;  and,  therefore,  the  de- 
priving his  majesty's  ministers  of  their  places 
IS  DO. treason.    Has  conspiring  to  deprive  his 
majesty  of  one  or  two  of  them  by  force,  evei' 
besn  held  to  be  high  treason  ?    Certainly  not. 
Jknd  I  do  reoolleet  to  bavs  read  .in  jome  por- 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


tion  of  bur  history  (whether  this  reign  or  the 
last,  I  will  not  undertake  to  say)  that  certain 

grivy  councillors  themselves  have  gone  into  the 
elds  and  pointed  their  pistols  to  each  othei^ 
each  intending,  no  doubt,  to  deprive  a  minister 
of  his  place  and  his  majesty  of  a  counsellor. 
Now^  those  gentlemen  would  have  thought 
theiaselves  very  strangely  treated,  if  an  indict^ 
ment  for  high  treason  had  been  preferred 
against  them,  though  if  the  event  of  their  battle 
had  been  different,  they  might  have  been 
treated  with  an  indictment  of  another  de- 
scription. Then,  to  go  one  step  further,  is 
depriving  his  majesty  of  all  his  ministers  at 
once  bv  force,  high  treason  ?  I  say  it  is  not. 
And  though  I  feel  all  the  horror  which  must 
be  excited  in  the  breast  of  an  Englishman  at  a 
plan  of  this  sort,  I  cannot  sacrifice  my  duty  to 
my  feelings,  and  refrain  from  warning  you  not 
to  pervert  the  laws  from  their  just  ends — not 
even  to  punish  guilt.  For  the  protection 
of  the  lives  and  liberties  of  us  all,  which  are 
only  safe  while  the  law  is  inflexibly  adminis* 
tered,  you  will,  I  am  sure,  attend  to  the  matter 
alone  in  the  charge  before  you,  and  consider 
whether  or  not  the  prisoner  has  been  guilty  of 
high  treason,  and  high  treason  alone. 

It  is  a  great  consolation  to  me  that  I  am  to 
be  followed  by  my  learned  friend,  who  with 
far  more  eloquence  and  ability  than  I  possess, 
will  point  out  the  discrepancies  in  this  evi- 
dence. I  have  been  anxious  to  do  my  duty  to 
the  prisoner •> not  forgetting  that  duty  which  I 
hold  every  lawyer  owes  to  his  country.  I  have 
told  you  the  danger,  and  have  read  from  the 
highest  legal  authority  the  fatal  consequences 
of  letting  in  a  flood  of  constructive  treasons, 
which,  thank  God,  it  is  in  your  power  to  pre- 
vent. And  be  assured  of  this,  that  whatever 
you  may  feel  as  to  the  particular  circumstances 
of  this  case,  you  are  best  serving  vour  country 
when  you  confine  yourselves  strictly  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  offence  charged  by  the  indict- 
ment before  you.  You  will,  therefore,  take  all 
the  circumstances  of  this  case  into  your  con^- 
sideration ;  you  will  say  whether  ^ou  can  find 
upon  the  whole  testimony,  includmg  the  con- 
taminated testimony  of  Hiden  and  Monument, 
those  facts  proved,  from  which  you  oan  infer, 
that  there  was  a  plan  of  levying  war  against  his 
majesty,  in  Order  to  force  him  to  change  his 
measures :  weigh  all  the  circumstances,  if  you 
do  find  them  fully  proved,  I  cannot  expect  you 
will  find  any  other  thaiv  a  verdict  of— guilty  : 
if  you  do  not  find  them  fully  proved,  lam  sure 
you  will  not  hesitate  to  pronounce  a  verdict  of 
— not  guilty.  Consider  it  well.  I  can  say  no 
more.  May  that  Being  in  whose  Jiaads  are 
the  issues  of  life  and  death^  4irect  your  minds 
to  a  right  conclusion. 

EVIDEWCX  ton  THE   PRISOVSR. 

Thomas  Chamben  sworn. — Examined  by  , 
Mr.  Adolp/tus, 

Where  do  yon  live? — No.  3,  Heathcock^ 
court,  in  the  Strand,  ^      *  • 

3Z 


to  my  place, 
him?— 


1075]       1  GEORGE  1F« 

•   TImt  is  neaity  oppottle  the  AdelpU,  I  be 
Here! — ^YcSyitii. 

D^yoa  know  a  oBan  of  the 
^— YeSy  I  have  aeeo  hitOp  be 

In  ^boae  eompany  ^id  yon 
Edwards's. 

Aboat  what  lime  did  you  aee 
«  week  before  the  Cato-slieet 
^laoe. 

Where  did  joq  see  bim  ?— -In  hit  room* 

Whe  were  then  ?— Myself  aad  Edwards. 

And  Adams  ?-— Yes. 

Tell  as  what  passed  then?— 

Mr.  Gumey.'^U  my  learned  friend  is  propo- 
Inng  to  give  any  contradiction  to  Adams,  he 
should  put  a  distinct  question. 

Mr.  Ji(i(pA«i.*With  all  my  heart,  I  sbotdd 
lather  do  it  so.  Did  Adams  and  Edwards 
come  in  company  or  separately  ? — They  came 
toffetber. 

I>id  they  make  any  proposal  to  yon  abont 
the  assassination  of  his  auyesty's  ministers  ?— 
Ves. 

.    Did  Adams  say  to  von  that  thev  would  do 
ft,  and  that  they  would  have  blood  and  wine 
or  their  supper?— Yes ;  Edwards  asked  me  to 
go  with  them,  and  I  would  not  go. 

Then  what  did  Adams  say  ?— -I  refused ;  hot 
1  ought  to  state  before  that,  after  I  learnt 

No ;  you  ought  not  to  state  that.  Did 
Adams  say  to  you  that  they  were  going  to  kill 
bb  majesty's  ministers,  and  that  they  would 
bare  blood  and  wine  for  supper  f — ^Yes. 

Did  Adams  and  Edwards,  at  any  time, 
come  to  you  again  at  your  lodgings  ?~0n  the 
!Monday  night  in  the  week  that  the  Cato- 
street  business  took  place,  it  was  a  very  wet 
Aight. 

Did  you  see  them  again  at  your  lodgings  on 
that  night?— Yes. 

Was  that  the  same  night  or  another  night?— 
Ihe  Monday  night. 

On  the  night  of  this  affair,  in  Cato-street,  did 
the  two  come  to  you  again  ? — No. 


XrM  ^Jamti  Itigs 


llOT« 


I  know  that;  tfaal  it  not  en  ta^Werto  asy 
^nestiott? — How  long  have  I  kaown  baa?  I 
cauMKaay. 

Aboat  bow  long  ? — I  caosMil  aqr. 

Yea  laaUy  cannol  say  hew  lengf — ^No;  I 
■  do  not  sappoae  I  have  been  in  bis 
? — Aboet   above  twiee,  or  three  times. 

look;     At  what  places?— The  fiislptece  I  ever 
1  him  to  speaa  to  him  was  near  the  cowt 
I  live,  at  a  fanqihlet  shop. 

Is  that  Ibe   thop  where  Ibcy  sdl 
DwaHs  aad  Medasas?— Yes. 

Kept  by  wfaomP — ^Let  me  see;  I  do 
know ;  Watlin^,  i  believe. 

You  are  qmte  right.  Give  me  one  of  tke 
other  places  at  wbwh  yoa  have  seea  him  f  •*! 
canaot  stale  where  I  have  seen  him. 

Oh  ves,  yea  can? — ^I  am  sere  I  cannot  in 
troth  chaige  mv  memory  with  it. 

I  must  tronble  that  meoiory  of  Towa,  bc>- 
eaese  when  you  have  seen  a  man  three  tinies 
you  most  know  where.  ShaH  1  help 
memory  ? — ^i  cannot  stale  wktete  it  was. 

Do  you  kaow  a  hoase  ealled  the 
anns  ? — Yes. 

Where  is  that  P— In  Bonad^eoart  in  te 
Stmnd. 

That  is  not  ht  ttvm  year  lodgingB  yen 
know  ?— It  is  not 

Did  net  yon  see  him  theref — No^ 

WiU  yoa  swear  that  ?— Yes. 

Positively  ?-Yes. 

You  have  been  there  ?— >Yes. 

When? — ^Three  times. 

When  were  those  times?— Befeee  Chi 


Who  was  in  the  chair  the  first  oi|^? — 
There  vras  ao  chair  where  I  was,  nor  any 
business  going  on. 

Mr.  Adolphm, — ^I  submit  that  to  ask  who 
was  in  the  chair,  when  these  prisoners  are  not 
proved  to  be  there,  is  not  eviaeoce. 

Mr.  Garafy.— -My  learned  friend  is 
paling  what  probably  may  come  oat. 


Who  came  then  ? — No  one,  not  that  day.  •       ^       ,         *x 

When  then?— On  the  Monday  before  the        Lor  J  Chief  Justice  Dailtai.— I  cannot  antici* 


Wednesday. 
Did  they  bring  any  thing  with  them?— Yes. 
What  ?— A  large  bag; 

.  Mf*  Otmey^— Speaktag  from  feooUeeiSon  I 
9V0«ild  uppeafto  year  kwdihip's  netes,  whether 
there  waa  such  a^nesiianpat  In  Adams. 

Mr.  dti^km^^l  was  not  able  to  take  «i 
nele^  a^  eroiMsamiattSoa,  and  tbereftttef 
^eaoaol  speiAt  to  it  t  I  *tHn  net  press  Itthte. 
'  Did  j«n  see  them  agrfn  f— Yes,  with  alarge 
Img  which  they  wanted  to  leave. 

Thdmas  Chamhert  cross-examined  by 
Mr,  Qvrnejf, 

What  are  you  ?-*A  bopt  maker. 

liow  long  have  you  known  the  prisoner  !  have  since  heard  was  tbe'filaek  Bog, 'onae. 
Ings  ?— Where  Is  the  prisoner  Ings  f  Who  was  in  the  chair  then  ?— There  mn  no 

Turn  to  the  bar  and  look  ?— I  might  have  ■  diair  dien,  it  %as  iti  a  little  parhmr. 
nten  him,  but  not  to  have  anykaowMge  of      What  was  the  siae  of  thb^eompany  ^-ll 
^^^'  anglt^  be  about  MveBtAoniihntkese.^ 


pate  what  may  come  out  in  the  evidence. 

Mr.  GtrM^f.-^I  am  not  iwrsotng  it  wibilyl 
assnre  yonr  lordship.  Who  was  in  the  ohasrf 
—Them  was  no  person  sittiag  ia  a  cfaalK.. 

But  there  might  be  a-ebatimaa  withent  thatP 
««>6nt*I  -tei  say  there^was  net. 

•How  many  ^fvbre  4lRse^-4  eannot  tei^  I 
was  tn-the  tap  loeak 

No-elfcerToom  bnt«tbe4Bp4nomf«-'Knc 

The^oOier  nlght^/yna  Snrtwtheie,  num  yen 
in  no  other  room  'bat  the  tapiroom  f-Mmie 
times  is  all  the4imte*^nraB^th*a^  ajJad^aMnys 
in  the  tap»r6ora. 

Do  you  kaow  the  fifaek  Oog  iaOrayViah- 
lane  ?'^I  have  bisen  at  a-pabKc  hoose,  whieh'I 


10771 


fit  Higk  TrtiuoH. 


A.  D.  1890. 


1107^ 


MHien  was  it? — ^On  a  Sunday  night. 

In  what  month?—!  cannot  state. 

Before  or  after  Christmaa?*— I  cannot  posi- 
tively «ay% 

1  dare  say  yoa  could  give  me  the  names  of 
those  seven,  all  ol  them  ?— I  am  sure  I  could 

BOl> 

Give  me  the  names  of  those  you  do  re- 
member?— I  was  invited  there  by  a  man  of  the 
name  of  Bryant. 

When  you  went  there  whom  did  you  6nd  ? 
— ^I  cannot  exactly  say. 

Just  give  me  some  of  them? — ^I  was  in- 
vited to  take  a  pint  of  beer  with  him,  he  was 
going  to  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope. 

Who  were  there  invited  to  take  leave  of  your 
liriend  Bryant  T — They  were  all  strangers  to  me 
except  one. 

Who  was  that  one  ?—That  was  Mr.  Thistle- 
wood. 

Do  you  know  BrmK  ? — Very  well. 

Will  you  swear  Bnint  was  not  there  ? — ^Yes. 

You  wtll?~I  wiO;  not  when  I  w^ks  in  the 
foom  he  was  not. 

Do  you  know  Pdin  ? — ^No,  I  do  not  think  I 
do  know  Paiin,  I  never  had  any  conversation 
with  him  to  mv  knowledge. 

That  might  be ;  but  will  you  swear  you  do 
not  know  him  ? — ^No,  I  will  not  do  that ;  for  I 
nay  have  seen  him  in  a  publio-lMmse. 

Did  vou  attend  the  meeting  at  Smithfield  in 
December  last? — ^Yon  mean  the  last  meeting 
tiiat  was  held  there. 

You  might  go  to  the  int  as  well  as  the  last  ? 
—I  was  at  all  of  them. 

Who  catried  the  black  flag  ?-«That  I  cannot 
state. 

Ifrhat  flag  did  yeu  carry  ?— I  carried  no  flag 
the  last  meeting. 

Any  meeting?  the  last  but  one,  perhaps  ? — 
Ijet  me  see ;  I  have  carried  two  flags. 

Did  you  carrv  the  black  flag  either  of  the 
times  ? — ^No,  I  did  not. 

What  flag  did  you  carry? — It  had  inscribed 
mpofi  it  **  ne  Manchester  Massacre.'' 

Did  you  carry  the  flag  with  the  inscription 
^  Let  us  die  like  Freemen,  and  not  be  sola  like 
slaves?"— I  never  saw  such  a  flag  as  that. 

At  either  of  the  Smithfleld  meetings  you 
never  saw  such  a  flag  T — Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Did  you  carry  a  flag  on  the  triumphal  entry 
iof  Mr.  Hunt  into  London  ?•— ^^  The  Massacre  of 
liaochesterr  no;  the ''Trial  by  Jury,**  that 
vms  the  flag  I  carried. 

Yott  have  told  me  you  know  Brant  very 
-well,  and  that  you  know  Thistlewood ;  do  you 
know  Davidson  ? — ^Yes. 

And  Tidd  P-^No ;  I  have  not  much  know- 
ledge of  Tidd ;  I  may  know  him  by  seeing  him 
so  our  stock  meetings,  in  eonducttng  our  trade 


Dnyeuknow  Wilson  ?~YeS|  I  have  seen 
Wilsoa. 

How  cAtB  hove  you  seen  him? — I  cannot 
exactly  say. 

Do  vou  know  Hatrison  ?-^Very  ynSk. 

And  Jlvadbom  ?  <  No ;  BmdbuffB^  I  ba;re  not 
inuch  knowledge  of. 


Strange? — ^No:  I  do  not  know  Strange  ar 
all. 

Gilchrist  ?— No,  I  do  not. 

Or  Cooper  ?— Nor  Cooper, 

These  you  do  not  know  ? — No. 

How  long  have  you  known  Mr.  Thistlewood  ? 
— Ever  since  Mr.  Hunt's  triumphal  entry. 

You,  I  dare  say,  were  excessively  shocked 
at  this  proposition,  made  by  Adams  and  Ed- 
wards, to  you,  to  go  and  assist  in  assassinating' 
his  m^esty*s  ministers  ? — It  shocked  me  so  I 
wouM  not  go  to  do  any  such  thing. 

And  as  Bow-street  is  a  very  little  distance 
from  you,  I  dare  say  that  induced  you  to  go 
and  lay  information  P — No. 

Ihnrnu  Chamhert  re-examined  by 
Mr.  Adofyhui. 

Did  Edwards  or  Adams  know  of  your  ac- 
quaintance with  those  other  persons  when  they 
came  to  your  house  ? — I  cannot  say  how  Ed- 
wards came  to  know  of  it. 

Bat,  however,  they  came  ? — ^Yes,  they  did. 

Maiy  Baker  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr*  CunooocL 

Are  you  Mr.  Richard  Tidd's  daughter  P — 
Yes,  I  am. 

Tliere  were  certain  things  found  at  his  house 
by  the  police  officers  ? — Yes. 

8ome  powder? — ^Yes. 

And  grenades,  as  they  are  called  ? — Yes. 

And  some  balls  ? — Yes. 

Who  brought  them  there? — They  were 
brought  in  in  the  morning  that  they  were 
seised. 

Who  brought  them  ? — A  man  and  a  boy. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Ed- 
wards ? — ^Yes ;  he  brought  some  of  the  hand- 
grenades. 

Did  he  bring  them  there  the  morning  they 
were  seized  ? — No. 

But  before  ? — ^Yes. 

When  were  they  taken  away  after  they  were 
first  brought  ? — ^They  ivere  taken  and  returned. 

Did  you  see  Edwards  on  the  morning  of  the 
33rd  ?— Yes. 

What  did  he  do  then  P — He  came  and  took 
some  of  the  grenades  and  powder  away. 

Were  any  of  ^  them  brought  back  again  ?— • 
No,  not  by  him.' 

By  any  body  ?— I  dare  say  they  might  be 
the  same  that  were  brought  back  on  the  24th, 
but  I  do  not  know. 

Waff  there  one  very  large  one,  do  you  recol- 
lect ?--Yes. 

Who  brought  that  first? — Adams. 

Was  that  brought  back  again  t— 'No. 

Mary  Baker  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  fhdiciior  Qenerai, 

The  box,  I  beUeve,  wa^  not  taken  away  ? — 
It  was  taken  by  the  oiBScers. 

How  long  might  the  box  have  been  there  ? — 
It  might  have  been  there  two  or  three  days. 

How  long  had  the  grenades  been  ^re  that 
were  taken  away  on  diet  Wednesday  f--I  d^ 


1079J        1  GEORGE  IV. 

not  know,  they  might  have  been  there  a  fort- 
night, I  cannot  say  as  to  the  precise  time. 

What  time  of  the  day,  on  the  Wednesday, 
was  it  they  were  taken  away?~ln  the  morning 
part. 

Mary  Baker  re-examined  by  Mr.  Cunoood, 

Was  the  box  fastened  or  corded  f — Corded. 
Had  it  been  opened  at  all  to  your  knowledge? 
— Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Mr.  Cttnooo(f.^We  shall  not  trouble  your 
lordship  with  any  more  witnesses. 

Mr.  Adotphm, — Gentlemen  of  the  Jury  >— 
The  course  of  this  cause  has  now  reached  that 
period  when  it  becomes  my  duty  to  address  to 
you  such  observations  as  appear  to  me  likely 
to  be  favourable  to  the  prisoner,  who  stands 
Jbefore  yon  for  his  life  or  death ;  and  if  there 
wanted  no  other  motive  to  induce  you  to  give 
a  serious  attention  and  a  kind  indulgence 
where  it  shall  be  necessary  to  the  arguments  I 
have  to  submit  to  you,   this  consideration 
would  be  sufficient,  that  probably  the  few 
feeble  sentences  I  shall  utter,  will,  if  your 
opinion  should  not  coincide  in  that  which  I 
have  to  say,  be  the  last  favourable  words  con- 
cerning that  unhappy  man,  which  he  will  ever 
bear  in  this  world.    When  I  say  favourable 
words,  I  do  not  mean  that  the  learned  judge, 
who  is  to  sum  up  the  evidence  to  you,  will 
not  make  every  suggestion  in  his  favour  that 
the  law  and  the  facts  enable  him  to  make, 
but  that  you  will  not  hear  from  any  person 
after  myself,  an  address  purely  in  favour  of 
his  cause,  you  will  hear,  recommended  with 
all  the  weight  of  authority,  and  all  the  force 
iif  talent,  a  strong  set  of  observations  against 
Jiim,  against  all  that  has  been  advanced  by  my 
learned  friend,  and  against  all  that  I  shall 
advance;   but  in  his  favour  you  will  hear 
nothing  but  those  deductions  which  the  evi- 
dence draws  forth  from  the  learned  judge,  and 
which,  I  hope,  to  whatever  extent  they  may 
go,  will  also  find  with  you  a  most  favourable 
acceptance. 

Having  so  very  lately  performed  for  another 
person  the  dutv  which  I  am  now  called  upon 
to  perform,  I  feel  most  sensibly  that  languor 
of  mind,  and  that  sensation  approaching,  if  I 
may  be  allowed  the  expression  here,  to  dis- 
laste,  which  ever  attends  those  who  have  to 
tread  twice  over  the  same  ground — those  who 
bave  to  advance,  for  a  second  time,  the  argu* 
jnents  and  the  topics  they  have  advanced  once 
before.  I  can  have  no  means  of  varying  my 
statements,  except  by  abridging  them ;  I  can 
have  no  means  of  adding  to  their  force,  unless 
I  were  to  call  in  aid^that  which  I  have  not — 
a  renovated  mind  and  extended  abilities,  such 
as  within  the  short  period  which  has  passed 
.between  Wednesday  and  this  day,  of  course 
cannot  be  expected.  But  I  advance  to  the 
performance  of  this  difficult  task  with  a  mind 
the  more  clear,  and  with  faculties  the  more 
unfettered,  because  I  am  enabled  to  lay  my 
hand  upon  my  heart,  and  to  say  that  no  one 


Trial  qfJamet  Ings 


UtIlO 


opinion  T'hicblhave  had  theiiOBOor  tonb- 
mit  to  the  former  jury,  has  since  beea  impsiRd 
in  my  mind ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  that  ibe 
transactions  upon  the  present  trial,  aad  Ibe 
variances  from  the  evidence  which  I  hevd 
before,  very  much  confirm  and  advance  thoN 
opinions  which  I  formerly  held,  and  make  me 
flatter  myself  that  I  shall  not,  wiihoatpio- 
ducing  the  effect  of  conviction,  addren  to  yoo 
some  of  my  arguments  and  observations. 

You  have  ^n  told,  in  the  fervid  and  elo- 
quent opening  of  this  case,  by  the  letmed 
Solicitor-general — and  you  have  heard  it  since 
from  my  lord,  in  a  way  that  I  hope  I  shattaot 
cause  it  to  be  mentioned  again— that  the  w- 
diet  whidi  has  passed,  oui^ht  to  be  as  ondi 
out  of  your  minds,  as  if  it  had  never  occund. 
I  agree  perfectly  in  that ;  I  recommend  it; and 
I  pray  it  may  be  so,  but  at  the  same  tioie  I 
know  how  difficult  it  is— nay,  how  tliwt 
impossible  it  is — for  any  men,  howefer  coned 
their  minds  may  be,  not  to  let  their  jtid|aMBts 
be  in  some  degree  influenced  by  their  meno- 
ries,  not  to  permit  their  minds  to  be  swap 
by  some  consideration  of  that  which  twelw 
virtuous,  discreet  and  honest  men  have  doie 
before  them.  I  am  therefore,  to  piay  yoQ» 
exercise  on  behalf  of  this  unhappy  mta,  wits 
its  utmost  rigour,  that  difficult  dnty  of  all^tIi^ 
tion  and  self-denial— to  forget  every  ^ 
except  what  you  have  heard  in  theooonew 
yesterday  and  to-day,  as  much  as  if  yon  w«rt 
totally  unconscious  of  its  having  pMwd ;  a»« 
this  man  were  brought  to  a  separate  trial,  »J 
had  no  connexion  with  any  other  P«"JJJT 
has  undergone,  or  is  to  undergo  the  jadgB»« 
of  a  court  and  jury.  . 

When  I  speak  of  my  own  '^«"""**;;;|^ 
own  labouting  under  something  appwaw 
to  distaste  in  entering  on  the  trial  of  thn  pW" 
oner,  I  cannot  help  contrasting  iBy»dJ«»* 
the  learned  Solicitor^general,  andbisendeniij 

joyous  and  happy  situation— he  is  gojj 
journey,  as  he  expresses  it  himselli  ^  , 
assumed  confidence,  that  he  canaot  w^ 
arriving  ultimately  at  the  point  of  •^"**?^ 
put  it  to  you  that  he  did  not  state  ^^'?2 
pected  to  prove,  but  what  he  knew  be  sW»J 
be  able  to  prove ;  he  did  not  put  it  tbat«  »* 
any  doubt  or  difficulty  about  in>k»"«[.°*^*J 
case,  but  that  experience  had  ttngh*™";"* 
he  knew  what  he  should  be  aWe  to  n^jT 
because  the  witnesses  had  undergone  esaw* 
nation  before,  and  he  could  calculate  ^ 
their  disclosures  would  be.  To  rae  theie  »J 
be  no  such  advantage ;  to  me  the  vwy 
advantage  I  shall  have,  will  be  to  shew  ^ 
hereafter,  by  the  comparison  of  AdaiM*  ^ 
timony,  as  he  varied  it  himself  from  ooefl»J 
to  the  other,  that  if  1  could  be  P«P»^ 
answer  the  facU  then  disclosed,  "*f  "J 
were  in  reserve,  and  I  should  have  a  n^  ^ 
from  the  same  witness,  he  haring  *1jv« 
things  whi(;h  he  thooghi  fit  notthea  to«>" 

It  uwery.  usual  with  ns,  when  ^^^ 
the  talent  we  hav«  to  bring  to  th«  W^ 


10811 


■for  Hi^  Trtatou. 


A.  D.  1820. 


ciosa 


be  OYerbttlanoedy  either  1^  the  popularity  of 
the  cause,  or  the  ability  of  the  advocate  you 
have  already  heard,  to  pray  you  will  dismiss 
from  your  minds  certain  topics  which  have 
been  introduced.  In  the  course  pf  the  speech 
of  the  Solicitor-general,  there  was  a  great  deal 
of  fervid  de6lamation  applicable  to  the  horrors 
which  might  have  been  produced  by  these 
speculative  enterprises — I  must  beg  you  to 
avert  yoar  minda  from  those  descriptions,  to 
think  only  of  that  which  is  actually  proved  to 
have  been  meditated  and  done,  to  carry  your- 
selves no  further  than  the  witnesses  carry  you, 
and  to  examine  the  testimony  of  those  wit- 
nesses with  that  strictness,  from  which  alone 
the  result  of  justice  can  be  obtained. 

The  learnt  Solicitor»general  seeing  rightly 
(I  cannot  call  it  foreseeing,  for  it  was  rather 
taking  a  retrospective  view)  seeing  exactly 
what  the  course  of  his  evidence  would  be,  and 
what  the  course  of  the  examination  of  his  wit- 
nesses would  turn  out,  proposed  to  prove  his 
ease  by  two  means ;  the  one  by  an  accomplice, 
and  the  other  by  witnesses  who  should  support 
that  accomplice ;  and  which  witnesses  he  said  to 
you  (and  particularly  applied  the  observation 
to  one  of  the  name  of  Hiden)  should  be  uoim- 
peached  and  unimpeachable.  The:  learned 
ooiicitop-general  then  proceeded  to  state  the 
law  with  respect  to  the  examination  of  accom* 
plices ;  certainly,  it  would  be  impossible  to  lay 
down  positions  of  law-  with  more  eloquence 
than  he  did  upon  that  occasion ;  but  I  cannot 
help  thinking,  with  ihe  deference  due  to  his 
high  station,  and  that  character  he  has  maintain- 
ed through  life,  that  a  little  accuracy  might  be 
added  to  his  propositions,  by  talents  much  in* 
ferior  to  his  own.  In  considering  the  evidence 
of  an  accomf^e,  this  is  most  true,  that  you 
must  consider  him  as  a  witness,  whom  necessity 
puts  into  the  hands  of  a  prosecutor,  and  for 
whose  antecedent  delinquency,  they  who 
bring  him  into  court  are  in  no  way  answerable ; 
•o  far  he  can  be  used  by  a  prosecutor,  without 
throwing  any  stain  on  a  prosecution,  or  those 
who  conduct  it.  They  do  not  willingly  con* 
laminate  themselves  with  a  bad  man,  but  they 
do  that  which  the  Solicitor-general  intimated 
to  you  they  alone  can  do,  they  pursue  the 
course  of  the  conspiracy,  by  having  recourse  to 
the  eye-sight  and  knowledge  of  those  who  have 
been  in  the  dark  recesses  of  those  conspiracies, 
and  can  alone  state  what  happened  there. 
Thus  far  I  agree  most  implicitly  with  the  So- 
lieitor-general ;  but  when  juries  and  a  court 
have  accomplices  before  them,  there  is  a  great 
deal  more  to  be  done  than  the  learned  Solici- 
tor«general  pointed  out  to  you,  which,  indeed, 
amounted  to  no  more  than  that  you  were  to 
look  at  him  with  the  same  eyes  as  you  would 
4it  the  most  respectable  witness ;  for  he  says, 
lint,  you  are  to  examine  the  interest  he  has  in 
tiie  evidence  he  giv«s ;  so  you  are  if  the  most 
jrespeetable  man  I  see  in  court  were  to  come 
-to  give  evidence ;  if  there  is  any  interest  or 
«ven  any  feeling  arising  out  of  partiality  or  af- 
itotioD^yoa  wiS  take  that  into  your  coosidera- 


.1 


tioo,  in  forming  your  estimate  of  the  evideaccy 
whoever  may  be  the  witness :  in  that,  therefore, 
an  accomplice  would  not  stand  in  a  different 
situation  nrom  the  mostbonourable  of  mankind; 
but  he  does  stand  in  a  different  situation,  and 
it  is  over  this  that  the  talent  of  the  Solicitor- 
general  has  been  employed  to  throw  a  clo^k ; 
he  asks,  has  Adams  any  interest  to  add  to  the 
deepness  with  which  the  crime  is  already  in- 
vested ?  Has  he  an  interest  to  represent  mat- 
ters worse  than  they  really  were  ?  has  he  an  in- 
terest to  carry  any  point  in  the  cause  ?  Yes, 
gentlemen ;  yes  is  the  answer  to  every  one  of 
those  propositions;  he  has  the  strongest  in- 
terest; ne  nas  procured  a  conditional  indemnity, 
as  we  are  to  suppose  from  the  concession  of 
the  Solicitor-general,  by  proposing  to  come 
forward  as  a  witness ;  but  he  comes  in  chuns 
and  in  custody,  he  comes,  not  as  a  free  man, 
speaking  spontaneously  the  dictates  of  his  own 
mind,  and  standing  upon  his  honour  and  eon* 
science;  but  he  speaks  as  a  man  who  must  carry 
certain  points,  to  earn  that  which  has.  been 
promisea  him,  and  without  which  he  has  no 
reason  to  think  he  shall  obtain  either  indemnity 
or  advantage;  they  are  to  depend  upon  the  suc- 
cess which  attends  his  evidence.  In  this  I  do 
not  rely  on  assertions  which  may  be  made  ;  I 
shall  refer  myself  to  your  own  good  sense,  to 
the  eiperience  you  must  have- of  the  nature 
and  operations  of  the  human  mind,  whether 
you  can  give  the  same  belief  to  a  man  vHio 
comes  into  court  in  chains  and  in  cnstody* 
which  you  would  to  a  man  who  comes  free 
from  fear,  and  exempt  from  bias,  especicdly 
when  he  comes  in  the  chains  and  custody  of 
those  who  can  prosecute  him  at  the  same  mo- 
ment for  the  offence  which  he  comes  to  prove 
against  others.  I  do  not  say  that  he.  is  in- 
capable of  being  received  as  a  witness,  but 
that  he  must  be  received  with  much  more  care 
and  caution  than  would  be  necessary  with  a 
witness  of  any  other  description. 

We  are  asked  again,  does  this  witness  ex- 
pose himself  to  contradiction,  and  is  he  con- 
tradicted? the  same  question,  too,  applies  to 
every  other  witness,  in  every  other  case  ^— 
every  witness  must,  take  that  which  an  ac- 
complice must  take,  the  chance  of  being  con- 
tradicted, if  his  evidence  is  capable  of  con- 
tradiction. But  the  accomplice,  whatever  may 
be  said  about  him  in  other  respects,  has  this 
advantage  over  an  honest  witness,  unless  a 
proper  deduction  is  made  from  his  testimony 
by  the  jury, — that,  in  a  matter  of  conspiracy, 
particularly  all  those,  or  nearly  all  those,  who 
could  contradict  him,  are  tied  up  and  prevented 
from  doing  so  by  being  included  in  the  indict- 
ment; and  whether  they  be  convicted  or  not, 
they  cannot  be  witnesses  to  contradict  him. 
If  this  prisoner,  for  example,  were  acquitted, 
undoubtedly  he  could  be  a  witness  for  others; 
but  until  he  is  acquitted,  the  law  does  not  give 
a  man  that  advantage  which  he  would  have,  if 
the  individuals  who  might  give  evidence  for 
-him  were  charged  in  a  separate  indictment ; 
and  being  supposed  iuQocent  until  pronounced 


10831       I  GEORGE  IV. 

gvRly,  nrigM  be  reenred  as  witnesses  befofs 
tbetr  trial.  Tbtis,  therefore,  tbosemost  capable 
of  contradictnig  the  aoeonplioe,  are  tied  up 
and  prereoted  gtriog  their  evideace ;  but  when 
we  are  asked,  are  the  witnesses  cootradicted 
that  have  been  brought  forward,  I  cannot  help 
thinking  it  sonMthing  more  of  a  taonting  ques- 
tion than  I  should  have  expected.  If  there 
are  men  who  are  not  named  in  the  indictment, 
and  who  may  be  cognisant  of  some  of  the 
timnsactions  on  which  it  is  founded,  can  it  be 
supposed,  when  a  witness  for  the  Crown  is 
brought  into  court  under  a  guard,  and  in  cus- 
tody, that  he  vrho  should  come  against  the 
Crown,  would  fail  to  expect  that  his  day  would 
come ;  tiiat  ere  long  he  would  appear  in  court 
in  a  very  different  character  from  that  of  wit- 
ness?— Can  it  be  supposed,  for  example,  that 
Palin,  who  has  been  named  by  the  learned 
counsel  for  the  Crown,  can  come  here  as  a 
witness?  It  must  be  known  he  is  beyond  the 
reach  of  any  sobposna ;  but  even  if  he  oould  be 
Ibond,  could  it  be  expected  that  he  would  come 
forward?  What  then  avaib  us  the  offer  that 
we  may  produce  him,  when  he  who  makes 
the  offsr  most  know  that  which  the  witness 
Tannton  tells  you  upon  his  oath,  that  Irom  the 
meosent  of  this  affair  taking  place,  PaKn  had 
been  a  fositive»  and  a  large  reward  offered  for 
npproheoding  him.  Thily,  the  offer  is  most 
gracious  to  us :  you  may  call  PaKn,  when  Palin 
could  not  come,  if  we  could  find  him,  without 
the  certainty  of  going  to  prison;  but  Palin 
cannot  be  found,  because  all  the  yigilance  of 
the  police  officers,  stimulated  b^  a  Urge  re* 
ward,  does  not  enable  them  to  discover  bim ; 
sudi  an  offer,  therefore,  does  seem  rather  an 
essay  upon  our  weakness,  than  a  suggestion 
of  &e  means  of  extricating  ourselves  from 
peril. 

When  the  statute  passed,  which  directs  that 
a  list  of  the  witnesses  shall  be  given  to  the 
prisoner,  it  certainly  was  with  the  benevolent 
▼iew,  that  by  knowins  who  should  appear 
against  them,  tbey  might  know  what  sort  of 
evidence  to  prepare,  in  order  to  repel  the  tes- 
timony of  those  witnesses.  The  prisoners  here 
have  a  list  of,  I  think,  one  hundred  and 
sixty-eight  individuals ;  nothing  to  guide  their 
judgment,  no  knowledge  but  such  as  their  own 
feeble  and  unwarranted  expectations  enabled 
them  to  form  of  who  would  be  likely  to  be 
called  against  them,  and  whom  the^  should  be 
able  to  contradict ;  they  give  their  instructions 
accordingly,  and  when  they  are  prepared  with 
instructions  to  contradict  a  witness  whom  they 
expect  to  be  produced,  because  he  has  been 
mentioned  throughout  the  transaction,  he  is 
not  brought  forward.  When  another  witness 
is  calledi  and  some  evidence  has  been  offered 
to  prove  him  nnworflhy  of  belief,  when  we  have 
other  witnesses  on  the  ioor  tc  prove  him  a 
man  to  whom  no  csedk  ought  to  be  given, 
we  find  him  withdrawn,  and  that  eapensc  has 
beggared  still  more  an  exhausted  pnrse,  and 
those  wiiMsses  who  have  come  tc  paitioolar 


TiM  qfjMWtu  Ing$ 


[lOU 


Mr.  Jbtmmuy  QemrA-^^ia^,  my  leid,  I 
meet  iotcrpcse. 

Mr.  4dfrfji*Ms»^  was  viAi«  two  word*  sC 
finishing  ^y  sentence. 

Mr.  Attoney  Central  —If  it  is  dooA  it  ii 
not  worth  while  to  object. 

Mr.  Jdvipha.-^!  shmM  be  sotiy  to  my  oqF 

thing  imgolar.  .  II I  am  wrong  I  shall  mboiit 
to  correction  from  my  lord.  I  tniit  I  wis 
making  no  observatioo  that  was  net  peifedlf 
wanantcd  bv  the  opening.  It  was  put  to  jos, 
gentlemen,  tlmt  you  might  believe  tbenitocMi 
to  be  produced  for  the  Crown,  nalsss  the  pii- 
soner  contradioled  thens  by  witnesses.  Ints 
shewing  yen  how  difficult  it  was  for  the  ptiMo- 
ers  to  produce  that  evideooe,  and  I  wss  ihen- 
ing  yon  more  particnlarly  that  the  bsl  of  168, 
which  by  formaline  of  law  has  been  delirenA 
to  them,  presented  no  certain  intteatios  vbs 
would  be  called ;  and  that  even  if  that  ciieso* 
stMnoe  could  have  guided  their  judgment,  « 
influcBOod  their  inteatkm,  that  some  how  « 
other^  hf  the  subtpactico  of  some  eridcseer 
that  judgaaent  was  exercised  in  vain.  K«V| 
though  you  have  heaid  a  rnmch  moie  abls  i^ 
gument  o«  the  other  side  than  IshallhtaUf 
lo  make,  I  should  think  in  ceoMMa  Unmt 
and  commcB  candour,  I  have  a  right  to  sasev 
the  aiguments  of  the  Sciieitor-goacnl,  ssd  Is 
say  th^  you  are  not  without  witnenm  bett«e 
we  are  not  able  to  produce  thesQ,  hat  ^c^*"* 
when  we  have  gone  to  the  labour  sad  ^^^ 
obtaining  them,  the  expense  is  thrown  avsjry  »* 
the  witnesses  anneoiioBd  to  us  are  not  hiongfat 
forward  by  the  Crown ;  and  whauvcr  rmaooi 
we  may  mive  had  for  believing  they  «iU  » 
called,  to  our  great  disnppointmettt  they  m 
not  so. 

It  is  said  there  aie  other  witnesses,  Go4 
and  Harris,  who  Iuitc  been  present  st  sosk  m 
those  conversations,  and  may  be  called.  I 
deny  that  there  are  any  such  witncvss;  til 
witness,  Adams,  has  to4d  you  that  which  ■ 
untrue;  there  are  no  apch  peaonswhomv* 
could  adduce ;  there  are  each  peisoBS  is  fiM 
other  room,  whom  the  Crown  could  call,  m 
then  we  sbould  see  whether  they  would  sweitf 
to  that  whick  the  informing  witneis  hsi  ad* 
vanced;  but  if  I  had  produced  to yoa a «>|l^ 
new  of  the  naase  of  Harris  or  Cook,  ws  nip 
have  been  told  *'  very  tme^  that  Uairis  or  tMl 
Cook  says  he  nerer  ms  at  such  a  msetiBf ; 
but  he  is  not  the  man  alluded  to."  ^^^ 
the  side  of  the  prisoner,  do  not  knpv  ^'^^'Vjf 
find  him,  and  we  shoyld  be  treated  vith  a  ion 
of  indifference  as  to  the  eflcsi  we  hsd  made 
(for  I  will  not  use  any  other  expresiieoX  ^ 
be  told  we  had  proved  nothing.  ^^LsstefaHr 
eays  the  SoUckwr^neraW^^Yeu  are  tsolH 

serve  whether  the  aoccmplior  witaess  ie  o'* 
not  confirmed  e'  net  last  of  all,  genllenien,  m 
firstofall.  I  say  it  is  a  piims«y  pwpoiiM* 
in  the  admioistratioo  of  law,  that  an  aoflPi|^ 
pUeeommct  be  beUsfvcdttnlesshe  isadfHlQSi4 
confirmed  ;  4httlbe  is,  an  the  Seli€il0Nr«*^ 


I085J 


Jinr  Higk  Treditm. 


A.D.  1820. 


[lOM 


Mtysy  a  comptetont  sad  a  credible  witDen ;  nayi 
I  can  produce  the  dicta  of  judges,  thai  lie  is 
capable  of  being  heard,  although  there  is  no 
confirmation  of  his  testimony,  but  shall  ever 
treasure  in  my  mind  the  suooeeding  words  of 
the  same  learned  judge : ''  When  I  hare  gnated 
all  this,"  he  said,  **  I  have  conceded  merely  a 
barren  truism,  for  it  has  always  been  the  prac* 
dee,  and  I  believe  always  will  be  the  practice 
of  judges  to  tell  jaries  that  they  cannot  beliere 
aa  accomplice  unless  he  be  ooofirraed,  or,  at 
all  events,  not  to  make  up  thctr  minds  to  a 
verdict  on  such  endence  uneoBfirmed  ''--Hioft 
confirmed,  I  admit,  in  eviery  proposition,  but 
so  confirmed  in  some  particular  essential  to  the 
issue,  as  to  make  it  safe  lor  a  jury  to  bebeve 
the  whole  of  his  evidence. 

There  are  other  points  to  which  I  will  call 
your  attention,  which  will  shew  what  oredit 
ought  to  be  giveii  io  an  accomplioe,  and  whe^- 
tber  he  ought  to  be  believed  or  not ;  and  I 
consider  this  of  the  more  importance  because, 
in  defiance  of  aU  I  have  beard  or  maj  hear 
fiwm  any  quarter,  I  do  and  must  maintaia, 
that  the  treasonoMe  intention  upon  which 
alone  you  can  find  the  prisoner  at  the  bar 
guflty  of  high  treason,  lies  in  the  mouth  of  the 
acoompliM  alone,  and  if  he  is  unfit  to  be  be* 
lieved,  and  yoli  erase,  as  you  then  must  do, 
his  testimony  entirely  from  your  memoiy  and 
Judgment,  there  is  not  a  shadow  of  pR>of  against 
the  prisoner  to  covnct  -htm  of  high  treason. 
When  I  speak  of  the  confirmation  of  a  witness, 
I  do  not  speak  of  those  nn  important  confirma* 
tions  whidi  in  some  parts  the  aecompKce  has 
received ;  I  do  not  speak  of  games  of  domino, 
of  lighting  of  candles,  of  flannel  bags,  and  ball- 
cartridges,  which  may  have  been  intended  for 
tone  purpose  or  another,  but  of  some  direct  ap- 
plication of  that  intentinn,  which  at  present 
lies  only  in  the  mouth  of  a  witness  whom  I 
t^alX  maintain  to  be,  on  his  own  showing, 
vtterly  incapable  of  being  supported,  except 
Iqr  complete  confirmation. 

-  ^Ilie  points  to  which  your  attention  ought  to 
be  directed  are  these  :^Is  the  account  which 
'Adams  has  given,  probable  or  even  possible  ? 
is  the  conduct  of  the  witness  such  as  to  entitle 
liiaQ  to  belief?  Or  docs  he  throw  doubt  and 
SQBpicion  upon  himself?  Is  he  contradicted 
liy  uil  the  witnesses  produced  on  the  one  side ; 
and  is  he  confirmed  as  far  as  he  might  be ;  or 
eve  ivitnesses  widiheld  for  iear  that  that  which 
ie  intended  for  confirmation  should  turn  out  to 
he  contradiction?  Those  are  the  points  to 
^vbich  I  think  you  onght  to  direct  your  atten- 
tioB.  When  I  say  you  ought,  I  say  it  with 
Bttbaiistion  to  your  own  better  judgments  and 
the  directions  you  may  receive  from  above; 
iMit  I  say  <tn  every  ene  of  these  points  the  evi- 
dence of  Adams  will  be  found  .^^ter  than  the 
mar  or  the  vapour  which  ^fioats  upon  it. 

-  iAtt  to  the  probability  of  his  story,  it  is  almost 
'«0nc0dc$d  by  the  other  side  that  it  is*  utterly 
^oid  of  probability ;  they  ^o  not  afibct  to  say, 
titts  is  a  narrative  we  should  have  believed  iy 
«tnel4  tkfaottglh  we^  not  admit  that  fte^gMNind 


on  which  it  is  impeached,  namely,  its  impro- 
bability, applies  to  that  more  than  to  other 
conspiracies  which  have  existed  within  our  own 
observation.  I  deny  that,  gentlemen ;  that  im- 
probable plots  may  have  arisen  within  our  own 
observation,  or  been  stated  in  history,  I  admit ; 
but  I  asser^  that  no  one  so  improbable  as  the 

r resent  ever  existed  in  truth  or  fiction ;  whm 
say  never,  I  do  not  pretend  to  have  read 
every  thing ;  but,  in  all  my  reading,  I  am  not 
aware  that  any  one  so  improbable  ever  existed 
either  in  Great  Britain  or  elsewhere.  I  am 
not  cash  enough  to  say,  and  never  will  say, 
that  because  a  plot  is  improbable,  you  are, 
therefone,  to  disbelieve  its  existence;  but  that 
if  a  witness  comes  fi>rwafd,  of  a  most  suspioi* 
ous  and  odious  description,  and  gives  you  an 
account  of  a  transaction  -void  of  all  bumav 
probability,  it  is  not  his  positive  swearing  ihat 
such  a  plot  existed,  that  will  induce  you  to 
believe  it  did  exist ;  but  on  the  contrary,  yon  ^ 
have  to  weigh  this ;  have  a  dozen  men,  or  any 
certain  number  of  men,  not  being  under  the 
care  of  aiieeper  of  madmen,  or  wearing  a  strait 
waistcoat,  concurred  in  a  plan  which  no  fauman 
being  can  believe  P  Or  is  it  the  malignaHt 
fiction  of  one,  who  knowing. already  to  what 
degree  they  were  tainted  by  an  inteaded  miir« 
der,  and  how  far  they  were  endangered  under 
lord  Ellenborough's  act,  ibr  shooting  at  ibe 
officers,  throw  in  such  additional  cirourastaneet 
as  might  include  them  all  under  a  charge  of 
high  treason  ?  The  witness  himself  is  arrested 
upon  a  charge  of  this  kind — he  is  obliged  to 
swear  to  tbat  which  will  recommend  him— 'he 
is  obliged  to  swear  deeply — he  is  obliged,  in 
swearing,  to  assume  the  sembknoe  of  a  Chris* 
tian — ^he  is  obliged  to  aim  at  consistency,  be- 
cause he  dares  not  move  one  tittle  out  of  the 
line,  for  the  consequences  to  him  would  be 
fatal;  he  caokes  before  you  in  .the  midst  of 
these  urgent  interests  and  pressing  necessities. 
And  can  you  think,  that  firom  such  a  mouth 
such  a  plot  receives  the  sanction  of  probability  ? 
My  learned  friend  Mr.  Garwood,  antici- 

Satea  that  I  should  go  minutely  into  the  evi- 
enoe,  to  shew  its  discrepancies,  and  the  im- 
possibility of  its  being  true.  I  did  so  once, 
out  I  confess  I  am  neither  prepared  nor  de- 
sirous to  go  through  it  again,  because  I  think 
that  the  leading  points  may  be  easily  selected 
and  arranged,  and  that  the  absurdities  will  be 
so  glaring,  that  when  once  shewn,  you  will 
have  a  full  notion  of  the  extent  to  which  you 
must  carry  your  credulity  before  you  deter- 
mine in  favour  of  the  testimony  of  a  witness 
like  Adaras. 

It  seems  that  at  some  time  in  January,  an 
interview  took  place  between  Thistlewood, 
Brunt,  and  the  witness  Adams,  at  which  some- 
thing was  proposed  about  the  assassination  of 
the  cabinet  ministers;  that  he  beeame  ac- 
quainted with  Thistlewood,  on  the  tsth  ^df  * 
January,  and  that  at  some  time  between  tbat 
and  his  going  -to  prison  on  the  16th,  this  ex- 
traordinary conversation  took  place.  I  tmv^  a 
note  ot  hu  examination  on  the.  former 


10871        ^  GEORGE  IV. 

sioD,  and  I  directed  his  attention  to  that,  and 
adverted  to  some  circumstances  to  i»hich  I 
shall  not  now  advert,  but  shall  notice  in  my 
further  address  to  you^  but  that  this  plot  was 
amnged  in  some  degree,  and  was  communi- 
cated to  this  man,  who  was  then  going  to 
prison  for  so  small  a  sum  as  six  and  twenty 
shillings,  and  who  was  shut  up  for  that  sum 
lor  fifteen  days.  Consider  who  this  man  is 
—«  bom  subject  of  our  lord  the  king — a 
soldier  who  has  received  his  pay — a  man  who 
is  bound  at  his  time  of  life  (for,  as  I  should 
think,  from  his  looks  he  must  be  nearly  fifty), 
to  have  due  and  right  views  of  the  obligations 
of  society — ^he  keeps  his  secret  in  his  own 
breast,  determined  neither  to  act  upon  it  nor 
to  disclose  it,  and  restrained  by  what  ?  by  fear, 
•ays  the  soldier  I  fear  acted  upon  me,  even  as 
early  as  the  15th  of  January,  or  the  day  before 
I  went  to  White-cross 'Street,  when  I  was  with- 
in  four  walls. — ^Why  did  you  not  go  and  tell 
the  Secretary  of  State  or  my  Lord  Ma/or  (for  it 
was  in  London)  of  this,  plot,  and  claim  the  pro- 
teotaon,  of  the  prison-walls,  till  those  persons 
were  secured  P  He  tells  you  that  he  felt  fear, 
and  yet  he  did  not  take  the  means  of  8afety-r-« 
gl^ious  specimen  of  the  consistency  you  are  to 
expect;  but  this  man  fears,  and  therefore  hates  ; 
for  no  man  fears  that  he  does  not  hate ;  but 
these  persons  so  feared  and  yet  so  hated,  are 
the  very  first  [persons  to  whom  he  addresses 
himself  on  getting  out.  He  is  discharged  on 
the  30th,  and  on  the  31st  of  January  he  is 
with  them  again ;  on  the  2nd  of  February  again, 
and  their  plan  is  then  disclosed — a  committee 
is  formed — the  chair  taken — ^resolutions  are 
passed  as  matters  of  business,  and  all  this  in 
ue  presence  of  a  man  of  the  name  of  Edwards, 
but  he  never  mentions  one  tittle  to  any  one  on 
the  face  of  .the  earth. 

Gentlemen,  do  you  believe  in  the  fear  ?  do 
yoo  believe  in  the  motive  ?  Is  he  not,  in  iact, 
the  suborned  witness  of  another  man,  to  state 
something  which  never  did  occur,  to  bring 
these  men  whose  lives  may  be  forfeited,  or  are 
endangered  for  crimes. of  another  description, 
within  that  of  high  treason,  becanse  that  is  a 
more  acceptable  mode  of  sacrifice,  and  may  do 
for  him  that  which  another  accusation  would 
not  have  done?  because  ss  to  every  thing 
which  relates  to  the  intention  of  massacre  at 
lordHarrowby*s  bouse,  as  to  every  thing  which 
relates  to  the  death  of  Smithers,  or  any  other 
part  of  the  subject  you  are  now  trying,  there 
vras  evidence  enough  vrithout  this  accomplice, 
and  therefore,  the  election  must  have  been 
made  somewhere  rather  to  convict  these  peo- 

Sle  of  high  treason,  and  to  make  them  a  sacri- 
ce  for  that,  than  to  convict  them  of  crimes  of 
which  they  could  have  been  proved  guilty,  by 
the  most  unexceptionable  witnesses,  if  they 
reallv  are  guilty ;  and  so  to  rid  the  country  of 
any- danger  from  tbem,  and  prevent  others  mm 
enterinic  into  such  combinations  in  future. 

Going  through  the  whole  of  the  evidence 
given  on  this  part  of  the  ease,  I  premise  that 
that  is  .a  perpetually  glaring  absurdity  which 


Tnial  of  James  Ings 


[1088 


nothing  but  the  most  abominable  audaeity 
could  ever  have  detailed.  I  beg  you  to  attend 
to  the  statement  of  the  steps  that  were  taken, 
of  ihe  propositions  made,  of  the  feeble  fi>Ke 
with  wfaach  it  was  intended  to  execute  the  looat 
extensive  plot  ever  known  in  this  country,  and 
all  this  not  taken  up  rashly,  or  on  the  spur  of  any 
occasion,  but  debated  and  methodised,  disctisa- 
ed  and  argued  for  the  space  of  five  weeks,  no 
one  having  the  wisdom  to  discover  that  this 
project  was  like  the  baseless  fabric  of  a  viskm. 
Even  supposing  they  are  all  staundi  and  liraa, 
even  supposing^that  which  he  gives  you  rea- 
son to  understand  they  could  not  possibly  s<i|>- 
pose<— that  thev  had  no  spies  or  traitors  anioiig 
them,  even  if  it  were  left  to  its  own  natural 
imbecility,  the  acts. of  plunder  and  mofder, 
the  conflagration  of  houses,  and  seixure  of  pro- 
perty might  have  taken  place,  but  ignoraaoe 
and  stupidity  are  not  so  great  as  to  indiiee 
men  to  believe  that  any  thing  further  could  be 
effected*  ^ 

You  have  had  that  which  produces  a!wa3Ps  a 
sort  of  mechanical  effect.  I  do  not  vaeam  to 
pay  an  ill  compliment  to  your  understandings^ 
out  you  have  had  a  display  of  visibte  obyeda^ 
— pikes  and  swords,  and  gans  and  blunder- 
busses have  been  put  before  you,  #0  the  end 
that  this  feeling  mav  be  excited  in  every  raaa's 
mind,  '*  how  should  I  like  to  have  this  sort  oi 
thing  put  to  my  breast  ?  how  should  I  feel  if 
this  were  applied  to  my  chimney,  and  that  to 
my  stair-case,"  and  so  on :  that  is,  that  the  in* 
dividual  feeling  of  each  man  may  make  Kioa 
separate  himself  from  society,  may  make  hiniy 
through  the  medium  of  his  own  perscNial 
hatred  of  violence  or  apprehension  of  danger^ 
think  that  this  contemptible  exhibitioii  of  im- 
perfect armoury  could  operate  on  a  town  filled 
oy  a  million  of  loyal  inhabitants,  or  could  give 
the  means  of  overwhelming  the  empire*  Wlien 
touched  by  reason,  theyjshrink  to  nothing,  aad 
vrill  never  produce  a  verdict  contrary  to  the 
evidence  of  facts :  it  is  like  displaying  t^ 
bloody  robe  of  a  man  who  has  been  stabbed  or 
murdered ;  it  6  like  the  trick  practised  at  eveiy 
'sessions,  where  we  see  a  witness  poll  oat  scMne 
cloak  or  handkerchief  dipped  in  blood  of  the 
person,  to  produce  conviction  through  &a 
medium  of  commiseration ;  they  do  not  trust 
to  description,  but  rely  upon  display.  That  is 
the  effect  of  the  production  of  these  arms;  bet 
to  suppose  that,  with  such  a  oollectioD  howt- 
ever  nimished,  vrith  such  a  combinatioQ  of 
miserable  means,  four  or  five  and  twenty  mea 
(for  that  appears  to  be  the  number  con- 
cerned ;  fifteen  or  sixteen  the  largest  number 
that  ever  met  to  resolve)  could  conceive  thej 
could  accomplish  these  mighty  designs,  dees 
exceed  all  belief,  unless  supported  by  msdb 
better  evidence. 

But  we  are  told  that  it  is  not  because  a  plot 
is  rash,  or  ill-conceived,  that  therefore  the  be- 
lief of  it  is  to  be  rejected .  I  agree  to  that,  pi»- 
vided  it  be  competently  proved.  It  is  tfatd^ 
all  plots,  in  all  histories,  tiaive  been  msh  sad 
ill-advised;   in  that   I  .do.  aot  jU(iBe:-.the 


1089] 


Jbr  High  Treaton. 


A.  D.  1820. 


LlOOO 


Strength  of  combioatioD^  the  force  of  influence, 
or  the  weight  and  application  of  phytical 
power  has  charaeterizea  every  one  I  have  read 
of;  and  where  rashness  has  been  displayed, 
it  has  been  from  a  mere  miscalculation,  and 
not  where  the  parties  have,  perceiving  the 
hopelessness  of  their  attempts,  yet  persevered 
in  them.  I  have  turned  my  mind  to  the  case 
of  the  earl  of  Essex,  in  the  reign  of  queen 
Elizabeth,  and  I  agree  that  that  was  a  most 
rash  and  ill-concertel  plot ;  but  that  illustrious 
nobleman  had  formed  a  plot  in  which  he  was 
countenanced  by,  and  connected  with,  some  of 
the  first  persons  in  the  realm.  The  rashness 
of  his  enterprise  consisted  in  the  idea,  on  his 
psrt,  that  the  great  popularity  of  his  enterprise 
would  engage  in  his  behalf  the  countenance  of 
all  the  citizens  of  London.  He  went  out 
with  two  hundred  followers,  and  when  he 
found  himself  coldly  received,  returned  to  his 
own  palace,  and  there  defended  himself:  he 
betrayed  himself  by  his  own  rashness;  he 
shewed,  it  is  (rue,  a  want  of  knowledge  of  the 
minds  of  the  people  among  whom  he  was  to 
move,  and  a  vizjki  of  sufficient  insight  into  the 
resources  and  wisdom  of  the  government  of 

aneen  Elizalieth,  which  he  attempted  to  over- 
irow;  but  his  was  a  very  different  case  from 
a  combination  which  has  no  support  from  in- 
fluence, or  from  monev ;  from  powerful  names, 
or  overwhelming  numbers. 

Gentlemen,  something  may  be  said  about  a 
parallel  to  be  found  to  this  plot,  in  the  plot  of 
colonel  Despard.    Colonel  Despard  himself  a 
soldier,  unaerstanding  the  art  of  leading  sol- 
diers, is  said  to  have  engaged  in  a  plot  fuU^ 
as  absurd  as  this.    I  shall  be  astonished  if 
such  parallel  is  attempted  in  the  present  case ; 
— I  was  present  at  the  trial  of  that  unfortunate 
roan  and  his  associates ;  but  from  something  I 
have  heard  on  this  subject,   I  thought  time 
must  have  obliterated  the  circumstances  from 
my  memory,  and  I  was  obliged  to  refer  back 
to  the  book,  to  see  that  it  is  as  different  from 
the  plot  you  are  required  to  believe,  as  it  is 
possible  one  plot  should   be   from   another. 
There  are  it  is  true,  gentlemen,  fundamental 
similarities ;  the  leader  of  that  plot,  had  a  feel- 
ing of  resentment  against  one  person,  which  it 
mav  be  said  is  parallel  with  this  in  that  respect, 
and  he  had  ulterior  objects ; — ^he,  the  leader,  a 
soldier,  professed  that  he  had  four  hundred 
soldiers  at  his  disposal,  and  that  with  the  in- 
fluence of  an  explosion,  he  could  get  the  rest 
of  the  soldiers,  and  all  the  people  to  be  on  his 
side* — Colonel  Despard  said,  I  have  a  hun- 
dred men  who  will  advance,   and  take   the 
lower;  is  that  the  case  here?  here  are  eight 
iiMn  to  advance,  and  take  six  pieces  of  artil- 
leiT,  and  to  march  to  the  Mansion  house.  The 
dewnfie  of  colonel  Despard  rested  a  great  deal 
oo  the  improbability  even  of  his  plot;  but 
there  was  a  damning  frict  oo  the  very  face  of 
it,   which  no  art  could  surmount,  which  no 
eloqaeoce  could  palliate,  his  particular  malice 
was  directed  against  one  individual,  and  that 
ivas  the  beloved  and  veaerable  sov«reiffii  then 
VOL,  XXX  ill. 


on  the  throne ;  his  object  was,  to  take  posses- 
sion of  the  great  cannon  in  the  park,  ana  shoot 
the  king  as  he  went  to  the  house  of  parlia« 
ment.— If  that  was  believed,  as  I  know  it  was 
believed,  then  there  could  be  no  doubt  or  diffi- 
culty that  it  was  a  direct  treason  against  the 
life  of  the  sovereign  himself ;  and  however  ab- 
surd might  be  his  ulterior  views,  that  by  itself 
constituted  the  guilt  charged  in  the  indictment 
against  him.    But  this  is  not  at  all  like  the 
plan  of  an  attack  on  the  lives  of  his  majesty's 
ministers ;— however  valuable  individually,  or 
however  important  their  services  collectively, 
an  intention  ,to  attack,  or  even  the  actual  mur- 
ther  of  them,  is  not  treason.    I  know  what  I 
myself  felt  on  that  occasion,  and  I  believe,  the 
feeling  extended  to  every  one  present,  least  of 
all  excepting  the  jury,  when  witness  after  wit- 
nesscame  into  court,  and  deposed  as  to  this  part 
of  the  plan,  and  that  the  colonel  being  renson- 
strated  with,  as  to  its  cruelty  to  otlwrs  who 
might  be  in  the  way  of  the  cannon  shot,  and 
the  impropriety  of  murdering  a  man  so  well 
belove  J  as  the  late  king,  said,  **  I  have  exa- 
mined the  matter  well,  myheart  is  callous,  and 
I  am  resolved  to  do  it/'    Shall  it  be  said  that 
the  rash  plot  of  these  persons,  stands  in  the 
slightest  degree  of  comparison  with  that,  al- 
though in  Despard's  plot  there  was  all  the  in- 
ferior apparatus  of  a  provisional  government : 
of  the  taking  of  castles;  of  securing  ports;  and 
occupying  roads :  but  there  was  as  a  previous 
guarantee,  an  oath  of  Bdelity  to  the  provisional 
government,  which  it  was  pretended  already 
existed,    and  the    concurrence  in    tliis   was 
brought  home  to  every  one  of  the  conspirators. 
There  were  proceedings  which  implied  the  ex- 
istence of  such  a  body,  and  it  was  held  out 
that  men  and  money  from  France  would  not 
be  wanting,  and  it  was  proved  that  they  were 
confidently  expected. — Is  this  a  plot  to  be  put 
into  competition  vrith  the  Cato-street  conspi- 
racy ?— one  wonders  that  such  a  parallel  should 
be  resorted  to.— I  shall  be  surprised  even  if  it 
can  be  forced  on  the  learned  Attorney-general, 
and  be  treated  bv  him  as  one  tenable,  even  for 
the  purpose  of  illustrating  a  thought,  or  turn- 
ing a  period. 

I  am  not  unread  in  the  history  of  my  coun- 
try.— I  know  the  plots  and  conspiracies  which 
have  been  formed  oy  vile  men.  I  vrill  not  re- 
fer you  to  such  as  that  of  Long-beard  the 
lawyer,  who  held  his  preaching  in  Cheapside ; 
but  as  a  conspicuous  example,  look  at  Wat 
Tyler's  insurrection ;  had  that  the  least  sirni* 
larity,  or  was  it  so  much  within  the  scope  of 
improbability  as  this  is?  It  arose  out  or  the 
anger  of  one  man,  for  an  insult  offered  to  his 
own  family  within  his  own  walls ;  but  far  from 
its  being  the  efibrt  of  an  individual,  the  Chro« 
niclers  who  enter  most  minutely  into  the  his- 
tory of  the  times  (I  think  HoUinshed  for  one) 
have  said,  not  only  Tyler  was  exasperated  by 
such  an  insult,  but,  that  other  persons  were  so 
In  every  county  and  almost  in  eveiy  town  io 
England;  and  it  is  much  doubted  whether 
Tyler  was  the  beginner  of  the  insarrecfi^,  or 

4  A 


lOOil        1  GEORGE  IV. 

w]i«tlier  another  man  in  Essex  did  not  bring  it 
on  before  Tyler  was  a  party. 
*  But  if  the  popular  ^ling  was  roused  be- 
yond the  possibility  of  restraint,  by  the  rnsult 
offered  to  Tyler  of  Dartford,  it  is  evident  that 
there  was  in  the  minds  of  men  in  general  a 
)Mnse  of  injury  and  proneness  to  resentment 
which  wanted  only  an  immediate  provocation  ; 
for  it  is  stated  that  on  an  insult  offered  to  this 
tnan's  daughter  by  a  tax-gatherer,  which  flesh 
and  blood  woald  not  endure,  under  pretence 
of  levying  a  poll-tax,  Tyler  hearing  a  noise  in 
his  house,  and  entering  with  his  lathing-staff 
in  his  hand,  wrought  the  officer  such  a  rap  on 
the  pate,  that  his  brains  flew  out  and  he  died 
Instantly.  That  was  the  circumstance  which 
roused  the  country,  and  occasioned  that  tre- 
mendous insurrection,  in  which  records  were 
destroyed,  learning  proscribed,  nobility  tram- 
pled under  foot,  ana  royalty  itself  defied  and 
tnenaced.  Is  that  to  be  compared  to  the  feeble 
combination  of  a  dozen  persons  in  a  back  room, 
getting  at  a  very  small  expense  such  a  parcel 
of  trash  together,  and  supposing  that  by  these 
they  could  over-run  the  country,  and  over-turn 
the  empire  ?  That  was  during  the  reign  of  an 
inexperienced  infant  king,  advised  by  impru- 
dent ministers,  and  deserted  or  feebly  sup- 
ported by  timid  friends :  that  aided  by  popu- 
lar feeling  of  grinding  and  insulting  oppres- 
sion, ran  throughout  the  kingdom,  and  pre- 
vented the  exertions  which  might  have  suc- 
coured the  Crown  and  relieved  the  capital : 
how  unlike  the  feebleness  of  the  present  pre* 
lended  combination ;  where  the  strength,  the 
feeling  and  the  influence  are  all  on  the  side  of 
government,  and  those  who  are  supposed  to 
meditate  its  overthrow  are  distinguished  only 
by  their  beegary  and  their  obscurity. 

Jack  Cade  is  another  person,  who  raised  one 
of  these  insurrections ;  but  for  what  ?  to  feel 
the  pulse  of  the  country  towards  a  disputed 
title  —  his  conspiracy  is  known  and  recorded 
in  history,  to  have  been  supported  by  those 
who  wished  to  put  the  Lancaster  title  in  issue, 
and  who  ga?e  their  support  under  hand,  to 
that  false  traitor,  as  he  is  called  in  our  statutes. 
— ^That  is  as  different,  as  any  hiritorical  case 
can  be ;  as  different  as  the  evidence  before 
you  is  from  reason,  consistency,  and  truth. 

Then  I  ask  you  again,  is  Adamses  evidence 
incredible,  as  it  will  appear  when  it  comes  to 
be  stated,  in  all  its  details?  and  using  the 
same  mode  of  supplication  you  have  heard 
from  my  learned  fnend,— Pegging  you  to  keep 
those  observations  in  your  mind,  and  tiy  the 
iBvidence  by  that  test — to  forget  the  garnish  of 
arms,  a  display  more  convincing  than  even  all 
of  the  eloquence  and  weight  of  my  two  learned 
friends,  who,  before' the  verdict  upon  this  man 
shall  have  been  submitted  to  your  considera- 
tiotr,  will  have  had  to  address  you. — I  ask 
trhether  this  is  a  plot  ^on  would  believe  out 
tif  the  mouth  of  one  witness  whoever  he  might 
be,  aiid  much  more  ont  of  the  mouth  of  such  a 
wretch  as  that  is  ? 

I  proceed  to  the  next  point  I  have  to  treat 


Trial  ofJamsi  Ingt 


[1093 


en.  Does  Adams  entitle  himself  to  credit? 
Is  there,  in  the  account  he  gives  of  himself  and 
the  manner  in  which  he  answers  qxiestioDS, 
either  in  chief  or  in  cross-examination,  that 
which  should  induceyou  to  give  credit  tohis  tes- 
timony ?  There  is,  I  am  told,  in  aneighbourinj 
country  (or  at  least  there  was)  a  time  when  t 
display  was  made  by  the  timid  and  fiilse- 
hearted  of  what  they  termed  a  cockade  of  cir- 
cumstances ;  it  had  two  sides,  each  represent* 
ing  devotion  to  a  different  cause ;  if  Buona- 
parte was  uppermost,  the  side  was  sheini 
whic^  presented  the  three  colours ;  if  Loais 
was  in  power,  then  it  was  while.  Soch  seems 
to  be  the  description  of  Adams's  conscieace; 
he  wears  his  religion  as  these  time-serriDgmeQ 
wore  their  cockades. 

A  man  may  change  his  party  through  fickle- 
ness, or  may  comply  with  those  in  power 
through  mere  inertness,  without  bad  intention; 
but  he  who  has  received  baptismal  rites  st  the 
font,  never  renounces  his  faith  in  his  Redeessff 
without  disqualifying  himself  for  erer  hm 
being  received  as  a  witness.  What  is  the 
volume  which  touched  his  lips  when  he  engij- 
ged  to  tell  you  the  truth,  the  whole  tnith,  m 
nothing  but  the  truth  ?  The  narratite  of  the 
sufferings  on  earth  of  that  Blessed  Sarioor 
whom  he  denies ;  the  precepts  of  a  religiw 
which  he  has  renounced  ;  the  book  on  wwdt 
we  Christians  place  our  hopes  of  heteafleiv 
and  by  which  we  endeavour,  as  far  as  the 
frailty  of  man  will  permit,  to  regulate  oar 
conduct  here;  a  book  which  he  threw  awayp 
idle  trashy  because  he  had  read  as  he  expressed 
it,  the  accursed  vrork  of  Thomas  ^^[^ 
book  which  he  has  denied  as  the  basis  of  fai* 
and  the  anchorage  of  hope,  and  yet  he  no* 
comes  before  you  as  a  renovated  man,  and 
asks  you  to  give  implicit  credit  to  his  oath. 
What  book  has  answered  the  book  of  Thwwj 
Paine  in  his  mind  ?  What  has  giten  him  that 
light  by  which  the  errors  of  the  *^«*'*.*|~j2 
head  have  been  corrected?  No  inspnee 
volume  has  wrought  the  blessed  change;  the 
handcuffs  upon  his  wrists,  and  the  iw* 
on  his  legs  have  been  his  only  tnloBj 
and  as  he  found  it  necessary  to  come  iwo 
court  to  be  a  witness,  he  found  it  con^i«* 
to  profess  himself  again  a  Christian  ?  Fh"J 
pretext — abominable  delusion !  IncapaWeJ 
obtaining  credit  for  tite  smallest  assertion  $«» 
a  man  should  make,  bnt  iooomparaWy  tooio- 
sigiiificant,  to  induce  a  jury  of  Christian>*J 
hesitate  for  a  moment  in  dismissing  fr^tntt*! 
minds  this  man,  whose  statements  txtt  W 
pollute  their  ears  and  corrupt  their  jtidgm«^ 
Apostacy,  odious  as  it  is,  does  not  form  t» 
whole  odium  of  this  wretch's  charact*^?" 
adds  to  this,  as  my  learned  friend  has  siW 
disloyalty  to  Vijs  sovereign— treascm  to  » 
country— treacheiy  to  his  companioo8--'W» 
h^  crowns  hie  inlkmy  by  a  bmten  impweaw 
in  delivering  bis  evidence.'  Bring  him  to  » 
test  of  his  own  observttioBiis^I  vM  m 
upon  repeated  occasions;  stating  to  him  w 
that  evidence  had  been,  and  stating  m 


k 


10933 


for  lli^  I'reasoH. 


A.  D.  1826. 


C1094 


ttiider  the  oonect,  I  do  not  tay  the  seTert^ 
▼igilance  of  my  learned  friend  on  the  other 
side,  reprehending  me  very  properly  when  I 
mistook  any  thing — I  asked,  now  came  you  to 
omity  from  your  statement  the  other  day,  facts 
so  important  as  many  of  those  you  have  related 
to-day?  <'Oh,  why,*'  said  he,  '*I  did  not  think 
they  were  of  any  importance  in  the  cause : 
the  prisoner  ahout  whom  these  statements  are 
made,  was  not  then  upon  his  trial ;  my  memory 
did  not  serve  me^  and  I  have  a  great  many 
<»diejr  things  in  my  memory  that  I  shall  pro- 
duce against  other  prisoners.'*    This  was  his 
own  voluntary  statement,  and  this,  gentlemen, 
from  a  man  who  is  sworn  to  telU  not  the  truth 
partially,  not  the  truth  as  he  may  conceive  it 
necessaiy,    but  to  tell  the  whole  truth,  and 
nothing   but   the   truth,  and    to   act   upon 
that,   so  help  him  God.    If  he  bad    never 
renounced    bis    Redeemer,    or   blasphemed 
the  book  of  life,  as  he  ha^   done,  does  he 
entitle  himself  to  be  believed  by  you,  when 
lie  acknowledges  that  he  is  ready  to   put  a 
construction  upon  that  oath,   different  from 
that  which  all  men  must  ?  and  he  sets  up  as  an 
apology  that  he  did  not  state  these  thinss  upon 
the  former  occasion,  because  they  did  not 
relate  to  the  prisoner  upon  his  trial !    Now, 
let  us  try  that — ^the  first  addition  he  makes  to 
bis  evidence  is'this^"  Brunt  said,  he  had  two 
men  to  call  upon  in  Carnaby-market.     He 
asked    Mr.   Thistlewood  whether  he   would 
walk  with  him,  which  Thistlewood  declined, 
and  I  went  with  Brunt  and  logs.*'    Does  that 
relate  in  any  manner  more  to  the  trial  on  which 
he  was  examined  yesterday,  than  it  related  to 
the  trial  of  Thisdewood,  on  which  he  was 
here  before?   Is  his  account  of  his  suppressing 
CsctSy  because  they  do  not  relate  to  the  case 
true,  or  is  it  true  that  he  invents  new  matter 
as  he  thinks  the  occasion  will  require?  Again, 
he  telb  a  long  story  of  Ings  doing  something 
at  a  meeting  at  which  Thistlewood  was  present, 
and  which  would  have  been  of  the  utmost  im- 
portance on  Thistlewood*s  trial,  if  true ;  that 
Ings   pulled    a  pistol  from  his    pocket   and 
declared  what  he  was  ready  to  do,  and  went 
to  do,  when  his  Royal  Highness  the  Prince 
Regent  was  going  to  the  Parliament  House, 
stating  it  in  the  midst  of  a  conference  with 
Thistlewood,  who  was  then  on  his  trial,  and 
yet  not  one  word  of  that  did  this  fellow  state ; 
but  he  takes  three  days  to  invent  it,  against  the 
prisoner  now  before  you  comes  ypon  his  trial, 
when  he  thinks  he  can  more  deeply  impress 
bis  statements  by  the  help  of  additional  cir- 
cumstances.   We  have  been   asked  why  we 
require  juries  to  disbelieve  witnesses,  and  yet 
produce   no   evidence    to   contradict   them. 
Gentlemen,  can  we  give  locality  and  substance 
to  the  fleeting  form  of  a  pliantom  ?    Can  we 
eoncentiata  and  fix  the  glittering  rays  reflected 
from  the  polished-  surface  of  a  mirror  ?   Unless 
we  could  do  these  things  we  cannot  apply 
eflBectual  contradiction  to  so  unstable  a  witness 
B9  AdsJn* ;.  when  we  think  we  shall  be  able  to 
jdo  sO|  be  avoids  us  ;  and  when  we  have  posi- 


tive evidence  in  answer  to  another  whom  we 
expect,  that  witness  is  kept  back  from  us, 
although  .used  and  mainlv  relied  upon  as  a 
supporter  of  Adams  on  a  U>rraer  occasion. 

In  these  respects,  has  Adams  entitled  him- 
self to  credit  at  your  hands  from  his  own 
shewing  ?  Unless  the  experience  of  a  small 
number  of  years  compared  with  the  rest  of  my 
learned  friends  at  the  bar — unless  the  know- 
ledge I  have  of  juries  which  those  years  have 
given  me— unless  the  observation  of  thirty* 
Bwe  years,  more  or  less,  constantly  applied  to 
courts  of  justice,  deceive  me,  it  does  not  wanjt 
the  feeble  exposition  I  can  give  to  it  to  make 
an^  honest  and  discreet  jury  say,  '<  on  the 
evidence  of  this  man  we  would  not  hurt  ^ 
mouse  or  a  beetle ;  his  evidence  with  us  must 
go  for  nothing.*' 

But  I  advance  this  matter  a  step  further : 
you  have  seen  that  he  is,  in  the  first  place,  the 
narrator  of  a  most  improbable  story ;  you  have 
seen  in  tlie  next  place  what  character  he  gives 
of  himself,  and  how  he  disentitles  himself  to 
your  credit ;  is  he  to  be  disbelieved  the  more 
because  the  witnesses  for  the  Crown  expressly 
contradict  him  in  many  material  points  ?  It 
is  a  material  point  for  your  consideration  ip 
the  case  that  is  now  before  you,  what  passed 
in  Cato-street  at  the  unfortunate  time  when 
Smithers  lost  his  life,  and  when  many  other 
valuable  lives  were  in  danger ;  certainly  you 
will  see  it  is.  Now  is  this  man  supported  or 
contradicted  in  that?  —  A  person  has  been 
brought  of  the  name  of  Monument,  who  has 
been  sought  as  a  confirmatory  witness ;  let  us 
see  in  what  does  their  evidence  differ*  That 
there  was  such  a  meeting  in  Cato^treet — that 
there  were  arms — that  there  was  gunpowder 
— that  there  was  a  man  killed — that  all  those 
circumstances  occurred  which  every  newspaper 
would  have  given  you,  and  every  newspaper 
had  given  you  for  two  full  days  before  Adams 
was  taken  into  custody  — -  three  days  before 
he  gave  his  evidence,  all  this  was  known,  and 
about  that  he  would  require  no  confirmationi 
and  certainly  receives  no  support:  but  is  he 
confirmed,  as  to  his  being  inere,  by  anv  wit- 
ness ?  In  the  first  place,  as  to  the  number  of  men, 
he  states  most  distinctly  upon  his  oath,  that 
Thistlewood*s  declaration  was,  that  there  were 
twenty  men ;  eighteen  above,  and  two  below 
stairs;  that  fourteen  would  be  sufficient  to 
nish  into  lord  Harrowby's  dining  room;  the 
number  was  stated  specifically,  that  six  would 
manage  the  servants,  even  if  they  were  sixteen 
in  number.  If  this  passed  in  a  room,  fifteen 
feet  long,  and  ten  broad,  could  Monument 
have  been  ignorant  of  it  ? — but,  on  the  con-, 
trary,  on  quite  another  mode  of  interrogatory, 
and  quite  another  occasion,  although  it  is  in 
relation  to  the  same  fiict  and  ending  in  the 
same  way.  Monument  tells  you  most  distinctly 
that  the  number  stated  was  twenty-five  then 

f>resent  —  that  it  was  needless  to  count  them, 
or  Thistlewood  knew  there  were  twentv« 
five — and  that  they  would  be  enough  to  da 
the  business.    That  must  have  been  the  sama 


1095]       1  GEORGE  IV. 

con?€rsatioD,  only  with  this  difference,  that 
the  mind  of  Adams,  if  he  was  there,  was  en- 
gaged in  the  Introdnction  of  those  wlio  were 
to  frustrate  their  object,  while  the  mind  of 
,  Monument  was  engaged  on  what  passed,  and 
he  told  the  truth.  He  says  further  that  there 
was  but  one  candle  a-tight  when  the  officer 
came  in  ;  that  when  that  one  candle  was  put 
out,  the  whole,  place  was  in  dai^ness.  And 
that  he  swears  most  positively.  Both  the  officers 
swear  that  there  were  more,  one  that  there 
were  five  candles  in  the  great  room,  and  he 
should  guess  by  the  quantity  of  light,  at  least 
three  in  the  back  room. 

Were  the  words  he  states  uttered  by  the 
officer  ?  or  are  they  a  fabrication  to  answer  one 
purpose  if  they  will  not  answer  another?  take 
those  words  seriously  into  your  consideration. 
— Adams  stated  that  when  the  officers  came 
in,  they  said,  ''  Here  is  a  pretty  nest  of  yon, 
we  are  officers,  and  have  a  warrant  to  appro* 
bend  you ;  as  such,  we  hope,  gentlemen,  yon 
will  surrender  quietlv.'' — It  those  words  were 
said,  all  defence  of  these  men  must  fail  on 
another  indictment ;  for  they  would,  without 
doubt,  be  guilty  of  murder;  but  did  the 
officers  say  ko  ?— both  the  officers  examined  to 
it,  most  distinctly,  honestly,  and  fairly  giving 
their  evidence,  state  all  that  we  said  was  (for 
I  put  down  the  very  words,  and  they  say  they 
were  the  same  in  substance),  **  We  are  officers, 
seize  their  arms;''  no  word  about  a  pretty 
nest;  no  word  about  a  warrant;  no  word 
about  yielding,  or  surrendering:— all  this  is 
the  vile  fiction  of  this  wretched  witness,  who, 
therefore,  on  every  test  he  goes  through,  is 
unconfirmed,  contradicted,  imd  deprived  of 
the  veiy  semblance  of  truth. 

I  shall  be  told,  perhaps,  it  does  not  apply  in 
the  slightest  degree  to  the  basis  and  body  of 
this  conspiracy,  whether  there  were  three 
candles  or  eight  candles,  or  one,  and  whether 
there  were  certain  words  uttered  or  not.  Per- 
haps some  of  you  have  done  your  duly  either 
here  or  ebewhere,  on  the  trial  of  other  crimi- 
nal cases ;  you  have  heard  prisoners  at  tlie  bar 
caH  witness  after  witness,  to  prove  an  alibi ; 
those  witnesses  have  been  kept  apart  by  the 
policy  of  die  law,  and  after  their  examination 
in  chief  to  the  principal  point,  they  hive  been 
asked  what  had  you  for  dinner-^ what  person 
did  you  sit  next — were  there  one  or  more  can- 
dles, on  the  table— did  you  get  up  to  help 
yourself,  or  was  there  a  footman  in  hvery,  or  a 
maid  serrant ;  and  a  discrepancy  in  the  evi« 
dence  has  turned  the  fate  or  the  prisoner ;  it 
would  be  in  vain  for  counsel  to  get  up  and 
say,  my  lord,  it  does  not  signify  a  farthing  to 
the  case  before  a  jufy,  whether  they  ate  roast 
beef  or  boiled  mutton,  or  whether  they  had  wax 
lights,  or  tallow  candles,  or  whether  they  had  a 
footman  or  a  maid  seryant,  the  judge  would 
say,  no,  sir,  but  we  must  see  from  the  account 
they  give  whether  the  witness  can  be  believed 
in  any  other  respect ;  then  I  apply  this  ta  the 
witness,  Adams;  supposing  there  were  no 
ehjeetiOB  arising  out  of  liis  own  mouth,  when 


Trial  ofjamtt  lugs 


11066 


he  is  contradicted  on  three  points  bj  wimcsm 
called  on  his  own  side,  is  he  a  man  to  be  be- 
lieved, to  hang  up  men  by  eleven  at  atine^ 
when  he  gives  his  evidence  from  time  to  tioe, 
to  carry  the  inculpation  to  the  prisoners » 
they  proceed  in  the  trials?  I  hope  a  better 
judgment  will  prevail,  and  that  my  client  fill 
have  the  benefit  of  that  better  jadgmeoL 

It  is  said  an  accomplice  ought  to  be  cos- 
firmed,  I  say  (and  I  trust  I  shall  have  the 
opinion  of  his  lordship  with  me  apoo  tint 
subject)  that  he  ought  to  be  Goafiimed  asfa 
as  he  can  be  confirmed,  for  the  veiy  term  con- 
firmation implies  doubt,  and  every  eircosH 
stance  by  which  doubt  can  be  elucidated  ii  t 
circumstance  by  which  his  evidence  cas  be 
confirmed ;  if  Uiere  is  any  thing  this  conupt 
and  tainted  witness  knows,  it  belongs  to  thM 
who  bring  such  cases  forward  to  see  wbelber 
it  is  or  is  not  within  the  knowledge  of  sone 
other  who  is  more  fit  to  be  believed.-!  iif 
this,  I  hope,  not  lightly  or  lasUy,  I  '^°*^"|^ 
being  once  told  on  a  prosecution  by  a  leaned 
judge,  for  whose  iudgroent  I  shall  ever  bive 
the  utmost  veneraUon,  that  the  duty  cfcoand 
for  a  prosecution  is  as  sacred  astbatoftte 
judge  himself,  that  if  there  was  any  tbiog 
within  the  knowledge  of  the  prosecoior  tfat 
could  elucidate  it,  it  ought  to  be  broogbt  for- 
ward, for  that  the  life  of  a  roan' is  not  a  oaticr 
merely  of  forensic  trial ;  the  ohject  is  not  Jo 
get  a  verdict,  but  to  enable  all  maokiod  todo 

justice,  and  to  see  that  the  ends  of  P"^?' 
tice  are  fairiy  and  fully  aecompHsbed.  aw 
is  true  in  a  private  or  ordinary  nrosecutioo,  a 
it  not  pecuharly  so  in  this  caser  yet,  feBtv* 
men,  it  is ;  for  whether  eleven  men  iball « 
shall  not  be  consigned  to  the  rope  of  t^J^ 
man  and  the  axe  of  the  executioner,  is  oMW 
utmost  importance  to  each  of  these  indinw* 
als;  to  them  it  is  as  important  as  if  ob  tfacir 
breath  depended  the  safety  of  the  empire,  ra 
to  each  man  his  own  li<e  is  roost  dear  m 
most  cherished  ;  we  ding  to  life  amidst  lono* 
and  sickness,  in  depression,  and  even  in  d^ 
pair.  When  hope  lias  fled,  the  love  ofW 
remains,  and  it  is  for  life  that  the  onfortooaie 
man  at  the  bar  now  appeals  to  yoor  jte^ 
and  to  your  discernment.  But  importu*  « 
the  question  is  to  the  parties,  it  ends  aiij 
them  with  the  day  of  their  suffering,  bot « > 
public  record,  as  a  monument  of  the  !iin»>" 
remains  for  ever.  This  conspiracy  ia  ^^^ 
posed  cloud  which  has  overshadowed  the  aa«a 
of  the  new  reign ;  whether  it  is  of  that  dW 
which  is  supposed,  or  whether  it  coold  beiW- 
sipated  by  a  putf  of  wind,  ought  to  be  » 

main  object  or  the  present  ?«»«»*"»"•»  2 
in  order  to  shew  that  in  its  real  cdooTS,  wv 
evidence  ought  to  be  resorted  to>  and  none  » 
be  kept  back.  If  there  is  any  thing  to» 
gained  by  these  trials  it  u  the  si>«»9»^ 
of  government  in  the  confidence  o^^he  pwj 
by  &  knowledge  of  the  danger  to  wtoj*  ^ 
government  has  been  exposed,  it  >**J*^ 

Slause  of  those  "wordiy  ministers^wh©  •* 
etected  and  brought  tp  pumshmeal  iw* 


10071 


Jbr  High  Trtatmi. 


A.  D.  1890. 


[1098 


coofpirmcy  as  thisy  and  it  is  upon  that  alone 
4hat  the  hopes  of  to-daj  can  rest.  Your  ver- 
<^iGt  will  decide  the  fate  of  that  man :  for  the 
Testy  Europe  as  well  as  Britain  will  judge  at 
the  fHresent  moment,  and  posterity  will  judge 
for  cTer :  if  therefore,  any  means  of  elucidation 
are  withheld,  all  the  testimony  not  produced 
will,  in  history  and  politics,  be  taken  against 
those  who  keep  it  back,  and  thus  not  only 
hardship  is  wrought  against  the  indiTiduaf, 
but  the  Tery  main  spring  which  should  ani- 
mate loyalty  and  engage  our  affections  in  such 
a  cause  as  this,  will  be  taken  away,  ne 
cause  belongs  first  to  that  unhappy  man,  who 
must  lay  down  his  life,  if  you  believe  the  wit- 
nesses against  him ;  but  it  belongs  afterwards 
to  you,  to  me,  and  to  every  member  of  the 
British  community,  for  our  honour  is  concerned 
in  the  honour  of  our  oountrv,  and  in  propor- 
tion as  that  is  set  high,  so  shall  we  rise  in  the 
estimation  of  other  nations,  and  so  will  our 
fespectabiltty  and  gratification  be  increased. 

I  have  done,  I  hope,  except  as  to  one  point, 
with  the  witness  Adams ;  but  there  is  one  part 
of  his  evidence  to  which  I  beg  to  direct  your 
particular  attention,  which  will  shew  you  that 
thst  is  particularly  true,  in  one  instance,  which 
1  impute  to  Mm  as  the  governing  motive  of 
bis  whole  conduct — that  he  has  charged  upon 
others  those  crimes  and  that  guilt,  of  which  he 
is  the  author,  and  which  he  perhaps  alone  is 
capable  of  forming ;  he  tells  you  that  Brunt 
professed  opinions  approaching  to  atheism; 
that  be  said,  when  he  was  told  that  he  should 
have  an  opportunity  of  murdering  all  the  min^ 
isters  at  once,  that  now  he  believed  there  was 
a  God,  that  he  had  often  prayed  they  might 
be  brought  together,  and  that  now  God  had 
deliver^  those  persons  into  their  hands.  That 
a  man  who  has  read  the  accursed  worics  of 
Paine,  till  he  has  renounced  the  faith  of  Jesus, 
should  use  such  expressions  is  probable ;  but 
call  Brunt  a  murderer,  call  him  an  assassin, 
cidl  him  a  traitor,  a  robber,  or  what  you  will, 
it  is  not  to  be  credited  out  of  the  mouth  of 
■neb  a  wretch  as  Adams— himself  an  avowed 
eootemner  of  his  bible  and  his  Redeemer — that 
he  who  commits  crime  in  this  world  cuts  him- 
self off  from  the  hope  of  penitence,  and  that 
be  has  not  that  which  the  thief  on  the  cross 
had,  a  hope  that  the  penitent  acknowledgment 
of  his  crime  might  enable  him  to  enter  into  a 
state  of  mercy.  I  implore  you  for  charity's 
flake  not  to  impute  this  to  Brunt  on  the  tes- 
timony of  such  a  wretch,  when  they  might 
famve  called  Edwards  and  others  lo  prove  it — 
Bdwards,  who  is  stated  to  have  been  present 
at  that  conversation,  but  who  is  not  called  to 
confirm  this  man  in  that  or  any  other  par- 
ticnlar. 

There  is  another  point  on  which  you  will 
consider  vrhether  Adams  is  to  be  believed  »— 
he  swears  distinctly,  that  he  never  had  been 
sit  the  lodging  of  a  man  of  the  name  of  Chambers, 
in  a  court  odled  Heathcock-court,  in  •  the 
Sttand :  and  that  we  might  be  sure  that  it  was 
not  the  D«me  of  the  court  that  might  lead  to  an 


equivocation,  I  took  the  pains  to  fix  that  on 
him,  ^supposing  it  is  not  Heathcock-court,  did 
you  go  to  any  such  man,  and  make  a  proposal 
to  any  such  man." — No,  no, — ^no  was  the  regu- 
lar answer  I  have  called  the  man  who  proved 
what  he  said,  and  what  he  did,  and  what  he 
wanted  to  leave,  and  1  have  proved  that  every 
thing  he  said  upon  that  was  like  that  which  he 
has  said  upon  all  other  points,  an  effusion  of 
rashness,  or  a  concoction  of  premeditated  fals^ 
hood.  I  saw  the  scope  of  the  cross-examination, 
and  I  could  not  fail  to  see  that  Chambers  was 
one  of  the  men  whom  they  call  radicals— that 
he  was  one  of  those  who  had  carried  forward 
and  assisted  at  meetings  of  these  people — 
that  he  was  deeply  engaged  in  the  exterior 
of  these  proceedings.  No  man  can  doubt  that 
he  was,  for  if  he  had  not  been  something  of 
the  kind  he  would  not  have  been  a  fit  person 
for  Edwards  and  Adams  to  practise  upon — 
if  he  had  not  had  the  discernment  and  good 
sense  to  see  through  their  treacherous  designs, 
he  too  would  have  been  at  the  bar  as  one  of 
this  traitorous  conspiracy — ^his  mouth  would 
have  been  shut  by  his  being  indicted  with 
the  others;  he  is  not  a  witness  I  should  prefer 
to  call,  but  he  is  a  witness  whom  the  treachery 
of  Adams  has  rendered  necessaiy,  and  you 
must  weigh  his  evidence  against  that  of  Adams. 
This,  however,  is  quite  clear,  from  the  cross- 
examination— -Chambers  was  mentioned  yes- 
terday ;  due  industry  has  not  been  spared  in 
the  mean  time ;  all  the  particulars  of  his  life 
are  well  known,  and  it  is  not  pretended  that 
the  height  of  his  crimination  goes  beyond 
this,  that  he  was  an  acquaintance  of  Tbistl»* 
wood,  and  had  drunk  with  him  in  a  public* 
house,  that  he  was  so  far  transported  with  the 
miserable  politics  infused  into  the  minds  of  the 
vulgar,  that  he  carried  a  flag  at  the  Sroithfield 
meeting,  and  the  triumphal  entry  of  Mr.  Hunt. 
Is  he  a  Deist  ?  Is  he  a  betrayer  of  his  friends  ? 
Is  he  a  traitor  to  his  king,  except  so  far  as  the 
circumstance  of  the  Smithfield  meeting  goes  ? 
— No,  no — no  is  the  answer  to  all  those  ques- 
tions, and  his  evidence  most  be  confronted 
with  the  evidence  of  a  man  who  is  all  these. 
How  far  such  a  man  ought  to  be  confirmed  I 
will  not  say,  but,  standing  as  he  does,  I  will 
say  that  he  ought  to  be  dismissed  entirely  from 
your  consideration  in  the  investigation  of  this 
cause.  But  is  there  evidence  enough  without 
him  ?  for  I  take  this  to  be  a  clear  proposition, 
if  a  witness*s  credit  is  doubtful,  before  he  comes 
into  tlie  box,  that  doubt  may  be  removed  by 
confirmation ;  but  if  he  has  in  the  box  disabled 
the  jury  from  believing  some  material  proposi- 
tion he  has  stated,  he  is  self-convicted  of  per- 
jury, and  the  jury  must  dismiss  his  testimony 
from  their  recollection,  and  hold  him  as  no 
witness  at  all,  and  so  1  contend  you  must  con- 
sider Adams.  It  is  not  for  juries  to  sift  and 
garble  testimonvi  they  must  believe  the  wit^ 
nesses  on  the  whole,  or  they  must  dismiss  them 
from  their  consideration  altogether— indeed  it 
would.be  an  insult  upon  your  understandings 
to  say,  in  this  matter  the  man  is  perjured — ift 


10091        1  GEORGE  IV. 

such  a  matter  he  is  not — we  will  believe  so 
mach : — the  very  word  perjured  shuts  up  the 
leaf  of  his  eTidence,  it  becomes  dry  and 
withered,  and  you  read  no  more ;  and  if  there- 
fore you  believe,  as  I  contend  you  must,  that 
this  is  a  false  and  peijured  witness,  his  evi- 
dence  goes  for  nothing,  and  he  is  removed  eiv- 
tirely  from  the  cause. 

I  come  now  to  another  witness,  or  to  other 
witnesses ;  and  let  me  see  how  far  they  confirm 
Adams  as  to  any  thing  that  is  material.  Hiden 
certainly  stands  in  a  favourable  point  of  view. 
In  one  respect,  my  learned  friend,  Mr.  Cur- 
wood,  made  a  mistake  respecting  him,  that  he 
was  a  man  who  received  the  knowledge  of  the 
crime  and  afterwards  concealed  it :  he  is  not 
such  a  man ;  there  is  this  favourable  circum- 
t^unce  in  the  testimony  of  Hiden  (if  you  believe 
iiim)  that  when  a  communication  was  made  of 
a  supposed  plot,  he  disclosed  that  to  lord 
Harrowby  at  the  Arst  jpossible  opportunity; 
but  we  are  a  long  way  from  believmg  Hiden 
for  that.  That  Hiden  may  have  had  some  know- 
ledge of  the  intended  meeting  in  Cato-street, 
and  the  intention  to  murder  his  majesty*s  min- 
isters, there  is  every  probability ;  that  he  learn- 
ed that  from  Wilson  is  a  matter  of  much  more 
doubt ;  that  he  may  have  derived  it  from  Ed- 
wards or  firom  Adams  is  extremely  probable, 
and  extremely  consistent  with  the  whole  of  the 
atory,  for,  with  all  the  wish  in  the  world,— 
aupposing  him  a  conscientious,  an  l^onest,  and 
an  unprejudiced  person, — to  give  that  man 
credit  tor  what  he  said,  for  God*s  sake  examine, 
whether  he  is  a  witness  of  that  untainted  kind 
that  ought  to  make  up  for  the  deficiency  of 
testimony  in  Adams.  I  asked  him  where  he 
lived,  he  told  me  he  lived  in  Manchester-roews, 
Manchester-streeL  I  was  told  afterwards,  with 
•ome  heat,  that  he  had  said  he  had  lived  there,  or 
that  he  had  been  living  there,  or  something  of 
the  kind ;  upon  all  these  subjects  you  are  the 
arbitrators,  and  I  put  it  to  you  whether,  until 
I  had  pursued  my  cross-examination  to  the  ex- 
tent ot  several  questions,  if  you  had  been  asked 
on  going  out  of  that  box,  to  say  who  is  the 
witness  Hiden ;  you  would  not  have  answered 
he  is  a  milk-seller,  and  lives  in  Manchester- 
mews,  Manchester-street.  Would  not  that 
have  been  the  impression  upon  tlie  minds  of 
every  one  of  you  ?  Could  you  have  had  any 
surmise  that  he  had  been  for  several  days  a 
prisoner  in  the  Marshalsea-prison,  haying  been 
translated  into  the  KingVbench  for  a  debt 
which  had  been  due  several*  months,  and  for 
which  he  had  been  absconding  from  Man- 
chester-mews ?  Can  you  then  receive  this  man 
as  confirmatory  of  the  evidence  in  general 
which  has  been  given  by  Adams  ? 

But  I  go  a  step  further :  does  he  by  himself 
(for  that  is  necessary  if  I  am  right  as  it  respects 
this  case)  does  he  pretend  to  know  the  name  of 
logs  at  all  ?  You  aro  trying  Ings;  I  know  it 
is  part  of  the  apparatus  of  tibe  indictment  that, 
being  laid  as  conspiracy,  the  acts  of  one  are 
evidence  against  the  whole,  and  that,  therefore, 
this  man  can  come  here  to  hang  lugs  on  de- 


Trial  of  James  l/tgs 


[1100 


daratioDS  of  Wilson ;  but  on  whom  does  the 
evidence  of  the  conspiracy  rest  I  on  AdaiD% 
and  if  he  were  to  be  taken  away,  Hiden  baa  119 
standing  ground.  But  put  it  thus: — ^here  is 
a  man  to  whom  a  communication  of  an  -intea^ 
to  murder  his  majesty's  ministers  is  made,  an^l 
a  proposition  that  he  sl^dl  join  in  the  attempt 
He  has,  tlien,  that  which  my  learned  friend,  tae 
Solicitor-general,  has  much  pointed  U>,a  direel 
interest  in  the  declaration  which  he  makes^ 
because,  without  alluding  to  my  lord  Harrow- 
by's  personal  character,  for  which  I  have  at 
much  respect  and  veneration  as  I  ought  t^ 
have,  can  any  Britisli  nobleman  be  supposed 
to  have  received  information  firom  an  obacust 
and  bumble  individual,  and  not  to  have  doof 
that  which  becomes  him  ?  But  there  is  tome* 
thing  remaining  to  be  done :  lord  Hairowby  is 
too  good  and  too  prudent  a  man  to  give  moDej 
to  an  individual  before  he  has  given  his  evi^ 
deuce,  but  I  need  not  tell  ^ou  what  a  man  may 
expect  on  suoh  an  occasion:  why  does  Mr* 
Hiden  come  here  to  tell  you  this  plan  of  con* 
spiracy  and  high  treason,  but  for  that  which  is 
to  raise  him  from  prison,  and  place  hina  in 
afiluence,  because  he  has  made  a  disclosort 
which  is  to  save  not  only  the  life  of  lord  Uar- 
rowby,  but  some  of  the  best  blood  in  the  kiiig« 
dom,  and  has  enabled  his  majesty's  minisien 
10  detect  this  dangerous  plot  1 

Then  it  being  avowed  that  he  was  not  ooe  of 
the  persons,  itwas  unequivocally  avowed  U>hii% 
as  he  states  it,  what  the  destination  of  the 
whole  plan  was,  and  that  he  was  to  be  engaged 
to  assist  in  it ;  but,  more  than  that,  he  states 
this  to  you,  which,  even  if  it  were  lakeii  as 
true  (and  it  shews  there  are  proverbially  mea 
that  ought  to  have  good  memories,  and  provea 
the  use  of  examining  men  separately),  be  statea 
all  the  houses  which  were  to  be  set  on  fire,  and 
there  was  not  in  the  midst  of  it  one  word  about 
the  barracks  or  any  one  place  except  the  houses 
of  lord  Harrowby,  the  bishop  of  London,  lord 
Castlereagh,  the  duke  of  Wellington,  and  some 
others  which  I  cannot  mention ;  and  then  being 
asked  again,  he  says,  **  there  was  no  other  thai 
I  can  remember.'* 

Then,  gentlemen,  do  you  believe  in  all  this 
of  the  firing  of  the  barracks,  and  all  the  leat 
which  has  been  introduced  into  the  canse  by 
Adams  ?  If  such  a  thing  had  ever  been  stated, 
it  is  quite  impos^le  that  so  material  a  feature 
should  have  escaped  the  memory  of  Hidea. 
You  have  no  other  evidence  but  that  of  Adaia^^ 
with  the  confirmation  of  the  serjeant  who  at* 
tends  at  that  place,  who  says  that  a  man  who 
had  been  in  the  light-horse  might  very  w^ 
know  where  the  stables  were,  and  the  evidence 
given  by  the  artillery-man  that  balls  made  of 
tar  and  pitch  and  rosin  would  set  fire  to  boards, 
and  still  more  easily  to  hay  and  straw  t  diia  is 
important  evidence,  as  well  as  that  of  the.  mas 
who  made  the  discovery  how  the  word  tmtim 
was  to  be  spelt*  But  I  beg  you  to  obserie 
this:— this  witness  is  called  to  sw^ar  not  to 
oonversations  held  in  the  presence  of  maaf 
persons,  but  to  one  private  coaveraatioa  anth 


11011 


far  High  Tteaton. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1103 


^e  indicted  individual  who  therefore  ean 
neither  come  forward  to  confirm  or  refute  him, 
but  who  leaves  the  field  free  for  this  witness  to 
walk  on. 

Now,  recollect  the  acconnt  which  that  man 
has  given  of  himself— of  his  purchase  of  cream, 
and  his  declining  the  engagement,  because  he 
was  to  go  and  purchase  it ;  and  bis  assigning 
that  as  the  reason  of  his  expecting  you  to  be- 
lieve all  the  rest  of  his  testimony,  when  he 
knows  not  the  name  of  a  family  he  has  sup- 
plied  for  three  years,  &nd  cannot  give  you  any 
particulars  even  of  the  number  or  situation  of 
the  house  they  inhabit.  Such  frail  memories 
form  very  insufficient  support  to  the  ibapsodies 
or  nonsense  of  such  persons  as  Adams. 

Then  comes  another  witness  as  confirmatory 
of  this  man,  Monument,  who  appears  to  have 
been  selected  only  for  the  penuiy  of  his  know- 
ledge.— Mr.  Edwards  was  present,  and  could 
confirm  Adams,  if  Adams  had  a  word  of  truth 
in  him ;  but  Monument  was  selected,  because 
Monument  was  never  present  at  any  of  the 
meetings — he  was  to  be  made  use  of  according 
to~  circumstances ;  he  was— even  on  the  night 
of  the  22nd— told  to  go  with  them,  but  not 
where  they  were  going,  and  that  the  whole 
would  be  disclosed  quite  in  time  when  they 
eame  there — ^he  is  brought  here  to  state  that 
which  lieutenant  Fitzclarence,  and  all  the  wit* 
tiesses  saw,  and  not  one  fkct  besides.  There 
it  no  disclosure  from  any  of  them  in  a  body, 
tending  at  all  to  confirm  this,  but  private  con- 
versations with  one  individual  at  a  time,  the 
nouth  of  which  individual.  Brunt,  is  shut  up ; 
and  another  individual,  who  has  already  suf- 
fered the  verdict  of  a  jury,  namely,  Thistle- 
Irood.  Is  this  the  way  in  which  a  charge  ought 
to  be  made  out,  when  there  are  in  the  power 
of  the  Crown  the  means  of  elucidating  the 
case. 

'  One  of  the  things  this  gentleman  said  in  his 
evidence— on  which  a  little  confirmation  might 
have  been  well  bestowed,  for  he  comes  as  a 
prisoner  in  custody — was,  that  all  Gree's-court 
were  to  be  in  it ;  and  there  the  question  is 
asked  of  him,  who  do  you  understand  princi- 
pally are  the  inhabitants  of  GeeVcourt— 
**  Iritfamen,  and  they  have  said  they  have  been 
deceived  by  the  Englishmen  so  often,  that  they 
^Ottld  not  concur  in  it  unless  the  English  b€^ 
gan.^«— Is  there  not  a  witness  in  the  list  of  the 
Crown,  who  lives  in  Gee*s-court,  who  knew 
6ee'»-court,  who  knew  the  persons  it  contained, 
and  whom  they  do  not  bring  forward  P — it  is 
abandoned  in  the  very  presenting  it^  and  they 
dare  not  tender  the  confirmationf — ^he  might  have 
told  whetherGee*8  court  contains  five,  ortwenty- 
five  Irishmen — the  Crown  knew  whether  or  not 
tbey  had  a  witness  to  prove  that — it  maybe 
known  elsewhere,  perhaps;  but  no  such  witness 
iMw  been  produc€»d ;  they  dare  not  call  a  witness 
to  confirm  that  man,  and  in  so  doing,  they 
ltiv«'b$m  up  as  not  to  be  b^eved — ^he  swears 
fo  cbnversations,  abont  w)(ieh  he  has  no  sup^ 

ert,  wliere  he  might  have  been  supported  if 
I  evidonce  were  true)  but  he  Is  not  sup- 


ported. It  was  pressed  upon  hitt  by  my 
learned  friend,  *'  Why  did  not  you  at  Cato- 
street,  if  you  had  no  stomach  for  this  fight,  dC'^ 
part,  when  the  tall  man  was  told  he  was  at 
liberty  to  go  V*  '^  Oh,  I  did  not  understand 
that  that  information  applied  to  me ;  I  thought 
it  was  only  the  tall  man  that  might  depart  and 
not  me  a  remarkably  little  man,  and  therefore 
I  staid  behind.  I  was  too  valuable  to  be  part-* 
ed  with" — such  a  witness  stamps  his  own  evi^ 
deuce— that  shows  how  embarrassed  he  is 
(though  so  fluent  in  the  examination  in  chief); 
when  he  comes  to  give  his  evidence  on  those 
questions  for  which  he  has  not  prepared  him- 
self by  antecedent  rehearsal ;  and  this  shews 
what  credit  you  ought  to  give  to  such  wit« 
nesses. 

Now,  gentlemen,  I  must  beg  your  attention 
under  diose  circumstances,  and  under  the  di^ 
rection  of  my  lord,  to  the  charge  upon  the  iiK> 
dictment,  and  to  the  manner  in  which  it  is  to 
be  proved.  I  shall  suppose,  for  the  purpose  of 
my  present  argument,  that  your  attention  wilt 
be  principally  directed  to  the  third  and  fourth 
counts  of  the  indictment,  the  first  of  which  is 
undisr  the  statute  of  86th  Geo.*  3rd.  cap.  7,  and 
which  declares  it  shall  be  high  treason  to  oon« 
spire  to  levy  war  against  the  king,  for  the  par^ 
pose,  observe,  of  making  him  change  his  go- 
vernment, or  alter  his  measures,  or  for  the 
purpose  of  subverting  the  constitution,  and  so 
on.  But  it  is  laid  to  be  a  conspiracy  to  levy 
war  against  the  king,  in  order  by  force  and 
constraint,  to  compel  him  to  change  his'  mea* 
sures.  I  ask  you,  except  in  the  rash  and  idle 
nonsense  which  Adams  has  talked  to  you,  is 
there  the  slightest  tittle  of  evidence  of  any  io« 
tention,  to  force  or  constrain  the  king  to  do 
any  thing  ?  Is  there  the  slightest  evidence  of 
intention  to  depose  the  king  ?  Is  there  any 
evidence  of  intention  to  subvert  the  constitu-* 
tion  of  the  country,  by  means  of  levying  war^ 
or  to  deprive  and  depose  the  king,  as  charged 
in  the  first  count  ?  The  second  connt  charges, 
that  they  conspired  to  excite  insurrection  witb* 
in  the  realm,  and  subvert  and  alter  the  legist 
lative  rule  and  government,  and  to  bring  and 
put  the  king  to  death.  The  third  charges  a 
conspiracy  to  levy  war  against  the  king.  All 
these  are  laid  as  conspiracies,  not  as  acts,  id 
order  by  force  and  constraint,  to  compel  the 
king  to  change  his  measures  and  his  oounaelsw 
The  fburth  count  charges  the  prisoner  wititf 
levying  war  with  intent  to  subvert  and  destrbjr 
the  constitution  and  government  of  this  realin, 
as  by  law  established,  and  to  deprive  and  de- 
pose the  king  of  the  Crown. 

Upon  the  first  three,  you  will  obtierve,  the 
eharge  is  a  conspiracy  entirely  and  altogether, 
and  that  conspiracy  would  not  be  high  treason, 
unless  it  were  coupled  with  the  intention  as*' 
signed  as  the  motive  of  the  conspiracy ;  and  ttf 
conspire  to  commit  any  one  of  those  acts,  b^ 
the  aAcievt  laws  of  the  land,  as  stated  by  mf 
leemM  friend,  Mr.  Curwood,  was  not  high 
Irtason.  •  *      ' 

Now,  gentlemen,  yoU  are  tontisfy  yourselviei 


11031        1  GEORGE  IV. 

whether  there  is  ativ  nan,  in  the  whole  bourse 
of  ttiis  eTidence,  who  deposes  to  any  such  in- 
lentioB  as  that  of  deposing  or  remorine  the 
king,  except  this  witness,  Adams,  whom  f  con- 
tend jfou  are  to  put  out  of  your  recollection  : 
or  are  there  any  two  men  (even  giving  him  as 
one)  who  swear  to  any  overt  act  or  acts  com- 
bined and  accompanied  by  that  intention,  for 
the  overt  acts  do  not  prove  the  intention ;  there 
must  be  something  else  from  which  to  collect 
the  intention.  Now,  I  am  bound  to  say  that 
the  only  overt  acts  which  csn  be  proved  as 
forming  any  point  on  which  those  who  charge 
the  prisoner  with  treason  can  rely,  are  those 
which  took  place  in  the  meeting  at  Cato-street. 
The  consultations  are  entirely  in  the  mouth  of 
Adams,  and  no  other  person  proves  any  other 
treason.  The  meeting  in  Cato-street  is  proved 
by  several  persons,  but  no  person  connects  it 
with  any  such  intention ;  but,  on  the  contrary, 
their  conduct  rebuts  sudi  an  intention.  Thev 
were  to  meet  to  carry  their  conspiracy  into  ef- 
fect by  deposing  the  king,  and  seising  the  go- 
Temment  into  their  own  hands.  What  were 
the  means  they  had  prepared  ?  a  certain  num- 
ber of  arms,  barely  sufficient  for  an  expedition 
on  the  high  way,  applicable  to  another  inten- 
tion whidi  is  disclosed,  but  not  to  that  which 
is  alleged  in  the  indictment :  thej  are  to  carry 
tiiat  intention  into  Effect  by  seizing  cannon, 
eight  in  number — ^by  conveying  them  without 
horses — ^by  acting  with  them  without  any  am- 
munition—«by  attacking  the  Mansion-house; 
and,  in  order  to  make  this  formidable  attack 
on  the  Mansion>house,  they  place  themselves 
at  the  greatest  possible  distance ;  in  order  to 
seize  cannon. in  Gray's-inn-lane,  they  remove 
from  BrookVmarket,  in'  the  very  neighbour- 
hood, to  the  very  furthest  extremity  of  London, 
and  having  performed  what  they  call  the  West- 
end  job,  they  are  to  transport  themselves  to 
the  Mansion-house,  a  distance  of  nearly  four, 
or,  as  they  were  to  proceed,  of  five  miles ; 
two  miles  and  a  half  before  they  can  seize  the 
first  of  those  cannon,  another  mile  and  a  half 
before  they  got  the  rest  of  these  self-moving 
cannon,  and  another  mile  before  they  place 
them  north  and  south,  to  attack  tiie  palace  of 
die  chief  magistrate  of  the  city :  they  are  to 
make  tlie  cannon  follow  them  as  tamely  as 
animals  wanting  their  daily  repast  follow  their 
keepers ;  and  to  do  it  with  the  more  fiicilily» 
they  plaoe  themselves  at  the  greatest  possible 
distance  from  the  scene  of  action. 

There  is  one  part  of  this  case  upon  which  I 
shall  have  to  address  you  by-and-by,  in  inquir- 
ing whether  their  situation  was  well  selected 
fot  that,  but  for  all  other  purposes  it  is  absurd 
to  imagine  they  should  have  chosen  to  go  to 
such  a  place  without  the  means  of  effecting  the 
end,  without  any  thing  that  could  contribute 
to  success.  Now,  is  there  the  least  evidence 
or  pretence  of  evidence  of  this?  What  says 
the  witness  P  There  were  supposed  to  be 
twenty  men,  ten  to  seiie  the  cannoo,  ten  to 
li^t  the  town,  and  then  they  were  to  be 
Joiaed  by  other  parties :  let  us  see  how  that 


Triid  qfJamet  Ingi  [  1 H^ 

was ;  the  ammunition  seized  io  C&io4tRet 
you  have  all  seen ;  separate  that  from  sojotiier 
real  or  supposed  ammunition^— is  there,  I  ay, 
the  least  evidence  that  any  ammanition  fit  for 
artillery,  even  supposing  thers  had  been  artil- 
lery, had  ever  been  earned  out,  or  intended  is 
be  used  for  such  a  purpose  ?— Have  you  toy 
evidence  that  that  was  disclosed  to  anybody  !- 
no,  not  the  least ;  and  if  these  men  (ooe  by* 
the-by  encumbered  with  two  hea?y  hods  in  i 
bag)  had  sallied  forth,  they  would  have  gone 
to  places  where  they  had  no  artilleiyi  and 
where  they  had  no  support ;  and  this  is  ^ 
overt  act  charged  to  induce  yoo  to  coaTid 
them  of  high  treason.  If  I  were  to  bear  to- 
day of  a  conspiracy  from  without,  to  libenie 
all  the  individuals  in  that  gaol  by  throvinf 
cherry  stones  and  carraway  seeds,  I  fbooU 
think  that  more  likely  to  be  true  than  this  ^  for 
my  imagination  does  not  go  to  the  eslest  of 
believing  there  can  be  troth  in  that  which  yw 
have  heard,  I  will  not  say  solemnlyi  but  nost 
flippantly,  sworn  to. 

Is  there  any  evidence  of  a  levying  war  sgainst 
the  kinff?  The  transaction  in  Cato-slreet,  I 
say,  did  not  amount  to  a  levying  of  war.  1| 
they  had  met  in  Cato-street  and  mordertd  all 
his  majesty's  ministers,  that  would  hare  bees 
a  most  horrible  and  un-Eoglish  assassinatioo, 
but  it  is  not  high  treason ;  it  is  qo  more  b^ 
treuon  to  murder  all  the  ministers  than  it  vai 
to  murder  one  of  the  most  amiaUc  aad  b<»oli^ 
able  men  who  has  existed  in  our  timeS)  the 
late  Mr.  Perceval,  and  for  which  I  saw  w 
assassin  stand  at  that  bar,  and  heard  bis  tiWr 
not  for  high  treason,  but  for  "b^^' ?"![ 
with  the  affecting  circumstance,  which  I  *ai» 
never  forset,  that  I  saw  the  venerable  sir  JaneJ 
Mansfield  summing  up  the  evidence  with  teas 
of  regret  streaming  down  his  aged  diwks,  wj 
an  individual  whom  he  had  always  lored,  «A 
vrhom  all  who  knew  reverenced.  If  •■?!*' 
gravation  could  have  made  such  acriinemgs 
treason,  that  assassination  presented  the  af- 
gravation ;  but  the  murder  of  one,  or  of »«"/, 
never  did,  nor  ever  can  amount  to  high  ttwfJJ 

Supposing  they  had  8[one  further,  wj^ 
the  cannon  in  Gray's-inn-lane,  and  the  aw- 
lery-ground,  that  would  not  have  been  aWT 
ing  of  war  aninst  the  king,  for  the  csnn*  *J 
not  the  king^s;  those  at  GrayVinn-lane  htm 
to  the  body  of  Light  Hoise  Volunteers,  W» 
in  the  Artilleiy-ground  to  a  prirate  comp^'^ 
the  seizing  of  those  is  a  felony,  but  ^^^^l 
nor  is  the  Mansion-house  one  of  •]»* /'jjj 
palaces,  it  is  the  official  residence  of  the  w™ 
mayor;  nor  is  the  Bank  the  king%  »^»J^ 
house  of  a  chartered  company ;  so  that  uw» 
you  believe  the  absurdity  of  iM^{}|"8  \^ 
visional  government  of  whom  nobody  » 
any  thing :  tlia  narrative  Uken  «^«^*t'*  a, 
short  of  a  levying  of  war  to  bring  it  wiiwn  w- 
description  of  the  36th  of  the  late  long. 

I  shall  not  dwell  upon  this  pow^'J^lio 
made  my  observation  upon  the  ^^""'Ir^Jt 
doubt  it  wiU  be  met  with  all  t^*  <»»"fr4 
triumph  fimn  what  I  see  qo  the  otb^r^w^rr* 


IMI1 


A.  1>.  1800. 


{MOS 


toppote  it  is  «ott8id«t«d  ^at  it  ymXi  not  bear 
diseuMion  fbr  a  dingle  moment. — ^I  imi  not  l9ie 
orade  of  tbe  law^— you  will  hear  whether  it  is 
1«w  or  not  from  ray  lord;  if  he  declares  it  to 
be  within  the  law,  yon  will  Uien  consider 
whether  you  are  satisfied  by  the  evidence  of 
two  credible  witnesses,  that  such  intentions 
were  entertained,  and  that  such  overt  acts 
were  committed^  or  whether  two  overt  acts 
have  been  proved  by  two  competent  witnesses; 
if  vou  should  be  of  that  opinion  of  ooxuse  you 
will  find  the  prisoner  guil^;  but  if  you  are  not 
of  that  opinion,  I  am  sure  nothing  which  you 
read  in  publicajtions,  before  you  knew  you 
were  to  sit  ki  that  box — nothing  of  the  feelings 
of  loyalty  which  yourselves  and  I  alike  enter- 
tain— nothing  of  your  feelings  of  desire  for  Uie 
preservation  of  those  who  hold  high  offices, 
which  no  man  ean  feel  more  warmly  than  the 
humble  individual  who  now  addresses  you— - 
nothing  of  your  fears  for  joyit  personal  safety-— 
none  of  those  considerations  and  still  less  any 
event  that  may  have  t^en  place  in  diis  court 
within  these  few  days  will  sway  you  from  a 
ri|ht  consideration  of  the  evidence ;  but  you 
will  proceed  upon  that  according  to  the  fair 
impression  it  shall  make  upon  your  minds. 
All  these  acts,  and  even  these  acts  carried  ftir- 
ther— -the   conflagration   of  buildings;   the 

E hinder  of  individuals ;  the  levy  of  money  by 
resistible  applications  at  the  door  of  every 
bouse-keeper-Aio  not  amount  to  high  treason. 

Looking  at  yoo,  gentlemen,  I  think  some  of 
you  are  of  an  age  to  recollect  that,  which  I  re» 
collect  when  young;  when  blood  flowing  like 
water,  the  conflagration  of  houses,  and  the 
blanng  of  prisons,  appalled  and  astonished  all 
mankind;  when  the  civil  arm  was  restrained 
by  terror ;  when  tiie  military  arm  was  not  used 
fbr  other  reasons,  till  the  intrepid  mind  of  the 
then  Solicitor-general  set  them  in  motion; 
w4ten  the  persons  who  had  thus  acted  were 
iwcured,  they  were  not  indicted  for  high  trea^ 
«on^  but  ibr  the  simple  felonies  thev  had  com«> 
mitted,  for  murder,  for  arson,  or  K>r  larceny; 
bot  not  one  of  those  who  were  immediate 
actors  in  that  scene  was  brought  to  trial  for 
treason :  the  instigator  and  prime  mover,  in-> 
deed,  was  tried  for  high  treason,  and  it  was 
decided  that  he  was  not  guilty  of  high  treason, 
for  that  he  had  not  levied  war'against  the  king. 
It  may  be  said,  that  the  statute  of  the  36Ui 
Geo.  drd  had  not  then  passed,  but  still  I  con. 
tend  that  if  all  the  acts  these  prisoners  had 
eonspired  to  db  had  been  flill  and  perfect,  and 
completed— except  the  introduction  of  a  new 
government,  under  the  name  of  a  provisional 
govemment^f  all  the  bloodshed  had  taken 
plaee,  and  all  the  conflagration  which  Uiey  are 
taid  to  have  meditated  had  been  efl^ected,  still, 
wider  the  authority  of  those  cases,  I  sav  their 
oriae  would  not  have  amount^  to  liigh  trea- 
son, so  as  to  substantiate  the  charge  in  the 
fourth  count,  that  of  levying  war  against  the 
kin*. 

.  If  ow,  supposing  after  all,  I  have  combated 
McMssiully  the  relevaney  and  the  sufilciency 

VOL.  xxxm. 


I  of  the  evidence,  still  there  is  oraeh  for  an  l» 
account  for.  Can  I  say  that  my  clients  aiw 
men  free  ftom  all  guilt  ?  God  forbid  that  I 
should  stand  before  you  to  say  so.  Shall  I 
apologise  for  their  guilt }  Certainly  I  will  wA  ; 
but  I  am  only  anxious  that  it  should  receive  ilt 
right  character.  Are  they  guilty  of  having  in* 
tended  to  murder  his  majesty's  ministers  ?  I 
cannot  shut  my  eyer  against  the  force  of  con* 
viction  that  they  are.  Are  they  guilty  of  ha*!« 
ing  pursued  schemes  of  murder  or  plunder  ia 
difierent  parts  of  the  town?  The  fire*balU 
which  have  been  brought  would  oonftiie  me 
upon  that,  if  I  attempted  to  deny  it.  Was 
^ere  a  personal  vengeance  against  us  majesty'il 
ministers  ?  Did  poverty  render  men  despemte^ 
and  impel  them  to  crime  ?  I  cannot  deny  it» 
and  for  that  crime  they  will  have  to  answer : 
but  that  these  eleven  men,  aided  by  nine  othera^ 
sought  to  overturn  the  state,  that  they  had 
their  confidences  to  impart,  and  their  assodatea 
to  seek  at  the  very  moment  when  l^is  plot  was 
to  explode,  is  so  absurd,  that  I  do  not  hesitate 
to  pronounce  it  incredible  and  impossible. 

it  cannot  be  foigotten  that  this  proceeding 
hangs  mainly,  if  not  almost  entirely,  on  This-* 
tlewood .  It  cannot  be  forgotten  how  lately  he 
had  been  emancipated  from  imprisonment  fov 
sending  a  diallenge  to  lord  Siamouth^  which 
his  lordship  did  not  accept,  but  very  property 
presented  him  for  punishment.  It  is  natund 
that  resentment  should  rankle  in  his  mind ;  he 
took  advantage  of  the  transactions  at  Manches* 
ter,  and  the  Sianks  recommended  by  ministers 
to  the  persons  who  had  taken  a  part  in  them ; 
he  imparted  to  others  the  feelings  by  which  he 
was  impelled,  and  they,  from  various  causes, 
co-operated  with  him  \  but  to  suppose  that  an 
idea  of  a  provisional  government,  or  of  a  revo- 
lution in  the  state,  entered  their  minds,  would 
be  to  say  that  all  their  plans  were  reduced  to 
mere  folly,  folly  more  gross  than  that  of  igno- 
rance made  drunk.. 

I  am  now  neariy  at  the  dose  of  the  address 
which  it  is  my.  duty  to  make.  It  has  been 
stated  to<  you-— «nd  it  will  I  hope  be  slated* 
twice  again^I  hope  the  attorney-general,  and 
my  lord,  if  I  may  be  so  presumptuous  as  to- 
anticipate  what  either  of  them  may  say,  will 
tell  you  that  this  is  acause  of  great  importance. 
Gentlemen,  indeed,  and  indeed,  it  is  not  so  much 
for  the  life  which  your  verdict  may  take  away, 
as  for  the  principle  which  your  verdict  may 
contribute  to  establish.  It  never  yet  happened 
that  liberty  or  justice  should  receive  a  wound 
throush  an  attack  made  on  a  good  man ;  for  on 
behalf  of  a  good  man  all  maiAind  arm  them- 
selves' in  their  prgudices,  and  in  their  hopes; 
but  the  attack  nas  always  been  made  through 
the  means  of  a  bad  man ;  and  good  men  have 
afterwards  been  sacrificed  by  force  of  the 
precedent.  So  it  is  in  tlie  present  day^  If 
such  a  witness  as  Adams  can  gain  credit  fpr 
what  he  has  deposed, — the  revolution  of  this 
country,  I  know,  will  prevent  our  seeing  Jef- 
f^es  on  the  bench, — ^but  we  shall  have  Titus 
Gates  in  the  witness-box^  and  audacious  wit* 

4B 


(11073  1  GEORGE  IV. 


TruU  tfJamm  hgt 


[im 


like  him  deiuMinctng  one  plot  after  an- 
other.   He  first  swore  to  the  popish  plot,  and 
that  was  so  popular  that  juries  gave  a  ready 
ear  to  it,  i«st  a»  iionest  men  would  gi?e  an  ear 
to  «  tale  beginning  in  the  mnrder  of  the  most 
honourable  and  respectable  men,  and  ending 
in  the  orerlhrow  of  the  state ;  after  the  stoiy 
had   been    told  again   and  again^  after  the 
populace  had,  with  shouts  and  acclamations, 
attended  the  convicts  to  the  scaffold,  reason 
resumed  her  empire,  doubt  intruded  itself  into 
the  public  mind,  and  they  who  at  first  triumph- 
ed* in  the  o?erthrow  of  supposed  traitors,  came 
to  so  sad  a  feeling  of  repentance,  ttiat  when  lord 
Stafford's  blood  was  to  be  shed  on  the  same 
evidence  for  the  same  plot,  when  he  turned 
found  and  protested  his  innecence,  the  answer 
of  the  sobbing  crowd  was, ''  God  bless  you,  my 
lord,  we  believe  you;"  then  it  was  that  they 
felt  that  justice  was  misled  by  the  credit  giv^ 
to  the  testimony  of  such  a  wretch ;  but  it  could 
not  be  got  rid  of  till  the  revolution  had  intro- 
duced- a  better  system ;  then  indeed  it  was  ex^ 
piated  bv  the  cenviction  of  the  pepured  wit* 
ness,  by  his  enduring  the  pains  and  indignities 
of  imprisonment,  the  pillory,  and  the  Toss  of 
his  ears^  and  he  ended  his  odious  life  in  pover- 
ty and  m  exile.    Alas  I  gentlemen,  one  drop 
•f  the  blood  he  had  shed  could  not  be  restoreo, 
one  hour  of  the  life  he  had  destroyed  could 
not  be  recalled.;  the  regrets  of  his  own  times 
and  of  posterity  for  hie  victims  were  alike  with- 
out avail ;  but  the  sight  of  his  triumph,  while 
his  villanies  were  sucoesslul,  was  a  perpetual 
gall  to  every  man  who  loved  freeoom,  and 
venerated  justice,  who  loved  his  neighbour 
and  feared  his  God,  as  you  do.    I  euiort,  I 
implore  you  to  look  with  scrupulous  exactness 
to  the  witness  Adams — to  a  spy  set  on  by  an 
informer;  return  to  the    verdict  which  your 
oonsciences  direct  you,  but  for  God's  sake  do 
not  allow  yourselves  to  be  swayed  by  the  evi- 
dence of  a  man  so  infamous,  so  detestable,  so 
incredible. 

Lord  Chief  Jmttke  DoZ^— James  Inge  do 
you  wish  to  rest  your  defence  upon  ^e  ob- 
servations of  vour  counsel,  or  do  you  iviah  to 
say  any  thing  ror  yourself? 

Inp. — ^I  wish  to  state  the  particulan  how 
I  became  acquainted  with  the  party  in  the 
first  place. 

Lord  Chief  Juttiee  DaUas.^Any  thing,  and 
•very  thing  which  yoy  wish  to  state  of  course 
the  court  and  jury  will  l^ear ;  now,  therefore,  is 
tl^e  time  for  you  to  state  them :  speak  loud  and 
w&  will  attend  to  wha^  you  say.— You  had 
peniaps  better  consult  whk  your  counsel. 

Ingt, — ^I  have  but  a  little  to  say,  my  lord. 

Lord  Chief  Jiatice  Dallas. — Having  drawn 
your  attention  to  whether  you  will  consult  with 
your  counsel  or  not,  of  course  you  will  judge 
for  yourself,  and  the  Court  wAl  hear  any  thing 
you  have  to  say. 

Ingt, — I  would  wish  to  speak  to  the  gentle- 
men of  the  jury.—- 


Gentlemen  of  the  juiyi^  1  am^a  man  of  so 
education,  I  hope  you  will  excuse  my  humble 
abilities ;  I  will  explain  the  particulan  as&r  n 
is  in  my  power.  I  left  Portsea  the  begiomnf 
of  May,  1819 ;  I  came  to  London,  me  and  of 
wife  and  fiunily.  The  reason  I  left  Portsea 
was,  I  had  nothing  to  do,  nor  any  prospect  of 
setting  any  employ  for  the  support  of  my 
family;  when  I  came  to  Londonlthoo^I 
should  get  employment ;  I  had  been  in  Loo- 
don  some  time — I  was  disappointed,  I  coold 
get  nothing  to  do — knowing  nobody  herOi  dot 
was  the  reason.  I  inquired  and  osed  ereiy 
means  I  was  master  of;  I  had  a  few  pooads 
by  me  when  I  came  from  Portsea ;  I  foond  the 
money  was  going  very  fast,  and  I  did  not 
know  what  to  do.  I  had  been  in  businem, 
and  had  lost  my  money,  not  by  drioldog  or 
gambling,  nothing  of  the  sort,  gentlemen-I 
could  not  get  any  thing  to  do,  and  I  told  my 
wife  I  thought  I  had  better  go  into  bttsnesS) 
with  the  little  money  I  had.  I  went  up  into 
BakePs-row,  and  took  a  little  shop,  and  carried 
on  business  fiom  Midsummer  to  Michaelmas. 
The  summer  being  very  hot,  wasveiranich 
against  me ;  I  lost  a  considerable  deal  ^ 
money  in  the  course  of  the  summer— I  could 
not  get  any  custom — I  found  my  money  w 
veiT  near  gone.  I  went  at  Micbaelmu  aod 
took  a  house  in  Old  Montaffue-street,  and 
turned  it  into  a  coffee  shop  and  eating-tone; 
and  having  done  Uiat  my  money  was  all  gone. 
It  did  not  turn  out  to  my  desire;  I  did  not 
make  money  enough  to  keep  iny  fi^7\J 
persuaded  my  wife  to  return  to  PortsHMudif 
because  she  would  then  be  among  her  fneodiy 
and  that  she  had  belter  bothers  withootiMB^ 
than  in  London. 

After  my  wife  had  left  me  some  consideiabie 
time,  gentlemen,  there  was  a  man  used  ti 
come  and  take  a  cup  of  coffee  frequently;  ^ 
used  to  enter  into  politics  about  the  goveo- 
ment— he  used  to  enter  into  the  Manch^ 
massacre,  and  so  on.  I  did  not  enter  iott 
conversation  with  him;  I  supposed  him  to  ^ 
an  officer.  I  was  after  that  in  Smithfield^ntf- 
ket,  looking  round  to  see  whether  I  could  fi 
employ,  having  no  money,  and  I  met  this  maa. 
He  asked  me  how  I  was,  and  whether  I  woaw 
have  any  thing  to  drink.— No,  I  (old  him,  i 
did  not  drink  in  the  morning.  He  say^ 
"  You  ought  10  stand  treat,  I  have  been  « 
your  house  freauently,  and  never  caught  yoj 
out  of  doors  before."  *'  It  is  not  in  my  po*^. 
says  I,  '•or  I  would."  He  «*»  ne  «* 
reason  I  would  not  stand  treat,  I  ^*Jt 

rt  no  money,  and  if  I  did  not  get  some  wcrti 
must  sell  my  few  things  very  show* 
"  What  have  you  to  sell  ?"— «A  sofe-bedst^ 
and  various  articles.*'— «<  I  should  like  to  bi^ 
the  bedstead,  if  it  will  suit  me:  what  is « 
stuffed  with r— «'  Horse  hair."  I  took  bun» 
my  lodnngs  in  Primrose-etreet ;  it  did  notauj 
him.  This  was  about  the  first  or  second  » 
January. 

In  a  few  days  I  met  the  jame  person  m 
Fleetpmarket;  he  aooceted  me  there  «{*>»'" 


1100] 


for  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1920. 


[1110 


the  same  way,  and  asked  me  whether  I  woald 
have  any  thing  to  drink — I  answered  him  as 
usual ;  he  said  '*  respecting  that  sofa,  I  believe 
I  have  got  a  friend  who  will  buy  it  of  you  if 
you  have  not  sold  it.f'    I  said  I  had  not.    He 
said,  **  My  friend  vrill  give  you  more  than  any 
one  else.''    He  took  me  to  his  friend,  and  I 
showed  him  the  sofa,  and  his  friend  would  not 
buy  it.    We  came  back  into  Fleet^street,  and 
I  went  along  with  him,  and  bad  some  bread 
and  eheese,  and  beer.    He  told  me  there  was 
something  about  to  be  done,  would  I  make 
one.    I  asked  him  what;  he  said,  "No  good 
man  wants  to  know  until  it  is  begun ;  but  Uiere 
IS  something  to  be  done."    We  went  and  had 
some  bread  and  cheese,  and  beer  together; 
then  he  introduced  me  at  the  White  Hart  to 
two  or  three  of  my  fellow  prisoners.    I  asked 
him  wbat  bis  name  was,  he  said  it  was  Wil- 
liams, but  his  name  is  Edwards.    He  toM  me 
he  had  made  the  image  of  Thomas  Paine,  at 
the  Temple  of  Reason,  at  Mr.  Carlile's,  and  I 
•  understand  the  same  man  did  mzke  it;  so 
that  I  am  not  deceived  in  the  man.    He  in- 
troduced me  at  the  White  Hart  to  take  some 
refreshment  with  them,  but  I  never  knew  the 
business ;  I  had  been  in  the  room,  but  nothing 
passed  about  it  at  the  time  when  I  was  there, 
nor  did  I  know  the  particulars  of  any  thing, 
because  they  did  not  wish  to  trust  me  as 
a  stranger.    On  that  very  day  when  we  had 
the  bread  and  cheese,  and  beer,  I  went  and 
carried  a  sword  to  be  ground  for  him.    I  left 
it  in  my  own  name ;  if  I  had  thousht  there  ivas 
any  thing  of  this  kind  going  on,  do  you  think 
I  shodd  have  left  the  swo^  in  my  cmn  name 
at  the  cutlei^s?    Is  that  reasonable  to  be  sup- 
posed?   f  had  no  idea  when  I  carried  that 
sword  to  be  ground,  that  there  was  any  thing  of 
this  kind  going  on,  you  may  depend  upon  it. 
I  met  him  afterwards  frequently ;  I  was  very 
^ort  of  food,  that  was  the  reason  i  kept  them 
company.    I  used  to  get  victuals  and  ^rink  at 
thb  room  whenever  I  went ;  there  was  a  -fire, 
and  the  weather  beinjif  so  cold,  I  was  glad  to 
go — the  man  where  1  was,  did  not  charge  me 
for  my  lodgings  at  No.  5K),  in  Primrose-street. 
On  the  23rd,  I  believe  it  was,  gentlemen, 
he  comes  to  my  lodgings  ;  he  did  not  find  me 
at  my  lodgings,  I  had  been  at  the  coilee  shop, 
to  get  a  cup  of  coffee ;  I  met  him  in  Bishops- 
gate-street;  he  says,  ^  I  believe  there  is  some- 
thing going  to  be  done^  if  you  will  come  up  to 
my  hiyase.      He  did  not  say  where  he  lived, 
but  '*eome  up  to  the  alley  opposite   Mrs. 
CarHle's ;  I  shall  be  there  at  six  o'clock.*^    I 
went  from  there  up  to  the  room ;  I  yras  there 
up  in  the  room,  and  got  some  bread  and  cheese, 
and  beer,  in  the  course  of  the  day.    At  six 
o'clock  I  went  to  the  alley ;  he  was  standing 
waiting  forme  there, but  I  understand  he  Uyes 
up  at  a  side-door  somewhere  in  tlie  alley,  by 
wnat  I  have  been  told  in  the  list  of  witnesses. 
I  went  with  him,  and  he  gave  me  a  couple  of 
bags,  a  belt,  and  that  knife-case,  and  we 
came  to  the  room  in  Fox-court,  whidh  has  been 
nentioiied^  gentlemen ;  and  he  and  I  went 


away  together  from  there ;  and  he  to^d  me  the 
bags  were  wanted  to  put  some  gin  in — that 
the  gin  was  to  be  got  sly.    The  reason  I  put 
them  under  my  coat  was,  that  the  patroles 
should  not  see  thenr,  for  if  they  happened  to 
see  the  bags  under  my  coat,  it  would  be  dis- 
covered where  he  got  the  gin*    I  went  up, 
up  against  St.  Giles's  church — he  went  where 
he  was  to  get  that  said  gin.    He  told  me  it 
was  not  there,  but  was  gone  up ;  accordingly 
we  went  tip  Oxford-street,  ana  he  turned  out 
at  the  left   hand,  and  told  me  to  wait.    I 
believe  I  waited  nearly  an  hour  in  Oxford- 
street  for  him  that  very  night ;  he  came  back 
to  me,  and  took  me  to  a  place  I  forget  the 
name  of  the  street,  I  never  was  there  before  in 
my  life— John-street,  where  the  arms  were 
tiien ;  I  had  never  been  there  before.    He 
told  me  he  was  going  to  call  upon  a  friend, 
and  said  ^  Do  you  stop  here,  you  will  see  * 
some  friends  of  mine  directly."    I  came  under 
where  the  archway  is,  gentlemen,  and  I  saw 
Davidson ;  Davidson  took  me  into  the  stable, 
and  he  went  up  the  ladder,  and  I  staid  down 
in  the  stable ;  I  heard  great  confusion  up  in 
the  loft ;  I  never  was  in  the  loft  at  all,  I  de* 
dare  before  God  that  I  never  was,  and  I  stood 
listening  at  the  ladder.    I  had  been  in  the 
stable  about  five  minuter  before  the  officers 
came  in ;  there  was  only  me  in  the  stable 
when  the  officers  came  in  with  Mr.  Ruthven, 
I  believe  that  is  the  gentleman ;  there  we're 
several  came  in,  and  I  jumped  on  one  side  up 
in  the  stall.    There  were  two  went  up  into 
the  loft,  and  the  third  that  came  in  collaned 
me,  and  said,  "  You  are  my  prisoner."**  -**  Veiy 
well,  says  I,"  and  as  soon  as  he  collared  me^ 
he  began  beating  me  with  a  staff,  till  my  head 
was  swelled  tremendously  on   one   side.    I 
heard  4he  report  of  a  gun  or  a  pistol*  and  the 
officer  left  me.    I  ran  out  into  the  street  and 
they  ran  after  me,  and  halloed,  '*  Stop.'^    I  ^ 
met  a  man  in  the  street  with  a  stick,  he  nit  me 
violently  over  the  head;  he  was  coming  to* 
wards  me,  and  I  towards  him.    I  got  round 
that  man,  and  a  watchman  came  and  hit  me 
yith  his  stick ;  I  vras  taken  prisoner,  and  taken  • 
to  the  watchhouse. 

Gentlemen,  this  man,  Edwards,  has  been  at 
all  the  meetings,  he  has  planned  and  done  every 
thing  whatever  that  was  to  be  done,  and  he  is 
not  brought  forward ;  he  is  put  into  ths  list  as 
a  witness,  and  I  am  sold  as  a  bullock  that  is 
driven  into  Smithfield-market,  depend  upon  it^ 
gentlemen,  I  am  sold  like  a  bullock  driven 
into  Smithfield-market.  The  attorney-general 
knows  the  man,  and  be  knew  all  the  plans  and 
every  thing,  for  two  months  before  I  was  ao-  > 

?uainted  with  it.  I  heard  a  gentleman  when 
was  up  before  lord  Sidmouth  say,  when  they 
came  out  to  look  at  us,  lord  Sidmouth  knew  of 
this  a  month  or  five  weeks  ago ;  that  was  when 
I  vras  apprehended  and  taken  before  the 
council.  1  consider  myself  murdered,  gentle* 
men,  if  this  man  is  not  brought  forward — he  it  : 
put  on  one  side.  I  am  ready  and  willing  te 
die  directly,  if  he  will  di«  oa  Utt  scafibld  with  * 


lllli       1G£0RGE1V. 

w.  He  WM  the  invealorof  thsplat,  if  it  Is  a 
p)9t»  and  he  has  known  all  about  it.  I  do  not 
▼alue  sty  life^  if  I  cannot  get  a  living  for  mv 
family ;  I  have  got  a  wife  and  fovr  smaU 
children;  but  I  was  drawn  in  this  kind  of  way 
wh^  I  had  no  victuals  and  no  drink.  My 
anxiety  about  my  wife  and  family  I  cannot 
describe  to  you,  and  I  hope  before  you  return 
your  verdia  upon  me,  that  if  you  think  me 
guilty  you  will  have  this  roan  brought  forward, 
or  else  I  shall  consider  myself  a  murdered 
man.  Edwards  was  the  man  that  came  to  my 
house  and  got  acquainted  with  me.  I  was 
not  at  any  meetincs ;  I  have  been  accused  of 
being  at  a  pablio-nouset  but  I  never  was,  only 
since  January,  at  a  public-house  in  BrookV 
maikat — ^I  never  was  at  any  other  meetings — 
I  never  attended  meetings  in  my  life,  till  since 
Christmas  :-*  Gentlemen,  I  never  was  at  none 
of  the  radical  meetings  in  London,  not  during 
the  time  I  was  here;  I  hope  you  will  weigh  it 
well  ID  your  minds,  gentlemen,  before  von 
return  a  verdict.  The  people  you  have  had 
before  you  are  people  engaged  in  this  plan, 
and  if  they  can  get  out  of  the  halter  them- 
selves they  would  hang  their  God-— I  really 
believe,  gentlemen,  that  man  Adams  would ; 
but  sooner  than  I  would  be  the  instintion  of 
hanging  a  man  I  would  die,  if  I  had  five 
hundred  lives,  yes,  gentlemen,  that  I  would. 

Lord  Chief  Jtutice  DaUa$,  —  Is  there  any 
thing  more  you  wish  to  say  ? 

L^-^l  have  nothine  more  particolar  to 
aajTt  my  lord — ^ves  gentlemen,  I  foreot  one 
thing ;  if  you  will  examine  that,  that  will  prove 
my  character  from  ray  childhood  ;  —  there  is 
my  character  down  there  from  my  childhood. 
— ^[Hondv^  m  apaper^ 

Lord  Chief  JuUiee  DM».  —  We  cannot 
recetye  that ;  witnesses  to  character  must  give 
their  evidence  upon  oath. 

R£PLT. 

Mr,  Att4)ni^f^eneral.  —  Gentlemen  of  the 
Jury;  The  case  being  now  closed  in  evi- 
dence and  in  observation  on  the  part  of  the 
Srisoner,  it  becomes  my  i>ainfal  and  anxious 
uty  to  address  you ;  and  in  doing  so,  I  assure 
you  that  as  it  is  my  most  earnest  desire,  so  it 
shall  be  my  endeavour  to  lead  your  minds 
fairly  and  calmly  to  the  conclusion,  which  not 
in  my  judgment,  but  in  your  own,  vou  ought 
to  arrive  at  upon  this  question ;  and  although 
I  cannot  but  regret  that  in  so  doing  I  shall 
have  to  ask  a  continuance  of  the  patient  at* 
tention  which  you  have  hitherto  paid  to  this 
inquiry  —  an  inquiry  of  infinite  importance, 
both  as  it  regards  the  individual  bemre  you, 
and  as  it  respects  the  public — ^I  feel  happy 
that  the  opportunity  is  now  arrived,  that  will 
enable  me  to  remove  prejudices  which  have 
been  attempted  to  be  excited  by  the  leanoyed 
cmnsel  who  have  addressed  you  on  the  part  of 
the  prisoner,  as  to  the  nature  and  still  room 
as  10  the  oenduct  of  this  proiecutioD. 


Tml  of  Jama  Jbgt 


[lilt 


It  baa  been  insinuated^— nay,  it  hat  beca 
stated  in  terms — that  the  result  of  this  trial 
is  intended  to  have  the  efiect  of  extending  the 
law  of  treason,  and  thxouffh  the  mediun  «f 
your  verdict  against  an  unfortunste,  and,«fr 
cording  to  the  epithet  of  one  of  mf  leaned 
friends,  a  wicked  man,  of  creating  a  precedent 
to  enable  fiituie  governments  and  peiwu 
hereafter  holding  the  high  rank  and  situitioa 
which  my  honourable  uid  learned  fiitnd  asd 
myself  have  the  honour  of  filling,  to  enlvtl 
the  power  of  the  down,  and  sacrifice  the 
liberty  of  the  subject.  What  there  has  bees 
in  the  course  of  this  investigation— what  th«e 
is  in  the  nature  of  this  case— what  than  ia  is 
the  conduct  of  ray  learned  friend  or  ayidf, 
to  call  for  snch  observations,  I  am  at  a  louts 
imagine ;  but  sure  I  am,  if  I  knew  myaetf  aid 
my  honourable  and  leaned  friend,  tbat  oat 
only  anxiety  on  the  present  occaaion  ia,  that  by 
the  due  administration  of  the  justice  of  the 
country,  and  hf  that  alone,  the  euilt  or  inso- 
cence  ot  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  ahall  be  eitab- 
lished. 

The  law  of  treason  if  definite  and  dear; 
but  m^  learned  friend,  who  first  addresaed  je% 
will  give  me  leave  to  state  that  he  miiappn- 
hends  the  law  as  it  now  stands,  when  he  telh 
you  that  an  attempt  has  been  made  by  the  ^ 
tute  introduced  in  the  late  reign,  to  extend  thi 
law  of  treason,  or  to  introduce  that  lihich  he 
characterizes  as  constructive  treason.  ^^^^ 
good  a  lawyer — ^at  least  I  give  him  credit  w 
being  such-^ot  to  know  that  that  atatate  hai 
not  extended  the  law  of  treason;  ^^^I^J^ 
done  no  more  than  make  those  acta,  im 
before  its  existence  had  been  detenaincd  wj 
the  highest  authority,  and  by  the  aagea  of  the 
law,  to  be  overt  acts  of  treason  under  tM 
statute  of  Edward  the  3rd,  substanthre  aod 
distinct  treasons  in  themselves.  Bot  nv 
learned  friend,  knowing  this,  has  endesfoond 
to  prevail  upon  you  to  believe  (although  I  jO 
satisfied  he  will  have  attempted  it  ioef^ctna^, 
because  any  erroneous  impression  made  bybs 
address,  vnll  be  completely  removed,  when  n 
the  last  stage  of  this  proceeding  you  shall  hii|a 
heard  the  law  laid  dovm  toyoabythel^^ 


introduction  of  uncertainty  and  sp*<^*>''^f^ 
the  Uw  of  treason;  but  that  the  object  of  w 
prosecution  also  is,  to  endeavour  to  estaUw* 
precedent  of  constructive  treason. 

There  is  no  foundation  either  in  Uw  or  id 
fact  for  such  insinuations  and  such  V'^'^*'^ 
there  can  be  no  other  motive  openting  ^ 
the  present  occasion  than  a  wish  that  lAptiw 
justice  shall  be  done.  If  the  conduct  of  tbep^ 
soner  at  the  bar,  and  those  who  are  >«r3rj 
with  him  in  this  charge  be,  as  is  adnu^^ 
both  the  learned  counsel,  ofthe"oat«^ 
description,  involving  them  in  crimes  •'•J^ 
our  nature  sbuddert— crimes  by  the  coPg^ 
sion  of  whidi,  aecoiding  to  the  cnaoesiww 
their  own  ^Arofum^  f^Um  ciwt$^ 


lll$l 


JtrJUgk  IVMMk 


A.D.  Ufa 


rui4 


liate  pvobably  beoone  fotfeitods  let  iMtak 
you  as  reasonable  men,  what  induceiDeiit, 
what  iDlerest,  what  motire  can  there  beoo 
the  part  of  the  Crowo,  to  attempt  to  bring 
home  to  them  a  diarge  of  a  higher  description, 
unlefls  it  be  the  firm  oooriction  which  oper« 
ates  vpon  my  mind  (and  whidi  I  am  airaid 
iciuty  in  the  conclnsion  of  this  inquiry,  operate 
upon  your  minds)  that  a  crime  of  greater  mag-> 
nitude  has  been  committed. 

My  learned  friends  on  the  iMtft  of  the  pri- 
soner, have  acted  rightly  in  calling  yonr  atten- 
tion to  the  specific  chaige  you  are  to  tiy.  God 
forbid  that  any  other  consideration  should 
«nt«  into  your  minds,  when  you  come  to  draw 
yonr  conclusion  upon  the  evidence,  than  whe* 
ther  that  chaige,  and  that  charge  alone,  has 
been  made  ont*    Whatever  other  guilt  the 

Erisoner  has  incurred,  whatever,  delinquencies 
e  may  have  committed,  dischaige  them  from 
your  recollection;  keep  your  minds  steadily 
intent  upon  the  accusation  now  made  against 
him,  and  fairly,  calmly,  and  dispassionately 
weigh  the  evidence  which  has  bMn  adduced 
in  support  of  it  I  beseech  you  to  do  this, 
and  I  ask  of  you  to  do  no  more.  After  an 
impartial  view  of  the  case,  pronounce  that  ver> 
diet  which  your  consciences  alone  shall  dictate 
and  approve :  if  it  shall  lead  to  a  verdict  of 
acquittal,  you  vrill  gladly  relieve  the  prisoner 
at  the  bar  from  the  weishty  chaige  made 
against  him:  if,  on  the  odier  hand,  you  are 
satisfied  that  the  charge  is  proved,  let  no  con<» 
sideration  of  the  consequences  of  your  decision 
operate  upon  you :  look  steadily  at  the  only 
<;piestion  into  whidi  you  have  taken  a  solemn 
oath  to  inquire;  and  fear  not  from  any  thing 
which  has  been  advanced  by  the  counsel  for 
the  prisoner,  to  pronounce  a  verdict  of  guilty. 
liy  learned  friend  the  Solicitor-general, 
when  he  opened  the  case  to  you,  stated  very 
shortly  the  charge  made  by  this  indictment, 
conceiving  (and  I  think  rigntly)  that  with  re- 
spect to  the  law  of  the  case,  there  was  neither 
difficulty  nor  doubt.  He  said  he  woidd  relieve 
your  mmds  firom  aU  technicalities;  he  told 
you,  that  which  I  take  the  liberty  of  repeating 
to  you  now  with  perfect  confidence,  that  if  you 
are  satisfied  that  the  prisoner  harboured  an  in- 
tention of  attempting  to  overset  the  existing 
government  (whether  that  design  could  or 
could  not  be  accomplished — whether  the  means 
used  were  adequate  to  the  end  or  not),  and 
that  he  acted  upon  that  intention,  he  is  guilty 
of  the  crime  imputed  to  him  by  this  indictment 
It  is  not  necessarv  by  the  law  of  treason,  that 
the  crime  should  be  consummated,  by  the  per« 
petration  of  the  act  in  contemplation ;  and  hr 
tbe  plainest  of  all  possible  reasons ;  if  sudi 
necessity  existed,  no  man  could  ever  be  tried 
ibr  high  treason ;  if  the  acts  meditated  must 
be  executed  before  the  crime  is  completed,  it 
nust  be  ascertained  whether  the  government 
is 'overturned  or  not,  before  a  man  could  be 
called  upon  to  answer  to  the  chaige.  Witk- 
out^  Iherefbre,  troubling  you  either  with  the 
•pdem  slatnte  of  25th. Edward  drd,  or  (he 


snove  teceot  act  of  the  Mth  of  his  late  maiesiy, 
I  beg  you  is  keep  your  attention  dosdy  dli- 
rected  to  the  facts ;  ask  yourselves  these  ques« 
tions :  did  the  plot  exist?  And  was  the  pri*> 
soner  at  the  bar  a  partidpator  in  that  plotf- 
If  you  find  that  the  evidence  oompeb  you  to 
answer  in  the  affirsaative,  it  then  will  be  your 
boundea  duty  to  find  him  guil^  of  the  ehaige. 

Much  hn  been  said  upon  the  testimony  of 
the  first  witness,  Adams ;  indeed  dmoet  the 
whole  of  the  very  able  and  eloquent  addNss 
you  last  heard  has  been  pointed  at  it,  and 
some  complaint  has  been  made  of  the  manner 
in  which  my  learned  friend  the  SolidtoNgea^ 
eral,  in  opening  thii  ciue,  stated  lo  vou  that 
his  testimony  should  be  exasuned.  My 
learned  friend  told  you  that  Adams  was  an 
attxiliary  in  the  sdieme;  he  reeommeaded  to 
you,  in  weighing  his  evidence,  to  consider 
the  interest,  or  supposed  interest,  he  might' 
have  in  the  result  of  this  prosecution;  you 
were  requested  to  see  whether  he  was  cesitra- 
dieted  upon  any  material  points,  and  hsdy, 
the  Solicitor-general  begged  you  to  give  your 
best  attention  to  the  confirauation  which  would 
be  produced  te  jrou  (»f  his  narrative.  I  still  sav 
these  are  the  tests  to  be  applied  to  that  man's  > 
testimony,  and  I  very  much  mistake,  if,  on  thn- 
review  which  I  shall  fed  it  necessary  to  lakn 
of  his  evidence,  and  when  I  come  to  point  out 
to  you  the  parts  in  which  he  is  confirmed,  any 
man  can  doubt  the  truth  of  the*,  story  whim 
Adams  has  told. 

The  first  question  my  leazned  friend  on  the 
other  side  has  asked,  is,  does  he  entitle  him- 
self to  credit  by  the  manner  in  which  he  gacve 
bis  testimony  ?  and  here  he  very  naturally  in* 
trodttced  an  answer  which  Adams  gave  unon 
his  cross-examination  with  respect  to  his  ibiw 
mer  life.  Undoubtedly,  a  veiy  melancholy 
fact  he  did  admit  to  you,  that  during  a  portion  > 
of  his  life  he  had  been  misled  1^^  those  doo* 
trines  which  of  late  have  been  so  industriously 
propagated,  and  wfaieh  I  cannot  but  fear  havn. 
Djsen  drenlated  pritadpally  with  a  view  to  lead 
to  these  destructive  plans  and  schemes  in 
which  we  charge  that  the  prisoner  at  the  bas 
has  been  involved.  It  is  the  object  of  men, 
who  have  sedition  and  treason  in  prospect,  to 
endeavour  first  to  undermine  the  religious  faith 
of  those  whom  they  may  wish  to  make  their 
associates  in  their  crimes.  He  has  confessed 
to  you  that,  by  havinc  had  in  his  possession 
Fame's  works,  he  did  for  a  time  become  an 
infidel  with  respect  to  the  christian  religion, 
but  he  never  gave  up  his  belief  in  a  Ood :  he 
owns  to  you  that  he  iMd  abandoned  his  belief 
in  that  sacred  volume  whidi  is  our  guide  and 
consolation  here,  and  the  sure  foundation  of 
our  hope  hereafiter;  but  he  tells  you  though  he 
had  for  a  time  been  so  dduded,  he  has  re* 
turned  again  to  that  belief  in  which  he  was . 
born  and  educated.  He  is  not  a  solitary  in- 
stance of  such  a  return  under  circumstances  of 
affliction :  another  occurs  to  my  mind  which 
has  happened  only  withm  these  few  days,  and 
of  which  Idasc  za^y^  vn  uXL  ippriM* .  I 


1116]       1  GEORGE  IV; 

allode  to  the  unfiwtwiiite  Magamb ,  al 
time  under  lenteiice  of  death  for  an  attempt  to 
assassinate  a  constable :  after  his  conyicdon, 
and  when  he  came  to  examine  his  own  mind, 
and  to  reflect  on  the  situation  in  which  he 
stood,  and  the  life  he  had  led,  that  man,  in  the 
moments  of  sorrow,  was  satwfied  that  he  had 
been  deceived  by  those  who  had  undermined 
his  futh,  and  he  again  embraced  the  religion 
he  had  abandoned.  And  in  considering  the 
conduct  of  Adams,  I  think  it  not  at  all  impos- 
sible that  his  proridential  escape  from  Uato- 
street  may  have  led  to  that  reformation  which, 
I  trust,  is  complete. 

Yon  have  been  desired  to  attend  to  the 
manner  in  which  he  gave  his  testimony.  I 
request  you  to  do  the  same.  It  has  been  said* 
that  on  some  former  occasion  on  which  Adams 
was  a  witness,  but  of  which  you  are  bound  to 
take  no  notice,  he  did  not  give  precisely  the 
same  account  of  minute  circumstances  as  he 
has  on  the  present  trial ;  that  is  to  my  mind 
the  strongest  proof  of  the  troth  of  his  stoty,— 
you  are  men  of  the  worid  and  men  of  expe- 
rience; is  there  any  thing  more  suspicions 
than,  when  a  man  has  given  a  long  narratiTe 
oontaining  various  circumstances,  accounts  of 
various  meetings  and  consultations,  that  he 
should  upon  a  second  examination,  repeat  mi- 
nutely the  testimony  he  had  previously  given 
in  the  same  words,  and  without  variation  or 
alteration? — ^I  say  such  conduct  to  my  mind 
would  be  the  strongest  proof  that  the  witness 
told  a  febricated  and  raise  story.  But  ^hen 
his  attention  is  on  a  second  occasion  called  to 
other  circumstances,  and  to  other  persons,  that 
he  should  remember  other  occurrences  which 
he  had  not  previously  detailed,  is  not  only 
most  natural,  out  a  proof  that  he  comes  as  the 
witness  of  truth :  he  gave  you  the  fairest  ac- 
count possible ;  when  questioned  as  to  several 
facts  be  has  now  introduced  aflfecting  the  pris* 
oner  at  the  bar,  he  said,  when  I  was  before 
here,  this  man  was  not  on  his  trial,  and  I  was 
not  then  so  fjarticulariy  examined  as  to  the 
share  he  had  in  the  transaction ;  but  now  that 
my  recolleetion  is  awakened,  I  am  enabled  to 
state  circumstances  that  did  not  then  occur  to 
me.  But,  says  my  learned  friend,  he  now 
omits  many  (acts  which,  upon  a  former  occa- 
sion, he  gave  in  evidence :  in  my  opinion  such 
omissions  are  so  fiir  from  detracting  from  his 
testimony,  that  they  add  a  weight  to  it.  He 
narrated  the  events  as  they  arose  in  his  me- 
mory at  the  time,  not  from  a  story  learnt  by 
rote,  and  as  a  child  would  repeat  his  lesson. 
As  men  of  the  world,  and  as  men  of  experience 
in  these  matters,  I  am  satisfied  you  will  consi- 
der that  the  evidence  of  Adams  is  confirmel, 
and  his  credit  esUblished  by  the  very  circum- 
stances upon  which  n^  learned  friend  fbunds 
his  objections  to  its  truth. 

I  wish,  gentlemen,  to  examine  all  the  ohjeo- 
tions  which  are  made  to  the  testimony  of  this 
witness,  before  I  draw  your  attention  to  those 
strong  confirmations  which  have  been  very 
properly  passed  over  by  my  learned  friends 


DM  cfjamet  lugs 


[1116 


who  ave  advoeates  for  the  prisoner,  it  being 
their  duty  to  present  the  case  to  you  in  the 
view  moat  favourable  for  their  client.  It  is 
said  there  are  contradictions  Of  him  by  the 
other  witnesses,  and  I  think  those  first  relied 
on  are  as  to  the  number  of  persons  in  Cato- 
street;  and  it  is  asserted  that  Adams  is  at  vn- 
rianee  with  Monument.  Let  me  call  your  re- 
collection to  what  passed  there  with  respect  to 
the  tardy  appearance  of  Tidd,  the  man  whom 
Monument  accompanied,  and  who  you  will  re- 
coliect  was  almost  the  last  penon  who  arrived 
on  that  evening.  Considerable  agitaiioa  had 
been  exhibited  by  the  party,  in  consequence 
of  his  not  coming  at  the  period  at  winch  be 
was  expected ;  Adams  was  there  long  before. 
Adams  tells  you  that  at  one  period,  when  the 
matter  was  talked  of,  Thistlewood  said  there 
were  eighteen  in  the  room  above,  and  two  be- 
low, m&ing  twenty.  Now  what  is  the  ao- 
count  given  by  Monument? — that  after  his 
arrival  with  Tidd,  and  just  before  ihej  were 
about  to  leave  the  stable,  and  when  soom  coo- 
vemtion  took  place  respecting  numbers,  it 
was  stated,  I  think  he  says  by  Thistlewood, 
that  there  were  then  five  and  twenty.  There 
would  be  no  material  inconsistency  in  these 
accounts  even  supposing  the  fact  to  which  the 
witnesses  are  speaking  to  have  taken  place  at 
the  same  time.  You  have  often  heard — in- 
deed it  is  a  trite  observation — ^that  where  wit- 
nesses are  speaking  to  the  same  occurrence,  it 
is  the  best  test  of  the  tmtli  of  the  story  they 
relate  tliat  Uiey  do  not  exactly  accord  in  all 
the  circumstances  attending  it,  but  that  there 
are  some  slight  variations  between  them.  I 
say  that  even  if  these  men  were  speaking  of 
the  same  transaction,  you  have  this  foct  coo- 
firmed  instead  of  being  contradicted,  namely, 
that  at  one  period  of  Uie  evening  there  was  a 
desire  to  ascertain  the  number  of  the  men  as- 
sembled. Monument,  therefore,  at  all  events 
confirms  Adams  as  to  ascertaining  their  nam- 
her,  and  they  difier  only  as  to  the  number 
when  ascertained. 

But  then  you  are  told  there  is  another  con- 
tradiction ;  that  Adams  diflers  from  the  offi- 
cers, as  to  the  number  of  candles  that  were  ia 
the  room ;  that  he  says  there  was  one  or  two 
in  the  first  room,  the  officers  on  the  contrary 
that  there  were  three  or  four,  and  that  it  ap- 
peared to  them  there  were  some  in  the  side 
room  from  the  shades  thrown  by  the  persons 
entering  it ;  and  lastly,  you  are  asked  to  re- 
fuse your  belief  to  the  account  he  has  tpven, 
because  he  differs  as  to  the  expressions  used 
by  the  officers  from  their  recollection  of  them. 
Turn  to  the  minutes  you  have  taken  of  the 
testimony  given  by  the  officers,  and  if  my 
learned  niend  is  entitled  to  argue  that  Adams's 
evidence  is  proved  to  be  untrue  by  that  testi- 
mony, I  will  show  you  that  by  the  same  test  it 
can  be  demonstrated  that  the  evidence  of  the 
officers  is  not  correct  Ruthven  saw  but  one 
man  when  he  entered  the  stable :  Ellis  and 
another  speak  to  seeing  two.  It  might  he 
9akdp  Buthven  does  not  speak  the  truth; 


fll7J 


fur  Hif^  Tra^tM.. 


At  &.  1880. 


ClllS 


and  if  my  Ittrntod  fn«iid's  mode  of  reasoning 
is  to  be  generally  applied,  you  might  altoge* 
thef  discard  the  unimpeached  testimony  of  the 
officers. 

There  is  another  point  in  which  Adams  is  con* 
finned  by  some  of  the  officers,  ^and  is  uncon- 
firmed by  others.  Adams  states  that  when  the 
officers  were  approaching  the  ladder  he  heard 
a  Toioe  exclaimmg,  '^  Holloa,  shew  a  Ught 
above."  Ruthven  stated  that  when  he  went 
up  the  ladder  he  never  heard  such  an  expres- 
sion. I  am  not  sure  whether  Ellis  stated  that 
he  did  not  hear  it :  but  when  you  come  to  the 
evidence  of  Westcoatt,  he  proves  there  was 
eocb  an  expression.  Adams  says  the  officers 
exdairoedi  **  here  is  a  pre^  n^t  of  you,  give 
up  your  arms,"  and  the  officers  say  that  they 
cried. oui  ''We  are  officers,  give  up  your 
arms  ;"  if  this  discrepancy  can  destroy  tne  tes* 
iimony  of  Adams,  it  will  destroy  that  of  the 
officers,  upon  whom  the  counsel  for  the  pri- 
soner have  not  cast  the  slightest  imputation. 

These  are  all  the  contradictions  which  hove 
been  relied  upon  by  my  learned  ftiend  on  the 
other  side,  and  I  hope  you  will  agree  with  me 
thai  the  observations  in  answer  are  satis&ctory . 
But  then  he  says  there  is  not  sufficient  confir- 
mation in  this  case,  and  that  all  the  confirma^ 
tion  of  the  witness  Adams  which  ought  to  be 
given,  has  not  been  adduced.  I  will  venture 
to  assert,  and  I  think  you  will  agree  with  me, 
that  there  hardly  ever  was  a  witness  confirmed 
as  he  has  been  in  such  a  variety  of  points,  and 
points  too  so  material  to  the  inquiry.  It  is 
said  by  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner  (we  shall 
see  wim  what  truth),  it  is  true  that  Adams  is 
confirmed  in  many  particulars,  but  as  to  the 
intention  and  die  plan  of  the  parties,  the  cor- 
roboration of  his  evidence  altogether  foils ;  and 
yet,  gentlemen,  this  is  urged  to  you  by  advo- 
cates who  admit  broadly,  plainly,  and  unequi* 
Tocally,  that  the  plan  upon  this  occasion  was 
to  assassinate  his  majesty's  ministers.  How 
do  they  get  at  that  plan  ?  on  what  evidence  is , 
it  that  mv  learned  friends  make  tliis  admis- 
sion ?  Tney  make  it  upon  the  testimony  of 
Adams, — upon  the  testimony  of  Adams  confirm- 
ed indeed  bv  the  occurrences  in  Cato-street, 
and  the  evidence  of  other  persons  to  which  I 
shall  call  your  attention  hereafter. 

Let  us  try  the  hypothesis  submitted  on  the 
part  of  the  prosecution.  We  say  there  was  a 
oeliberate  pian  formed  by  the  prisoners  Ings, 
lliistlewood,  and  their  associates,  to  overturn 
the  Government, — that'  the  first  blow  to  be 
struck  to  carry  that  plan  into  effect  was  the 
assassination  of  his  majesty's  ministers  in 
Grosvenor-square,  on  the  night  of  the  2drd  of 
February,  and  that  that  blow  was  to  be  fol- 
lowed up  bymovements  in  various  parts  of 
the  town.  The  proposition  of  the  otlier  side 
is,  that  the  plot  was  certainly  to  assassinate  his 
majesty's  ministers,  but  that  it  was  to  begin 
and  end  there,  and  that  no  proof  arises  out  of 
the  testimony  of  Adams,  none  out  of  the  evi- 
dence of  Hiden,  none  out  of  the  account  given 
by  Monunienty  none  from  a  variety  of  fiu:t8 


established,  and  which  cannot  be  controverted, 
that  there  was  any  design  contemplated  by 
the  conspirators  beyond  the  destruction  of  the 
illustrious  persons  assembled  as  guests  at  the 
table  of  lord  Harrowby,  and  the  conflagration 
and  consequent  plunder  of  a  part  of  the  town. 

To  prove  the  case  for  the  prosecution,  one  of 
the  conspirators  himself  is  called :  I  beg  leave 
to  add  mj  humble  recommendation  to  that  of 
the  Solicitor-general,  as  to  the  caution  and  at- 
tention with  which  you  should  examine  such 
testimony.  A  man,  who  admits  himself  to  be 
a  participator  in  such  a  scheme,  is  to  be 
watched  with  the  greatest  circumspection,  and 
his  evidence  is  to  be  most  scrupulously 
weighed ;  but  in  this  as  in  every  other  case, 
where  it  is  impossible  for  you  to  get  at  the 
secret  consultations  and  deliberations  of  the 
persons  engaged,  if  the  testimony  of  an  ac- 
complice cannot  be  received ;  the  crime  must 
go  unpunished ;  for,  if  it  is  to  be  laid  down 
that  an  accomplice  is  not  a  witness  to  prove 
the  ofience,  complete  indemnity  is  offered  to 
persons  forming  such  a  scheme:  they  may 
proceed  as  far  as  they  please,  knowing  that  if 
eren  their  friends  prove  treacherous,  they  can- 
not be  received  as  witnesses  in  a  court  of  lustice 
affainst  them.  Fortunately,  however,  for  the 
administration  of  justice,  that  is  not  the  law  in 
this  countnr ;  an  accomplice  is  a  competent 
and  a  creoible  witness,  if  his  testimony  re- 
ceives confirmation— not  confirmation  as  to 
every  part  of  his  story,  for  that  would  in  most 
cases  be  impossible,  and  in  all  unnecessary, 
for  if  the  law  required  confirmation  of  eveiv 
part  of  the  account  of  an  accomplice,  and  such 
confirmation  could  be  adduced,  his  testimony 
would  not  be  requisite,  the  witnesses  who  could 
so  confirm  him,  might  themselves  be  examined. 
If,  therefore,  you  find  the  testimony  of  Adams 
supported  in  material  points,  if  he  relates  facts 
to  which  other  persons  of  undoubted  veracity 
depose,  then  you  will  be  justified— you  will  be 
bound  to  conclude  tliat  the  whole  of  his  ac» 
count  is  true. 

Now  let  us  see  in  what  points  Adams  is 
confirmed,  and  I  will  take  you,  although  it 
may  occupy  a  little  of  your  time,  through  the 
different  parts  of  his  narrative,  and  shew  you 
how  he  is  supported.  The  first  thing  whicb'he 
states  to  you  m,  that  upon  his  coming  out  of 
prison  and  meeting  a^n  with  Thistlewood 
and  Brunt,  he  was  earned  to  a  room  in  Brunt's 
house,  which  had  been  hired  by  the  prisoner 
Ings  for  the  purpose  of  their  consultations,  a 
circumstance  which  is  proved  by  Eleanor 
Walker  and  Mary  Rogers,  who  tell  you  that 
the  room  had  been  hired  for  the  prisoner  Ings, 
under  the  false  pretence  that  he  was  going  to 
occupy  it  as  a  residence;  and  it  is  also  con- 
firmed by  Hale.  Was  that  room  used  as  a 
lodging  ibr  Ings  ?  Did  he  ever  occupy  it  as 
such,  or  carry  any  furniture  tliere  ?  Was  not 
the  only  purpose  for  which  that  room  was 
used  that  which  Adams  states,  namely,  for 
the  consultations  and  deliberations  of  those 
penoos  wjx>  had  this  treasonable  plan  in  view  Y 


M19> 


I  GBoaGE  ly. 


ia  this  tbcft  Adans  b  coaBnned>^  B«l  k  it 
nkl  it  U  an  ttnimporiaiit  ^Mrt.  What,  i»'  it 
uniniporiaiit  to  baio  it  proved  that  ponooi 
have  hired  a  room  for  the  purpote  of  ooDsultiDg» 
deliberating  upon,  aod  matoriag  plans  of  a»> 
saaunaiioo  and  treason  ?  Have  yon  not  coot* 
finnation  that  it  was  taken  under  a  frlse  pre- 
tence? is  it  even  asserted  by  the  prisoner,  or 
1^  his  learned  ooonsel,  thai  that  room  was  not 
hired  onder  the  oolonr  of  being  a  lodging  for 
IngSp  bat  tot  the  real  and  my  parpose  of 
nlanning  and  furthering  the  oonspiiaqr  chaiic^ 
by  the  iadictmenty  ana  of  preparing  those  m* 
stnunents  of  destruction  wnich  you  have  seen 
produced  in  the  coarse  of  this  trial?  Adams 
tells  you  that  SMetings  were  constantly  held 
in  that  room,  from  the  instant  of  bis  emerging 
fiNm  prison  up  to' the  23rd  of  Febiuaiy.  He 
states  to  you  that  impatience  having  been  ei- 
prmsed  br  these  perM>ns  as  to  the  accomplish» 
ment  of  their  schemes^  it  was  determined  that 
on  Wednesday  something  shoald  be  done ;  he 
informs  you  that  Thistlewood  had  appointed  a 
committee  tOr  be  held  on  the  Sunday  morning, 
in  the  room  adjoining  Brunt's  apartments, 
and  that  such  committee  met  Here  then 
Adams  is  confirmed  in  a  most  material  and 
important  manner.  He  says  there-  was  a 
larger  meeting^  than  usual  on  that  morning ; 
SIM  Halci,  the  apprentice  of  Brunt,  informs 
you  that  the  assembly  of  Sunday  was  more 
numerous  than  any  he  had  ever  before  observed 
ia  that  room.  What  was  done  in  that  room  ? 
How  were  these  conspirators  employed  there  f 
Adams  teUs  you  that  he  saw  some  working 
upon  the  pflua-etaves  which  have  been  pro- 
duced  to  vou,  and  others  upon  the  grenades 
and  fire-bails  which  have  been  exhibited* 
What  does  Hale  sUte?  That  he  frequently 
heard  persons  working  there;  that  the  sound  on 
sawing  was  not  unfreqnant,  and  that  he  ac- 
tually noticed  in  that  room  the  ammunition- 
they  had  prepared. 

.  What  iS  tne  next  important  point  ?  A  fiict 
which  it  was  impossible  Adams  could  invent 
without  the  certainty  of  being,  contradicted  if 
it  was  not  true :— he  says  that,  on  the  mominff 
of  the  23rd|  he  .went  into  Brunt's  room^  and- 
saw  there  a  man  of  the  name  of  Strange^  and 
another  person  whom  be  does  not  know,  flint- 
ing  (fl  think  that  was  bis  expression)  their 
pistols,  and  preparing  their  arms ;  how  stands- 
the  confirmation  upon  that  point?  Tlie  ap- 
prentice boy  (between  whom  and  Adams  there 
has  been  no  concert,  for  there  could  be  none, 
as  Adams  has  been  in  custody  from  within,  a 
day  or  two  of  the  time  of  the  meeting  in  Cidto- 
street  up  to  the  present  period),  Hale  tells  you- 
tiiat  on  that  dayihesaw  Strange  and.  another 
man^  whose  name  he  does  not  know,  getting 
ready  their  arms»  preparatory  toiling  to  Cat<v 
street.  Who  are  the  pfrsons  who  attended  at: 
this  room?  Adams  enumerates  the  names  of- 
several  of  the  prisqoerst  and  of  others  who  are* 
not  indicted;  he  tells  you  that  Thistlewood, 
Ings,  Davidson,  Brunt,  Harrisop^  Bradhum, 
and  Hall  used  to  attend  there,  and  that  in  ad« 


dition  to  IheiA  theie  wan  Filler,  PaUn,  aad 
Cook  ;  it  was  proved  by  the  appvenlice  bcv 
that  every  one  of  those  men  was  in  the  hsiat 
of  frequenting  this  apartment.  Is  this,  thca^ 
ail  invention  on  the  part  of  Adams?  No,  he 
is  confirmed  by  testimony  tikat  is  unimpeaclied,. 
and  unimpeadiable ;  for  no  endeavour  has 
been  nUde  in  the  course  of  this  trial  to  tfanw 
the  slightest  imputation  on  the  charaeter  of 
Hale ;  no  attempt  in  cross  eTaminatioa  to 
shake  his  credit,  or  to  induce  you  not  to  be- 
lieve in  the  fullest  degree  the  testimony  be  has 
given  to  the  court. 

But  there  is  another  most  remarkable  fact  in 
which  Adams  is  confirmed  bv  Hale.  Adams 
tells  you.  that,  on  the  33fd,  after  they  had  met 
in  the  room  hired  by  Ingi,  and  before  they  set 
out  for  Cato^street,  Thutlewood  proposed  to 
vrrite  a  prodamation,  which  was  to  oe  ezhibitod 
upon  the  walls  of  the  houses  adjacent  to  those 
to  which  ^T%  might  be  set,  in  order  diat  it 
might  be  ^e  better  read  by  tiie  populace.  He 
leqi^rsd  paper  for  that  purpose,  and  Adams 
says,  that  Thistlewood  talked  of  getting  sndi 
as  newspapers  are  printed  upon,  but  thai  on 
his  suggesting  cartitdge  paper.  Brant  was 
desired  to  procure  six  sheets.  Would  a  nnn 
invent  such  a  fkct,  not  knowing  who  vras  seat 
for  the  paper,  and  being  quite  unconscious  that 
he  would  be  capable  of  confirmatian  ?  It  is  in 
evidence  before  you  that  Brunt  went  to  his 
apprentice  Hale,  derired  him  to  procure  the 
cartridge-paper,  that  it  was  procured  aial-  taken 
into  the  room.  Hale,  therefore,  confirms  him 
as  to  that  foot.  My  learned  friend,  then  ad- 
verted to  the  contents  of  the  proclamation,  and 
he  argued  imder  a  mistake  for  some  time  that 
Monument  might  have  confirmed  Adams, 
whereas  the  evidence  was,  thAtMonumeat  vras 
not  in  Brunt's  house  at  all.  Can  you,  then, 
when  you  have  these  confirmations  before  yoa, 
say)  upon-  the  assertion  of  counsel  only,  yes, 
we  will  believe  the  paper  was  procoiod,  bat 
we  do  not  believe  that  it  was  obtained  for  the 
purpose  suggested,  although  the  fact  is  sworn 
to  by  the  same  witness  ?  And  you.are  aUked, 
becmise  it  is  said  part  of  this  paper  was  fbaad 
in  the  cupboard,  to  believe  that  the  rest 
had  been  used-  for  the  mdiing  of  cartridgei^ 
though  you  have  not  tbrsfigfatest  evidence  thai 
cartridges  were  at  that  time  preparinfr;  they 
were  ail  procured  before,  and  all  that  the  con- 
spirators were  then-  doing;  wss  aceootring 
tnemselves  for.  the  purpeso  of  going  to  Cato- 
street 

What  b  the  next  foct?  I  should  have  in- 
troduced itbefotein  point  of  order,  and  it  is  a 
most  striking  ciroumslanoew  It  is  proved  that, 
on  the  Tuesday,,  some. alarm  had  been  excited 
in  eonseqnence  of  Adams's  communicatioii 
that  the  landlord  had  iirformed  him  they  had 
been  su^meoted:  of  holding  improper  meetings 
at  the  White  Hart.  You  will  recollect  the 
agitatioB  that  prevailed  among^  them  apoii 
that  o^caaion ;  they  vfesa  so  bent  upon  their 
schemes  that  they.tasuldaiotffasoplstliaisaspicfoai 
that  their.  plaffrviia8riflBli}&ta' be: hBBVo^.stfll 


1311 


Jbr  High  Treaton. 


A.  D.  1820. 


tum 


more  were  they  offended  by  the  attempt  of  an 
associate  to  damp  the  ardour  of  their  aaherents. 
In  order  to  ascertain  whether  there  was  the 
least  suspicion  of  them  entertained  by  the  go* 
tremment,  it  was  with  great  shrewdness  pro- 
loosed  that  a  watch  should  be  placed  on  lord 
Harrowby's  house,  to  commence  at  six  o'clock, 
to  continue  till  twelve,  and  to  be  again  set  at 
four  in  the  morning,  in  order  to  ascertain  whe- 
ther any  soldiers  were  introduced  into  that 
house,  or  any  other  in  Grosvenor*sauare. 
.That  is  proved  beyond  the  possibility  of  con- 
tradiction. Could  Adams  oe  aware  of  such 
confirmation?  You  have  heard  it  flippantly 
(I  do  not  use  the  word  offensively)  treated  as  a 
mere  confirmation  of  a  game  of  dominos  having 
been  played.  It  appears  to  me  a  most  im-> 
portant  confirmation ;  it  is  shown  that  David- 
son and  another  were  first  to  watch,  and  that 
Tidd  and  Brunt  were  to  relieve  them.  Tidd 
came  to  Brunt*s  house  in  Fox-court  after  some 
delay,  and  departed  from  thence  in  company 
with  Brunt,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  their 
share  of  the  duty  in  Grosvenor-square,  but 
stated  that  there  nvas  a  person  whom  he  wished 
to  see  on  that  evenine,  a  very  important  man, 
and  that  if  he  should  be  so  fortunate  as  to 
meet  with  him,  he  should  not  be  able  to  attend 
the  watch.  After  a  short  time,  Brunt  returned, 
saying  that  Tidd  had  met  the  man,  and  that  he 
could  not  watch,  and  Adams  was  selected  to 
accompany  Brunt.  It  is  established  by  the 
watchman,  that  a  man  of  colour  was  seen  with 
another  loitering  about  the  square.  It  is 
proved  to  you  by  Gillan,  that  on  that  evening 
ne  actually  played  with  Brunt  at  Dominos,  in 
a  public  house  in  the  neighbourhood.  Thus 
vou  have  the  fact  of  the  watching  confirmed 
beyond  the  possibility  of  doubt,  and  my  learned 
frieod  might  as  well  argue  that  because  Gillan 
did  not  hear  them  say  that  the^  were  watching 
lord  Harrowbv's  house,  there  is  no  evidence  of 
the  purpose  for  which  they  went  into  Gros- 
Tenor-square  on  that  night.  Can  you  be 
brought  to  draw  such  a  conclusion  by  such 
fallacious  reasoning  f  At  the  time  Adams 
gave  the  account,  it  was  impossible  for  him  to 
know  that  Gillan  could  be  brought  forward  to 
confirm  this  part  of  his  statement.  I  say,  then, 
again,  this  is  a  most  remarkable  confirmation 
of  the  circumstances  which  passed  on  the  even- 
ing before  the  23rd,  not  less  remarkable  than 
the  two  confirmations  of  the  events  of  that  da;^ 
to  which  I  have  already  called  your  attention ; 
namely,  of  their  coming  to  prepare  their  arms 
at  Brunt's  room,  and  the  sending  for  the  car- 
tridge paper  by  Thistlewood  to  prepare  the 
proclamations. 

There  is  another  material  circumstance; 
Adams  tells  you,  that  Tidd's  house  was  used 
as  a  d^p6t  for  the  arms ;— )do  you  want  testi- 
mony on  the  part  of  the  Crown  to  prove  it  ? 
If  confirmation  is  required,  you  fina  it  in  the 
eridence  of  the  unfortunate  young  woman  who 
was  called  for  the  prisoner.  She  states  that 
ihe  box  containing  the  cartridges  and  combus- 
libkt  bad  been  Uiere  a  -fortnight:,  let  them 

VOL.  xxxin. 


have  be^  carried  there  by  whom  they  might, 
there  they  were  for  the  purposes  of  this  con«« 
spiracy ;  and  a  most  remarkable  fact  she  has 
introduced,  with  which  we  were  before  unac- 
quainted, that  on  the  very  morning  of  the  23rd, 
some  of  the  articles  were  removed  from  Tidd's 
premises  by  these  persons ;  I  leave  you  to  say 
whether  they  were  not  removed  from  thence  to 
Cato-street.  Here,  then,  Adams  is  confirmed 
in  a  most  important  point,  not  only  important 
as  it  respects  the  assassination,  but  when  you 
come  to  consider  the  nature  of  the  things  that 
were  prepared,  you  must  be  satisfied  that  the 
contents  of  that  box  were  calculated  for  the 
execution  of  a  plan  embracing  other  objects 
beyond  the  destruction  of  his  majesty^s  mi- 
nbters. 

Another  fact  worthy  of  your  attention  is 
stated  as  to  the  proceedings  of  Tidd,  on  the 
evening  of  the  23rd.  It  is  proved  by  the  ap- 
prentice Hale,  that  after  some  of  the  conspira* 
tors  had  gone  to  Cato-street,  Tidd  called  at 
Brunt's,  and  received  a  pike  head  and  a  sword^ 
which  he  said  he  would  take  care  of,  and  carry 
to  the  place  where  they  were  wanted.  Monu«* 
ment  and  Adams  tell  you,  that  Tidd  did  not 
arrive  at  Cato-street  till  after  the  other  con« 
spirators;  it  is  clear,  from  the  testimony  of 
Hale,  that  he  did  not  set  out  from  Fox-court 
till  all  the  others  were  gone. 

There  is  another  circumstance  in  which  he 
is  most  materially  supported,  and  supported 
beyond  the  power  of^  contradiction,  a  fact 
which  he  has  not  invented,  for  it  is  spoken  to 
by  others,  and  confirmed  by  the  seisure  and 
production  of  the  deadly  instrument  to  whidi 
It  relates.  Adams  has  informed  you,  that  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar  produced  a  large  butcher's 
Knife,  and  you  will  recolleet  the  bloody  pur« 
pose  to  which  Ings  stated  it  was  to  be  applied  ; 
Adams  remarked  that  it  had  wax-end  round 
the  handle,  which  the  prisoner  said  had  been 
placed  there  to  enable  him  more  firmly  to 
grasp  it,  and  to  prevent  its  slipping  from  his 
hand.  That  very  knife,  be  it  recollected,  is 
taken  from  Ings  on  the  night  of  the  23rd,  and 
on  his  person  afterwards  was  found*  the  case 
to  which  it  belonged,  and  in  which  he  had 
most  probably  carried  it.  Are  all  these  con- 
firmations nothing  ?  Do  they  not  mainly  cor-» 
roborate  the  whole  story  told  you  by  Aaams  f 
Do  you  not  find  his  testimony  supported  in 
almost  every  particular  in  which  it  is  capable 
of  confirmation  ?  and  are  you  then  to  be  told, 
when  his  evidence  is  thus  strongly  corrobo* 
rated,  that  you  are  to  believe  him  as  to  one 
part  only  of  the  conspiracy  charged,  namely, 
the  assassination  of  bis  majesty's  ministers,  and 
that  you  are  to  dismiss  from  your  consideration 
all  he  has  sworn  as  to  the  ulterior  objects  of 
this  nefarious  scheme  ? 

In  addition  to  the  knifh,.you  have  also  a 
sword,  particularly  pointed  out  to  you  amonc 
the  many  found  in  Cato-street;  that  sword 
was  carried  by  the  prisoner,  as  long  ago,  I 
think,  as  Christmas  last,  to  a  shop  in  Drury^ 
laa^,  for  the  purpose  x»f  being  shaipeoed,  and 

4C 


llta]       lGEOR6£IV. 

particular  directions  were  giveii  by  him  re- 
epectifig  it.  The  unfortunate  man  at  the  bar 
ttatesy  in  the  few  sentences  he  has  addressed 
to  you  in  his  defence,  that  he  took  that  sword 
to  the  stable  bv  the  desire  of  another  person ; 
that  it  was  not  his  own  sword,  but  that  £d wards 
gave  it  him,  and  that  he  carried  it  for  him. 
Although  you  haVe  heard  occasionally  of  Ed- 
wards, there  is  not  the  slightest  proof  that  he 
was  in  Cato-street  at  ail,  but,  on  the  contrary, 
bis  presence  there  is  negatiyed;  this  sword, 
therefore,  must  have  been  carried  by  some  one 
of  the  persons  who  were  in  Cato-street.  In 
addition  to  the  sword  and  the  knife,  Adams 
speaks  of  two  bags  or  haversacks,  which  Ings 
cuiibited  before  he  went  from  Fox-court ;  that 
he  accoutred  himself  with  them,  and  stated 
that  the  horrible  purpose  to  which  they  were 
to  be  applied  was,  to  cany  off  the  heads  of 
two  of  his  majesty's  ministers,  from  the  massacre 
in  Grosvenor^square ;  the  prisoner  is  actually 
found  with  those  two  bags  suspended  from  his 
shoulders ;  but  I  am  tiring  you  I  fear  with  the 
enumeration  of  these  circumstances ;  but  they 
will  make  good  the  assertion  with  which  I  set 
out,  that  you  would  find  so  much  of  confirma- 
tion bef^^re  you,  that  it  would  be  impossible 
for  you  to  doubt  the  general  accuracy  of  the 
account  of  Adams. 

I  must  trouble  you  with  a  remark  or  two  on 
the  interest  Adams  is  said  to  have  upon  this 
occasion,  and  oa  which  so  much  observation 
has  been  made.  What  possible  interest,  I 
appeal  to  ^TtTj  one  of  you,  can  he  have  in 
Huperadding,  if  it  did  not  exist,  the  ulterior 
plirpose  of  overturning  the  government?  Adams 
IS  apprehended — he  states,  there  is  a  nefarious 
ylot  10  assassinate  the  whole  cabinet,  sufficiently 
mlamotts,  as  my  k»med  ^end  admits — suffi« 
dently  horrible;  what  credit  then  is  he  to 
obtain  by  charging  the  conspirators  with  the 
fiirth^r  intention  of  destroying  the  existing 
order  of  things  ?  His  interest  was  all  the  other 
wey — he  had  disclosed  enough  of  in&my  and 
guiH,  when  he  had  made  known  the  plan  of 
Ussassination.  If  the  scheme  originated  in 
motives  of  private  revenge  entertained  against 
the  ministers  individually,  what  object  could 
he  have  in  stating  that  it  was  a  mere  step  for 
the  accomplishment  of  other  projects  ?  He  had 
fdready  heaped  upon  his  own  head,  and  that 
of  each  of  his  associates,  a  load  of  crime,  suffi- 
ciently heavy  to  press  them  down ;  and  what 
possible  motive  can  be  assigned  for  his  increas- 
ing their  delinquency  and  his  own  by  stating, 
that  they  intended  to  overthrow  the  govem- 
inent  ?  the  charge  so  far  from  giving  a  greater 
tppearance  of  truth  to  his  account,  was  calcu- 
lated to  diminish  its  credibility  in  proportion 
to  the  magnitude  afid  atrocity  of  the  crime 
imputed.  1  submit  there  is  an  absence  of  all 
interest  in  Adam^  to  make  the  offence  of  these 
men  more  heinous  than  it  was,  and  that  nothing 
can  have  induced  him  to  implicate  them  to  the 
extent  he  has,  but  a  desire  of  disclosing  the 
whole  of  the  conspiracy,  and  making  as  ample 
atonement  as  is  in  his  power  to  the  offended 
laws  of  his  country. 


Trial  qfJamn  Inp 


C1134 


While  we  axe  talkioji  of  private  reveofq 
against  his  majesty's  ministers,  permit  me  to 
ask,  if  the  gratification  of  that  feeling  was  the 
only  object  these  conspiratora  had  in  view, 
why  was  not  the  scheme  which  th^  originally 
purposed  and  approved,  of  assassinating  the 
ministers  at  their  own  houses,  persisted  in  ? 
If  the  plan  ori^nated  in  hatred  and  animosity 
against  the  individuals,  tell  me,  as  reasonable 
men,  what  anxiety  could  they  have  to  take  off 
the  whole  of  the  cabinet  at  one  blow,  unless 
it  was  intended  to  carry  into  effect  the  ovei^ 
throw  of  the  state^  by  availing  themselves  of 
the  confusion  arising  out  of  the  destractioa  of 
all  the  executive  ministers  of  the  Crown? 
When  you  find  by  the  concessions  of  my 
learned  friends  (and  they  have  made  none 
which  the  necessity  of  the  case  has  not  forced 
upon  them,  they  have  admitted  nothing  it  was 
possible  for  them  in  duty  to  the  prisoner  to 
aeny),  when  the  counsel  for  the  accused  are, 
by  the  strength  of  the  eridence,  forced  to  allow 
that  there  was  a  conspiracy  to  murder  his 
majesty*s  ministers,  and  that  the  prisoBers  met 
in  Cato^treet,  for  Uiat  avowed  purpose ;  I  ask 
any  man  to  assign  even  a  plausible  reason, 
why  Adams,  a  participator  in  the  guilt,  should 
wish  to  add  to  the  admitted  enormity  of  tbdr 
crime,  by  chai^ng  tHem  with  intentions  of  a 
still  more  atrocious  nature. 

If^  then,  Adams  has  no  interest  to  deceive 
you,  and  if  you  find  him  confirmed  in  the  ma- 
terial parts  of  his  narrative,  what  just  reason 
can  there  be  for  refusing  credit  to  the  testi- 
mony he  has  given  to  the  court  ?  Bat  does 
the  case  rest  upon  the  evidence  of  Adams  ?  do 
my  learned  friends  imagine,  that  you,  or  that 
I,  have  blotted  out  from  our  recollection  aU  that 
we  have  heard  from  the  mouths  of  the  other  wit* 
nesses?  Before  I  dismiss  Adams,  let  me  call  your 
attention  to  Chambers,  who  is  put  into  the  bos 
to  contradict  him.  My  learned  friends,  to 
whom  the  prisoner  has  confided  his  defenc^ 
examined  Adams^  as  to  whether  he  had  oiled 
on  this  Chambers,  and  used  certain  expres- 
sions; Adams  denies  using  the  expressions 
imputed  to  him,  and  the  gentleman  who  last 
addressed  you  says,  he  must  admit  that  Cham- 
bers has  been  mixed  up  with  bad  company  hv 
my  friend  Mr.  Gumey  who  cross-examined 
him^that  undoubtedly  he  is  a  radical — that 
he  has  been  carrying  flags  at  different  meetinss 
— but  that  nothing  beyond  this  can  be  brongSt 
against  his  character.  I  remember  (perhaps 
they  have  not  escaped  vour  memory)  the  very 
forcible  observations  which  were  made  by  the 
learned  counsel  who  first  addressed  you  on  die 
part  of  the  prisoner  (adopting  language  sup- 
posed to  have  been  used  by  the  Solicitor-gene^ 
ral,  in  examining  the  testimony  of  a  man,  who 
had  been  stated  to  have  had' proposed  to  him 
by  another,  to  make  an  abonunable  acimsaticm 
against  a  third  person,  with  the  view  of  ex^ 
tprting  money) ;  my  leaimed  friend  said,  that 
the  Solicitor-general  had  remarked,  that  the 
man  who  could  receive  such  an  applicatioi^ 
^parently  assent  to  it,  and  not  oomiaaiiicaAf 


Ui5l 


*  g-  -  -  • 

Jar  High  Treastm. 


A.  D.  18da 


1112$ 


It  to  a  magistrate,  was  unworthy  of  credit ; 
and  the  learned  gentleman  applied  that  observ« 
atioQ  of  the  Solicitor-generai  to  some  of  the 
witnesses  on  the  present  occasion.  The  cotin- 
ael  for  the  prisoner,  not  fuUj  anticipating  the 
tTtdence  which  Chambers  would  gire,  has  by 
these  observations  cut  up  root  and  branch  the 
testimony  of  that  man.  Chambers  tells  you 
unblushingly,  that  a  proposition  was  made  to 
him  by  Adams,  to  jom  in  a  conspiracy  to  as- 
sassinate his  majesty's  ministers,  accompanied 
by  expressions  which  must  have  disgusted 
every  man,  who  heard  them,  "that  he  would 
sup  that  night  on  blood  and  wine.'*  Cbanw 
bers  lives  within  five  minutes  walk  of  Bow- 
street ;  but  until  he  is  produced  before  you  as 
a  witness,  he  buries  the  diabolical  proposal  in 
his  own  bosom;  he  associates  still  with  his 
friends  the  radicals,  and  he  never  communi- 
cates the  nefarious  scheme  to  a  msgistrate,  in 
order  to  put  a  stop  to  it,  and  bring  to  punish- 
ment its  ffuilty  projectors.  Then  what  credit 
wiU  you  give  to  tnis  man  ?  If  it  be  argued  that 
a  man  who  has  been  solicited  to  join  with 
another  to  extort  money  fVom  a  third,  by  mak* 
ing  a  diarge  against  him  affeoting  his  character 
is  unworthy  of  belief  if  he  conceals  the  fiict; 
with  what  force  does  the  observation  appiv 
to  this  most  extraordinary  witness  ?  How  it 
at  ODce  destroys  his  evidence  1  According  to 
his  own  confession,  when  the  proposition 
was  made  to  him,  he  did  not  shew  th^ 
least  disapprobation  of  it;  he  exhibited  no 
signs  of  horror  whatever  at  receiving  it  fh>m 
men,  of  whom,  according  to  his  own  account, 
he  knew  little,  and  to  whom  he  owed  nothing 
on  the  score  of  friendship  that  could  have  in- 
duced him  to  keep  the  communication  secret ; 
yet  he  never  divulges  it  to  a  magistrate,  of 
any  human  being,  till  he  is  called  here  to-day 
for  the  first  time  to  make  it  public.  Upon 
^his  miserable  attempt  at  contradiction  of 
Adams,  I  win  not  trouble  you  with  another 
observation,  as  I  think  vou  will  be  of  opinion, 
that  the  weight  of  credit  is  due  to  Adams  who 
denies  the  conversation,  rather  than  to  Cham- 
bers who  says  it  passed,  and  who  has  till  this 
hour  kept  it  a  secret. 

The  occurrence  of  Chambers  to  my  recollec- 
tion, carried  away  mv  mind  from  the  witness. 
Monument.  It  has  been  said  you  should  at- 
tend not  only  to  the  evidence,  but  to  the  man* 
ser  in  which  it  is  given.  In  my  opinion,  no 
nan  ever  gave  his  testimony  in  a  more  deli- 
)>erate  or  solemn  manner  than  Monument? 
he  was  not  shaken  in  a  single  fact.  What  is 
his  account? — that  he  had  been  introduced  to 
Tbistlewood,  by  a  man  of  the  name  of  Ford, 
fome  few  weeks  before  this  tfiUxr,  find  that  af-* 
terwards  Thistlewood  called  upon  him  with 
Brunt.  It  is  very  material  for  you  to  recollect 
Hhe  conversation  that  took  place  between  him 
and  Thistlewood  upon  that  occasion ;  the  fiict 
of  TIAstlewooA  comiug  and  desiring  a  private 
interview  with  him  iis  conihrm^  by  Ihe  evi- 
dence of  his  brother,  who  lavs  that  he  was  at 
lione  at  the  toe  Thistlewooa  aad  Bnmt  call- 


ed. It  Is  broadly  asserted  that  there  was  no 
treason  in  this  conspiracy ;  that  nothing  be- 
yond an  intention  to  assassinate  his  majesty'l 
ministers  is  proved.  Be  good  enough  to  re« 
collect  what  it  was  that  'Thistlewood  said  t6 
Monument  at  that  visit — **  Great  events  are  at 
hand ;  the  people  are  desirous  of  a  change.  I 
have  been  oeceived  by  many  persons,  but  now 
I  have  a  number  of  men  tiiat  will  stand  by 
me. *'  Great  events  are  at  hand !  — The  people 
are  desirous  of  a  change  1  What  Events  f-^ 
what  change  ?  The  change  of  his  majesfy'i 
ministers  ?  On  that  change,  gentlemen,  yoii 
had  observations  offered  to  you  that  hardly 
became  the  gravity  of  this  momentous  inquiry': 
it  was  stated  that  to  oppose  his  majestv^s  go- 
vernment, and  to  endeavour  to  remove  his  mi- 
nisters, was  not  treason;  that  even  for  two 
privy  councillors  to  fight  a  duel  was  not  treason  i 
and  therefore  it  was  argued  seriously,  that  be^ 
cause  men  in  a  fair  opposition  to  the  mea- 
sures of  bis  majesty's  government  might  em 
deavoor  to  displace  his  ministers,  it  is  ng^ 
treason  tp  remove  them  all  by  assaaii nation. 
«<  Gr^  events  are  at  band,  and  tbe  people  are 
desirous  of  a  change.**  Can  you  doubt  tha^ 
Thistlewood  intended  to  convey  to  the  mio4 
of  Monu^nent  that  a  grcfat  political  blow  woold 
soon  be  struck,  and  a  change  in  the  form  of 
government  effected  ?  If  not,  what  did  he 
mean  by  saying  that  he  had  now  people  that 
would  stand  by  him,  although  he  had  been 
jeceif^  before  ?  What  had  that  to  do  with 
the  removal  of  his  majesty's  ministers,  by  fair 
means?  Nothing,  gentlemen,  nothing.  It 
proves,  most  satisfactorily,  the  guilty  purpose 
which  was  at  that  time  lurking  in  th^  minds 
of  Thistlewood  and  his  misguided  adherents. 

What  does  Monument  prove  niore.'  He 
tells  you  that  when  he  arrived  in  Cato-street^ 
apprehensions  were  expressed  as  to  the  numbers 
there  assembled  not  being  capable  of  accom- 
plishing all  the  schemes  the  prisoners  had  in 
view.  Thistlewood  told  them  they  were  not 
to  be  alarmed,  that  there  were  men  enough  to 
go  to  lord  Ilarrowby's  and  that  there  were  other 
parties — for  what  purpose  ? — ^not  to  go  to  lord 
Harro  why's,  that  is  not  pretended — ^Thistlewood 
alluded  to  parties  who  were  to  meet  in  other 
parts  of  the  town.  This  declaration,  coupled 
with  fiicts  to  which  I  shall  by  and  by  advert—- 
I  mean  their  preparations — shews,  beyond 
all  doubt,  to  tne  mind  of  eveiy  reasonable 
man,  that  their  great  plan  was  the  overthrow 
of  government,  however  ineflScient  the  means 
for  that  object^  and  that  the  removal  of  his 
majesty's  ministers  was  only  the  first  step  in 
the  march  of  destruction.  Monument  is  un- 
tbuched  in  his  character  by  any  thing  that  has 
appeared  before  you,  except  so  far  as  his 
going  to  Cato-street,  s^nd  his  apparent  adop- 
tion of  their  schemes  affects  him  ;  his  private 
conduct  is  unimpeached,  his  evidence  is  un- 
cpntradicted. 

Then  there  is  another  witness  of  still  greater' 
credit,  at  least  I  think  you  will  consider  him 
so,  lanean  the  witness  Hiden;  bis  testimony. 


1127]       1  GEORGB  IV. 

joined  to  the  meeting  in  Cato-ctreet,  proTes 
this  treason.  Let  us  examine  what  Hideo's 
conduct  and  character  have  been:  you  have 
heard  motives  imputed,  you  have  bad  interests 
suggested  which  might  operate  upon  the  minds 
of  other  witnesses,  let  me  ask  you  fairly,  what 
motive  can  you  assign  to  a  man's  disclosing  a 
circumstance,  as  Hiden  did,  before  it  took 
place  ?  Why  should  he  impart  the  mete  ex- 
pectation of  a  meeting  in  Cato^street,  if  no 
meeting  had  been  intended?  Is  there  any 
charge  against  Hiden  P  Had  he  any  sinister 
end  to  serve  by  the  disclosure  ?  Gentlemen,  I 
must  confess,  I  felt  some  little  indignatioa 
while  the  comments  were  making  by  my  learn- 
ed friend  on  this  man's  testinmny;  he  said 
lord  Harrowby  was  a  very  respectable  cha- 
lacter,  a  very  worthy  man,  but  still  he  in- 
sinuated to  you  that  money  had  either  been 
offered*— 

Mr.  Adolphm, — God  forbid,  Mr.  Attorney- 
general.  I  did  not,  indeed.  I  never  meant 
to  insinuate  any  such  thing.  I  said  that 
gratitude  would  naturally  impel  my  lord  Har- 
rowby to  do  something  for  the  man  who  had 
done  this  to  save  his  life,  but  that  of  course 
nothing  would  be  done  till  after  the  trial,  and 
that  the  recollection  would  remain  upon  his 
mind  to  the  close  of  his  days. 

Mr.  Attorney  OeneraL — Gentlemen,  I  am 
extremely  glad  of  the  interruption.  Then  my 
learned  friend's  remark  points  only  to  what 
may  have  been  passing  in  the  mind  of  lord 
Harrowby.  He  may  treat  my  observation  in 
the  manner  he  thinks  it  deserves,  but  I  must 
put  vott  in  mind  that  there  is  no  question 
asked  of  the  witness  as  to  any  expectation  of 
seward  in  a  pecuniary,  or  any  other  manner. 
Then  if  he  had  formed  no  such  hope,  why  is 
the  efiiect  of  it  imputed  to  him  ?  Is  it  intended 
to  detract  from  the  credit  of  lord  Harrowby, 
or  of  the  witness  ?  With  respect  to  lord  Har- 
rowby, it  is  completely  disavowed ;  it  is  dis- 
tinctly admitted  that  he  has  not  given  Hiden 
money  for  that  which  he  has  done ;  it  is  said 
be  must  feel  gratitude  for  the  preservation  of 
which  the  witness  has  been  the  means,  but 
that  no  pecuniary  reward  has  been  bestowed. 
What  then  do  you  find  operating  upon  the 
mind  of  Hiden,  when  he  makes  the  communi- 
cation ? — at  that  time  there  was  no  charge  ex- 
isting against  him,  nothing  has  appeared  in 
4he  evidence  to  fix  upon  him  any  acquiescence 
in  the  communicated  plan ;  he  stands  before 
vou,  not  as  an  accomplice,  not  as  a  person 
lending  himself  to  the  wicked  schemes  ot  these 
conspirators,  not  as  a  man  acting  from  pecu- 
niary or  other  improper  motives ;  he  comes 
before  you  as  an  individual  to  whom  the  plot 
had  been  divulged  by  Wilson,  and  who  feeling 
it  to  be  his  bounden  duty  to  make  it  known, 
'gives  information  of  it  bv  means  of  a  letter, 
which  he  delivers  to  lord  Harrowby,  requesting 
that  nobleman  to.  put  it  into  the  hands  of  lord 
Castlereagh,  to  whom  it  was  directed. 

But  see  how  this  disclosure  affects  the  tes- 


Trial  qf  James  Inp 


HISS 


timony  of  Hiden  in  another  view.  Hewiit 
have  been  a  prophet  if  it  was  not  tnie:  kv 
did  it  happen  to  be  verified  by  the  transaction 
on  the  following  night  in  Caio-street?  Had 
he  been  in  Fox-court  ?  Had  he  ever  leen  uy 
of  the  preparations  T  No,  gentlemeD,  tlie  oolj 
knowledge  he  had  gained  was  by  ibe  cod- 
munication  of  Wilson,  and  yet  he  inputs  Ik- 
fore-hand  events  which  afterwards  take  place. 
Then  is  there  no  evidence  from  Hideo  of  the 
ulterior  purpose  of  this  plot?— does  he  tdl 
you  that  it  was  confined  to  the  aasassinaiioa 
of  his  majesty's  ministen  ?  <«  He  asked  me  to 
join  their  party ;  I  asked  for  what ;  be  said,  to 
be  one  of  a  number  who  were  going  to  neet 
to  destroy  his  migesty*s  ministen  at  a  cabiaet 
dinner ;  that  they  had  got  all  ready,  and  ww 
waiting  for  a  cabinet  dinner;  that  they  had 
some  l^gs  such  as  I  never  saw ;  that  some  oi 
them  were  made  of  turpentine,  and  some 
bound  round  with  cords,  and  some  made  «t(h 
tin,  and  their  strength  was  sudi,  that  if  s^ 
fire  to  they  would  heave  up  the  wall  in  front  of 
the  houses  opposite  to  us ;  he  said,  that  it  m 
intended  to  set  fire  to  several  houses;  w 
mentioned  some,  lord  Harrowh/s  the  duke « 
Wellington's,  lord  Sidmouth's,  Iwd  Calfl^ 
reagh's,  the  bishop  of  London's,  and  one  dor 
which  I  do  not  remember."  For  what  weri 
these  houses  to  be  set  fire  to  after  hiam^atJ,' 
ministers  were  destroyed?  If  remp^ 
the  object  of  the  assassins,  that  wooU  bate 
been  attained  by  the  borrihle  murdwrfttf 
illustrious  persons  assembled  atlordHanowtni 
but  it  does  not  rest  there,  andlfeelUtoM 
proper  to  call  your  particular  attention  towitf 
Wilson  further  told  Hiden  upon  thatooaaoj- 
— «  Things,"  he  said,  «  were  to  be  ^^^ 
the  room  where  the  ministera  were  sitlmji  «w 
all  that  escaped  the  explosion  were  to  die  nj 
the  sword,  and  that  by  UghUog  the  m  » 
would  keep  the  town  in  a  state  of  confcajji 
and  in  a  few  days  it  would  become  gwo* 
There,  gentlemen,  you  have  the  kfy:«**!V. 
the  whole  of  the  object  they  had  iDfi«»» 
inefficient  as  their  means,  vriW  as  their  sdww. 
visionary  as  their  purpose  may  »PP^^ 
sitting  here  soberly  and  calmly  to  co«>«J J 
them,  these  conspirators  viewed  wem  r^ 
very  different  eyes ;  they  vainly  in»P"*"  "JJ 
such  a  blow  being  struck,  the  i»«0Dtenw 

people  (as  Thistlewood  had  i«pw«"ri  u^ 
to  be)  would  join  them  with  an  overwhcl^ai 
force,  and  enable  them  to  destroy  "e.«>^ 

rivemment,  and  erect  another  ap<>".'^j""J 
say,  therefore,  that  this  commaniatwo " 
Wilson  to  Hiden,  coupled  widi  the  other »» 
in  the  case,  proves,  beyond  all  qaeit«»i  ^ 
plot  they  had  in  contemplation.  ^ 

But  see  how  the  conversations  Wiis^rJ 
with  Hiden,  confirm  Adams  also:  r9jr 
find  that  after  there  was  a  fiirther  comjj 
cation  between  them  on  the  afternoon  « 
meeting  in  Cato^treet,  Wilson  »d»^ 
"you  are  the  very  man  I ^^J^^A 
ed  "  what  is,  there  gomg  to  D^^^TTjajiit 
there  is  going  to  be  a  cabinet  dioiitf  «^ 


1149] 


Jbr'Higk  TreatOH, 


A:.D.  1890. 


riido 


at  lord  Hdtnmhy%  in  Ofosrenor-flqaare,  and  I 
was  to  be  sute  to  come— I  asked  where  I 
should  come— he  said  I  was  to  come  up  to 
John-street,  to  the.  Horse  and  Groom,  or  to 
stand  at  the  corner  of  Cato^treet,  till  I  was 
shoved  into  a  stable.  I  asked  him  how  many 
there  were  to  be,  he  said  there  were  foar  di« 
visions,  one  in  GrayVinn-Ianet  one  in  the 
Borough,  and  one  in  the  city,  or  Gee's-court, 
besides  that  in  Cato-street — ^he  said  GeeV 
court  was  all  in  it,  but  tbev  would  not  move 
till  the  English  had  begun ;  he  said  after  they 
had  been  at  Grosvenor-square,  they  meant  to 
retreat  to  somewhere  about  the  Mansion-house, 
that  was  where  all  the  parties  were  to  meet;" 
now  you  will  recollect  that  Adams  tells  you 
their  plan  was,  to  get  possession  of  the  Man- 
sion-house, and  make  it  the  seat  of  the  pro- 
visional government ;  be  is  confinned  in  this 
by  Hiden,  not  one  of  the  conspirator*—*'  he 
said  also  there  were  places  where  they  could 
take  the  cannon,  four  pieces  in  some  Artillery- 
ground,  by  killing  the  sentry,  and  two  pieces 
m  GrayVinn-lane,  which  could  easily  be  got 
at,  by  knocking  in  some  door.'^ 

It  is  aigued  before  you  with  great  force,  and 
with  considerable  ingenuity  and  eloquence, 
that  Adams's  testimony  cannot  be  believed, 
because  this  story  of  taking  the  cannon  in 
Gray  Vinn-lane,  and  *9X  the  Artillery-ground, 
is  incredible,  and  therefore  the  whole  must  be 
the  invention  of  Adams,  and  Adams  alone; 
but  you  will  find  other  persons  did  not  con- 
sider it  so  visionary — ^Wilson  not  only  men- 
tioned the  plan  to  Adams,  but  mentioned  it 
with  apparent  confidence  in  its  practicability. 
Thus  is  the  existence  of  the  general  plot  con- 
^rmed,  and  the  testimony  of  Adams  himself 
in  a  very  material  point  supported. 

An  attempt  was  made  on  the  cross-examina- 
tion, to  shake  the  credit  of  Hiden,  by  an  in- 
quiry into  his  place  of  residence,  and  into  what 
he  was  going  aoout  on  the  evening  of  the  23rd  ; 
and  my  learned  friend  had  gravely  insisted,  that 
because  he  asked  him  where  he  lived,  and  he 
answered  Manchester-mews,  Manchester- 
square,  and  it  turned  out  that  no  longer  ago 
than  last  Saturday  he  was  taken  in  execution 
for  debt,  and  therefore  came  up  in  custody  of 
an  officer*  the  first  answer  was  false,  although 
be  left  his  wife  and  family  in  Manchester-mews. 
If  such  a  misfortune  should  happen  to  any  of 
you  as  the  being  taken  to  prison  for  debt,  and 
three  days  after  you  were  asked  wher^  your  re- 
mdence  was,  would  you  think  you  told  a  fidse- 
hpod,  if  you  had  said  my  residence  is  in  Man- 
ehester-mews,  or  wherever  it  may  be  f  The  man 
had  just  been  removed  from  his  house,  he  vras 
brought  up  in  custody,  he  could  not  have  meant 
by  that  answer  to  deceive  any  person,  because 
he  knew  that  a  habeas  corpus  had  been  issued 
to  bring  him  here,  and  that  he  could  not  ap- 
-oen  but  in  the  custody  of  an  officer;  and  yet 
for  want  of  other  materials  you  were  seriously 
addressed  upon  this  topic  by  one  of  my  learned 
friends  at  great  length,  and  asked  to  disbelieve 
the  testimony  of  Hklen. 


But  he'  was  also  cross-examined  as  to  a 
family  in  Princes-street,  Cavendish-square^ 
which  he  had  served  for  three  yean,  and 
I  cannot  forget  that  the  witness  was  loudly 
told  to  be  accurate  in  what  he  said,  because 
inquiries  would  be  made,  to  see  whether  he 
told  truth  or  not.  Many  hours  have  now 
passed  over  our  heads  since  Hiden  was  ex- 
amined ;  ample  opportunity  has  been  afforded 
to  the  prisoner  at  .toe  bar,  to  discover  whethec 
that  fact  was  true  or  false ;  but  no  witness  has 
been  produced  to  you  to  shew  that  he  was  in- 
correct in  any  part  of  his  testimony.  Hiden 
then  stands  uncontradicted  ;  he  is  a  man 
against  whom  there  is  no  imputation  of  pre- 
vious bad  conduct  of  any  description ;  he  an- 
swered most  willingly  every  inquiry  respect- 
ing  the  persons  with  whom  he  has  lived  as  ser- 
vant, to  whom  access  therefore  might  have 
been  had,  if  any  thing  could  be  found  against 
him;  it  was  not  last  night  that  the  prisoner 
knew  for  the  first  time  that  Hiden  was  to  be  a 
witness,  for  by  the  lenity  of  our  law,  as  my. 
learned  friends  know,  he  has  had  for  nearly  a 
month  in  his  possession  a  list  of  all  the  wit- 
nesses who  could  be  produced  against  him, 
their  places  of  residence,  and  their  business  or 
occupations,  so  that  he  can  have  no  excuse  to 
make  that  he  is  taken  by  surprise,  and  is  not 
therefore  prepared  to  investigate  Uie  charactex 
of  the  witness. 

My  learned  friend  made  some  observations 
on  the  list  of  witnesses,  that  the  number  is  very 
great,  and  therefore,  the  difficulty  they  had  in 
considering  who  was  to  be  called  in  this  or 
that  particular  case,  was  great  also;  this,  gentle- 
men, is  said  to  induce  you  to  suppose ;  that 
the  prisoner  has  been  subjected  to  hardship. 
Between  forty  and  fifty  of  those  witnesses  are 
either  police  officers,  wardens  of  the  Tower^ 
or  police  magistrates,  whose  testimony  has 
not,  but  might  have  been  wanted,  and  whose 
names,  therefore,  the  legal  advisers  of  the  Crown 
were  obliged  to  insert,  for  this  reason,  that  if 
the  name  of  a  witness  is  not  in  the  list  he  can- 
not be  examined  against  the  prisoner.  We 
were  obliged  to  insert  not  only  those  who  were 
known  to  be  acouainted  with  the  facts,  but 
those  also  who,  by  the  remotest  possibility^ 
could  be  necessary  to  be  produced  before  you. 
I  believe,  therefore,  every  warder  of  the  Tower 
is  in  that  list,  from  the  apprehension,  that 
something  might  occur  after  the  prisoners  were 
in  custody^  that  it  might  be  material  to  give 
in  evidence:  all  the  police  officers,  all  the 
soldiers  who  were  in  Catorstreet,  only  two  of 
whom  have  been  called,  are  included  in  it ;  and 
therefore  the  complaint  which  has  been  made, 
appears  to  me  to  oe  one,  which,  aAer  this  ex- 
manation,  you  will  think  without  foundation. 
They  knew  as  well  as  we  did  who  the  material 
witnesses  were  likely  to  be,  and  had  an  op- 
portunity of  discovering  evexy  thing  that  could 
be  brought  forward  against  this  or  that  par* 
ticular  witness. 

I  have  now  observed  upon  the  testimony  of 
Adamsy  Moaument  and  Hiden.    I  do  not 


tt^l]       1  GEORGE  IV. 

trooble  you  widi  goiw  ovtr  Ibe  wiwis  pofoti 
ofcoBfirmitWii,  bat  I  beg  to  eill  your  atleatioD 
to  wbat  took  pUco  tt  Cato^tmtl^  aod  lo  tbo 
■latariak  cottectod  Iheve,  wiih  a  tmw  to  Aew 
iIm  ultimate  ol^tcu  of  this  plot.  Itie  eiiaie. 
tod  that  ooe  part  of  the  plan  wai  to  aseaMiaaie 
bie  mnjei^fl  ministen:  what  were  tba  netro- 
iMnts  proTided  ?  Wero  they  ooly  adequate 
|o  that  purpose,  or  were  they  «ot  evidently 
designed  lor  a  larger  and  mofo  extenoiTo 
scheme  f  I  know  not  how  many  band^grsnades 
were  found ;  you  have  seen  them,  and  had  one 
^  them  opened,  and  tou  have  heasd  the  effects 
Hkely  to  be  produced  by  their  exploeion.  To 
the  work  ofassesstnation  many  of  the  inetiw- 
ments  which  lie  on  the  table  are  weH  adapted ; 
I  mean  the  guns,  the  pistols,  and  the  swords. 
Bat  were  p&es  requisite^  or  were  they  not 
father  designed  for  operations  in  the  streets? 
A  pike  in  a  room  is  of  little  utility,  and  when 
you  see  the  length  of  their  handlei,  and  the 
number  of  diem  (many  more  than  were  no> 
cessaiy  for  the  party  assembled  in  Cato* 
street),  I  think  you  wiU  agree  with  me  that 
they,  could  be  prepared  for  no  other  purpose, 
but  to  be  used  in  the  open  air.  But  gentle- 
men,  1,300  rounds  of  bell  cartridges  bare  been 
shewn  to  you,  965  in  the  box,  and  between 
300  and  300  found  in  a  bag  at  Tidd*s  house- 
were  those  designed  merely  for  the  assassina^ 
tton  of  his  majesty's  ministers  T-^an  you  en- 
tertain a  doubt  that  they  were  intended  for 
more  extensive  destruction  T  There  is  another 
part  of  tfie  preparations  which  hardly  requires 
a  remark  to  satisfy  you,  it  was  meant  for  other 
objects ;  you  hare  seen  the  flannel  bags  and 
their  contents,  and  it  is  in  evidence  that  they 
are  cartridges  for  cannon,  and  are  made  to  be 
used  in  six-pounders.  Were  there  to  be  any 
eannon  at  lord  Harrowby's? — ^No.  How  then 
were  these  cartridges  to  be  applied?  The 
answer  is  obrioos.  Wilson  communicated 
to  Hiden  that  cannon  were  to  be  taken  at 
the  Light-horse  Volunteers  riding  school,  in 
GraVs-Inn-lane,  and  at  the  Artillery-ground : 
for  those  cannon  these  cartridges  were  intended ; 
no  reasonable  man  can  doubt  it ;  some  of  them 
were  found  at  Tidd's  and  some  at  Brunt's, 
none  in  Cato-street;  is  it  not  then  evident  that 
they  were  desianed  for  the  accomplishment  of 
other  deeds  of  Dlood,  after  these  conspirators 
had  perpetrated  the  assassination  in  OrosvenoN 
squared 

Were  no  other  persons  engaged  in  thb  plan 
than  those  who  assembled  in  Cato-street  f 
Recollect,  gentlemen.  Hale  says,  that  after  the 
party  was  gone  to  Cato^treet  he  was  directed 
to  carrjr  any  persons  that  called  at  Brunt's,  to 
the  White  Hart  in  BrookVmarket ;  Potter  and 
others  did  call ;  for  what  purpose  ?  They  were 
not  going  to  Cato-stieet ;  they  were  not  of  the 
party  to  attack  lord  Harrowby's.  The  ez« 
pression  of  Brunt,  when  be  returned  to  his 
nouse  in  the  evening,  confirms  the  apprentice. 
**  We  will  go  out — all  is  not  over — something 
is  yet  to  be  done."  What  was  to  be  done  ? 
They  had  been  defeated  in  the  pbm  of  assassi- 


TiM  ofJame$  Ing$ 


(list 


nalng  his  majesty^  toinislen.  Tbatsomettii^ 
was  ezpecfed  to  be  effected  by  those  persons 
spoken  of  by  Wilson  to  Hiden,  of  whom  PaKs 
and  Poller  were  two.  My  learned  Ineod 
iheught  he  deiivoi)  a  triumphant  argument  from 
the  absence  of  Palin;  but  I  \h\vk  it  operates 
agaiwt  the  prisoner  at  the  bar ;  he  says,  it  ap- 
pears that  a  reward  has  been  offi»red  for  Palin's 
apprehension,  and  asks  therefore  how  be  can 
pioduce  him  on  tim  occasion ;  he  tells  you 
Palin  has  absconded — ^absoonded  for  whatP-^ 
Is  he  a  partictpater  in  the  plot  at  Cato-street? 
Was  he  at  Cato-etreet?  He  has  absconded, 
because  he  knows  there  were  other  purposes  in 
view,  trakorous  and  treasonable,  in  which  be 
Is  deeply  Implicated ;  that  is  the  reason  why  be 
b  not  forth-coming  to-day. 

How  does  this  apply  to  Hall,  Cook,  Hairis^ 
Potter,  and  others,  whom  Adams  has  men- 
tioned ?  Hall  might  be  produced ;  my  learned 
friends  do  not  bring  him  forward ;  and  their 
argument  is  this,  Adamsls  story  is  a  fiction^ 
these  persons  were  not  there,  or  If  they  were 
there  what  he  states  to  have  passed  did  not 
take  ]^ace.  If  they  were  not  tnere  they  might 
be  csbed  to  prove  that  foot ;  it  could  not  hurt 
them ;  all  of  them  would  be  able  to  conlradict 
Adams,  arid  satisiV  you  that  what  he  has  sworn 
Is  false ;  what  is  the  plain  inference  fVom  this  ^ 
that  thev  were  there;  and  if  they  were,  as 
Adams  has  stated  wluit  occurred  on  several 
occasions,  they  might  be  made  witnesses  to 
contradict  him.  I  say,  the  absence  of  those 
men  confirms  beyond  tne  possibility  of  doubt 
the  testimony  of  Adams. 

Then  if  this  be  so,  how  stands  the  case 
befbre  you  in  point  of  proof?  The  feet  off 
their  meeting  in  Cato-street,  the  preparatioBS 
which  are  inade,  the  intention  to  assassinate 
his  mijestv's  ministers,  are  not  only  proved  ^ 
but  not  denied  by  the  prisoner  at  ttie  bar. 
What  obiect  had  uiese  men  in  the  assassin*^ 
tion  of  his  majesty's  miniisters,  if  it  was  not 
to  be  followed  up  by  other  acts  ?  Tou  have  it 
in  evidence  from  Hiden,  you  hare  it  in  evi- 
dence from  Monument,  the  feet  itself,  the 
efndenda  rei  shews  that  ther  had  in  their  minds 
that  ulterior  purpose  which  we  charge,  and 
which  is  the  only  question  you  have  to  try  on 
this  occasion.  Do  not  be  deceived  by  any 
arguments  which  you  have  heard,  that  you  are 
to  consider  whether  the  plan  could  be  efleded 
—whether  the  means  were  adequate  to  the 
end — whether  it  was  not  wild  and  visionarv. 
To  you  and  me  considering  the  case  calmly 
it  may  appear  to  be  so ;  it  was  wild,  it  waa 
visionary,  my  learned  friend  says,  xmequaUed 
in  folly  in  the  history  of  this  country  or  any 
other;  and  he  diallenged  me  to  produce 
before  yon  Pespardfs  case  as'  a  parauel,  and 
eommented  at  mat  letigth  upon  the  facts  of 
it;  and  you  wttt  recollect  that  Thistlewood^ 
one  of  the  psrt^,  had  that  plot  in  his  mind|' 
even  in  Cato-street ;  for  he  said,  when  ixm* 
plaint  was  made  of  their  want  of  fotce,  "ttiaf 
rf  iliey  did  not  proceed  then,  it  woiild  be  a 
Despard's  job."     The  plaii  of  Despard  wtt 


l»33l 


Jbr.HigA  Tteas<m* 


11194 


quite  as  wild  tnd  quite  as  visionary  as  the 
present  Part  of  his  scheme  was,  to  assassinate 
the  kingy  pait  of  this  was  to  assassinate  the 
ministers.  Despard  thought  he  could  take 
the  Tor/er  and  the  Bank,  with  means  less  effec- 
tual than  those  exhibited  on  this  occasion; 
he  had  a  few  ineni  but  where  were  his  prepa- 
rations? Had  he  hand-grenades— «had  be  pis- 
tols— had  he  pikes — had  he  ball-qictridges — 
had  he  all  those  implements  which  have  been 
produced  to  you?  he  imagined  that  with 
twenty  men  he  could  take  possession  of  the 
large  cannon  in  the  p&rk,  and  fire  it  at  his 
majesty  as  be  was  going  to  parliament,  -and 
that  they  might  afterwards  make  themselves 
masters  of  the  l^ower,  and  establish  a  provi- 
sional government.  My  learned  friend  says, 
he  might  have  taken  possession  of  the 
cannon  in  the  Park,  and  have  nuirdered 
his  miyesty ;  and  I  sav  here  with  respect  to 
the  assassination  of  his  mi^^atjr's  ministers, 
it  appears  to  me  that  was  not  difficult  of 
execution,  and  would  probably  have  been 
carried  into  effect,  I  will  not  describe  to  you 
what  has  been  so  well  pictured  by  my  friend 
the  Solicitor-geoeral ;  I  only  ask  you  to  con- 
ceive what  would  have  been  the  confusion  and 
tenor  through  the  metropolis,  if  they  had  been 
able  to  accomplish  that  and  some  other  parts 
of  their  plan — ^if  in  the  dead  of  the  night,  the 
inhabitants  of  this  great  city  had  been  alarmed 
by  fires  in  various  places  by  the  report  that 
his  nujesi^'s  ministers  had  been  destroyed  in 
GrosvesDorHMiuare,  and  that  there  were  par* 
ties  in  arms  roving  over  the  town.  It  is  not 
al  all  impossible,  that  for  a  few  houcs  the  con- 
spirators might  actually  have  been  in  jesses- 
sioo  of  London ;  there  was  nothing  visionary 
in  the  primary  objects  of  their  plot;  the 
destruction  of  the  ministers,  the  firing  of 
houses,  were  both  practicable ;  I  admit  the 
rest  of  their  scheme  could  not  have  been  car- 
ried  into  effect,  nor  could  Despard's;  thev 
were,  to  a  certain  extent,  both  equally  wild. 
If  my  learned  firiends  cite  instances,  I  cite 
X>espard*s  case  as  one,  in  which  similar 
plans  had  been  conceived,  and  similar  inten- 
tions manifested ;  and  for  which  that  unfor- 
tunate man  suffered  on  the  scaffold. 

Then,  gentlemen,  do  not  be  led  away  by 
the  notion,  thatbecause  the  conspiracy  appears 
^rild  or  visionary,  you  are  to  aismiss  it  from 
your  consideration;  the  question  is  not, 
whether  its  objects  could  have  been  efiected,  but 
whether  they  were  contemplated  by  the.prfsoner 
at  the  bar,  and  his  associates. 

With  respect  to  the  facts  as  tlue^  affect  the 
prisoner,  I  will  not  go  over  them  particularly; 
vou  find  him  at  their  various  meetings  ;  you  find 
him  using  expressions  at  those  meetings,  indi* 
«atiog-his  intentions;  but,  above  aU,  you  find 
Lim  nnallyat  Cato-street:^he  st^she  went 
tb#pe  ipoocently ;.  you  will  recollect  the  mm* 
ner  in  which  he  was  acooutrod,  -be  -had  twor 
stj^fs  over  his  shoulde^,  frm  which -huMg 
two  haversacks ;  he  had  a  belt  loundb^  waist 
In  which,  wew  a  brace  of  .pistols ;  |^  kai  this 


A.  D.  IB9Q. 


I^nife,  for  no  doubt  can  be  entertaiaed  that  b« 
was  the  nwn  who  had  the  knife,  his  owa 
defence  has  admitted  it;  he  was  bylhestep^ 
ladder  which  ascended  to  the  loft  above;  he  wae 
there  first  seized  by  the  officer,  who  took  fromhifla 
the  knifp,and  I  think,  the  sword ;  hethenu8seay#d 
from  the  stable ;  he  is  pursoed ;  you  renem- 
ber  the  violent  resistance  he  made ;  this  mea^ 
who  would  have  you  believe  he  was  innocent 
of  any  improper  object,  or  any  improper  pur- 
pose, actnally  dtscharges  a  pistol  at  the  officer, 
and  on  being  intenogated  oy  that  <^cer  why 
he  fired  at  him,  he  exclaimed,  with  bratal 
ferocity,  that  he  wished  he  had  shot  him  dead. 

Then  the  cloth  case  of  the  knife  is  aotuali|y 
found  on  his  person  it  has  been  &tted  to  the 
knife,  as  you  have  seen,  aa<Lthat  case  is  aotiib- 
ally  made  of  the  same  materials  of  whi<^  iJho 
belt  round  his  waist  was  composed  ;  thos  yoa 
have  him  from  the  commencement  of  the  ploA 
to  the  dose,  active  in  the  promotion  of  thia 
design.  I  do  not  trouble  you  at  present,  nor 
will  I,  with  the  various  expressions. be used» 
the  savage  exaltation  he  displayed  when  they 
found  the  cabinet  dinner  was  to  take  plaee,  or 
his  determination  to  mutilate  sooM  of  the 
ministers,  and  expose  theur  mangled  limbs  to 
the  populace.  Butlauut  beg  yon  to  sec^ 
lect  that  in  Cato-street .  Davidson  was  tak^QA 
and  if  anv  thing  were  wanting  to  shew  the 
des^p[is  of  these  conspiratom,  you  have  it  in 
Davidson's  expression — ^  Who  would  not  die 
in  liberty's  cause."  Then  the  cause  in  whtdi 
they  were  embarked  was  one  for  psoouring 
liberty  by  the  overthrow  of  the  country  ia 
which  we  live ;  here  is  a  declaration  of  one  af 
the  party  as  to  the  object  of  their  plot. 

This  being  the  case,  and  these  the  questions 
for  vour  consideration,  I  leave  with  peife«[t 
confidence  to  vou  the  verdict  you  have  to  pior 
nounce.  I  do  assure  you,  gentlemen,  :un- 
feignedly,  that  my  only  anxiety  has  been  ihaA 
the  case  should  be  presented  to  yon  fairiy,  and 
with  such  observations  on  rov  part  as  my  duty 
as  a  servant  of  the  public  calls  on  me  to  make 
in  answer  to  those  offered  to  you  on  the  pa^ 
pf  the  prisoner.  The  constitution  of  the  country 
has  wisely  placed  in  your  breasts  the  ultimate 
determination  of  this  question.  It  has  been 
represented  to  you,  and  truly,  by  my  learned 
friend  who  las^  addressed  you,  that  it  is.  a  case 
of  very  great  importance.  Undoubtedly,  i]t 
is  so,  but  there  is  nothing  so  important  as  the 
due  administration  of  justice;  if  the  charge 
has  failed  in  your  estimation,  in  proof,  if 
you  entertain  a  reasonable  doubt  of  the  guilt 
of  the  unhappy  man  at  the  bar  {but  let  it  be 
recollected,  it  must  be  a  reatonabU  doubQ,— 
then  the  merciful  inclination  of  •our  laws  will 
require  that  you  should  acquit  the  pri(9one|. 
But  if  the  facts  and  the  testimony  by  ^vhioli 
they  have  b^en  proved,  clearly  satisfy,  your 
minds  that  the  change  has  b^en  substAiUiatfMl 
--*that  the  designs  which  I  have  stisM  V>  9<m 
were barboureain that ' man's boiofi^  %pdtlmt 
he  acted  with  otJJMn  <in  .the  furtberMMPO  m)4 
towP^eti9n'Of  ihmp  ^^  ^  wtaesses  hlive 


1135]        1  GEORGE  IV. 

told  you — ^tben^  important  as  the  case  is  -as  it 
regards  tbe  prisoner,  it  becomes  infinitelr 
more  important  as  it  affects  tbe  public,  ana 
it  will  be  your  bounden  duty  to  find  him 
guilty.  That  you  will  d^ide  uprightly  and 
honestly,  no  man  who  has  witnessed  your 
attention  and  desire  to  scrutinize  and  weigh 
tfab  case,  can  doubt. 

SUMMINO-VP. 

•  Lord  Chief  Justice  DaUoi.  —  Gentlemen  of 
the  Juiy ;  this  long  and  painful  inquiry  being 
now  (so  far  as  regards  tbe  proof  and  the  ob- 
senrations  from  the  bar)^rminated,  it  becomes 
lay  duty  to  recapitulate  the  evidence,  with 
auch  comments  as  the  circumstances  of  the 
«ase  shall  seem  to  roe  to  require.  In  this  late 
"•tage  of  the  proceeding,  it  would  be  more  than 
aupetilttous — ^it  would  be  idle  to  remind  you, 
t£at  the  charge  imputes  to  the  prisoner  at  the 
bar  the  highest  crime  which  any  subject  can 
commit  Other  offences  aim  at  the  person 
•or  property  of  individuals,  but  high  treason', 
by  seeking  the  subversion  of  the  established 
government,  aims  at  the  property,  the  liberty, 
and  the  lives  of  all.  Still,  however,  nothing 
'will  depend  upon  the  comparative  magnitude 
-of  this  ^ence ;  for  be  the  alleged  crime  great 
^>r  small,  every  man,  standing  in  tlie  situation 
in  which  the  prisoner  is  pla^,  is  entitled'  to 
have  the  charge  against  him  deariv  and  satis- 
fMtorily  proved ;  with  this  only  difl^ence  (and 
I  make  the  obtermtion  in  the  outset,  as  being 
in  favour  of  the  prisoner),  that  in  proportion 
to  the  magnitude  of  the  offence  and  the  con- 
•equences  whieh  result  from  his  conviction, 
ought  the  proof  to  be  clear  and  satisfactory. 
Whether,  in  the  present  case,  it  be  so  or  not, 
it  will  ultimately  be  your  exclusive  duty  to 
determine. 

-  The  indictment  contains  different  counts  or 
charges  which  are  founded  upon  two  particular 
statutes ;  the  first  being  an  ancient  statute,  to 
which  you  have  already  been  frequently  re- 
ferred, and  which  passed  in  the  reign  of 
Edward  the  3rd ;  the  second  a  more  recent 
act,  which  passed  in  the  reign  of  his  late  ma- 
jesty. Ana,  in  the  outset,  and  before  I  draw 
your  attention  to  any  part  of  the  evidence,  I 
shall  describe  the  nature  and  substance  of  these 
different  charges  disentangled  from  technical 
and  artificial  statement.  Tbe  first  count  is  a 
charge  of  compassing  and  imagining  to  depose 
the  king — which  is  made  treason  by  the  statute 
which  passed  m  the  reign  of  his  late  majesty, 
the  3dtli  of  Geo.  the  Srd — and  the  overt  or 
open  acts  stated  in  the  indictment,  are  mani- 
festations of  a  secret  intent ;  for  it  is  in  the  in- 
tention that  the  crime  of  high  treason  consists^ 
The  treason  alleged,  is  compassing  and  ima- 
gining to  depose  the  king,  and  tbe  overt  acts 
are  in  themselves  such,  all  or  some  of  them,' 
as  are  sufficient  in  point  of  law  to  bring  the 
icaae 'within  the  treason  charged,  supposing  tlie 
overt  acts  themselves  to  be  as  matter  of  fact 
made  out  by  sufficient  and  satisfactory  proof. 

-  Ptsling  ove^  the  second,  the  third  count 


Trial  &f  James  Ingt 


nisd 


is  a  charge  of  conspiracy  to  levy  war  against 
the  king,  in  order  to  compel  his  mayesty 
to  change  his  measures  and  with  respect 
to  Uiis  also,  I  have  to  inform  you,  that  the 
overt  acts  which  are  stated  in  support 
of  this  count,  are  dearly  sufficient  to  sustain 
the  charge  in  point  of  law,  if  the  acts 
themselves  be  established  by  the  testimony 
before  yon. 

With  respect  to  the  two  remaining  counts 
upon  the  face  of  this  indictment,  it  is  not 
necessary  to  go  particularly  into  them ;  the 
one  is  a  charge  of  levying  war,  which  need  not 
be  particularly  adverted  to  in  this  ^case ;  but 
this  I  will  say  only,  if  the  evidence  which 
you  have  heard  be  true,  and  the  insurrectioit 
which  is  sworn  to  have  been  intended  bad 
taken  place,  and  if  it  were  an  insurrection  not 
for  a  private  purpose,  but  for  a  public  and 
genersi  purpose,  such  insurrection  would  have 
been  a  levying  war  ^;ainst  the  king ;  but  in 
this  case,  the  charge  is  not  the  acitud  Uvyimf 
war  against  the  king,  but  the  oompkin^  to  levy 
war.  With  respect  to  the  remaining  count, 
that  of  conspiring  to  put  the  king  to  death,  I 
would  state  to  you,  if  it  were  necessary, 
that  it  is  not  requisite  in  order  to  support  a 
charge  of  such  a  description,  that  any  blow 
should  be  actually  aimed  or  intended  to  be 
aimed  at  the  roytd  person,  or  that  the  natural 
life  of  the  king  should  be  the  direct  object  of 
those  who  enter  into  a  conspiracy  of  such  de- 
scription ;  it  is  enough  that  measures  are  me- 
ditated calculated  to  bring  about  a  change  in 
the  government,  the  effect  and  tendency  of 
which  would  be  as  a  natural  and  probable 
consequence,  the  death  of  the  king.  But,  how« 
ever,  with  respect  to  these  counts,  to  render 
the  investigation  as  simple  as  possible,  yos 
may  dismiss  them  from  your  consideration,  and 
confine  youselves  to  the  two  counts,  one  of  whidi 
states  the  compassing  and  imagining  the  deadi 
of  the  king,  and  the  other  a  conspiracy  to  levy 
vrar  in  order  to  compel  the  king  to  change 
his  measures.  Having  thus  explained  the 
nature  of  the  charge,  to  which  it  will  be  ne- 
cessary for  you  to  apply  your  minds,  I  pro- 
ceed immediately  to  recapitulate  the  evidence. 

The  first  witness  called  is  Robert  Adams, 
a  prisoner  in  custody  upon  the  same  charge  as 
that  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  The 
account  which  he  oegan  by  giving  of  himsdf 
is,  that  before  he  was  taken  he  lived  in  Hole- 
in-the-wall-passage,  near  BrookVraarket ;  he 
was  acouainted  with  Brunt;  the  commence- 
ment or  his  acouaintance  with  him  was  at 
Cambray,  who  tlien,  in  1816,  passed  by  the 
name  of  Morton.  He  savs,  ^'i  was  mvsdf 
originally  a  soldier  in  the  Oxford  Blues,  abont 
eighteen  years  ago,  and  from  those  I  was  dis- 
charged, owing  to  illneas,  and  since  then  1 
have  been  a  shoemaker.  I  pursued  that  trade 
vrhile  I  vras  in  France  with  the  English  amy. 
When  I  returned  to  England,  I  renewed  my 
acquaintance 'w&h 'Brunt ;  he  lived  in  Fox* 
court,  Ora/i^inn-lane.''  He  is  then  asked  as 
toThistl«wobd ;  and  he  mfn,  ^  ItoovTWacle^ 


11373 


Jht  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


11138 


ivoody  with  whom  I  first  became  acqtiainted 
on  the  12th  of  January,  that  was  on  a  Wednes- 
day, in  this  year ;  Brant  and  Ings  introduced 
me  to  him ;  I  had  known  Ings/  that  is,  the 
prisoDer  at  the  bar,  **  five  or  six  days  before/' 
So  that  with  respect  to  Thistlewood,  the  evi- 
dence of  Adams  opens  with  the  fact,  that  he 
was  introduced  to  ThistTewood  not  merely  by 
Brant,  but  by  Ings,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar. 
He  was  introduced  to  Thistlewood  at  his, 
Thistlewood'is,  lodgings  in  Stanhope-street, 
Clare-market.  ^^I  had  some  conversation 
with  Thistlewood  in  the  nresence  of  Brunt 
and  Ings.  ^On  Brunt  introaucing  me  into  the 
room  to  Thistlewood,  he  said,  '  Here,  Mr. 
Thistlewood,  is  the  man  I  was  speaking  to 
you  of.'  ^Is  this  the  man?*  he  said;  and 
then,  turning  to  me,  he  said,  ^You  lately 
belonged  to  the  Life-guards?'  I  said,  'No, 
to  the  Blues.*  He  said,  '  I  presume  you  can 
use  the  sword  well,  and  are  a  good  soldier?' 
I  answered,  thai  once  I  was  a  good  soldier, 
smd  could  use  the  sword  well ;  and  that,  even 
now,  I  could  use  it  to  defend  myself,  if  ever  it 
ihould  become  necessary.  He  then  said  of 
the  different  shopkeepers  in  London,  that  they 
were  all  a  set  ot  aristocrats,  and  all  working 
under  one  system ;  that  he  should  glory  to 
see  the  day  that  their  shops  were  all  shut  up 
and  well  plundered.  He  next  talked  of  Hunt, 
that  he  Was  a  eoward,  and  no  friend  of  the 
people;   and  he  had  no  doubt,  if  he  could 

get  into  Whitehall,  and  overlook  the  govem- 
lent  books  there,  he  should  find  his  name  as 
a  spy  employed  by  them.  He  next  spoke  of 
Coobett,  and  said  he  was  equally  bad;  for 
ipvith  all  bis  writings,  they  were  not  calculated 
to  do  good  to  the  public  at  all.  Nothing  fur- 
ther passed  at  this  time.  Brunt  said,  he  had 
two  men  to  call  upon  in  Camaby-market,  and 
iisked  Thistlewood  whether  he  would  call  upon 
them  for  the  purpose  of  seeing  these  men  ? 
Thistlewood  declined  it,  and  upon  that  we 
left  the  room  with  Brunt  and  Ings.  On  the 
17th  of  January,  I  went  to  prison  for  debt ; 
on  Sunday,  the  IGth,"  that  is,  the  day  before, 
**  I  had  another  interview  with  Brunt,  at  the 
White  Hart,  in  Brook's-market,  in  a  room  at 
the  back.  At  this  meeting,  Thistlewood,  Ings,** 
(the  prisoner  at  the  bar)  **  Hall,  Brunt,  Tidd, 
smd  tio  other  persons  that  I  recollect,  were 
presept.  It  was  the  following  day  that  I  went 
to  prison  for  debt,  and  in  prison  I  remained 
until  the  day  after  the  death  of  the  king.  I 
saw  Ings  on  the  31st  of  January,  at  the  White 
Hart ;  and  I  saw  him  also  at  Brunt's  room  in 
the  course  of  this  day ;  I  mean  on  the  second 
floor  front  room.*'  He.  says  there  was  also 
smother,  aback  room,  upon  the  same  floor, 
imd  that  room  was  the  place  at  which  the 
meeting  took  place ;  this  was  between  six  and 
seven  itf  the  evening,  ''  I  had  never  met  them 
before^  and  I  then  went  to  this  place  for  the 
first  time.  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings,  Hall, 
and  Edwavds  were  there,  and  nothing  particu« 
}ar  passed  in  the  course  of  this  evening.  The 
V^edoesday  nii^ht  following  was  the  next  time 
VOL.  XXXIIL 


I  was  there,  about  seven  o*clock  in  the  even* 
ing,  on  the  2nd  of  February,  and  I  found 
Ings,  Hall,  Harrison,  and  Davidson  there,  and 
Thistlewood,  Brunt,  and  Edwards.  There 
was  a  conversation  between  them  respecting 
the  indisposition  of  the  new  king ;  they  said  9, 
few  words  on  this  subject.  At  Uiis  time  I  saw 
in  the  room  some  pike-staves ;  Thistlewood 
said,  he  wished  they  were  feruled,  and  holes 
bored  at  the  end  or  them  in  order  to  admit 
the  pike,  that  they  might  be  taken  to  a  place 
of  safety,  which  be  called  the  d^pdt,  not  con-^ 
sidering  them  to  be  safe  in  the  place  in  which 
they  were.  I  did  not  know  at  tnis  time  whero 
the  d^pot  was ;  but  I  learned,  afterwards,  it 
was  at  Tidd 's,  who  lived  in  Hole-in-the-wall-i 
passage,  adjoining  the  house  in  which  I  lived  ; 
the  staves  were  green  sticks  of  the  substance 
of  my  wrist ;  they  were  brought  from  the  other 
side  of  the  water ;  they  were  fresh  cut,  quite 
green,  and  thicker  than  my  wrist ;  *the  same 
evening  I  saw  Ings  pull  a  pistol  from  his 
pocket ;  they  said  in  the  course  of  conversation 
that  they  thought  the  king  would  die ;  Thistle- 
wood said,  he  had  rather  the  new  king  would  Um 
for  a  little  while  longer^* — and  you  virill.attend 
to  this,  gentlemen — **  a»  it  was  not  their  intent 
tion  thai  he  ihoM  ever  wear  the  crown  ;^  he 
alluded  to  the  people  of  the  country  in  general,^ 
saying  that  they  were  all  a  parcel  of  cowards  ; 
and  Ings  said,  on  the  day  the*  prince  regent 
went  to  open  the  parliament  I  myself  went 
into  the  Park,  took  a  pistol  in  my  pocket;  with 
the  sole  intention  to  shoot  the  pnnce  regent  |f 
he  then  pulled  a  pistol  out  of  his  pocket,  and 
said,  this  is  the  pistol  which  I  took,  regretting 
within  himself  tliat  he  had  not  an  opportunity, 
to  do  what  he  had  intended ;  saying,  had  he 
done  it,  he  did  not  care  a  damn  for  his  owa 
life.  I  cannot  recollect  any  thing  that  passed 
more  upon  the  subject;  the  appointed  place 
of  meeting  was  the  room  in  question,  and  the 
times  of  meeting  twice  in  the  day,  at  eleven 
in  the  morning,  and  seven  in  the  {evening ;  in 
the  room  there  was  no  furniture,  a  stove  only  i 
and  I  learned  that  the  room  was  taken  for 
Ings,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  but  for  what 
purpose  I  cannot  say,  tiot  having  been  present 
when  it  was  originally  taken.  I  attended 
several  meetings  between  that  and  Saturday 
the  19th;  I  saw  the  prisoner  Ings  at  every 
meeting  I  was  at ;  I  recollect  a  meeting  before 
the  time  of  the  king's  funeral ;  I  found  Thistle* 
wood  there,  Brunt,  Ings,  Hall,  Harrison^ 
Davidson,  and  Bradbum ;  they  came  in  some 
of  them  afterwards,  ^arrison  had  been  in 
the  life-guards.  Thistlewood  began  to  tell 
me  what  Harrison  had  proposed ;  he  said  he 
had  seen  one  of  the  Life-cuards,  who  had  told 
him  that  on  the  night  of  the  funeral  every  man 
of  the  Life-guards  was  to  attend  it  that  could 
be  mounted,  and  that  the  Foot-guards  would 
be  required  to  attend  as  well ;  and  in  addition 
to  this,  all  the  police  officers  that  could  be 
spared,  from  London;  that  after  'he  left  the 
life-guardsman,  it  struck  him  that  would  be  a 
favourable  opportunity  to  collect  their  men 
4D 


11S9J       1  OEOROS  IV. 

together,  have  a  ric»t  in  London  that  night,  and 
take  possession  of  the  two  pieces  of  cannon 
in  GrayVinn-lane,  and  the  pieces  of  cannon 
also  in  the  Artillery-gronnd ;  it  was  thought 
they  should  he  able  to  proceed  onwards  by  the 
means  of  the  people,  who  would  turn  over  to 
them,  and  he  toonght  it  would  be  best  to  send  a 
party  to  Hyde-park-comer,  in  order  to  stop  any 
orderly  in  his  majesty's  service  proceeding  from 
London  to  Windsor,  to  give  information  of  what 
was  going  on  in  London ;  the  telegraph  should 
also  be  seised,  to  cut  off  all  communication 
with  Woolwich ;  it  was  thought  necessaiy  to 
dig  entrenchments  across  thf  end$  of  the  roads 
that  led  to  different  parts  of  London,  to  stop 
the  artilterv  frmn  entering  London ;  Thistle- 
wood  and  Harrison  agreed  that  if  the  sofdiers 
got  any  intelligence  that  there  was  a  disturb- 
ance lu  London,  thev  would  be  so  orertired 
on  their  arriTal  in  London,  that  they  would 
not  be  fit  for  duty ;  Brunt  and  Ings  were  not 
present  at  this  part  of  the  conversation ;  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  observation  they  came  in ; 
and  on  their  coming  in,  Thistlewood  went  to 
them,  and  communicated  to  them  what  I  have 
been  stating  shortly ;  Brunt  and  Ings,  the  pri- 
soner, at  the  bar,  disapproved,  saying  that  there 
was  nothing  short  of  the  assassination  or  mur- 
der, I  am  not  certain  which  word  they  made 
nse  of^  would  satisfy  them ;  I  had  heard  be- 
fore from  Brunt  and  Ings  that  there  was 
an  intention  to  assassinate  the  king's  minis- 
ters ;  I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  more  par- 
ticular passing  this  night  fietween  this  night 
and  the  19th  of  the  month,  fngs  was  often  in 
the  room ;  he  said,  we  most  have  the  ministers 
if  possible,  before  the  parliament  shall  be  met. 
On  Saturday  the  19th  I  was  at  Brunt's,  be- 
tween eleven  and  twelve  in  the  forenoon; 
Thistlewood,  Davidson,  Harrison,  logs  the 
prisoner,  and  Hall,  were  there ;  on  my  enter- 
ing the  room  they  rose,  saying,  that  it  was 
agreed  on,  that  if  nothing  occurred  between 
this  and  Wednesday,  that  Wedn^ay  night 
should  be  agreed  on  to  go  to  work,  for 
they  were  all  so  poor  they  could  not  wait  any 
longer ;  Thistlewood  proposed  there  should  be 
a  meeting  to-morrow  morning  to  form  a  com- 
mittee, to  draw  out  the  plan  upon  which  we 
were  to  act ;  and  on  this  Thistlewood  said, 
Brunt  if  you  go  round  to  vour  men  give  them 
orders  to  come  armed ;  Brant  turned  round, 
and  said,  damn  your  eyes,  are  you  afraid  of 
dflSeers  entering  the  room  ?  should  any  attempt 
to  do  it,  I  will  take  damnedgood  care  that  none 
6f  them  should  go  out  alive*  lliey  met  again  onthe 
Sunday  morning ;  it  was  just  turned  of  eleven ; 
Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings,  Harrison,  Davidson, 
Hall,  firadburn,  Wilson,  Cook,  Tidd  Edwaids, 
and  myself.  I  had  not  been  long  in  the  room 
before  Thistlewood  proposed  to  enter  on  bus- 
iness, and  that  Tidd  should  take  the  chair, 
which  he  did  with  a  pike  in  his  hand ;  and 
After  the  chair  had  been  so  taken,  Thistlewood 
j^roposed,  as  they  bad  been  waiting  so  long, 
and  as  tfatia  was  oo  probability  of  ministen 
AMetbg  to|[ether|  that  if  nothiiig  occwitd  be* 


Triul  ofjm$0i  Ingt 


U14Q 


fore  Wednesday  night,  the  ministen  akoold  te 
taken  off  separately  at  their  own  honses;  thu 
they  should  not  be  able  to  destroy  so  many,  bat 
they  must  put  up  with  what  thejr  coald  get; 
that  they  thought  three  the  mosthkelyDombec 
they  would  be  able  to  kill;  and  he  proposed 
Wedneeday-night,  but  what  precise  hour «( 
that  nig^t  I  cannot  name ;  it  was  also  propo- 
sed, at  the  same  time,  that  the  twopiecoof 
cannon  io  Gray's-inn-lane,  aod  the  six  in  the 
Artilleiy-ground  should  be  taken;  snd  tbs 
latter  were  to  be  taken.  Cook  heading  the 
party  that  were  to  take  them ;  and  sAcr  thei 
were  taken  they  were  to  be  loaded  on  the 
ground  before  they  went  out,  and  if  soy  bod; 
interrupted  them,  those  cannon  were  to  be  it 
readiness  to  enable  them  to  make  t  susd. 
He  was  then  to  make  a  moveoeot  to  the 
Mansion-house,  and  the  Man8ion4ioase  «» 
to  be  beset  on  both  sides,  three  cannon  to  be 
brought  up  against  each ;  he  wu  to  wk»  i 
demand  of,uie  Mansion-house,  and  if  the 
demand  was  refused  he  was  to  fire  on  both 
sides ;  on  doing  this  it  was  thougjit  they  wosld 
soon  give  up  the  bouse  to  theo,  aod  it  vss  ti 
be  made  the  seat  of  the  provisioiMd  g«ven< 
ment.  After  this  had  been  thus  seciued^ 
thought  that  with  the  two  pieces  of  cannon  rraii 
Gray  Vinn-lane  they  might  attack  the  Binh  « 
England/  and  proceed  to  plunder  it ;  hut  Ths- 
tlewood  thought,  that  it  wottld.benece«7 
not  to  destroy  but  to  keep  the  hooks,  as  n 
would  be  the  means  of  bringing  to  hgbt^iM 
of  the  proceedings  of  government,  with  which 
they  were  not  acquainted.  Palin  was  wt 
present  at  this  time ;  but  it  was  propos^  that 
he  should  be  the  roan  to  set  fire  to  the  diiternt 
buildings  that  had  been  mentioned ;  ss  to  ^ 
time,  Thistlewood  said  it  could  not  be  fixed, 
but  that  there  would  be  time  between  that  tad 
the  Wednesday-night;  he  thought  it  hettoio 
leave  it  to  a  fitter  opportunity,  and  thenTw- 
tlewood  said  he  had  nothing  more  to  i^ 
Then  Brunt  came  forward  and  said,  that  M 


being  made  for  Brunt,  he  came  fc"*?"^^ 
propose  hisplan,  and  when  he  was  hegin^ 
to  speak,  lliistlewood  said,  Stop,  jo^^ 
better  let  the  proposals  I  have  made  wp 
from  the  chair,  to  see  whether  eve^  one » ia« 
room  is  ag^eable,  and  he  put  it  to  the ©eow 
speak  if  they  wished ;  the  proposal  was  a«3«o- 

ingly  put  from  the  chair,  and  Ms«n\^  Ythil 
Brunt  now  came  forward  and  said,  w»  J" 
proposal,  respecting  the  assassination  of  ow' 
isters,  was  this;  he  said  it  would  be  done » 
this  way,  that  as  many  men  as  they  co^  fr 
together  for  that  fob  should  be  dirided into" 
many  parties  as  they  could  kill  ministen^  tv| 
after  the  men  were  singled  out  for  ^^^"^ 
ministers,  one  man  should  be  drawn  ootn^ 
each  by  lot,  and  that  man  that  H  WI  "PJ 
should  be  the  man  that  should  o^^'Vl. 
genUemas  or  the  ford,  that  they  had  iom 
andifbe&iUd,  aad  shrfid  tbtJciitMp" 


11411 


J^r  High  Treoion. 


A.  D.  181K). 


[ii4t 


eowardice»  1>e  was  to  be  run  through  the  body 
wpoQ  the  spot ;  this  proposal  was  agreed  to. 
After  that  ralin,  P^ter,  and  Strange  came  iui 
and  Thistlewood  commnnicated  to  them  what 
M  passed,  and  they  agreed  to -it.  Palin  got 
up,  and  said  he  wished  to  speak  a  few  words 
upon  wliat  had  dropped  from  Thistlewood  and 
Brunt;  be  said,  I  have  paid  great  attention  to 
what  has  been  said^  and  have  agreed  to  it ;  and 
if  it  can  be  done,  it  will  be  a  great  acquisition 
to  what  we  have  in  view ;  but  this  I  want 
to  know — ^yon  talk  ef  from  forty  to  fifry  for 
the  west-end  job ;  you  talk  of  taking  the  two 
pieces  of  eaonen  from  Gray's-imi-lane>  and  six 
pieces  of  cannon  from  the  Artillery-ground, 
and  how  is  aH  this  to  be  done  at  the  same 
time }  In  addition  to  which,  I  am  also  with 
my  men  to  set  fire  to  the  different  buildings ; 
and  he  wanted  to  be  satisfied  how  it  was  to  be 
done.  He  said  yon  ought  to  know  better  than 
I  do  what  men  you  have  to  depend  upon ;  with 
respecttto  myself  I  can  give  you  no  satisfac- 
tion as  to  the  men  I  can  bring  forward,  unless 
I  can  be  trusted  to  commnnicate  to  them  part 
of  the  plan,  if  not  the  whole  of  what  they  are 

foing  to  do ;  and  when  they  will  be  wanted. 
IpoQ  this,  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  and  Tidd  said 
it  shoukl  be  communicated  to  them ;  and  Palin 
was  aatisfied.    Af^r  the  chair  was  left,  This- 
tlewood turned  round  and  said.  Brunt,  now 
Palin  is  here,  you  can  take  him  to  the  place 
near  here,  and  let  him  see  if  it  be  possible  to  do 
what  we  think ;  and  Palin  ana  Brunt  went 
i^way  together.    They  were  not  absent  above 
ten  minutes;  when  th^  returned,  thev  had 
been,  they  said,  to  a  building  behind  Fur- 
nival's-inn,  which  Palin  was  to  inspect ;  upon 
their  return,  Palin  said  he  thought  it  a  very 
easy  job,  and  it  would  make  a  good  fire. 
Upon  this  Brunt  renewed  the  subject  of  the 
assassination ;  and  he  said,  he  had  an  idea  that 
there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  drawing  the 
■wn  who  were  to  assassinate  the  king's  min- 
isten.    lags  said,  whoever  has  the  lot  to  mnr- 
der  lord  Castlereagh,  I  am  the  man  to  turn 
out  to  murder  that  thief;  this  was  on  the 
Sunday.    lie  met  them  again  on  the  Monday 
jttoming  at  Brunt's,  about  ten ;  and  he  says, 
when  1  got  there,  there  were  Brunt,  Harrison, 
Thistlewood,  and  Ings  the  prisoner  at  the  bar ; 
io  the  course  of  the  morning  others  came ;  and 
on  entering  the  room  on  the  Monday,  they 
were  gathered  round  the  fire  and  seemed  cast 
down.      I  communicated  the  report  I  had 
board,  that  there  had  been  two  officers  of  the 
police,  one  from  Hatton-garden,  and  another 
nooB  Bow*street,  to  know  what  was  going  on ; 
and  that  they  had  intelligence  from  Bow-street, 
£rom  which  it  appearw,  ihat  there  was  an 
information  at  Bow«street  and  at  lord  Sid- 
mooth**  office  of  what  was  going  on.    Bar- 
jnsoo  tamed  round  and  said,  you  have  acted 
dcunned  wrong.    I  asked  why?    Brunt  turned 
sound  and  said,  jou  have ;  if  you  liave  any 
iiuiig  to  communicate,  it  is  your  duty  to  speak 
to  oao  or  to  Mr.  Thistlewood.    I  said  I  thought 
it  was  my  duty  to  communicate  it  to  ally  as  it 


'         f         * 

concerned  all ;  they  then  began  to  separate,  to 
caH  on  their  men  and  on  the  Marylebone  Union. 
On  the  following  morning  I  went  again  to 
Brunt's ;  on  the  Tuesday  morning,  about  ten 
o'clock,  I  found  in  the  room  Brunt,  Tidd,  Ings, 
and  Hadl,  and  I  had  not  been  long  there  before 
Ings  polled  three  daggers  out  ofhis pocket  ;betng 
askea  the  intention  of  them,  he  made  a  son 
of  flourish"  which  the  witness  described,  ^*  and 
he  said  it  was  vrith  a  view  to  run  these  daggers 
into  their  bodies :  they  were  put  into  his 
pocket.  Just  after  this  Edwards  came  in,  and 
went  up  to  Thistlewood,  and  he  said  he  had 
seen  in  the  paper  of  the  day  that  the  ministers 
were  to  dine  the  following  Wednesday  at  lord 
Hanrowby*s.  Thistlewood  doubted  this,  not 
having  seen  ii  in  the  paper  which  he  had  seen ; 
and  it  was  therefore  proposed  that  the  paper 
should  be  sent  for.  It  was  sent  for,  and 
brouc^t,  and  read  by  Thistlewood  himself; 
when  it  appeared  to  be  so.  Brunt  jumped 
about  the  room  for  joy,  saying  I  believe  now 
there  is  a  God,  for  I  prayed  that  he  would  call 
these  fellows  together,  and  now  he  has  heard 
my  prayer ;  Ings  said,  we  shall  have  an  op« 
portoni^  of  cutting  off  lord  Castlereagh's 
nead .  Inistlewood  proposed,  that  a  commi  ttee 
should  be  formed  to  consider  a  plan  to  assas« 
sinate  the  ministers  altogether ;  it  was  formed; 
I  was  to  take  the  chair,  which  I  did,  and  I 
called  them  all  to  order,  and  Thistlewood  was 
going  to  proceed,  but  I  said  first  that  I  had 
something  to  say,  and  stopped  him;  I  begged 
to  know,  before  they  proceeded,  whether  every 
man  who  heard  me  yesterday  morning  had 
given  what  I  had  said  a  dud  consideration; 
but  upon  this,*^  he  says,  **  they  were  like  a  set 
of  mad  devik;  and  Harrison  said,  the  first 
man  who  said  a  word  to  throw  cold  water  upon 
what  they  had  then  in  view,  he  would  run  that 
man  through  directly  with  a  sword ;  I  was  re* 
moved  from  the  chair,  and  Tidd  was  put  in. 
Thistlewood  was  about  to  propose  a  plan,  but 
Palin  stepped  him,  and  said,  Mr.  Adams  said 
something  yesterday,  and  has  alluded  to  it  this 
morning,  and  he  wanted  to  know  what  it  was 
before  we  proceeded  further.  Brunt  said, 
damn  you  I  will  tell  you  what  it  is,  and  then  he 
proposed  that  there  should  be  a  watch  set  on 
lord  Harrowby's  house;  that  it  was  to  begin  at 
six  in  the  evening,  and  consist  of  two  men  at 
a  time,  who  were  to  take  notice  who  went  out 
and  who  went  in,  and  if  they  were  police  of« 
ficers  or  soldiers  it  was  to  be  communicated  to 
the  committee ;  and  Brant  further  said,  that  if 
nobody  was  found  likely  to  obstruct  the  busi« 
ness.  It  should  be  proceeded  on.  Then  This- 
tlewood himself  came  forward ;  he  said  it  was 
a  much  more  favourable  opportunity  to  take 
them  all  together  and  at  this  one  house  than  it 
would  be  to  take  them  separately.  In  taking 
them  separately,  at  their  own  houses,  they 
should  perhaps  have  but  three  or  four;  but 
take  them  all  togeUier,  and  there  may  be  four* 
teen  or  sixteen,  and  that  will  be  a  rare  haul. 
I  ahould,  propose,  he.said,- forty  men  to  go 
with  me ;  I  will  go  with  a  note  to  the  door, 


1143]       I  GEORGE  IV. 

lo^be  presented  to  lord  Harrowby,  knockiog 
at  the  door,  and  telling  the  senrant  thai  I  must 
have  an  answer,  and  then  on  his  going  in,  he 
proposed  that  he  should  be  followed  by  dif- 
ferent me'oy  with  pistols,  swords,  cutlasses, 
and  pikes,  and  if  the  servants  made  any 
resistance,  they  were  to  be  shot,  and  the  men 
were  to  rush  in  after  they  took  pvoesession 
of  the  stairs ;  two  men  at  those  leading  to  the 
upper  part,  and  two  at  those  leading  to  the 
lower ;  each  was  to  have  a  hand-grenade,  to 
prevent  any  retreat,  and  if  any  one  attempted 
to  escape,  they  were  to  put  nre  to  the  h^d- 
erenade,  and  fling  it  among  jthem  to  destroy 
them ;  two  men  were  also  to  Uke  the  command 
of  the  area ;  one  with  a  blnnderi>uss,  the  other 
with  a  hand-ffrenade ;  and  if  anv  attempt  were 
made  from  the  lower  part  of  the  house,  they 
were  to  be  served  in  the  same  manner ;  and 
the  servants  being  so  secured,  then  the  men 
were  to  enter  the  house,  led  by  Ings  at  his  ovm 

Sroposal ;  he  said  he  would  go  to  his  lordship's 
oor,  with  a  brace  of  pistols  and  a  knife,  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  cutting  off  their  beads, 
meaning  tne  beads  of  lord  Sid  mouth  and  lord 
Castlereagh,  and  that  in  addition  to  this,  he 
would  briog  away  the  hand  of  lord  Castle- 
reagh; and  having  done  this,  it  would  be 
thou^t  in  future  a  great  deal  of.  On  entering 
the  room,  he  added,  that  he  should  say,  well, 
ny  lords,  I  have  got  as  good  men  as  Uie  Man- 
cbester  yeomanry;  enter  citizens,  and  do  your 
duty;  he  was  to  be  followed  by  the  two  swords- 
men, and  they  were  to  be  Harrison  wad  my- 
self; and  after  this  was  done,*'  that  is,  after 
the  assassination  had  taken  place,  ^  they  were 
to  retreat,  and  Harrison  was  to  take  an  illu- 
mination ball,  to  go  to  the  horse-barracks  in 
King-street,  and  £ng  it  into  a  straw  shed,  to 
set  nre  to  them ;  others  of  the  party  were  to 
fo  to  Gray's«inn4ane,  to  take  the  cannon  there ; 
and  on  the  road  there  if  they  met  vrith  any  in« 
terruption,  they  agreed  the  persons  interrupt- 
ing should  be  shot  or  run  tlirough  ^ith  the 
pikes  they  might  have.  Cook  was  to  go  to 
the  Artillerv-ground;  Ings  rejoiced  again  that 
he  should  have  an  opportunity  of  cutting  off 
their  heads.  Harrison  was  there ;  he  proposed 
a  couutersiflrn  to  be  communicated  to  the  men 
who  came  forward,  and  Button  was  the  name ; 
it  was  to  be  pronounced  separately;  the  man 
that  came  up  to  the  person  stationed  at  the 
top  of  Ozfora>road,  vras,  on  his  approach,. to 
•ay  B,  II,  t,  and  the  man  vrho  was  to  receive 
him,  was  to  pronounce  t,  o,  n,  and  on  this 
being  done,  he  was  to  be  conveyed  to  the 
place,  to  be  appointed  afterwards ;  this  was 
proposed  by  Harrison ;  I  went  again  to  Brunt's 
on  th^it  day  in  the  afternoon,  at  three  o'dodc ; 
in  going  up,  I  perceived  a  strange  smell,  and. 
I  soon  discovered  the  cause ;  Ings,  Hall,  and 
Edwards  were}  in  the  room,  and  I  saw  that 
Ings,  the  prisoner,  was  making  fire-baUs  for 
the  purpose  of  setting  fire  to  the  different 
buildings.  Edwards  was  there  preparing  fuses 
for  hand-grenades..  Hall  was  laying  sheeU 
of  paper  on  the  flgor  to  lay  the  fii«4»Us  on 


Tria^qfJama  Inp 


CI  144 


after  they  bad  been  dipped  in  the  iron  pot,  to» 
prevent  -  their  sticking  to  the  hand;  I  went 
away  almost  immediately,  and  returned  be-. 
tween  six  and  seven,  when  I  found  Thislle* 
wood  there;  there  were  two  strange  nieB, 
whom  X  had  not  seen  before;  Harris  was  tKe 
name  of  one,  he  was  then  unknown  to  aae  ;• 
the  other  was  then  unknown  to  me,  and  iseo 
still.  I  remained  there:  Tidd  came  a|  half 
past  seven.  On  his  coming  in,  having  beea 
applied  to,  to  go  wjth  Brunt  at  nine,  to  watcb 
lora  Harrpwb^'s  house,  he  agreed :  Davidaoa 
was  to  go  at  SIX ;  and,  on  Tidd's  entering^  he 
expressed  himself  not  satisfied  at  not  meeting 
the  man  he  expected.  Brunt  then  said,  it  is 
time  for  us  to  go  on  the  watch,  to  relieve  thoee 
who  had  been  stationed  there,  and  Brant  and 
Tidd  went  out  to  go  to  lord  Uarrowby's^  In 
about  five  minutes  Brunt  returned,  saying,. 
that  they  had  called  at  the  house  where  tl& 
man  was  appointed  to  be,  and  that  he  was 
oome ;  that  he  was  a  man  lUcely  to  be  of  great 
consequence,  and  that,  as  such,  he  himself 
could  not  go  with  Brunt  on  the  watch,  fugs 
said,  somebody  else  should  go  vrith  him. 
Brunt  asked  me  to  go,  and  I  consented:  jost 
ay  we  were  going  out,  Edwards  4ame  in.  I 
asked  him,  whether  any  thing  had  been  seen  \, 
He  said,  what  he  had  seen  or  heard  he  shovld 
commnnicate  to  Ihistlewood.  When  wecaar 
to  Grosvenor-sqnare,  I  saw  Davidson  and  eno* 
ther  man.  After  we  relieved  Davidemi, -we 
stopped  but  a  little  while ;  we  went  to  lefresk 
ourselves  at  a  house  at  the  comer  of  the  mews,; 
directly  at  the  bade  of  lord  Hannowby's  hcraae. 
Brunt  got  playing  at  dominos  with  a  person 
who  was  ther^  and  stopped  there  till  eleven. 
I  went  out  twice,  by  his  oesire,  to  vratch,  end- 
I  stayed  in  the  neighbonihood  till  twrive 
o'clock,  which  was  the  time  to  which  we  were 
appointed  to  watdi.  When  I  left  the  aqoav^ 
I  came  directly  home ;  the  watch  was  to  com- 
mence, again  the  next  morning.  Ings  and 
Hall  were  to  be  upon  the  watch  at  four  o'dock 
in  the  morning;  that  is,  on  Wednesday  the 
23rd. .  I  went  to  Brunt's  early  in  the  moniio^ 
but  did  not  stop ;  I  went  again  at  two  o'dock ; 
I  found  Brunt  in  his  own  room ;  there  was. 
nobody  else  in  the  room  at  first,  but  Stmige 
came  m  shortly  after  myself,  and  two  or  thrae 
other  men  came  in  who  were  not  known  to 
me ;  and  a  drawer  being  opened,  I  saw  several 

E'istols;  I  cannot  tell  the  exact  nnoiber. 
runt,  at  this  time,  proposed  to  me  to  go  natO' 
tlie  regular  room,  which  vras  the  back  room  ; 
they  were  putting  on  leather  under  the  pistol 
flints ;  and  in  the  back  room  I  saw  anus  of 
different  descriptions,  cutlasses,  pbtols,  and 
a  blunderbuss  with  a  brass  barreL  Jnst  after, 
Thistlewoed  came  ;  then  the  prisoner  and  HaH  ; 
then  another  stranger  or  two ;  and  as  th^ 
came  in  th^  prepared  themsdves  with  m^ 
ferent  aims ; .  they  then  fixed  the  flints  in  the> 
fire-arms,  and  put  slings  to  the  cntlasses.  This- 
tlewood  looked  round,  and  said,  well,  ay 
lads,  it  looks  now.as  if  you  ate  going  to  dec 
sometl|ing;  aadhft  came «p tone,  pndsaad^ 


lUA] 


JtiT^  Mxigh  TVmiMi 


A,D.  isack 


til4d 


weU^  Mr.  AdaoM,  bow  do  yoo  dtf  ?.'  I  aufwe?^ 
od|  Iqw  in  spiritSy  I  have  bad  notbiog  to  drink 
to«day.  Then  aome  gin  was  brought;  and 
alter  this,  Ibistlewood  proposed  to  £etcb  aooie 
paper  in  order  to  write  some  bills :  he  pro- 
duced money  fpr  the  purpose  to  Brunt,  and 
said,  that  he  shonld  like  the  same  sort  of  paper 
as  newspapers  were  printed  on.  I  said  to  him, 
as  you  do  not  know  the  nfune  of  this  paper, 
you  had  better,  get  cartridge  paper,  which  will 
ansWer  as  well,  and  Brant  accordingly  sent 
for  it  by  his  apprentice  boy«  The  cartridge 
paper  being  brought,  lliistlewood  sat  down  to 
wnte  three  bills ;  but  in  writing  the  last,  he 
expressed  .himself  tired;  he  appeared  to  be 
confused,  and  said,  be  conld  not  write  any 
longer.  Three  •  bills  were  lead  by  himself 
aloTO,  and  they  were  put  on  the  floos  to  di^, 
and  then  doubled  up ;  I  saw  one  of  these  m 
logs,  the  prisoner*s  hands,  and  one  in  Thistle-* 
wood's  hands,  and  the  words  he  read  were 
these :  *  Your  tyrants  are  destroyed  I  the 
friends  of  liberty  are  called  together,  as  the 
provisional  sovemment  is  now  sitting/  And 
tk|en  he  read,  as  subscribed  to  this,  Uie  name 
of  Jantes  Ings,  Secretary,  February  33, 1820. 
He  then  appeajred  tired.  Hall  then  was  called 
upon  to  write  a  fourth,  but  he  refused)  a 
atranger  was  then  proposed..  Ings  was  in  the 
room,  being  busy  at  this  time  preparing  for 
aetion;  and  he  put  a  black  belt  round  his 
waist,  which  was  to  hold  two  pistols;  be  had 
dang  round  his  shoulder  a  belt  for  a  eotlaas, 
and  on  each  shoulder  there  was  a  large  bag,  in 
the  form  of  a  soldier's  haversack;  and  this 
being  done,  viewing  and  examining,  or  looking 
al  himself,  he  said,  I  have  not  got  my  steel,  I 
am  not  complete ;  but  never  mind.  He  then 
drew  a  great  knife,  brandished  it  about,  and 
said,  it  was  a  knife  to  cut  off  the  head  of  lord 
Casdereagh  and  the  rest,  as  he  came  at  them. 
Being  asked,  what  he  had  the  bags  for  ^  he 
aaid,  he  intended  to  bring  away  the  beads  of 
lord  Castlereagh  and  lord  SidmQUth  in  them : 
it  was  a. large  broad  knife  that  he  said  he  had 
pnpared  for  the  purpose,  and  bound  round 
the  handle  with  wax-end,  to  prevent  his  hand 
from  slipping  when  at  work.  After  this,  This- 
tlewood  and  Brunt,  who  had  been  out  of  the 
room,  returned..  While  they  were  absent, 
Palin  came  in;  and  when  he  perceived  that 
Thistlewood  and  Brunt  were  not  present,  he 
took  on  himself  to  address  those  who  were  in 
the  room,  .and  said,  he  hoped  all  in  the  room 
knew  what  they  were  met  for ;  he  hoped,  he 
aaid,  they  would  consider  it  properly  ;  whether 
the  assassination  would  be  approved  of  by  the 
oountry,  and  they  would  or  would  not  turn  on 
OUT  siae.  -  A  tall  man  then  made  some  remaiks, 
saying,  you  seem  to  speak  as  if  all  in  the  room 
knew  what  is  goina  to  be  done;  I  am  not 
alraid  myself,  nor  do  I  consider  a  man  who 
turns  out  in  a  cause  like  this  ought  to  value 
his  lifie.  At  this  moment  Brunt  entered  the 
room,  apd  seeing  a  change  or  alteration  In  the 
oountenanees  of  those  who  ware  in  the  room, 
hr4mkiad  the  came.   Ilia  tali  man  told  him 


again,  that  there  were  some  in  thr  room  who 
wished  to  know  what  they  were  met  there  for, 
upon  which  having  told  him  this.  Brunt  an- 
swered, this  is  not  the  place  where  yon  are  to 
be  informed,  but  go  np  witti  me  to  the  Edg^ 
ware-road,  and  then  we  shall  know,  and  idl 
who  go  with '  me  shall  have  drink  to  put  them- 
in  spirits.    A  blunderhusir,  with  a  brass-barrel, 
was  slung  over  me  under  my  great  coat,  a 
broomstick  which  had  been  prepared  for  the 
reception  of  a  bayonet  at  one  end  was  given 
me  as  a  walking  stick.    Nothing  else  partieu-^ 
lar  was  then  done,  except  that  Brunt  said  it 
was  time  for  us  to  prepare  to  go  from  the 
room  where  we  were,  as  it  would  be  wanted 
by  Palin's  men  in  the  evening.    I  saw  die. 
foniles  put  on  the  pike  staves  in  Brant's  room 
by  Bradbura;  there  was  a  cupboard  in  the 
room,  in  which  were  some  swords>  some  tal- 
low, some  pitch,  and  some  of  the  smaller  hand- 
grenades.    I  had  seen  in  that  cupboard,  gun-> 
powder,  a  musket-belt,  and  the  hand-grenades ; 
and  I  saw  powder  put  in  some  of  the  band- 
grenades  there  to  complete  them.    Abcnit  six' 
o'clock  we  went  away  from  Brant's  for  Cato-. 
street ;  Brant  and  the  strange'  man  were  with 
me  at  first ;  afterwards  I  met  Thistlewood  be-' 
fore  I  got  there,  ih  the  £dgware-road,  and  I' 
arrived  at  Cato-street,  at  the  corner  of  th^  street 
under  the  archway ;  the  building  was  a  stable 
on  the  right  side;   I  found  there  Davidion 
sitting  and  a  person  standing,  they  appeared 
to  me  to  be  doing  something  to  pikes  ;  i  went 
through  the  stable  up  into  the  loft.     Ings,' 
Hall,  and  Bradbura  were  there,  they  were  tM« 
ing  different  arms  from  a  bench  in  the  room ; 
Tidd  was  not  there,  and  in  consequence  of 
his  not  beinff  there,  Thistlewood  appeared  ra« 
ther agitated,  for  fear  he  would  not  come; 
Brant  seeing  the  men  rather  confused,  for  it 
was  pretty  general,  said  there  vras  no  occasion 
for  any  uneasiness  respectincr  the  arrival  of 
Tidd,  for  that  he.  Brant,  vrould  forfeit  his  ovra= 
existence  that  tidd  would  be  forthcoming. 
In  Gbnsequence  of  what  had  appeared  in  the* 
faces  of  the  men,  Ings  now  began  to  be  terri* 
fied,  and"  as  the  witness  described  it,  <*  as  if 
he  vras  mad ;  he  beffan  to  stamp  and  swear, 
to  put  both  his  hands  up  to  hb  hair  as  if  he 
would  tear  it  off;  and  said  '  Damn  my  eyes, 
if  you  drop  the  concern  now,  I  will  cut  my 
throat  or  snoot  myself.'    Thistlewood  said,  for 
God's  sake  do  not  talk  of  dropping  the  bttsi« 
ness  now,  if  you  do  it  will  tura  out  a  second 
Despard's  job ;   and  looking  round,  Thistle- 
wood said,'  that  there  were  men  sufficient, 
eighteen  here,   that  is  in  the  loft,  counting 
them,  and  two  below,  being  twenty  men  in  all, 
which  number  he  said  was  sufficient;  suppose, 
he  said,  sixteen  servants  should  be  found  in 
lord  Harrowby's  house,   they  would  not  ^e' 
armed,  th^  would  not  be  prepared ;  we  are 
armed,  ana  it  vrill  not  take  us,  from  our  en-, 
tering  the  house  to  our  coming  out  again, 
above  ten  minutes ;  Tidd  came  in  in  iS>o,ut 
twenty   minutes  before  the  'officers   entered 
tha  room,  andhe  propoeedthatioiirteendiould'' 


il47}       1  6B0BGB  IT. 

be  the  nmaber  to  eotor  tlit  lioDM,'aBd  it 
was  pat  aod  agreed  to»  and  they  were  se- 
lectea;  aft  this  time  BniDt  prodaoed  a  gin 
bpttte  fixxn  his  pocket;  Ia|^  was  one  of 
the  fourteen  selected,  I  also  was  one,  and 
Harrison  was  another;  this  beinff  done 
and  the  people  ready  to  go,  I  heard  some- 
body in  the  stable  i  there  was  a  bostling^ 
and  a  sound,  a  sort  of  holloa !  shew  lights 
from  above !  on  this  Tbistlewood  took  a  can- 
dle, went  to  the  stain,  and  looked  to  see  who 
it  was,  and  then  he  pnt  down  the  candle  seem- 
ing in  quite  a  confused  stato;  I  never  heard 
bim  speak :  at  this  time  two  officers  entered 
the  room,  Tbistlewood  sidled  from  where  he 
was  into  the  inner  room ;  In|;s  and  Brant  and 
Harrison  were  also  in  the  inner  room;  the 
officers  stood  in  the  room  et  the  top  of  the 
bidder,  with  a  pistol  presented,  and  one  of 
them  said,  here  is  a  pretty  nest  of  you,  adding, 
gentlemen,  we  have  a  warrant  to  apprehend 
yon  all,  and  I  hope  you  will  go  quietly ;  at 
ibis  time  another  of  the  officers  of  the  name 
of  Smithers  said  to  his  brother  officers  make 
room  let  me  come  up ;  and  on  his  coming  up 
between  the  two  officers,  going  on  between 
4kem  and  looking  forward,  the  group  in  the 
room  rushed  forward,  and  I  saw  a  man  rush 
lorward,  another  hand  presented  itself  with  a 

gistol,  which  was  Ared,  and  the  motnent  it  was 
red  the  candle  went  out,  and  I  could  see  no- 
thing afterwards;  I  did  not  see  Smithers  fall ; 
there  ^as  now  great  confusion;  the  officers 
seeing  Smithers  murdered,  ran  down  stairs 
and  gave  the  alarm  of  murder ;  I  came  out 
from  the  stable  as  I  went  in,  and  made  my 
way  through ;  a  pistol  was  fired  at  me,  I  think 
at  me,  from  the  window;  I  succeeded  in 

Setting  home ;  while  I  was  under  the  archway 
le  soldiers  were  coming  through.  I  was  my- 
self apprehended  afterwards  on  the  Friday 
morning,  and  I  have  been  in  custody  ever 
since.'' 

On  the  cross-examination,  he  says,  **  I  was 
examined  here  on  Monday,  on  the  former  trial ; 
I  was  bom  in  Suffolk,  and  educated  as  a  Chris- 
tian ;  I  was  once  a  Deist,  but  I  believe  in  God, 
I  have  been  a  Christian  again  ever  since  I  was 
concerned  in  this  affiur;  I  was  taken  after  the 
23rd  ef  February,  and  I  have  ^lled  myself  a 
Christian  sbce;  I  had,  since  last  August,  re- 
nounced faith  in  the  Christian  religion,  and 
have  taken  it  up  again  since  the  time  I  have 
mentioned,  that  is,  on  the  day  that  this  business 
happened,  on  the  23rd  of  Febraarv.  I  never 
was  an  Atheist,  nor  ever  denied  a  God,  though 
I  was  brought  by  that  accursed  book  of  Paine^ 
to  deny  the  trath  of  the  Scriptures.  When  I 
was  in  the  army,  I  served  in  England,  in  the 
Blues;  I  now  have  no  allowance,  nor  had  I 
any  pension  on  retiring.  On  looking  atja 
paper,  which  is  not  afterwards  .produced,  he 
says,  this  is  my  writing;  since  Monday  I 
luive  been  in  the  House,  of  Correction,  as  I 
had  been  before,  not  in  solitary  confinement, 
but  I  have  had  no  conversation  with  any  body. 
I  have  been  in  the  habit  of  seeing  men  in  tlji 


IHol  tfJwmu  Ingi 


[1148 


eoort,  but  I  have  seen  no  one  who  has  told 
me  what  pamed ;  nobody  has  told  me ;  I  sun 
kept  in  a  room  by  myself,  guarded  by  two 
men,  and  heard  nothing  about  the  trial,  eze^ 
what  I  have  stoted.  I  have  known  £dwaide 
since  the  early  part  of  January ;  Brunt  was  on 
the  continent  some  years  ago."  Then  lie 
says,  **  I  never  intended  to  give  inlbnnatioii 
against  the  otbers,  nor  to  commit  murder; 
after  I  had  got  into  the  knowledge  of  wbnt 
vras  in  hand,  I  waited  an  opportunity  to  get 
out  of  it,  but  I  was  preventea  by  threats  that 
had  been  held  out;  I  was  not  disposed  to 
plunder  the  London  shops,  nor  to  do  any  thii^ 
of  the  kind ;  there  were  no  particular  threats 
made  use  of  at  the  time  that  1  am  speaking  of: 
there  were  Areata  the  day  before  I  went  into 
prison;  I  was  asking  Bnint  for  the  nian  that 
was  first  drawn  up  in  the  presence  or  Tbistle* 
wood;  firunt  ssid,  there  wonM  be  nothing 
eommunicated  till  the  day  of  acting.  Tbistle- 
wood said,  nothing  shall  be  communicated; 
they  said,  the  day  that  we  think  of  going  to 
work,  we  will  have  die  men  all  together,  and 
give  them  a  treat,  and  then  we  shall  tell  them 
what  is  to  be  done,  and  after  that  vre  will  never 
lose  sight  of  them ;  Brunt  said,  there  shoold 
be  no  writings  kept  that  should  put  them  into 
danger,* but  said,  that  if  any  man  he  IhmI 
spoken  to  of  this,  by  his  behaviour  afaonld  in- 
duce him  to  think  that  he  wonld  inform  against 
the  o'thers,  he  would  instantly  himself  run  htm 
through  the  body.  I  was  in  prison  for  n  debt 
of  twentv-three  shillings  and  eight-pence.  It 
was  on  Uie  16th  of  Januaiy  that  I  heard  those 
threats  throvm  out  by  Brunt ;  it  vras  a  Sunday; 
we  were  in  a  room  at  the  IVhite  Hart ;  on  the 
30th,  when  I  had  been  in  prison  fifteen  days, 
I  joined  those  parties  again ;  and  irhen  I  was 
discharged  from  prison,  I  found  that  the  White 
Hart,  as  a  place  of  meeting,  was  given  iq> 
during  the  time  I  had  been  in  prison ;  I  never 
knew,  till  then,  nf  the  room  taken  at  Brant's  ; 
on  Wednesdvr,  in  Februaiy,  Edwards  was 
there.  The  oUier  day,  when  I  was  examined, 
I  did  not  tell  about  Ings  pulling  a  pistol  from 
his  pocket,  saying,  he  hoped  £e  king  would 
not  die  then,  and  that  the  duke  of  York  would 
not  come  to  the  crown;  I  did  not  tell  the 
other  day  about  Ings  saying,  they  were  all  n 
damned  set  of  cowards,  tlmt  he  took  a  pistol- 
in  his  pocket  when  the  prince  regent  went  to 
Etrliament,  with  the  sole  intention  to  shoot 
m ;  that  on  his  making  use  of  that  expression, 
he  took  the  pistol  from  his  pocket  to  convince 
them,  and  exclaimed,  there  is  the  pistol  that  I 
took,  and  that  he  regretted  he  had  not  done  it, 
saying  had  he  done  it,  he  had  not  cared 
a  damn  for  his  own  life;  and  the. reason* 
why  I  did  not  then  tell  it  was,  that  it  did 
not  come  to  my  recollection  till  to-day.'* 
He  says,  in  order  to  shew  he  did  not  bmre 
tell  all  he  knows,  the  transaction  is  so  molt>> 
farious  and  so  extensive,  he  did  not  recollect  iL 
He  says«to-da^,  ^I  have  not  said  any  thing 
^boiit  their  being  to  go  to  Brighton  and  M$^ 
gate  and  Dover,  and  teke  posoessien  of  te 


1149) 


Jhrr  HigA  TVMMit. 


A.  D.  18Sa. 


[1156 


out-ports;  if  any  ^ing  now  comes  to  mj 
ininay  wUle  I  stay  here,  I  will  state  it ;  but  it 
did  not  occur  to  me  to  mention  before  what 
I  did  when  I  was  examined  before,  that  at 
the  meetinff  on  the  19th  of  February,  Brunt 
said,  he  bad  work  to  finish,  and  could  not  go 
about  the  assassination  next  day;  and  I  say 
now,  Brunt  being  asked  by  Thistlewood,  on  the 
19lh^  to  call  on  his  men,  said  he  had  work  to 
do,  and  did  not  know  that  he  should  be  able  to 
attend.  I  was  at  a  meeting  on  Sunday  the 
20Ui ;  at  that  meeting,  before  ther  all  left,  there 
were  fifteen  present,  that  was  when  Tidd  took 
the  chair;  they  did  not  know  then  of  the  cabinet 
dinner  at  lord  Harrowby's,  their  plan  then  was 
to  go  to  he  houses  of  the  ministers  to  assas- 
sinate them,  and  then  they  were  to  take  the 
cannon.  I  think  I  stated  on  Monday  last, 
^eir  plan  to  take  the  cannon,  and  go  to  the 
Mansion-house,  if  I  did  not  I  forgot  it.  At 
the  meeting  on  the  32nd,  Ings,  took  three 
daggers  out  of  his  pocket.  There  were  thirteen 
different  persons  present,  but  I  cannot  re- 
collect the  different  individuals  who  were  at 
each  meeting,  and  what  was  said  by  each ;  I 
cannot  recollect  what  happened  as  to  each  in  this 
way.  If  I  had  thought  of  any  thing  that  was 
material  when  I  was  examined  before,  I  should 
have  mentioned  it.  The  regular  time  for  meet- 
ing was  that  which  I  before  mentioned ;  and  I 
pever  remembered  our  continuing  assembled 
till  twelye  at  ni^t.  Brunt  said  he  had  left 
Tldd  to  meet  a  man  whom  Tidd  could  trust, 
tad  therefore  that  he  did  not  go  to  the  watch. 
Things  transpired  on  the  23nd  which  I  have 
oot  stated  either  on  last  Monday  or  now ; 
what  I  have  mentioned  now  I  cannot  say  that 
I  mentioned  here  on  Monday  last ;  I  cannot 
say  whether  I  told  of  Brunt  having  a  man  to 
ineet,  and  in  consequence  proposing  to  me  to 
take  the  watoh.  I  stated  the  number  in  Cato- 
street  was  twenty ;  I  took  that  from  the  state- 
ment of  Thistlewood  (I  did  not  count  them 
myself),  that  there  were  eighteen  above  and 
two  below.  I  do  not  know  Monument  at  all. 
The  room  might  be  fifteen  feet  by  ten ;  we  were 
not  close  together  when  the  acciaent  happened, 
and  I  cannot  say  whether  I  was  nearest  the 
door,  I  mean  the  door  leading  into  tlie  little 
room,  which  was  in  the  middle  of  the  room  on 
the  side  of  the  room ;  I  was  at  the  end  of  the 
t>ench  next  the  window,  where  I  could  see 
about  the  room.  There  was  one  candle;  I 
cannot  say  but  there  might  be  another,  but  I 
never  saw  but  one,  and  if  there  were  more 
than  one,  it  was  at  the  time  when  I  was  out  of 
the  room ;  and  if  any  man  swore  there  were 
eight  candles  in  the  room  he  would  not  speak 
ihe  truth,  and  I  would  tell  him  that  he  was  a 
fidse  man.  I  cannot  tell  whether  the  officers 
made  a  speech,  but  to  the  best  of  my  recollec- 
tion, one  of  the  officers  said,  Here  is  a  pretty 
iiest  of  you !  One  said,  gentlemen,  I  have  a 
warrant  to  take  you  all,  and  this  was  Uie  sense 
and  eff'ect  of  what  he  said ;  adding,  as  such 
X  hope  Tou  will  go  peaceably.  I  cannot  re- 
cpUtct  that  it  was  said,  We  are  officeiSi  yield 


^# »  « 


yoar  arms.  Edwards  was  always  very  deep« 
and  much  in  conversation  with  Brunt  an4 
Thistlewood  to  outward  appearance.  I  went 
away  after  this  affair  quietly.  I  did  not  be- 
fore teU  of  a  pistol  being  fired  at  me,  I  did  not 
know  it  at  the  time  ;  but  in  the  coat  I  had  on 
there  is  a  hole  where  the  ball  went ;  the  greaU 
coat  I  bad  on  is  in  the  room  where  I  sleep.  I 
never  called  on  Chambers,  in  Heath-cock- 
court,  with  Edwards ;  I  do  not  know  where  it 
is.  Three  or  four  days  before  this  affiur  took 
place  in  Cato-street,  Edwards  went  with  me 
to  buy  a  pair  of  boots  of  a  woman  ;  that  was 
the  only  time  of  my  being  alone  with  Edwards. 
We  called  in  at  the  wine  vaults  near  New- 
port-muket;  I  never  called  on  any  person  along 
with  Edwards  to  solicit  him  to  join  a  part^  to 
kill  his  majesty's  ministers,  and  I  never  said,  I 
would  have  blood  and  wine  for  my  supper. 
I  never  knew  Stephen  Whatman.  I  never  had 
a  conversation  with  a  man  in  Kingsland-road 
about  the  tower,  and  using  Cashman  as  a 
watch-word.  I  did  not  take  any  ammunition 
back  after  I  left  Cato-street.  Hall,,  in  the 
room,  gave  me  a  pistol  and  five  rounds  of 
cartridges ;  when  the  officers  came,  the  pistol 
lay  at  the  end  of  the  bedch  next  me.  I  have 
never  handled  a  pistol  since ;  the  cartridges  I 
threw  away  as  I  came  out.  I  never  carried 
the  large  grenade  anywhere ;  I  carried  some 
pikes  from  Brunt's  up  to  Tidd's.  I  saw  Ed- 
wards making  the  fuses  and  the  touch-pa{>er 
for  them.  I  cannot  remember  a  score  of  words 
which  Edwards  used  ;  what  he  had  to  say  was 
in  a  side-way  with  Thistlewood  or  Brunt.  I 
did  not  tell  the  story  about  the  one  pound 
note  this  day  which  1  told  on  Monday.  Th^ 
largest  sum  I  ever  saw  was  six  shillings,  given 
by  Thistlewood  to  Brunt;  one  shilling  at 
another  time,  and  seven*pence  at^  another. 
The  newspapler  Edwards  mentioned  was  the 
New  Times.  There  was  but  one  candle,  which 
was  put  out  instantly  on  the  report  of  the 

fistol,  but  whether  by  the  report  of  the  pistol 
cannot  tell.'' 

Now,  gentlemen,  postponing  till  hereafter 
all  observation  on  the  testimony  of  accomplices, 
I  will  only  desire  your  attention  to  the  &et, 
that  we  are  now  passing  to  a  different  head  of 
testimony,  that  is,  the  evidence  of  persons  not 
accomplices,  nor  in  any  way  involved  in  the 
imputed  guilt  of  these  transactions,  but  wit- 
nesses as  to  ydiom  it  is  not  pretonded  (and 
properly  not  pretended)  by  those  who  conduct 
the  deduce,  ^at  the^  are  not  entitled  for 
what  they  say  to  the  fullest  credit  from  you : 
and  therefore  it  will  be  very  material  for  yon, 
as  affecting  the  conspiracy  in  general,  and 
more  particularly  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  indi« 
vidually,  to  attend  to  the  facts  which  are  now 
about  to  be  proved  by  unimpeached  and  un- 
impeachable witnesses. 

The  next  witness  is  Eleanor  Walker.  She 
says,  **  I  know  Brunt ;  he  lodged  at  my  mas- 
ter's house;  he  had  lodged  there  about  a 
twelvemonth  last  January :  he  occupiied  two 
firont  looms  on  the  seoond  floor;  in  Jantiary 


Ii5ll       1  G£0RG£IV. 

tost  he  introduced  another  perwm  lb  take  tiM 
back  room  two-pair  of  staixBy  vhon  I  did  not 
then  know  by  sight,  or  by  namey  bnt  I  aftetw 
wards  found  out  that  th^  name  of  this  |>erson 
was  Ings  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  The  prisoner 
took  the  room;  I  did  not  know  him  flien; 
Brant  did  not  tell  me  at  this  time  what  he 
was ;  the  room  was  to  be  taken  at  39.  a-week, 
unfurnished ;  he  said  perhaps  he  might  bring 
in  his  goods  in  a  week  or  better." 

On  her  cross-examination,  she  says,  ''I 
Kved  in  the  lower  part  of  the  house;  I  have 
heard  people  occasionally  going  up  and  down, 
backwards  and  forwards,  bnt  I  did  not  see 
them,''  On  her  re-examination,  she  says, 
^  there  is  a  door  belonging  to  my  mistress's 
house,  by  which  lodgers  go  up  from  without, 
without  ffoing  through  the  shop,  and  there  is  a 

grifiate  door  which  leads  to  the  staircase,  and 
le  back  door  comes  out  6f  the  passage  towards 
the  stairs ;  and  coming  through  this,  they  can 
|o  up  without  going  through  the  shop  at  all." 
The  next  witness  is  Mary  Rows,  who  told 
you  that  the  former  witness  is  net  niece,  and 
was  her  terrant  at  the  time  of  whidi  she  has 

rken.  She  says,  ^I  remember  her  letting 
two»pair  of  stairs  back  room  in  January 
last ;  it  was  occdpied  for  five  weeks,  and  the 
person  who  took  it  paid  for  four ;  one  week 
remained  due."  She  says,  ^  the  lodging  wai 
kept  till  Brunt  was  taken  up ;  I  asked  Brunt 
who  the  lodger  was ;  he  told  me  that  he  was  a 
butcher  out  of  employ;  he  said,  he  knew 
Kothing  of  him,  except  that  he  had  seen  him 
at  a  puotic  house,  aba  had  heard  him  inquire 
for  a  lodging ;  and  on  one  evening,  when  I 
was  putting  my  children  to  bed,  I  saw  three 
men  going  up  stairs,  and  the  middle  man  of 
the  three  was  the  black  man  ;^  which  I  need 
not  remind  you  is  the  description  of  Davidson 
(who  has  been  one  of  the  prisoners  at  the  bar 
included  in  this  indictment,  and  who  is  to  be 
tried  on  a  separate  indictment)  in  company 
with  Ings  and  Brunt. 

Joseph  Hale  b  the  next  witness  called ;  and 
his  evidence  also  is  extremely  material.  Hale  is 
an  apprentice  to  Brunt,  and  he  sayS)  **  I  lived 
with  him  in  Fox-court ;  he  bad  two  rooms  in 
the  front  of  the  house,  one  to  live  in,  and  the 
other  to  work  in ;  and  there  I  knew  Ings,  the 
prisoner  at  the. bar.  I  remember  his  taking 
the  two-pair  of  stairs  back  room  as  a  lodging; 
I  had  seen  him  in  Brunt*s  workshop  abont  a 
fortnight  before  he  took  the  lodging,  and  more 
than  once.  Brant  looked  at  the  room  with 
him ;  and  when  they  came  out,  I  heard  Brunt 
lay  to   the   prisoner,   it   will   do,   go    and 

S've  them  a  shilling;  this  was  on  Monday, 
igs  came  there  that  evening,  and  Hall  was 
with  him.  Ings  came  and  asked  Mrs.  Brant 
for  the  key''  the*key  being  usually  kept  hang- 
ing up  in  MrVb  Brant's  room ;  that  is,  the  key 
of  this'back  room,  in  which  there  was  up  ftir- 
niture  when  taken  by  the  prisoner  at  the  bar, 
and  into  which  it  does  not  appear  by  the 
evidence  that  any  furniture  was  brought. 
The  jkej  bei^  asked  for  it  wu  broogbt^  And  I 


TVisf  2fJawm  Inp 


ri>5S 


(bey  went  into  the  loon.  ^I  beard  oCbertf 
come  that  evening;  and  from  this  time  till  juf 
master  was  taken  up,  persons  nsed  to  oomc  to 
the  room  in  tne  evening,  and  they  were  or  saam 
of  them  were,  Thistlewood,  Ings  the  prisoner  at 
the  bar,  Davidson,  Bradborn,  Tidd,  Edwnidb, 
Adams,  Hall,  Potter,  Strange ;  tbm  was  ao 
forniture  in  the  room;  they  used  to  bonofw 
Brant's  chairs  to  sit  on;  Brant  himself  used 
to  attend.  I  saw  these  persons  also  occ8sio»-' 
ally  in  Brant's  room  ;  th^  called  each  other 
by  their  names  sometimes,  and  thej  called 
Thistlewood  sometimes  T,  and  eometnaes 
Arthur/*  whidi  yon  know  is  his  christiaB 
name.  ^One  day  I  saw  the  door  open,  and 
then  observed  some  long  poles,  like  brandies 
of  trees.  I  have  heard  faAmmering  and  sawing 
going  on  in  the  room.  My  master  was  taikea 
up  on  Thursday,  the  24th  of  Febroaiy ;  on  die 
Sunday  before,  in  the  morning,  there  was  a 
meeting  in  the  room,  the  persons  I  have  named 
being  then  present ;  there  were  others  besides  ; 
it  was  a  larger  meeting  than  nsnal;  they  went 
avray  one  or  two  at  a  time ;  my  master  was  in 
die  room  with  them;  and  after  the  meeting,  I 
saw  Strange  with  my  master,  in  my  nmslei^e 
room.  On  Monday-evening  there  was  a  meet- 
ing; on  Tuesday-evening  there  was  aaolhef 
meeting ;  on  Wednesday  several  persons  came 
up  at  different  times,  I  cannot  say  precisely 
how  many,  but  several  of  these  came  in  die 
morning,  and  some  came  in  the  afternoon.  I 
remember  Strange,  and  a  man  I  did  not  know, 
coming  into  our  workshop  about  two  o^dock, 
and  Strange  and  the  otner  man  were  then 
fiinting  five  or  six  pistols,  which  they  did  not 
finish;  for  one  of  the  men  said,  there  were 
persons  overlooking  them  from  the  houses  oppo- 
site, and  Brant  told  them  to  go  into  the  hmdk 
room,  for  they  could  be  seen  out  of  the 
window  of  the  houses  opposite,  and  .diey 
went  then  into  the  other  room,  Brant  and  the 
other  men.  I  saw  Thistlewood  there,  aboot 
four  o'clock,  he  asked  for  a  piece  of  writing 

Eper ;  I  gave  him  some,  he  took  it  into  the 
ck  room ;  after  that.  Brant  came  out  ^od 
told  me  to  go  and  get  six  sheets  of  cartridge- 
paper;  he  gave  me  sixpence  to  bny  it.  I 
went  and  bought  the  sheets,  and  gave  them  to 
Brant ;  he  todL  them  into  the  back  room,  and 
after  this  some  of  the  men  went  away ;  some 
others  went  into  my  master's  room ;  my  master 
went  away  about  six  o'clock.  After  he  was 
gone,  my  mistress  wanted  her  table  for  tea» 
which  was  id  the  back  room.  I  knocked  at 
the  door,  and  asked  for  the  uUe;  Potter 
answered,  and  gave  me  out  the  table,  and  ott 
opening  the  door  I  saw  four  or  five  men,  be* 
sides  Potter,  I  saw  Tidd  in  the  conisfi  ^  the 
evening,  wlio  came  to  Brant's  room.  Ifrs. 
||rant  took  him  to  the  cupboard,  and  diewed 
him  a  pikehead  and  a  sword,  and  asked  Mm, 
what  she  could  do  with  them  ?  upon  which  he 
told  her  to  give  them  to  him,  and  he  woold 
take  them  away,  which  he  did;  he  took  dieat 
iiito  the  baek  room ;  after  diat  I  heaiid  some 
peiiODS  go  down  Itaiii;  apoiMAi  asaHhtm 


11681 


j^  High  Tr&ann. 


A,  D.  1820. 


U154 


ny  mavtraii's  f«ea|  wbd  scidy  if  any  pento 
aame  and  iaqatred,  they^werd  to  be  sent  to 
tiie  White  Hart;  shortly  iCfter  three  persons 
cute ;  lihey  did  not  know  the  way  to  the  White 
Hart;  I  went  and  shewed  them;  after  that 
Fetter  came ;  I  told  him  the  same  thing,  know- 
ing the  way  he  went  hindself ;  my  master  came 
home  about  nnv,  his  boots  were  Tery  muddy, 
and  the  tail  of  his  coat ;  be  deemed  rather  con- 
fiised.    He  told  his  w^''   (this  was  after  the 
Cato-street  business),  **  it  wtis  all  up,  or  words 
to  that  effect,  that  where  he  had  been,  there 
had  been  a  lot  of  officers  come  in,  that  he  had 
saved  bis  Itfie,  and  that  was  all;  as  he  said 
this,  a  mati  came  in^  Brant  shook  hands  with 
him,  and  asked  bin,  if  he  knew  who  had  in- 
-formed?  he  said,  no^  he  had  himself  received 
«  terrible  blow  on  his  side,  and  was  knocked 
down;  and  from  their  manner  of  speaking 
•together,  I  ^Udge  they  had  been  together.    As 
he  was  going  away,  6run€  said,  there  was 
something  to  be  done  yet,  and  they  went  away 
together.    When  they  were  gone,  my  mistress 
and  I  went  into  the  bade  room',  and  I  saw  a 
long  pole  in  the  comer  of  the  room ;  and  in 
the  cupboard  I  saw  several  rolls  of  brown 
paper  and  tar ;  some  round  balls  I  saw  also, 
-made  with  string,  and  tar  all  over  them.    I 
have  heard  since,  that  they  are  hand-grenades ; 
they  are  tied  with  rope  yam :  they  were  the 
'Mine  that  were  fbusd   by   the   officers  the 
next  morning.    There  was  adso  an  iron  pot  in 
the  room  whsoh  belonged  to  Brunt,-  arid  there 
were  two  flannel  bags,  which  were  full.    My 
^master  came  home  about  eleven,  and  directed 
-me  to  rise  in  the  morning  as  soon  as  I  could, 
said  clean  his  boots,  which  I  did;  he  then 
aalced  me  if  I  knew  the  Borough  ?  I  said,  Yes. 
'*^Ji  I  knew  Snow's^fields  ?  No.— He  told  me 
bow  I  was  to  And  them,  and  that  I  was  to  go 
to  Potter,   Kirby-street,  Snow's^-fields.     He ! 
desired  me  to>  faring  a  rash  basket  into  tbe 
back  nxmtf,  and  he  took  another,  and  desired 
sue  to  pat  those  things  into  the  basket  which  I 
bare  dBseribed  as  having  seen  the  night  before ; 
^me  was  tied  up  with  a  blue  apron  of  Mrs. 
Bunt's,  ^Mdueh  nad  been  used  as  a  curtain  to 
tbe  window  of  the  back  room ;  the  other  was 
-not  tied: up;  he  then  went  into  his  own  room, 
«:td  looked  for  something  to  tie  it  up  with ;  at 
ibis  moment  two  officers  caase  in  and  seised 
<tiMBm«    On  the  Sunday  to  whieh  I  have  spoken, 
I   think    at  tbe  meeting   there  were   abo«t 
tweatj  present/' 

Ob  croas-examination,  he  says,  **  I  waa  net 
watpnseA  particularly  at  the-  meetings ;  I  did 
not  suapCNst  what  they  w^re  about,  nor  bad  I 
my 'knowiedipe  of  what  the  pistols  wew for; 
I  never  was  ma;  court  of  justice  before;  nor 
ewer  before  a  magistrate,  except  when  I  was 
ejaunined  about  this  business.^ 

Tbie  eiidsy  for  the  present,  tbe  testimony  of 
kiiese  three  witnesses —coming  forward,  under 
tbe  eiroenistances  I  have  stated  to  you-^^^rant- 
[Dg  no  oonftrmation  as  to  any^  part  of  their 
aeetimonyt  and  who  prove  against*  the 
vtbeBs,   and  the  ppsooer  at   the   bar,  the 

vdi«  xxxiu. 


fecfla  t?hidi  I  have  stated  to  yon — the  taking 
of  the  room  for  the  prisoneD— the  employment 
of  that  room — the  approach  to  it  by  tbe  stain 
•*«the  backway — the  frequent  meetings — their 
contibuing  for  five  weeks,  down  to  the  di». 
covery  which  took  place  in  Cato*street  -r-  the 
arms  seen  from  time  to  time — the  putting  all 
the  bags  in  the  room  taken  for  Ings,  and  the 
other  circumstances  I  have  stated.  —  How  fi&r 
this  evidence  is  material,  if  there  were  no 
other  evidence  to  confirm  the  account  given 
by  the  witness  Adams,  or  whether  it  be  at  all 
material,andif  so,  how  far  material,  in  combina- 
tion with  all  the  other  evidence  to  which  your 
attention  will  be  drawn,  it  will  be  for  you  to 
consider  when  you  compare  the  different  parts 
of  the  case. 

The  next  witness  called  is  Thomas  Smart, 
vi^o  is  a  watchman  in  the  parish  of  St. 
George's,  near  lord  Harrowby^s  house.  He 
says,  *^  I  was  on  the  watch,  on  the  night  of 
Tuesday  the  82nd  of  February,  in  Grosvenor- 
square ;  I  saw  four  very  suspicious  looking 
characters,  about  half-past  eight  or  a  quarter 
before  nine,  on  the  22na  of  Febraary,  and  one 
of  these  was  a  man  of  colour ;  there  was  a  tall 
man  with  him :  they  were  peeping  down 
the  airea,  and  I  left  my  watch  at  seven  in  .the 
morning.  Bissix  was  a  watchman  at  the  same 
time  with  me ;  he  and  I  met  everv  half  hour, 
at  the  end  of  our  round ;  and  I  told  him  there 
were  some  suspicious  characters,  and  to  keep 
a  look  out  after  them.'' 

Charles  Bissix  is  next  called,  who  says,  hb 
is  a  watchman  in  Grosvenor-souare,  and  was 
there  on  watcA  on  the  22nd  of  February ;  **  at 
about  a  quarter  before  nine  I  was  at  the  end 
of  my  beat,  on  the  same  side  on  which  lord 
Harrowby  lives ;  there  were  two  men  passed 
me,  one  was  a  dark  man,  a  man  of  colour  I 
believe;  he  said,  watchman,  is  it  almost 
nine  ?  to  which  I  answered,  within  a  few 
mitiutes." 

Henry  Gillan  is  next  called ;  he  says,  that 
he  used  tbe  Rising  Sun  public-house,  the 
comer  of  Charies^reet  and  Adams-mews ;  and 
he  says,  **•  on  Tuteday,  the  22nd  of  February, 
I  was  there  when  there  came  in  two  persons, 
and  I  aftenArards  played  at  dominos  with 
Brant,  between  nine  and  ten  in  the  evening ; 
I  was  there  before  he  came  in;  another 
taian  came  with  him ;  they  bad  bread  and 
cheese,  and  some  porter,  and  we  played  about 
half  an  hour.  I  left  the  house  first  and  I  left 
it  about  ten ;  I  know  that  it  was  the  22nd  of 
Febraaiy  by  tbe  list  b^  which  I  carry  out  my 
medicines ;  I  have  libt  the  list  with  me  now ; 
that  is  the  only  recollcetion  I  have  of  it." 

Hien  John  ciectjlir  Morrison  is  called,  who 
says  he  is  a  jour^yman-  to  Mri  Underwood 
the  cutler,  in  Druryi-lane,  and  worked  with 
him  at  Christmas  last,  remembers  on  Christ- 
asas  eve  last,  a  berson  bringing  him  a  sword 
to  sharpen  ;  he  was  dressed  like  a  butdier. — 
To  this  part  of  the  evidence  you  will  of  course 
attend,  ia  eonneedon  with  the  testimony  that  . 
vrill  afterwards  appear  ;^the  time  when  ^lia 

4£ 


11551       1  GEORGE  IV. 

happened — the  circumstances  under  which  it 
took  place — the  circumstances  of  who  brought 
this  sword — all  are  highly  material.  He  says, 
that  the  person  in  question  brought  a  sword 
to  his  master's  shop,  on  the  day  before 
Christmas-day ;  he  says,  he  was  dressed  like 
a  butcher ;  <'Ings,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar, 
was  the  person  who  brought  the  sword;  he 
called  three  days  after,  wad  paid  me  nine 
pence  for  grinding  it;  he  told  me  to  grind 
Uy  and  to  make  the  point  particularly  sharp, 
and  to  make  it  cut  both  back  and  edge ;  it  was 
a  short  sabre.  After  this  he  called  again,  and 
brought  ir  veiy  long  one,  which  might  be  a 
fortnight  after,  and  then  he  gare  me  the  same 
directions  which  he  had  given  before  as  to  the 
other.  It  is  customary  with  us  to  ask  the  name, 
that  we  may  know  to  whom  we  are  to  return 
the  things  when  they  are  called  for ;  and  he 
said,  Ings  or  Eames  was  bis  name,  to  the  best 
of  my  knowledge  f*  and,  looking  to  the  prisoner, 
he  says,  Ings  is  the  man  who,  at  the  time  in 
question,  brought  Uiese  two  swords,  with  a 
direction  to  have  the  point,  the  edge,  and  the 
back,  the  one  long,  and  the  other  short,  sharp- 
ened. This  is  the  evidence  of  a  person  not 
connected  with  the  conduct  of  any  of  these 
parties,  in  any  of  these  transactions,  but  a 
witness  on  whose  testimony  no  observations 
of  an  adverse  nature  can  be  made,  or  have 
been  attempted. 

Then  Eaward  Simpson  is  called ;  he  is 
corporal-major  in  the  second  Life-guards.  ''  I 
know  Harrison ;  he  was  formerly  in  our  regi- 
ment; he  has  been  on  duty  at  King-street 
barracks ;  I  cannot  say  how  long,  but  he  had 
been  there  long  enough  to  know  the  different 
state  of  the  barracks  in  the  course  of  his  duty ; 
he  would  be  perfectly  acquainted  with  them ; 
the  barracks  join  Gloucester-mews ;  there 
were  formerly"  (that  is  before  the  transactions 
that  were  discovered  on  the  night  in  question) 
"  windows  lookinc  into  the  Mews ;  those  had 
been  stopped  up  mree  or  four  days  after  the 
affair  in  Cato-street ;  there  was  straw  in  the 
room  always,  and  hay  likewise,  and  if  any- 
thing inflammable  had  been  thrown  in,  and  the 
straw  had  caught,  it  would  have  been  the  de- 
struction of  the  whole  barracks." 

The  next  witness  is  James  Aldous,  a  pawn- 
broker in  Berwick-street,  Soho.  He  Knows 
Davidson  :  "  he  pledged  a  brass-barrelled 
blunderbuss  with  me,  which  he  redeemed  on 
the  23rd  of  February,  in  the  morning;  he  said 
nothing  at  the  time ;  I  have  seen  it  since ;  it 
was  shown  to  me  at  Port  man-street-barracks 
by  the  officer  ;**  this  blunderbuss  being  one  of 
those  proved  to  have  been  taken  on  the  night 
in  question  proved  by  this  witness  to  have 
been  pawned  with  him  by  Davidson. 

Now,  gentlemen,  we  return,  after  these  six 
witnesses  -« impartial  and  unconnected  with 
the  case— to  a  person  who  stands  in  some 
respect  in  a  particular  and  peculiar  situation ; 
and  I  now  call  yeur  attention  to  the  evidence 
given  by  Thomas  Hiden.  He  says,  that  he  is 
A  cow-keeper  and  dairyman^  living  in  Man- 


Trial  qfJmmei  Ii^s 


itise 


chester-mews ;  that  he  knows  (he  priacmer 
Wilson;  he  had  known  him  shortly  beCoie 
last  February.  Wilson  I  need  scaredy  19- 
mind  vou  is  one  of  the  persons  who  has  iwem 
proved  to  have  been  liom  time  to  tinae  prewt 
at  these  meetings,  hxving  conducted  himself 
in  the  way  in  wUdi  he  appears  to  have  done 
on  the  testimony  of  former  witnesses,  some  of 
whose  evidence  1  have  read,  and  the  remain- 
der you  will  piesently  hear.  He  wa»  also 
taken  on  the  night  in  question,  as  will  stppear 
from  the  subseqnent  part  of  the'eTidcnce,  ia 
Cato-street.  ''He  asked  me  if  I  would  he 
one  of  a  party  who  were  going  to  meet  to  de- 
stroy his  majesty's  ministers,  and  he  told  me 
they  had  got  such  things  as  I  never  saw,,  and 
they  were  waiting  for  a  cibiaet  dimier ;  he 
said  the  things  were  made  of  tarpawlin,  tin 
and  powder,  and  that  it  would  heave  up  one 
of  the  walls  of  the  very  house  by  vHiioi  we 
were  walking;  he  told  me  that  they  weie 
to  destroy  his  majesty's  ministers;  they  were 
to  have  a  cabinetZdinner,  and  at  what  time  he 
would  let  me  know ;  thev  were  going,  he  said,  to 
light  up  some  fires.''  Now  with  this  yoo  w2l 
connect  the  evidence  which  stands  also  on 
•nsuspicious  testimonv — the  testimony  of  oA- 
cecs,  nv  whom  in  tne  various  places  these 
fire-balls  were  afterwards  found — ^with  the 
account  given  of  the  nature  of  them  and  ikm 
effects,  by  the  seijeant  of  the  artillery  who  was 
afterwards  called  as  a  witness.  He  tells  too^ 
that  Wilson,  one  of  the  persons  who  had  a*> 
tended  these  meetings,  and  who  is  diaiged 
with  being  one  of  these  conspirators,  told  him 
that  they  were  going  to  light  up  some  fires; 
**  he  named  lord  Harrowby's  house,  the  duke 
of  Wellington's,  lord  Sidmouth's,  lord  Caatle- 
reagh*s,  the  bishop  of  London's,  and  one  mors 
which  I  do  not  know.  He  said  I  had  no  oc- 
casion to  be  aftaid,  that  a  gentlemaa's  servant 
had  furnished  them  with  a  certain  som  of 
money,  and  if  they  would  act  upon  the  occasioe 
or  on  the  subject  he  would  give  them  a  con- 
siderable sum  more ;  he  told  me'' — and  yea 
will  have  the  goodness,  gendemen,  to  attend  te 
this — **  that  by  lighting  the  fires  and  keeping 
the  town  in  a  state  of  conftuion,  in  a  few  days 
it  would  become  general ;  that  the  hand-gre- 
nades were  to  be  lighted  for  the  purpose  of 
being  throvrn  into  the  room,  and  all  that  es- 
caped the  fire  were  to  die  by  the  edge  of  the 
sword,  or  some  other  means;  but,  he  added,  if 
I  did  make  one  of  them,  Mr.  Thistlewood 
would  be  glad  to  see  me,  and  I  tohl  him  I 
would  make  one ;  after  thu  " — and  this  is 
terial  for  you,  gentlemen,  to  consider ; 
person  was  not  at  the  meeting  on  the  nigihl  in 
question  in  Cato-street,  nor  at  any  of  the  fi»- 
mer  meetings,  nor  was  ever  himself  apprdiead* 
ed  on  any  charge  of  conspiracy  or  crime — ^"  X 
wrote  to  lord  Castlereagh,  it  might  be  two  or 
three  days  after;  I  went  to  lord  Castlercaigli^ 
but  could  not  see  him ;  I  delivered  it  to  loid 
HaiTowby  in  Hyde-park;  it  was  on  the  day  of 
the  discovery  that  I  saw  Wilsonagain  in  Man- 
chester-street, who  said,  you  are  ttie  wtry  msa 


1157] 


fir  High  Triaton, 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1158 


I.  want  to  9e% ;  h%  said,  there  would  be  a 
cabioet-dinDerat  lord  Harrowby's  in  GrosTenor- 
square,  and  I  was  to  be  sure  to  come ;  I  wished 
to  know  where,  he  said  to  John-street,  to  the 
Horse  and  groom ;  he  told  me  I  was  to  go  into 
the  public-house,  or  stay  by  the  comer  till  I  was 
shoved  into  a  stable  close  by ;  that  I  was  to 
meet  him  at  a  quarter  before  six  or  by  six ;  I 
asked  him  how  many  there  were  going  to  be  ? 
he  said  about  twenty  or  thirty  there,  but  those 
were  not  all,  for,  he  added,  there  was  a  party 
in  the  Borough,  and  another  in  Gray's-inn-lane, 
and  another  in  the  city  or  Gee's-court,  I  am 
not  certain  which  he  said;  he  said  that  ail 
those  living  in  Gee's-court  were  in  it ;  but  they 
would  not  act  unless  the  Englisdi  began  first. 
You  have  heard  from  other  evidence,  that  the 
court  in  question  is  chiefly  inhabited  by  Irish, 
and  therefore  Wilson  told  him  that  they  would 
not  act  unless  the  English  began  first ;  indeed 
it  is  followed  up  by  saying  ^  Gee's-court  had 
all  eokbarked  in  it ;  he  told  me  they  were  all 
Irishmen  that  inhabited  Gee*s-court ;  he  said 
after  they  had  done  in  Grosvenor-square,  they 
-were  to  meet  somewhere  about  the  Mansion- 
lionse ;  he  told  me,  also,  tliere  were  pieces  of 
45annon  which  could  be  easily  flrot  in  Gray's-inn- 
lane,  by  knocking  in  a  small  door ;  that  there 
were  four  pieces  at  another  place,  which  they 
could   get  by  only  killing  the  sentry  in  the 
Artillery-ground,  where  exactly  I  cannot  re- 
collect ;  I  promised  him  to  come,  and  he  pro- 
mised me  to  be  there  a  quavter  before  six ;  I 
went  to  Johii««treet,bui  I  was  behind  my  time 
in  consequence  of  business ;  it  was  nearlyseven 
4>'clock ;  I  saw  Wilson  and  Davidson ;  David- 
son is  the  man  of  colour ;  they  stood  at  the 
comer  of  the  gateway ;  I  had  known  Davidson 
a  long  time  before  ;  they  said,  you  are  behind 
jKHirtime;  I  said,  yes,  I  could  not  keep  it; 
l>a¥idson  asked  me  if  I  was  going  in,  saying. 
Hi r.  Thistlewood  was  there ;  1  told  him  I  could 
not  go  in,  for  I  had  been  employed  to  go  and 
^et  some  cream,  and  I  asked  when  do  you  go 
A'way ;  he  said,  he  thought  about  eight,  and  if 
gnone  away,  I  was  to  follow  them  into  Gros- 
w^enor-square,  and  he  told  me  that  I  was  to  be 
at  the  bottom  of  the  square,  the  fourth  house 
from  the  comer  at  the  bottom  of  the  square ; 
X>aTidson  said,  come  you  dog,  this  is  the  best 
-tiling  you  ever  had  to  do  with  in  your  life.'' 
XJpoa  a  paper  being  produced  to  him,  he  says, 
^*  this  is  the  letter  which,  before  this  meeting 
ixm   Cato-street,  in  Hyde-park,  I  myself  per- 
tfonally  delivered  to  lord  Iiarrowby.'' 

On  his  cross-examination,  he  says,  '^  the  let- 
ter is  my  writing.  I  was  a  cowkeeper  about 
CcptJkT  years ;  I  never  was  a  shoemaker  before  I 
9^SkS  a  cowkeeper ;  I  was  a  gentleman's  servant, 
a.o^  I  was  brought  up  to  farming ;  I  lived  in 
TMMy  1^^  place,  at  colonel  Bridges's  in  South 
ff^ixdley-street,  that  is  six  or  it  may  be  seven 
^«3.TS  ago,  I  cannot  precisely  say ;  he  had  the 
i^lBole  house,  but  whether  it  was  a  hired  house 
^cnished  b^  him  or  taken  furnished,  I  do  not 
arm ;  I  did  not  live  long  with  hi|n,  it  might 
<.wo  or  three  months,  it  might  b^  two  or  it 


might  be  'One,  at  this  distance  of  time  I  cannot 
exactly  say  which ;  I  lived  with  major  Dive .; 
a  year  and  three  months,  in  Tavistock-street, 
Bedford-square,  I  lived  there  as  a  footman,  he 
keeping  only  one ;  I  then  went  to  Mr.  Brice, 
in  Stratton-street ;  for  the  last  five  years  I  have 
been  a  milkman  or  a  cow-keeper,  I  have  lived 
in  Manchester-mews  three  years,  my  family 
has  been  ther^;  I  have  been  two  or  tliree  or 
four  months  from  home  at  a  time,  and  I  have 
been  lately  for  debt  in  the  prison  of  the 
Marshalsea ;  I  was  in  piison  for  about  eighteen 
pounds  due  to  Mr.  Powell,  who  is.  a  milkman 
and  a  cow-keeper,  I  wentinlast  Saturday,  being 
taken  then  in  execution.  In  the  beginning  of  last 
summer,  I  was  out  of  the  way  between  two  and 
three  months,  it  might  be  June  or  July  or  August, 
or  the  beginning  of  September,  but  not  so  late  I 
believe  as  October ;  I  was  at  home  at  different 
times  in  July  and  August,  my  wife  and  my 
family  carry  on  the  business,  she  and  my  family 
remained  there  and  carried  on  my  business  for 
me ;  my  family  still  live  in  Manchester-mews, 
nt  least  they  did  last  Saturday  morning,  and 
they  have  been  there  all  the  time  I  have  men- 
tioned, and  are  there  now  for  all  I  know; 
they  are  living  there  now,  my  sister  told  me  so 
to-day ;  I  have  known  Davidson  for  three  or 
or  four  months;  I  do.  not  know  Edwards; 
I  know  a  Mr.  Edwards ;  the  person  you  are 
inqniring  for  may  be  the  person  whom  I  know ; 
the  Mr.  Edwards  !•  know  lives  two  hundred 
miles  in  the  country."  therefore  he  thinks  that 
cannot  l^e  the  person  about  whom  the  counsel 
for  the  prisoner  was  inquiring ;  he  says,  '^  I  * 
carried  on  the  business  of  milkman  in  Durwes- 
ton-street,  by  the  Edgware-road ;  I  have  been 
twice  to  the  Scotch.  Arms  in  a  small  court  by 
the  Strand,  I  went  to  the  shoemakers'  club,  I 
went  with  a  friend  of  the  name  ,of  Clark,  a 
tailor;  I  cannot  state  what  was  the  sul^ect  of 
conversation,  it  was  seven  or  eight  months  ago. 
I  only  know  the  prisoners  Davidson  and  Wilson, 
and  had  conversation  with  them,  I  had  seen 
Davidson  it  might  be  a  week  or  fortnight  be- 
fore ;  I  had  never  been  at  Fox-court ;  I  knew 
nothing  of  this  particular  afiair  till  Wilson  told 
me ;  the  cream  is  a  great  profit  to  me,  I  might 
gain  two  or  three  shillings  by  that  order,  it  was 
for  a  family  1  was  to  get  the  cream ;  they  lived 
at  No.  6,  Princes-street,  Cavendish-square, 
I  have  served  them  for  three  or  four  years,  I 
do  not  know  their  names,  I  have  had  orders 
for  cream. repeatedly  from  them,  our  people 
brought  home  the  order,  I  did  not  go  to 
the  house,  my  wife  or  sister  went  ,to  tell 
them  it  could  not  be  got ;  I  do  not  serve  them 
myself  nor  ever  did ;  my  wife  serves  them  I 
believe ;  I  have  been  at  the  house  many  times, 
I  have  seen  maid  servants  there,  I  cannot,  say 
when  I  was  last  there ;  I  serve  them  daily ;  I 
do  not  know  what  quantity  of  cream  was  or- 
dered for  that  night ;  we  get  a  shilling  profit 
upon  apint,  and  more  than  a  quart  was  ordered ; 
I  do  not  know  the  name  of  any  servant  in 
the  house;  it  was  the  first  time  I  met  Wilson, 
th^t  be  said  I  had  no  occasion  to  b$  afraid,  for 


1150]       1  GEORGE  iV* 

there  wu  a  gentleiMui's  lervaiit  «ko  rappUed 
motieT;"  he  then  says,  ^he  told  me  so  at 
two  different  timet,  I  had  known  him  long 
before,  and  have  often  met  with  him  ;  I  never 
went  into  Cato-street,  only  to  the  comer." 

On  the  re-examination  he  sajt,  **  I  carried 
on  my  business  till  last  Satuiday,  in  Maft- 
chester-mews ;  I  was  taken  last  Satnxday  in 
execution.  I  think  the  number  fras  <^  of  the 
gentleman's  house  who  was  to  have  had  the 
cream,  and  I  think  it  was  the  first  door  on  the 
left-hand-side  from  the  square,  going  down  to 
Oxford*street."  Now  this  is,  you  see,  a  wit- 
ness who,  more  or  less,  but  not  idtogether, 
has  on  this  day^  at  least  been  described  to  you 
as  an  accompbce ;  whether  he  is  so  or  not,  or 
in  what  particular  situation  he  stands,  I  shall 
consider  more  fully  hereafter.  But  at  present, 
yon  will  remember  that  he  is  a  person  who, 
though  he  tells  yon  he  in  words  consented  (and 
whether  in  heart  or  not  it  is  for  you  to  judge) 
to  go  with  these  persons  on  this  purpose  being 
communicated  to  him  by  Wilson  originally, 
yet,  before  the  hour  arrived  in  which  this  fstal 
project  was  to  be  carried  into  execution,  he 
appears  to  have  gone  with  a  letter  to  the  noble 
loiti  to  whose  evidence  I  shall  afterwards  call 
your  attention — a  letter  ftist  intended  for  lord 
Castlereagh;  but  such  was  his  anxiety,  not 
having  been  able  to  see  that  noble  loid,  that 
he  went  to  lord  Harrowby's  house ;  finding  he 
was  ridinff,  he  went  to  Uie  Park ;  and  in  the 
Park,  berore  the  meeting  took  place,  he  de- 
livered the  letter  in  question.  Now,  I  can 
only  say  that  it  is  not  merely  most  extraordi- 
nary, but  unaccountable,  that  he  should  have 
been  able,  unless  gifted  with  the  spirit  of  pro- 
phecy, to  deliver  a  letter  to  lord  Harrowby, 
oefore  the  meeting  in  Cato-street,  giving  him 
notice  of  a  conspiracy  there  going  on,  if  it 
were  merely  a  thing  as  yet  in  the  womb  of 
timet 

The  next  witness  who  is  called  is  lord  Har- 
rowby himself.  He  tells  you,  that  he  is  pre- 
sident of  the  oouncil ;  that  it  is  usual  to  have 
cabinet  dinners;  and  that  in  February  last 
these  dinners  had  been  interrupted  by  the 
death  of  his  late  majesty.  In  Uie  latter  end  of 
the  week  preceding  the  23rd  of  February,  he 
caused  cards  to  be  issued  inviting  the  members 
of  the  cabinet  council  to  dine  with  him  on 
Wednesday  the  28rd  of  February;  he  then 
mentions,  with  their  respective  offices,  the 
several  persons  who  were  to  have  been  present 
at  that  dinner ;  and  von  will  see  how  far  this 
agrees  with  the  number  stated  to  the  persons 
assembled  in  Cato-street,  by  Thistlewood  as 
likely  to  be  present  at  the  cabinet  dinner,  and 
who  were  there  stated  to  be  fourteen  or  six- 
teen. His  lordship  mentions  the  lord  Chan- 
cellor, the  earl  of  Liverpool,  Mr.  Vansittart, 
earl  Bathnrst,  lord  Castlereagh,  lord  Sidmouth, 
lord  Melville,  the  earl  of  Westmorland,  the 
duke  of  Wellington,  Mr.  Canning,  Mr.  Wel- 
lesley  Pole,  the  earl  of  Mulgrave,  Mr.  Robin- 
eon,  and  Mr.  Bragge  Bathurst;  and  his  lord- 
ship afterwards  adds,  fburteen  besides  himself; 


TtM  €fJmm  iW«t  [ll«D 

^all  these  were  memben  of  Um  PiWy  eoom* 
cil;  my  house  is  on  the  south  side  off  Grov- 
venoT'^equare,  next  door  to  thear^bUopof 
York.  On  Tuesday,  the  22nd  of  FebrMiy,  I 
was  riding  in  the  Park,  and  I  was  arcoefd 
by  a  person  whom  I  did  not  then  know;  I 
now  know  that  person  to  be  Hiden ;  he  gave 
me  this  letter,  addressed  to  lord  Castlereagii ; 
he  said  it  was  of  material  importance  to  lord 
Castlereagh,  as  well  as  myself  and  souse  olhen^ 
and  wished  it  to  be  delivered  immediately. 
I  was  myself  going  to  Cariton-hoose,  to  atftoMi 
the  council  that  was  held  by  the  king  ;  and 
therefore,  not  finding  lord  Castlereagh  theic^ 
I  despatched  it  with  a  note  from  myself  to 
him.  I  met  Hiden  in  the  Park,  by  appMit- 
ment,  the  next  morning.  He  made  a  oonums- 
nication  to  me  there;  the  communication 
which  he  made  to  me  is  oontaioed  in  &a 
letter,  except  that  wbidi  I  have  spokeift  lo 
before ;  and  I  should  add,  that  at  tnis  time, 
he  personal^  made  that  communication  to  me 
in  more  gener^  terms.  The  plan  of  the 
dinner,  upon  this,  vras  given  op  ibr  that  d^; 


I  dined  at  Fife-house^  the  eari  of  Liverpool^ 
The  preparations  at  my  honse  proceeaed  t» 
all  outward  appearance,''  that  the  pla»  of 
giving  up  the  dinner  m^t  not  be  known  la 
the  persons  assembled,  *'as  if  the  c<MBipa»f 
had  oeen  to  dine-  there,  till  they  were  stopped 
by  a  note  I  sent  fK>m  lord  liveipool's  (which 
being  despatohed  between  seven  and  eight 
from  Fife-nouse,  I  ooneeive  reached  mr  own 
bouse  about  eight  o'bkick)  to  say  timt  tte  ca- 
binet dinner  could  not  take  pboe.  I  had 
concealed  from  my  servants  the  alteratioii  of* 
the  plan,  and  every  thing  went  on  as  usoaL 
I  had  no  communication  with  any  person  m 
to  this  particular  thing;  but  we  had  informa- 
tion, long  previous  to  this,  of  some  geoesal 
design  of  this  nature  being  intended."  Hea^ 
therefore,  you  see  (if  the  fact  could  be  dooiitcd 
upon  the  testimony  of  Hiden,  if  Hidee  coold 
be  considered  at  idl  an  accomplice,  which  yen 
will  judge)  whether  he  is  oompletel^  oonfirmed 
by  the  noble  lord  who  has  given  this  evideaei^ 
proving  that  Hiden  gave  him  a  letter  in  the 
Park,  which  gave  him  the  information  oeo- 
tained  in  that  letter,  and  upon  which  they  had 
previous  general  information.  Lord  Hanow- 
Dy  having  left  the  court,  was  called  back ;  and 
Hiden  was  called  up ;  and  his  lordship  says, 
^'tbat  is  the  person  who  delivered  me  me 
letter.'' 

The  next  witness,  is  John  Baker,  botfer  lo 
lord  Harrowby ;  and  he  speaks  to  same  effect 
as  lord  Harrowby  as  to  the  dinner. 

Now  we  fall  back  to  the  testimony  of  a  pei^ 
son  who  undoubtedly  is  an  accomplice,  namely, 
John  Monument;  who  introduces  himself  bf 
telling  you  that  he  is  at  thia  time  a  prisoner  ia 
the  Tower.  He  says,  **  I  met  Ihiitlewood  at 
the  house  of  a  person  named  Ford,  about  t«e 
or  three  months  before  the  meeting  in  Cal^ 
street ;  about  a  fbrtnight  after,  he  caHed  en 
me ;  Brant  was  with  him ;  I  was  in  the  reomi 
I  and  my  moUier  and  my  btodier  wen  with  me; 


ll€Il 


Jar  Hii^  Tn/uon. 


h«  was  in  the  Toom  flve  minatet,  frfaeft  lie 
called  me  to  Xh%  outside  of  the  door ;  Brunt 
di4  not  go  out  with  us ;  he  said  greei^  events 
are  at  hand" — here  again,  gentlemen,  you 
will  attend  to  what  follows — ^"  great  events 
are  at  hand ;  the  people  every  where  are  ami* 
ous  for  a  change ;  he  had  been,  he  said,  pro<- 
mised  support  by  many  men,  who  had  de- 
ceived him;  but  now  he  had  got  men  that 
would  stand  by  him ;  he  asked  me  whether  I 
had  any  arms;  I  said  no;  he  said  no  man 
ehould  be  without  arms,  eveiy  one  who  be- 
longed to  him  had  arms ;  some  a  sabre,  some 
a  pistol,  some  a  pike,  and  that  I  might  buy  a 
pistol  for  four  or  five  shillings.  I  said  that  I  had 
DO  money  to  buy  a  pistol;  he  said  that  he 
would  see  what  he  could  do;  there  was  no 
other  conversation  at  this  time;  I  returned 
into  the  room;  Brunt  and  Thistlewood went 
away  together.  Two  or  three  days  after  this, 
Brunt  called  on  me  by  himself;  he  said  he 
was  in  a  hurry,  and  nothing  particular  pass- 
ed;  on  the  22nd  of  February,  Brunt  called 
again,  in  company  with  Tidd,  about  two  or 
three  o'clock ;  I  said  I  thought  I  had  lost  you ; 
he  said  the  king's  death  had  made  an  altera- 
tion in  their  plans ;  I  asked  what  plans ;  he 
said  there  would  be  a  meeting  on  the  following 
evening  at  Tybum-tumpike,  whefe  I  should 
know  all  the  particulars ;  and  then  he  turned 
round  to  Tidd  and  asked,  should  he  give  me 
the  word?  and  Tidd  said  yes,  be  supposed 
there  was  no  danger ;  and  then  he  told  me 
that  if  I  saw  any  people  about,  I  was  to  say  to 
them  6,ti,#,  and  if  they  were  friends,  they 
would  answer  t,  o,  n,  making  the  word  button  0 
he  said  he  would  call  the  next  morning  and 
tell  me  further  particulars;  they  then  went 
arway.  On  the  following  day,  Wednesday, 
Brunt  called  on  me  between  four  and  five 
oVlock ;  he  called  me  down  stairs,  and  told 
me  that  be  wanted  me  to  go  with  him ;  I  told 
liim  that  I  could  not  then,  for  that  I  had  some 
work  to  finish ;  he  asked  me  when  it  would  be 
done ;  I  told  him  not  before  six ;  be  told  ne 
then  I  must  go  to  Tidd's  house,  and  he  toM 
me  where  Tidd  lived,  in  Hole-4n-the-wall 
passage,  Brook's  market ;  he  went  away,  and 
at  half-past  six  I  went  to  Tidd^s ;  I  found  him 
at  home;  he  said  he  was  waiting  for  some 
more  men,  and  they  had  not  come ;  and  he 
said  he  could  not  wait  later  than  seven  o'clock ; 
at  seven  o'clock  Tidd  went  to  a  box  in  the 
comer  of  the  room,  and  took  out  a  pistol, 
iphich  he  put  into  a  belt  round  his  body  under 
a  great  coat,  and  then  he  took  about  six  or 
eight  heads  of  pikes,  in  a  piece  of  brown  paper, 
in  his  hand,  and  a  staff  four  feet  long  which 
had  a  hole  to  receive  a  pike-head ;  he  went 
down  stairs  into  Holbom,  and  I  along  with 
him,  and  we  went  up  Holborii,  and  going  up 
Oxford^street,  I  asked  him  what  we  were  going 
about  ?  he  said  I  should  know  when  I  got  there ; 
was  it,  I  asked,  to  the  House  of  Commons  we 
were  going;  he  said  no,  there  were  too  many 
soldiers  about  there?  he  thett  told  me  we  were 
going  10  GrMveuotwsqptaye;  tasked  who 


A.  IX  ISM.  [laoB 

thtPi;  to  said  there  waetobaaeabiAetdiaMr 
there  that  evening;  nothiig  acre  pa»ed,  and 
he  then  teok  me  lo  Cato^street,  through  the 
gateway  on  the  riirht  hand  into  a  stable ;  tWo 
people  were  standing  under  the  gateway :  be 
spoke  to  them ;  I  went  into  the  stable,  thert 
were  three  or  four  men  there>  and  a  light;  h# 
asked  whether  Mr.  Thistlewood  wis  up  staim, 
they  told  him  he  was;  we  went  up  staiiai 
there  were  one  or  two  or  three  ana  twenty 
people,  as  near  as  I  can  tell,  of  whoai  Thiitie^ 
wood  was  one  $  and  on  a  heacb  there  wens  a 
gmt  manv  swoi^s  and  pistols ;  Tidd  went  up 
stairs,  and  when  up  stairs  a  man  in  a  great 
coat  spoke  of  die  impropriety  of  going  with  w^ 
small  a  |»rty  to  lord  uarrowby's.  Thistte* 
wood  said  it  was  quite  sufficient,  for  if  lord 
Harrowby  had  sixteen  ieivants,  fourteen  of 
our  men  would  be  quite  enough  to  m  into  the 
room.  The  man  then  said,  what  raall  we  do 
when  We  come  out  of  the  room>  as  there  would 
be  people  in  the  street,  who  might  prevent  one 
escape ;  to  which  Thistlewood  answered,  this 
is  the  smallest  body,  there  is  another  and  a 
larger  body,  the  largest  is  alreadv  awayi  Da- 
vidson then  told  the  man  not  to  throw  cM 
water  upon  their  proceedings,  for  if  he  was. 
afraid  or  his  life^  Uiey  oould  do  without  himy 
and  he  might  go.  Brunt  then  said,  sooner 
than  leave  the  nisiness,  he  would  go  into  th» 
room  alone. and  blow  them  all  up  j  he  said  yoa 
know  we  have  got  that  winoh  can  do  it,  or  ta 
that  effect ;  the  man  then  said  he  did  not  like 
going  with  so  small  a  number,  but  as  they  weoe- 
aU  nnr  it^  he  would  not  be  afpiinst  it ;  ha  theii 
proposed  that  they  should  put  themsllleee' 
under  the  orders  of  Thistlewood ;  when  Thkb. 
tlewood  said  every  one  engaged  in  the  husi» 
ness  would  have  the  same  heneur  with  himself; 
and  he  then  proposed  that  the  fourteen  men  to 
go  into  the  room  shonld  velimteer  from  among 
tiie  persons  that  were  in- the  room )  a  fow  mi* 
nutes  afterwards,  tsvelve  or  thirteen  out  of  the 
fourteen  ranged  themselves  aoeoi^ngly  eat  the 
other  side  of  the  loem;  one  (Tidd)  came  ftrit 
and  spoke  to  me,  on  which  Thistlewood  put 
him  hack,  and  said,  you  all  know  your  places; 
I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  particular  passing 
after  that  until  the  officers  came  into  the  reem^ 
which  was  about  five  minutes.^  Ihis  brings 
us  to  that  part  of  the  transaction,  whieb  intio- 
duoes  the  police  officers  first  into  the  stable, 
and  afterwards  up  into  the  loft.  He  says, 
**  there  seemed  first  to  be  two  or  three,  they 
got  up  stairs  before  those  in  the  room  knew  it  ;• 
they  told  them  in  the  room  that  they  were 
officers,  and  called  upon  them  to  surrender, 
telling  them  that  there  was  a^  guard  of  soldiers 
below ;  I  was  taken  into  custody  in  the  room 
and  I  have  been  in  confinement  ever  since/' 

On  cross-examination,  he  says,  ^fear  led 
me  there ;  Bmnt  at  my  house  said,  that  every 
man  who^  engaged  in  it  and  did  not  eomie  foiw 
ward,  should  he  deetrojred  $  I  was<  foolish,  but 
I  eaimot  ohai|fe  myself  with  anyerime;  I  waa 
afinaid  there  was  soinethiiig  had ;  I  did  net 
koow^ <i4yIenspeondf theyww»f oinf-to  tStm 


11633       1  GEORGE  IV. 

House  of  Comnons.  When  h«  told  tan 'it  wm'| 
to -ft  cabinet  dinner,  I  asked  no  fbrther  ques- 
tions, because  I  was  certain  what  it  was ;  I 
could  not  see  that  they  could  be  going  for  any 
thing  but  to  destroy  the  persons  so  assembled 
at  dinner;  I  had  not  been  at  their  private 
meetings ;  I  saw  Thistlewood  at  Ford's  about 
a  week  before  the  Finsbury  meeting,  and  this 
was  after  the  Manchester  meeting;  and  I  went 
to  Tidd's  because  I  was  afraid  to  express  re- 
luctance to  go  with  them.  When  1  found 
what  they  were  about  in  the  room,  my  inten- 
tion was  to  get  away  from  themy  when  Thistle- 
wood  or  somebody  told  the  man  in  the  brown 
ooal,  that  if  he  was  afraid  to  join  them,  he 
might  go  away,  I  wished  he  had  said  so  to 
me ;  I  joined  them  from  fear,  and  proceeded 
from  fear.  I  did  not  know  what  their  pro- 
ceedings were  at  first ;  I  admit  that  I  certamly 
acted  very  fboUshly." 

.  This  last  witness,  I  have  already  told  you, 
undottbtedly  stands  in  the  situation  of  an  ac- 
complice, about  him  therefore  I  say  no  more 
at  present. 

llie  witness  who  is  now  called  is  Thomas 
Monument  He  says, ''  the  last  witness,  John 
Monument,  is  my  brother.''  Crentlemen  you 
will  attend  to  this ;  Thomas  Monument  is  not 
one  of  the  persons  charged  with  this  conspi- 
racy, and  therefore  upon  this  part  of  the  case, 
taking  his  brother  as  an  accomplice,  the  point 
for  your  consideration  will  be.,  how  far  he  is 
confirmed  by  this  witness,  whose  testimony 
BOt  being  attacked  may  be  assumed  to  be  true. 
He  says,  **  John  Monument,  the  last  witness, 
is  my  brother ;  I  lived  with  him ;  Thistlewood 
called  upon  him  at  his  lodgings,  in  company 
with  Brunt ;  they  remained  in  the  room  some 
time,  I  suppose  ten  minutes ;  and  then  This- 
tlewood asked  my  brother  if  he  could  speak  to 
him ;  they  went  out-side  the  door."  This  wit- 
ness therefore,  not  an  accomplice,  confirms 
the  story  told  by  his  brother,  wno  is,  in  all  the 
panioulars  stated  by  John  as  to  Thistlewood's 
coming  there,  calling  his  brother  out  to  speak 
to  him,  of  course  about  something  that  could 
not  be  disclosed  before  Thomas.  "Brant 
called  upon  my  brother  on  Tuesday  the  22Dd 
of  February,  and  brought  a  man  of  the  naro^ 
of  Tidd  with  him,  when  they  came  into  the 
room,  my  brother  said,  Brunt,  I  thought  I  had 
Ipet  you ;  then  something  was  said  concerning 
the  king't  death;  Brunt  said,  the  king's  death 
had  made  some  alteration  in  their  plans ;  my 
brother  said,  what  plans  ?  he  said,  they  had 
different  objects  in  view.  Then  Brunt  'said, 
suppose  we  give  them  an  outline  of  the  plan ; 
and  then  Brunt  said,  that  we  w^re  to  meet  up 
at  Tybum-tumpike  on  the  following  evening 
at  six  o'clock :  lie  then  gave  the  pass  word ;'' 
and  he  repeats  the  pass  word  as  other  wit- 
nesses have  done ;  **  the  next  day,  about  five 
o'clock  in  the  evening,  Brunt  came  and  asked 
my  brother  if  he  was  ready  to  go ;  he  could 
not  go  just  then,  for  be  had  to  finish  some 
work,  and  he  told  him  to  call  onUdd  and  he 
VDuld.takf  him ;  my  brother  then  went  aw^y 


Trial  ofJama'Ingi 


U1164 


at  near  seven  o'clock,  and  I  never  saw  fains 
after  this  till  I  saw  him  in  custody.*'  Yoa 
will  judge  for  yourselves  on  this  part  of  the 
case,  how  frir  the  testimony  of  Monument  the 
accomplice  engaged  in  the  conspiracy,  is  or  is 
not  confirmed  in  all  its  particulars  by  the  tes- 
timony of  his  brother  who  speaks  to  these 
facts,  who  never  went  near  Cato-street,  and 
who  is  in  no  way  connected  with  these  trans- 
actions. 

George  Gaylock  is  the  next  witness,  who 
says,  '*  I  live  at  No.  2,  Cato-street ;  on  tbe 
23rd  of  February  I  saw  Harrison,  one  of  tbe 
prisoners  at  the  bar,  in  Cato-street;  he  was 
going  into  the  stable;  I  asked  him  how  he  did 
and  what  he  was  going  there  for  ?  He  said  he 
had  taken  two  chambers  and  was  going  to 
clean  them  up." 

The  next  witness  is  the  first  of  the  police 
officers  who  went  to  Cato-street,  George  Tho- 
mas Joseph  Ruthven.  He  went  to  the  spot 
about  six  o'clock,  and  he  entered  the  stable  at 
about  half-past  eight.  ^  On  going  in,  I  ob- 
served a  man  walking  backwards  and  forwards 
with  a  gun  on  his  shoulder ;  I  did  not  observe 
him  particularly ;  there  were  others  with  me ; 
I  said  to  them,  secure  that  man,  and  I  went 
up  stairs  first  myself;  next  came  Ellis,  and 
then  Smithers,  and  Gibbs  as  I  have  been  since 
told,  but  I  did  not  see  him.  On  getting  into 
the  loft,  I  observed  several  men  standing  round 
a  carpenter's  bench  ;  there  were  about  twenty- 
four  or  twenty-five  round  the  bench.  I  heard 
a  clattering  of  arms,  and  saw  some  persons 
apparently  sorting  them.  I  said,  We  are  of. 
ficers ;  seize  their  arms.  Thistlewood  looked 
up,  caught  up  a  sword,  and  retired,  with  three 
or  four  others,  into  a  little  room  to  the  right  of 
the  bench ;  two  or  three  men  went  also  into 
the  back  apartment  I  know  Thbtlewood  well ; 
have  known  him  from  the  time  of  tbe  state  trials, 
two  or  -three  years  ago.  Smithers  then  ap- 
peared on  my  right  hand,  he  approached  the 
door  where  "Aiistlewood  had  retired,  on  which 
Thistlewood  stabbed  him  wiih  a  sword ;  he  hi^ 
been  fencing  with  the  sword  before,  and  a 
pistol  was  fired  almost  instantly,  on  which  the 
lights  were  put  out.    I  tlien  heard  a  voice, 

kill  the  b rs  1  throw  them  down  stairs.  On 

this  there  viras  a  rush  towards  the  staircase ;  I 
joined  in  it,  and  got  down  stairs;  there  was  no 
light  in  the  stable  when  I  got  down.  I  got 
into  John-street,  and  there  I  met  the  soldiers. 
I  returned  to  the  stable,  and  I  saw  Tidd  com- 
ing out  of  the  door;  I  called  to  somebody  fol- 
lovring  me  to  lay  hold  of  him ;  and  immediately 
upon  that  he  lined  his  arm,  and  I  saw  a  pistol ; 
I  pulled  him  on  me,  and  we  fell  upon  a  dung- 
heap  ;  the  soldiers  came  up,  and  seijeant  Legg 
extricated  me,  and  I  took  Tidd  to  the  Horse 
and  Groom.  I  searched  him;  I  found  two 
ball-cartridges  in  his  breeches  pocket,  and  a 
belt  round  his  waist  Bradbum  was  brought 
in  while  I  was  there ;  T  searched  him,  and  I 
found  six  ball-cartridges  and  three  loose  balls, 
and  round  his  waist  was  a  string,  five  or  so. 
times  roundi  that  would  have  answered  the 


1166] 


ftrt  High  trediQni 


purpose  of  holding  a  pistol.'  Davidson  was- 
also  brought  in,  and  he  began  to  sing,  Scots 
wha  ha  wi  Wallace  bled ;  ai^  he  said,  damn 
any  man  that  would  not  die  in  liberty's  cause ; 
he  gloried  in  it.  Wilson  was  brought  in,  but 
I  did  not  search  him.  After  this  I  returned  to 
the  loft  and  found  there  several  soldiers,  four 
prisoners,  and  some  police  officers  in  the  room. 
When  Smitbers  received  the  thrust  with  the 
sword  be  fell  backward,  and  cried,  Oh  my 
God !  or.  Oh  I  am  done !  I  do  not  know  which, 
and  died  directly.  I  found  arms  on  returning 
to  the  loft  */'  Jhen  he  produced  the  list  of  all 
the  things  that  were  found  in  the  loft,  together 
with  another  list  of  arms,  ammunition,  and 
accoutrements;  of  all  of  which  you  have  heard 
so  much  and  seen  them  displayed,  and  which 
were  found  not  only  in  the  loft,  but  a  part  at 
Brant's,  and  a  part  at  what  is  called  the  d^p6t 
at  Tidd's.  **  Tidd  fired  a  pistol  when  he  was 
lying  upon  me.  Wilson,  when  in  the  Horse 
and  Groom,  said  he  did  not  care  a  damn ;  he 
knew  it  was  all  over ;  they  might  as  well  kill 
him  now  as  at  any  other  time.  Before  I  went 
to  the  stable  I  went  to  the  Horse  and  Groom ; 
while  I  was  there,  Cooper  and  Gilchrist  came 
in ;  after  they  went  out  Gilchrist  came  back 
for  a  stick,  one  end  was  cut  round,  as  if  to  re« 
ceive  the  socket  of  any  thing.  I  think  there 
were  about  eight  lights  in  the  two  rooms ;  four 
or  five  in  the  first  room  of  the  loft.  I  could 
see  them ;  I  have  no  doubt  th^e  were  four  or 
five.  I  said,  we  are  officers;  seize  their  arms. 
Smithers  said  nothing  more  than,  let  me  come 
forward ;  and  when  he  received  the  blow  he 
fell  back,  crying.  Oh  my  God ! " 

James  Ellis  is  the  next  witness  called ;  he 
says,  **  I  was  one  of  the  conductors  of  the 
Bow-street  patrole  on  Wednesday,  the  23rd  of 
February.  I  went  with  other  officers,  and 
entered  the  stable  close  to  Ruthven ;  there  was 
a  light  in  the  stable;  two  men  were  there. 
The  first  I  observed  was  standing  about  half- 
way between  the  door  and  the  foot  of  the 
ladder.  I  believe  it  was  Davidson ;  he  had  a 
short  gun  or  carbine  in  his  liand ;  he  carried  it 
so  ** — [the  vritness  pointed  out  how]  "  and  at 
his  left  hand  side  a  long  sword  and  two  white 
cross  belts.  I  took  him  by  the  collar,  and 
turned  him  half  round ;  I  looked  in  his  face, 
and  saw  that  he  was  a  man  of  colour,  upon 
which  I  desired  some  of  the  officers  to  secure 
him,  and  left  him.  There  was  another  roan 
near  the  foot  of  the  ladder  in  the  ftirther  stall 
of  the  stable;  he  appeared  to  be  a  shorter 
man,  he  had  a  dark-coloured  coat.  I  took 
little  notice  of  him.  I  followed  Ruthven  up 
the  ladder,  and  heard  what  I  understood  to  he 
a  aignal  to  those  above.  Smithers  followed 
me ;  I  ascended  the  ladder,  and  I  heard  im- 
mediately a  rattling  of  swords  when  we  got 
up.  Ruthven  called  out,  that  we  were  officers, 
seize  or  surrender  your  arms,  I  am  not  positive 
which ;  there  were  candles  in  the  loft,  uree  or 
more,  and  lights  in  the  little  room  besides. 
The  lights  were  placed  on  a  carpenter's  bench, 
which  stood  acro00  the  loomi   On  getting  into 


A.  D.  1820.  [1166 

the  loft  at  the  top  of  the  ladder,  I  saw  a  num- 
ber of  men  falkng  back,  placing  themselves 
against  the  back  of  the  Ion.  I  saw  Thistle* 
wood  and  two  or  three  more  between  the  cap- 
pouter's  bench  and  the  door  of  the  little  room. 
On  my  gaining  the  top  of  the  ladder,  he  shook 
his  swoni  in  this  manner  at  me,  as  if  to  make 
a  stab.  I  desired  him  to  desist,  or  I  would 
fire.  I  had  a  pistol  in  my  right  hand,  and  a 
constable's  staff  in  my  left  hand,  which  I  held 
up  so.  Tfaistlewood  retreated,  backing  into 
the  little  room ;  and  at  that  moment,  having 
ffained  the  top  of  the  ladder,  Smithers  rushed 
forward  to  enter  the  door  of  the  little  room ; 
and  the  moment  he  was  in,  Thistlewood 
stabbed  him  in  the  right  breast.  *  Smithers  held 
up  his  hands.  I  saw  him  Ml  back,  and  heavd 
him  exclaim.  Oh  my  God !  and  foiling  almost 
immediately,  he  staggered  past  me,  and  rose 
no  more.  1  fired  at  Thistlewood ;  the  lights 
were  put  out  the  moment  I  fired ;  the  flash  of 
my  own  pistol  was  the  last  light  I  saw.  Great 
confusion  immediately  took  place;  there  was 
a  rush  by  me ;  I  was  thrown  down  the  ladder  ; 
several  shots  were  fired  in  the  loft  while  I  wai 
on  the  ladder ;  two  or  three  shots  were  fired, 
when  I  found  myself  in  the  stable ;  two  passed 
me  at  the  door.  I  cannot  tell  exactl^  from 
where  fired.  Another  shot  was  fired  in  the 
stable  by  a  man  who  stood  there.  There 
were  some  shots  from  the  window  of  (h# 
little  room,  which  looks  into  Cato-street. 
While  at  the  door,  I  heard  a  cry  of,  Stop  him  I 
and  observed  a  man  running  away  towards 
Cato-street ;  he  had  two  white  cross  belts.  I 
pursued  him,  and  caught  him  in  Cato-street ; 
It  was  Davidson.  On  laying  hold  of  him,  be 
made  a  cut,  intended  for  me,  with  a  sword ; 
others  came  up,  he  was  secured.  I  left  him 
with  an  officer,  and  returned  to  the  stable, 
where.  I  found  lieutenant  Fitzclarence  and  the 
soldiers ;  four  men  were  in  the  loft  in  custody 
of  the  soldiers;  of  these  Monument  was  one 
and  Wilson  another ;  they  were  all  taken  t» 
Bow-street,  and  finally  committed." 

The  next  witness  is  William  Westcoatt,  who 
went  with  Ruthven  and  the  others,  but  not  up 
into  the  loft.  He  says,  "  when  they  had  gone 
up  I  heard  a  noise  of  firing  and  conftision''-^ 
and  then  this  witness  tells  you,  and  to  which 
you  will  particularly  advert — that  he,  remain« 
ing  below,  observed  Ings'in  the  stable,  who 
rushed  towards  him,  the  witness,  as  if  endea* 
vouring  to  get  out  of  the  stable.  He  says^ 
*'  I  seized  him  by  the  collar,  and  shoved  him 
back  against  the  wall  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder ; 
he  put  his  hand  to  his  side  as  if  to  get  out  a 
weapon ;  I  knocked  him  down ;  at  this  tim« 
the  officers  came  tumbling  down  the  ladder. 
I  heard  a  firing  above;  I  saw  the  flash -of  a 

Sistol  from  the  ladder  after  they  had  come 
own ;  it  appeared  .to  have  been  fired  into  the 
stable;  then  a  man  came  down  the  ladder  who 
appeared  to  have  fired  the  pistol ;  it  was.This« 
tlewood ;  he  turned  round  and  presented  a 
pistol  at  my  head ;  it  went  off.  I  had  before 
lifted  up  my  left  hand,  it  passed  through  th* 


Sier ]       1  OBOiftGJB  IV. 

llii<'  dMi  ift  VIHDg  «p  Md  fraMnting  the 
puloly  ^  I  iet  go  of  Iqi^  whom  I  was  holdiog 
iefora  at  woiuided  hw,  and  there  were  three 
boles  ia  my  hat;  I  received  then  a  Tiolenl 
Mow  Oft  the  light  side  of  my  head»  ead  I  fell ; 
as  I  felly  Thistlewood  made  a  cut  at  me  with 
a^swordy  and  mshed  out  ai  ^  stable  door.^ 

The  nexl  witness  is  Luke  Nixon,  also  a 
Bow-stieet  patn^e,  who  went  with  tfie  other 
eAcera ;  be  says,  **  I  saw  Westcoatt  in  con- 
fliel  with  I<i0i»  in  the  stable ;  I  saw  Inga  leave 
the  stable ;  I  made  a  soanch  at  him  to  catoh 
hm^  but  missed  him ;  I  do  not  think  Thistle^ 
^need  had  got  awajr  Uien ;  lags  got  out,  and  I 
tan  after  him  up  Johnmtiieet,  but  he  had  got 
too  ihr;  on  this  I  beard  a  pistol  fired^  and 
going  up  I  found  him  in  the  custody  of  Brooks 
•ad  Champion.'' 

Joseph  Champion  is  next  called,  be  also  is 
one  of  the  Bow-atreet  peirole;  be  says,  ''I 
ipllowed  Rathven  to  the  foot  of  the  ladder ;  I 
was  about  the  sixth  or  seTcnth  man  behind 
Urn ;  I  was  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder  when  he 
was  at  the  top;  I  saw  Ings  at  the  bottom ;" 
tfaie  is  the  second  witness  who  speaks  of  him 
byname;  as  to  the  foimer  offiber^  you  will 
jiidge  whether  he  identifies  him  or  not  by 
4esoription ;  be  says^  **  I  saw  Ings  at  the  foot 
«f  the  ladder;  he  looked  up^  and  cried  out, 
look  out  above ;  Westcoatt  endeavoured  to 
eeewe  him>  but  he  made  his  escape.  I  foU 
lowid  hkat  and  laid  hold  of  him  just  after 
Jkoeka  had  laid  hold  of  him ;  we  took  him  to 
the  watcb-hooscy  and  we  seaiched  him,  and  oa 
hie  panon  we  found  four  pistol-balls,  the  key 
of  a  pistol,  a  case  of  blue  doth  for  a  large 
knifoy  which  fitted  the  butcbec^s  knife  pro- 
duced here,  and  which  had  was^-end  twisted 
round  die  handle ;  I  took  off  lus  great  coat, 
and  then  under  this,  about  his  person,  there 
were  two  haversacks  slung,  over  bis  shoulders ; 
I  saw  in  one  of  them  a  tin  case,  with  loose 
piapewder,  neatly  fiill ;  he  bed  a  doth  bek 
round  his  Waist  with  pistol  holsters.'' 

Mm  Wright  was  also  one  of  the  Bow-»street 
patrefe ;  be  was  there  on  the  28rd  of  Februaiy, 
and  saw  a  man  in  the  fortber  stall,  and  says, 
'*  I  took  a  knife  and  swoid  ^m  him ;  it  was 
a  boicher's  knife^  with  a  wax->end  tied  round 
the  handle  of  it;  the  swoid  was  about  three 
foel  long ;  I  took  these  (rem  a  man  at  the  foot 
of  the  ladder,  in  sixe  like  the  pnsoner  at  the 
barf"  and  who  is  proved  by  the  other  two 
witnesses  lo  have  been  by  name  Ings  the  pri- 
se«se;  he  says,  <'  I  was  kimcked  down,  a^d 
leeabeda^ub  on  my  sida;  when  I  lecoveied 
bewaegone." 

.  Ifcotihs  is  thea  caHad^  who  wasakM)  a  pat^ 
iola>;  .aad  he  teHs  yoi,  .<<  when  I.was  ta  Johu. 
eteaat,  I  saw  Ings  lunniagi^  tha  street;  I 
•iessedtfae.stieet»aiid  foud  oneof  mv  pait^ 
aeiB  w&di  a  cutlass;  I  went  np,  and  the  po- 
sooer  presented  a  pistol  and  said  he  wouUl 
ahool me^ and fieed;  the  ball  struck  me,  and 
went  through  mj  collar  and  the  shoulder  of 
■7  waialcoal^aad  out  at  the  ba^  of  my  neck; 


it  staggered  me  to  the  light,  end  ihen(Inp. 
pose,  meaning  to  avmd  the  pmsait  of  ny 
eompanion>  whq^  was  following  bim)  be  cue 
into  the  Edgeware-road  and  threw  tbe  puat 
away ;  a  litUe  further  on,  there  was  a  viub- 
man  of  the  name  of  Moay,  vdio  laid  bold  of 
him  just  as  I  did ;  I  never  lost  stgbt  of  Ua 
till  he  was  taken ;  I  said,  when  taken,  joi 
rascal,  why  did  you  fire  at  me,  a  man  yoo  M 
never  seen  before;  he  said  to  killyoo,  audi 
wish  that  I  had  done  it ;  and  this  be  repealed 
afterwards  to  the  soldiers,  and  to  my  paitnen.' 

William  Lee  is  also  a  Bow-street  patroh, 
and  he  says«  **  I  went  to  the  Horse  and  Grooa 
in  the  evening,  before  the  oflkers  went  to  the 
stable;  I  saw  Cooper  and  Gilchrist  go  it 
there;  they  were  tsJcen  that  night  and  cod- 
veyed  to  Bow-street/' 

The  next  witness  was  lieutenant  FitMis- 
rence ;  he  says,  that  be  is  a  lieatenaot  in  the 
Coldstream-guards ;  that  he  was  applied  to  oa 
Ute  night  in  question,  to  go  to  Oato-straet; 
that  he  took  a  picqoet  with  him,  and  airirri 
there  a  few  mmutes  after  eight;  be  entered 
the  stable  three  or  four  minutes  after  eight: 
going  under  the  gateway,  leading  into  Cato- 
street,  1  saw  a  police  officer,  wbo  cried  est, 
SoldienI  soldiers  1  sUble-door!  He  ujh 
that  he  saw  two  or  three  persons  in  the 
stable—^  I  was  met  by  two  men,  one  prs- 
sented  a  pistol  aft  me ;  I  am  not  sure  that  it 
was  a  pistol,  but  he  preaented  somelbisg  at 
me,  wiiidi  appeared  to  me  te  be  a  pistol ;  at 
the  same  time  a  man  with  a  sword  struck  it 
me,  whidi.I  parried.  Seeing  a  body  of  sol- 
diers coming  op,  be  ran  into  the  stable ;  I  fol- 
lowed him,  uid  the  moment  I  got  into  the  stable, 
I  ran  up  against  a  man  who  surrendered  himself^ 
saying,  do  not  kill  me,  and  I  will  tell  jou  ail; 
I  gave  him  over  to  the  sddiers.  I  then  na 
forward  into  the  stable;  I  went  up  into  ose 
of  the  stalls,  and  took  a  man  oat,  wbom  I  al» 
delivered  to  the  soldien;'*  and  tben  in  tbe 
very  gallant  and  proper  discharge  of  his  datr 
—considering  the  firing  that  was  soiag  on,  At 
time  of  night,  the  obscurity  of  tbe  place,  asd 
the  danger  with  which  it  was  attended— be 
goes  up  this  narrow  ladder,  on  which  there 
was  only  nxmi  for  one  at  a  time.  He  sajs, 
''  I  led  the  soldiers,  and  when  I  got  into  ^ 
loft,IfdloverthelegpsofpoorSBmbcn.  of 
tbe  light  in  ascending  the  steps,  I  n^  three  or 
four  men  in  the  room ;  I  serared  these  abo; 
then  I  went  on,  and  tfaerewas  s  large  qoajtitr 
of  arms  in  different  places  of  tbe  loft;  hiuv- 
derbuBses,  swords,  pbtols,  pikes,  and  th^ains 
were  packed  up  and  seized  by  the  dtfeicoi 

soldieia  who  took  them  away."         ^.„. 
The  aeit  witness  called,  is  SerjeaatWiHaa 

L^^,  who  is  a  seijeaat  of  the  second  battalios 
of  the  Gsldstream»guakdS|  and  went  with  op- 
tain  Fit»>elanaee,  wbo  ditected  ^  ?^ 
He  says,  the  moment  the  poUce  op»  "■■ 
spoken  lo  him,  the  party  were  direct^  » 
advance  in  double  quick  Ume.  "^^^^. 
be  says,  «  we  had  hear44he  »«P«»jiP^' 
thete  waaa  man  5la»diagin*i»»*»*^*^ 


11693 


fat  High  Treaxon. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1176 


the  door;  he  had  a  pistol,  and  he  levelled  it 
against  captain  Fitz-clarence;  but  it  was  turned 
away  by  my  pike.  I  then  seized  the  pistol 
with  my  left  hand,  and  a  scuffle  ensued  be- 
tween the  prisoner  and  me ;  that  prisoner  was 
Tidd.  After  some  time,  we  both  having  hold 
of  the  pistol,  it  went  off,  and  tore  a  hole  in  my 
coat ;  I  delivered  Tidd  to  one  of  the  police ; 
the  pistol  is  here ;  on  going  up  into  the  loft 
I  saw  three  others  who  had  surrendered." 

The  next  witness  called  is  Samuel  Hercules 
Taunton,  who  says,  <'  I  belong  to  the  police- 
office  at  Bow-street.    On  Thursday  morning, 
the  24th  of  February,  I  went  to  Brunt's  lodg- 
ings, where  I  saw  -Brunt  and  apprehended 
him ;  I  searched  the  apartments  occupied  by 
him,  but  found  nothing  in  the  front  room ;  I 
then  went  into  the  back  room,  where  I  found 
two  rush  baskets,  both  packed  up,  one  tied  up 
ID  a  blue  apron  ;  and  having  seized  Brunt,  I 
asked  him  an^out  them,  and  he  said  he  knew 
nothing  of  them.    I  brought  the  baskets  out, 
and  I  opened  them  afterwards ;  and  I  found 
in  them  nine  papers  of  rope-yam  and  tar,  and 
other  ingredients  calculated  to  take  irre ;  and 
also  steel-filings.    In  one  of  the  baskets  there 
'were  four  hand-grenades;    three   papers   of 
rope-yarn,  tar,  and  other  ingredients;   two 
bags,  containing  each  one  pound  of  gun-pow- 
der ;  five  flannel  bags  empty ;  one  leather  bag 
containing  sixty-three  bullets.     In  the  room 
there  was  an  iron  pot,  which  appeared  to  have 
had  tar  boiled  in  it  very  recently,  and  a  pike 
handle  finished  in  rough;  this  was  what  I 
found  at  Brunt's.    I  afterwards  went  to  Tidd's, 
about  nine  in  the  morning,  and  searched  his 
lodgings,  where  I  found  434  balls  in  a  haver- 
sack; 171  ball-cartridges,  loose ;  69  ball-cart- 
ridges, without  powder ;  three  pounds  of  gun- 
powder, in  a    brown  paper;  10  grenades; 
11  bags  of  gunpowder,  one  pound  each,"  these 
are  the  flannel  bags ;  ^  ana  10  flannel  bags, 
empty ;  and  there  was  a  small  linen  bag  with 
powder ;  a  powder  flask  with  some  powder  in 
It ;  68  bullets,  four  flints,  and  27  pike-handles 
^th  sockets  at  the  ends  for  pikes ;  and  a  box 
which  contained  965  ball-cartridges.    This  '\s 
all  I  found  at  Tidd's." 

He  was  asked,  upon  his  cross-examination, 
about  Palin ;  whether  there  is  a  reward  offered 
for  him  ?  he  says  there  is ;  that  he  has  observed 
that  he  is  advertized  for  the  part  he  took  in 
this  business. 

•'Daniel  Bishop  is  the  next  witness  called, 
and  says  he  apprehended  Thistlewood  between 
ten  and  eleven  in  the  forenoon  of  the  24th  of 
Febmaiy,  at  No.  8,  White-street,  Little  Moor- 
lields,  in  the  apartments  of  a  Mrs.  Harris ;  his 
own  abode,  he  says,  being  in  Stanhope-street, 
Olare-market.  lie  says  he  was  in  bed  with 
bis  breeches  and  stockings  on.  "Upon  my 
cypening  the  door,  he  just  held  up  his  head  from 
under  the  bed-clothes ;  I  had  a  pistol  in  one 
hand  and  a  staff  in  the  other.  I  told  him  who 
I  was,  my  name,  and  that  I  had  a  warrant 
against  him ;  he  said,  I  shall  make  no  restst- 
Hit  coat  and  waistcoat  were  by  the 
VOL,  XXXIIL 


bed-side ;  in  his  waistcoat  pocket  there  were 
three  leaden  balls,  a  ball-cartridge,  a  blank- 
cartridge,  and  two  flints,  and  a  small  silk  sash. 
I  took  him  into  custody.*' 

On  the  cross-examination  he  says,  '^  I  do 
not  know  £dwards.'' 

Ruthven  was  then  called  back,  and  he  pro- 
duced the  arms  taken  from  Cato-street. 

Morison  was  called  back,  and  identified  a 
sword  found  there  as  the  one  brought  to  him 
,to  be  sharpened,  by  Ings.  He  says,  that  it 
'*  was  directed  to  be  made  particularly  sharp 
at  the  point,  both  back  and  edge,  as  sharp  as 
a  needle ;  it  appears  to  have  been  rubbed  on  a 
stone  to  keep  the  keenness  of  the  edge.'' 

Taunton  is  next  called  back,  and  he  pro» 
duces  the  arms  found  at  Brunt's.  He  says> 
*'  this  basket  contains  nine  papers  of  rope^ 
yarn,  tar,  and  other  ingredients;  there  are 
also  some  steel  filings."  Then  he  produces 
the  basket  which  was  tied  up  in  a  blue  apron, 
and  says,  ''  these  are  flannel  bags  full  of  gun- 
powder; there  are  also  some- empty;  there 
are  four  hand-grenades;  a  pike-handle,  filed 
at  the  end  so  as  to  receive  a  pike,  and  it  has 
a  ferule  on ;  this  is  the  iron  pot,  there  is  the 
appearance  of  tar  at  the  ■  bottom  ;  these  are 
the  sixty-three  bullets  in  a  leathern  bag.'' 
Then  he  produces  the  things  found  atTidd's,and, 
looking  at  t\em,  he  says,  ''  These  are  some  of 
theball-carti'idges;  three  pounds  of  gunpowder^ 
some  hand-grenades,  eleven  bags  of  gunpowder, 
of  a  pound  each,  some  empty  bags  ;"  and  he 
produces  the  various  things  found  there. . 

Then  Ruthven  is  called  back,  and  he  proves 
that  those  arms  found  in  Cato-street  were  most 
of  them  loaded,  one  or  two  had  been  fired 
off;  the  others  were  drawn  last  Monday. 

Then  Serjeant  Hanson  is  called ;  he  is  in  the 

Royal  Artillery,  and  he  looks  at  the  fire-balls ; 

he  says,  they  are  composed  of  oakum,  tar,  and 

rosin  ;  and  if  they  were  lighted  and  thrown  into 

a  house  they  would  set  the  house  on  fire; 

if  into  a  hay-loft,  still  more  likely.    He  says,. 

looking  at  the  fuse,  it  would  bum  about  half  a 

minute;  and,  looking  at  the  thing  itself,  he 

says,  this  one  would  bum  three  or  four  minutes; 

and  then  looking  at  one  of  the  cartridges  (and 

this  part  of  the  evidence  is  very  material)  so 

seized  at  this  d^pdt,  he  says,  "  this  is  a  flannel 

cartridge  for  a  six-pounder,  powder  is  so  made 

up  for  the  purpose  of  charging  cannon;  but 

ours  are  not  made  up  in  the  same  way,  for 

they  are  serge ;  this  will  answer  the  purpose.*' 

Then  he  looked  at  the  hand-grenades,  he  took 

one  to  pieces ;  and  then  he  says,  that  the  ex^ 

terior  tight  binding,  as  they  appear  to  you  to 

be,  increases  the  effect  when  Uiey  burst;  if 

they  were  slack  they  would  not  have  half  the 

effect ;  and  then  he  pointed  out  to  you,  before 

they  were  taken  to  pieces,  the  great  nails  in 

different  situations,  which  in  a  thing  likely  to 

explode  with  this  violence,  would,  like  a  shower 

of  shot,  be  scattered  in  all  directions,  and  be 

productive  of  infinite  mischief;  and  then  ho 

says,  this  is  more  powder  than  we  use  to  burst 

a  nine-inch  shell. 

4F 


1171]        1  GEOtOE  IV. 

•  Thii  is  the  whole  «€  the  evidence  for  Ihe 
•proeecutioii  which  I  hare  felt  it  ny  duty  im 
4hie  case,  so  inportant  to  the  prisoner  at  the 
bar,  to  state  to  you. 

Go  the  part  of  ihe  prisoneri  the  fiiat  witness 
called  was  Thomas  Chambers ;  who  says,  tliat 
he  lires  at  No.  3,  Heath-cookHDo«rt,  in  the 
Strand,  nearly  opposite  the  Adelphi.  He  is 
called  to  impeadi  the  character  and  the  testi- 
monv  which  was  giTen  by  the  witness  Adams; 
and  he  says,  ''  I  had  seen  Adams  in  company, 
with  Edwards  about  a  week  before  the  Calo- 
street  business  took  place ;  I  was  by  myself  in 
aof  room  when  they  came  together ;  they  nwde 
a  proposal  to  me  about  the  assassination  of 
the  king's  ministers,  and  asked  me  to  go  with 
Ihera;  I  refused;  Adams  said  to  me  they 
were  going  to  kill  his  majesty's  ministers,  and 
they  woold  have  blood  and  wine  for  sapper ; 
they  came  to  me  again  on  the  Monday*night, 
(it  was  a  wet  night)  before  the  Cato»street 
business ;  they  brought  a  large  bag  and  wanted 
to  leave  it.  I  am  a  boot-miScer ;  I  cannot  say 
how  loDg  I  have  known  Ings ;  I  have  not  been 
in  his  company  above  two  or  three  times.  I 
wet  him  near  the  court  where  I  bve,  at  a  pam-» 
phlet  shop,  where  they  sell  the  Black  Dwarf 
and  the  Medusa ;  the  shop  is  kept  by  Wat- 
Ung ;  I  know  the  Scotch  Arms  in  Round-court, 
in  the  Strand ;  it  is  near  my  lodgings ;  I  never 
Mw  Ingf  there ;  I  had  been  these  three  times 
before  Christmas ;  there  was  no  business  going 
•n,  nor  any  chairman ;  the  three  times  I  was 
there,  I  was  in  the  tap-ioom ;  I  have  been  at 
the  Black  Dog  in  Gray's-inn-lane ;  there  was 
no  chair  there,  it  was  in  a  little  parlour,  and  I 
saw  seven  persons  there;  I  was  invited  there  by 
a  man  of  the  name  of  Bryant,  who  was  going 
to  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope ;  they  were  all  stran- 
gers to  me  but  one,  and  that  one  whom  I  knew 
vras  Thistlewood;  I  know  Brunt  very  well, 
but  he  was  not  there ;  I  will  not  swear  I  do 
not  know  Palin  ^  I  have  not  had  any  conTersa* 
tion  wiih  him,  but  I  may  have  seen  him ;  I  was 
at  all  the  meetings  in  Smithfield;  I  cannot 
state  who  earned  the  Uack  flag  upon  that 
occasion,  but  I  hare  carried  two  fla|^ ;  there 
was  inscribed  on  one,  *  The  Manchester  Ma** 
sncre ;'  never  saw  a  flag,  *  Let  us  die  like 
Free  men,  not  Hve  Hke  Slares.''  Gn  Hunt's 
tntry,  I  carried  a  flag  of '  Trial  by  Jurv ;'  I 
know  Davidson ;  I  have  not  much  knowledge 
ofTidd,  I  may  have  seen  him;  I  have  seen 
Wilson ;  I  know  Harrison  very  well ;  I  have 
not  much  knowledge  of  Bradbum  ;  I  do  not 
know  Strange,  nor  GOchrist,  nor  Cooper;  I 
have  known  Thistlewood  since  Mr.  Hunt's 
triumphal  entry ;  the  proposal  of  assassination 
shocked  me  so,  that  I  did  not  go ;  Bow««treet 
was  near  me,  but  I  did  not  myMdl  go  to.  Bow^ 
street  and  give  any  inlormatioa;  I  die  not 
know  whether  Edwards  knew  of  my  «^fyiinr- 
tnee  with  the  other  people.'^ 

Hien  the  next  witness  wha  is  cnUed,  ie 
lu7  Barker,  the  daughter  of  Tidd.  She 
wyiy  some  powder  was  fonnd  at  his  houae,  and 
iome  grenades  and  baUs ;  "  thi^  wei«  bcwghi 


TrM  qfJ0m€$  Ing$ 


E117« 


in  the  morning  by  a  man  and  n  b6y ;  I  know 
EdwaKls ;  he  biooght  some  of  the  grenades^ 
Edwards  was  the  man ;  they  were  takes  vtny 
and  returned ;  I  saw  Edwanls  on  the  monaaf 
of  the  23rd,  he  came  and  took  some  of  the 
grenades  and  powder  away ;  they  might  be  the 
same  that  were  brought  back  on  the  24thy  bet 
I  do  not  know;  ther«  was  one  very  large  one; 
Adams  brought  it ;  that  was  not  brought  beck 
again.'' 

Upon  croasHnamioation  she  says,  *^  the  bos 
had  been  there  two  or  three  days  ;  I  do  not 
know  how  loiy^  the  grenades  had  bees  these 
they  might  have  been  there  a  fortnight ;  it  mm 
on  the  morning  of  Wednesday  that  thej  wem 
taken  away ;  the  box  was  kept  cerded,  it  had 
not  been  opened  to  my  knowledge.** 

This  is  the  evidence  on  the  one  side,  and  tm 
the  other ;  and  it  is  for  you  to  say  whether, 
upon  this  evidence,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  be 
or  be  not  guilty  of  the  criminality  impeted  m 
him  by  this  indictment;  one  of  the  diasges  ben^ 
a  conspiracy  to  depose  the  king,  and  the  other 
a  conspiracy  to  levy  war  against  the  king; 
such  as  I  have  before  stated. 

You  have  been  truly  told,  that  the  natme 
of  this  ofienoe  consists  in  the  intention ;  and 
the  intentions  charged  are  those  which  I 
hare  pointed  out.  The  overt  acts  themsdves 
are  but  manifestations  of  the  inward  intent^ 
and  if  soch  overt  acts  as  are  stated  are  estab- 
lished by  the  evidence,  there  can  be  no  doohi 
that,  in  point  of  law,  the  prisoner  is  guilty. 

Now  first,  with  respect  to  the  purpose  — ^It 
must  be  a  public  purpose :  and  the  purpose 
charged  is  an  intention  to  bring  abont  a  cevi^ 
tion  in  the  government,  to  compel  the  king  ta 
change  his  measures,  and  to  put  many  of  those 
employed  in  the  administration  of  the  govern^ 
ment  to  death,  by  the  means  that  have  beea 
stated  and  prored.  But  still,  if  this  weis 
merely  an  intention  to  assassinate  the  king^s 
ministers,  and  that  such  assassination  should 
end  with  itself,  however  diabolical  such  a  de« 
sign  would  be,  still  having  no  ulterior  public 
view,  it  would  not  be  the  ofiisnce  imputed ;  bst 
it  will  be  for  you  to  judge  on  the  facts  in 
proof,  what  were  the  motives,  and  what  the 
end  fljid  object  of  the  conspiracy  in  autstion. 

To  begin  with  the  evidence  of  Adans.  VL 
jon  believe  him,  there  can  be  no  possible  doubt 
m  the  case ;  for  he  proves  the  origin  and  pn^ 
pess  of  different  meetings,  from  time  to  ttms^ 
at  which  this  scheme  was  formed  and  matured, 
up  to  the  moment  when  it  was  preparing  to  be 
carried  into  execution.  But  you  have  been 
told,  and  truly,  that  Adams  is  an  accomplioe; 
that  he  is  a  man,  upon  his  own  confession,  as 
guilty  as  those  against  whom  he  appeats  to 
give  OTidenee ;  and  so  undoubtedly  he  aaostbe 
taken  to  be.  But  it  is  not  to  be  expected  in 
oases  of  this  sort  that  an  accomplice  eao^  ever 
be  an  innooent  person :  the  very  nature  of  his 
situation  imports,  that  )ie  hims^ls  conneetel 
in  guilt  with  those  whom  he  stands  forward  lo 
accuse;  and  if  the  doctrines  which  we  base 
h^nrd  thm  4^7  «S^i  bei  %^<^M|  it  wouU 


lira] 


fit  Ihf^  7f«ndii. 


A.  D.  >89D. 


U174 


BewBr  b«  pdssiUe  to  c«ll  an  aocDnplice,  bteaust 

liisMitiiliOdy  wQHilfilM  got  rid  of  faf  tU  ainiflt 

observstabn  4Mt  he  wai  an  aoeompfioiiy  that  is^ 

a  gviity  man  liimtcAil    Ak  tke  same  tiBM  yon 

have  bean  Iroiy  told,  that  tiioogk  in  poina  ef 

htn  an  aoeomplioa  is  a  witwesa  coaipelent  to 

\t%  raceivady  aiid  theralora  one  wbo  in  point  of 

law  it  is  eompetent  to  a^  jury  to  beUet«>  jtk  in 

the  practieai  application  of  the  role,  janes 

Angku  not  to  eottviot  upon  the  testimoi^  of  a* 

accomplice,  unless  his  testimony  raceiveapioper 

and  reasonsible  confirmation.    Upon  this  part 

of  the  case,  I  have  heard  the  law  not  inten* 

<ionally  but  grossly  mis-stated ;  the  role  is^ 

abat  an  aceomptico  mast  be  confirmed-^ Qon*- 

linned  in  some  particulars,  but  not  confirmed 

in  all ;  for  you  bave  been  traty  told,  that  if 

this  last  were  the  role,  it  would  be  unneceasary 

to  call  an  aocompUce ;  beeause  if  the  other 

frvtBo/M  could  confirm  him  in  aU,  by  prnttnc 

tlie'same  fitcts  themselvies,  dieir  etideoee  would 

mipersede  the  necessity  of  his  eiridenee,  and 

therefore  it  m  not  aecessaiy  to  confinn  an  ae^ 

complice  in  all  particulars,  the-  niU  being,  that 

it  is  necessary  only  to  confinn  him  to  such  an 

extent  as  that  upon  the  iacts  stated  by  otiier 

^minesses,  the  jury  nmy  see  that  ho  is  worthy 

^  beliefs    Now  is  thisy  or  is  it  not,  the  case  or 

6«ntleiiiien,  to  take  ftm  the  lastimeny  of 
A]ln*4llrea  wit^MSses;  to- whom  I  hate  rti^vred-^ 
tfie  MtaM  set«raat  who  let  Che  lo^^rngt-^Miv. 
Rogers,i!0  whomtiie  bons&belongedw*«ind  Halev 
wrbo  was  the  apprentice  of  Brottt.  What  is 
•romd  by  all  these  tfiree  witnesses  ?  You  will 
Jtidge,  whether  it  be  or  be  not  die  strongest 
pisssible  confirroaCion  of  the  evidence  of  an 
eM!<feompbce,  which  perhaps  it  is- capable  of  re- 
«ei^i»g.  Adams  had  toM  you  that  a  bach  i«om 
was  tabea  in  Fox-court^  Gmy Vinn4ane ;  that 
il  was  taken  by  Brunt  for  lags,  who  was  de* 
n«rf  bed  to  he  a  butcher  out  ofemploy ;  and  it 
is  distinctly  proved— ^onfivnring  in  that  par- 
eleular  every  pert  of  Adaim's  testimony-*4hat 
elie  foora  was  uken  for  Ings,  that  the  meetings 
^rera  held  in  this  room,  that  lie  continued  there 
mp  <a  the  night  of  the  meeting  in  Cato-streat; 
that  he  never  returned  there  after  that  night; 
and  that  Brunt,  another  of  the  party,  wei4  out 
art  tfte  same  time,  retnmed  the  same  evnning, 
and  conducted  himself  in- 1^  nmnaer  yon  have 
Heard.  All  these  essential  and  leading  ieatures 
of  Adams's  evidence,  are  oenfitaMd  by  the^testi- 
iDony  of  these  accredited  witnesses.  And  not 
only  this,  but  on  that  very  evenin|f  you  fiud 
that  Brunt  came  home,  and  told  his  wife  that 
it  was  all  up;  that  tlie  police  officers  had 
found  their  way  into  the  Ion ;  that  he  himself 
bad  escaped  only  with  his  life;  and  then,  shortly 
alter,  came  in  another  man,  who  also  had  been 
present,  and  who  stated,  he  had  received  a 
fclow.  The  apprentice.  Hale,  upon  whose 
character  no  imputation  is  attempted  to  be  cast, 
proves  the  poles,  the  bags,  pikes,  and  pistols- 
all  these  deadly  preparations  going  on  firom 
time  to  time  in  the  apartment  of  Ings,  in  the 
boose  from  which  Ings  and  Brunt  saUied  forth 


on  Aer  Digbt  in  qiiestion.  Ings  never  did 
setum  to  it ;  and  fiSrant  retnmed  and  beharved 
himself  in  this  way.  The  next  morning  the 
officers  found  Brunt  packing  into  iwo  baskets, 
to  he  conveyed  awav,  all  the  difierent  arms 
and  amnmnition,  which  have  been  produced 
before  yon ;  therefore,  if  the  ease  rested  upon 
the  testimony  of  Adams  only,  is  this  such  oow- 
firmation  of  the  troth  of  the  story  told  to  yon 
by  him,  as  to  make  bim  a  witness  worthy  of 
your  belief?  So  I  state  the  question,  leaving 
it  to  you  to  answet  it  to  yourselVes. 

Independent  of  this,  there  is  the  testimony 
of  Mennment,  with  re|faid>  to  whom,  if  it  rested 
merely  on  his  testimony,  it  might  be  said,  that 
one  accomplice  eaonot  be  oonfirosed  by  an- 
other ;  but  unfortunately  it  does  not,  for  hife 
brother,  who  is  not  implicated,,  proves  Thistki- 
wood  and  Brunt  coming  to  the  house.  He 
itonfirflM  every  part  of  the  testimony  of  Adams 
as  to  this  part  cS  the  case;  mid  in  addition  16 
this,  yon  have  the  evidence  of  asietber  witness, 
and:  that  a  person  who  stitnds  in  a  very  difbiS' 
ent>  sBtuation-^tbeevidence  of  Hideoi  Be,  up 
to  a  certain  time,  had  engaged  in  the  transact 
ticm  in  question ;  but  such  was  his  remone  of 
oonaoience,  so  completely  did  be  sicken  la 
mind  as  tkas  night  alpproadied,  that  yon  find 
that  before  Uie  parties  asseti^led  in  Cato^ 
stmal^  he  did  that  which  he  could  not  Have 
done  uniem,  as  I  stated  befoie,  he  hiad  possessi- 
ed  the  spirit,  of  prophecy  v-*be  actually,'  iai 
Older  to  prevent  the  mischief  intended,  went  to 
lord  Castlereagh's,  and  afterwuds  to  lord  Han^ 
rowby's,  and  deltvonred  the  tetter,  afonvwaming 
to  prevent  what  woidd  olheiwlso  have  taken 
place.  Whether  he  be,  therefore,  an  accomplice 
np-to  a  certain  stage,  or  not^  it  isimfamt^al  to 
examine  <  he  was  not  an  accomplice  at  thf 
time  he  did  that,  which  tended  to  defeat  the 
plan  proposed. 

Nor  does  it  rest  on  the  testsmoay  of  Adams 
so  confirmed,  or  Monument  so  oonfinsied,-  of 
the  ftot  of  the  deliveky  of  the  leuer,  bat  you 
will  judge  whether  tnis  story,  is  not  alao  con^ 
firmed  by  aU .  that  took  place  on  the 'night  ni 
question  in  Cate»street.  Them  yon  fiad,  ae^ 
sembled'in  the-stable  and  in  a  room  spmd 
over  with  anmn^  hay-loft  I  might  ahoEiDSt  say 
converted  intO'an  anenal-'-ft  number,  and  of 
riie  nnmberwas  Inge  the  prisoner,  of  peiions 
dmwa  up^  as  it  were  in  military  array,  on  tbe 
point  of.  sniffing  %A,  he  was  seiaedr-^be  es^ 
caped ;  he  was  pursued — he  turned  round  and 
fired  a  pistol ;  and  on  being  asked  by  one  of 
the  officers,  what  he  meant  by  shooting  at  him 
an  innocent  man,  he  said,  to  kill  you,  and 
I  wish  I  had  done  it — I  am  sorry  to  add,  but 
it  is  my  painfiil  duty  to  draw  your  attention 
to  the  evidence,  that  a  sword  was  taken  from 
a  man  not  known  at  the  moment  by  the  person 
who  took  it  to  be  logs,  but  proved  to  be  him 
by  two  other  witnesses;  and  when  he  was  seized, 
there  was  found  on  his  person  a  sheath  or  case 
fitted  to  the  knife  of  which  you  have  heard, 
and  under  his  coat  and  over  his  shoulders  were 
found  those  two  bags  of  which  AOaJUs  had 


1175]  1  GEORGE  IV. 

spoken ;  the  bags  id  which  the  arowed  mien- 
tiOD  was  to  carry  away  the  heads  of  soBie  of 
the  mardered  party. 

Now  this  is  truly,  in  all  its  circamstaiices,  a 
case  of  a  most  extraordinary  nature.  It  is 
admitted,  that  all  these  persons  were  met  (not 
it  is  argued  for  a  treasonable  purpose)  but 
with  an  intention  to  proceed  to  a  cabinet  din- 
ner, to  assassinate  all  the  ministers  assembled 
there ;  to  what  motive  can  this  be  refened  ? 
Was  it  prirate  malice  ?  Was  it  personal  re- 
venge merely  ?  The  lots  of  the  prisoners  at 
the  bar  were  cast  too  widely  asunder  from 
those  of  the  objects  of  their  vengeance,  to  per- 
mit us  to  account  for  their  plan  on  any  grounds 
of  private  or  personal  difference.  Is  it  possible 
to  suppose,  that  the  object  was  to  commit  a 
murder  merely,  and  stop  there  P  Of  this  you 
will  judge,  looking  to  the  nature  of  the  prepara- 
tions made;  not  merely  daggers  conccsided, 
irat  long  staves  for  pikes ;  not  merely  cartridges 
/or  pistols ;  but  cartridges  of  a  sise  to  charge 
artifiery ;  grenades  sufficiently  strong  in  their 
construction,  to  be  equal  to  the  power  of  a 
nine-inch  shell— the  number  of  arms — the 
Quantity  of  ammunition — the  military  d^p6t — 
tne  fire  balls,  and  the  surveys  made.— Connect- 
ing this  with  what  relates  to  the  Mansion-house 
and  the  Bank — the  provisional  government — 
and  the  expectation  that  the  people  would 
rise  and  join — ^it  is  for  you,  gentlemen,  to 
judge,  whether  this  was  merely  to  lend  to  and 
end  in  the  assassination  of  the  king's  ministers ; 
or,  whether  there  was  not  an  ulterior  purpose 
of  insurrection  and  revolution,  to  which  the 
assassination  was  but  preparatory  and  subser- 
vient. 

But  it  has  been  said,  is  it  probable  that 
persons  comparatively  so  few  in  number  should 
suppose  themselves  able  to  accomplish  such  a 
mighty  purpose  as  to  bring  about  a  revolution 
in  the  government  of  the  country  ?  1  cannot 
tell  what  in  their  estimation  might  be  proba- 
ble ;  but  this  is  a  most  uncertain  test  by 
which  (o  judge ;  for  if  I  had  been  told  there 
could  be  found  five-and-twenty  men  on 
the  face  of  the  earth,  and  still  more  (and  1 
grieve  to  say)  five-and-twenty  men  of  the 
country  to  which  we  have  the  happiness  to 
belong,  who  could  have  combined  to  commit 
such  a  dreadful  deed  of  barbarity  and  blood,  I 
should  have  said,  till  they  had  been  detected 
in  the  way  in  which  these  persons  have  been 


TrM  ofJamu  Ingt  [  1 176 

detected,  it  is  utterly  impossible  1  It  never 
did  happen— it  never'can !  I  cannot  bdiefve 
on  any  testimony  that  it  is  intended.  Bnt 
how  failadons  would  have  been  audi  rpneowing 
is  proved  too  clearly  by  the  hsXl  And  the 
fact  established,  the  next  step  I  fear  is  of  no 
difficulty  whatever.  For  that  public  revolution 
could  only  have  been  intended  by  such  meansi 
is  as  difficult  to  disbelieve  as  it  was  difficolt  to 
believe  in  the  means  till  established.  Beaades, 
upon  the  evidence,  it  will  be  for  you  to  say, 
whether  extensive  co-operation  was  not  the 
support  and  consequence  to  what  they  looked, 
as  proved  expressly  not  only  by  the  measeras 
but  by  the  different  declarations  given  in 
evidence. 

The  prisoner  has  called  witnesses  to  im- 
peach tne  testimony  of  Adams,  of  whose  en- 
denoe  you  will  judge.  You  have  heard  his 
defence,  which  I  n€wd  not  repeat  to  yon,  and 
in  which  he  has  desired  you,  before  yoa  dis- 
pose of  his  case,  fully  to  examine  all  the  cir- 
cumstances, and  well  to  weigh  the  verdict  yos 
may  pronounce.  In  that  prayer  I  most  rendfly 
join.  Weigh  well  the  evidence !  Delibeiaie 
thoroughly  on  the  result !  And  if  in  concfa" 
sion  you  can  have  any  doubt  of  the  facts  which 
constitute  the  overt  acts  charged,  or  the 
purpose  alleged  as  connected  with  then ;  if 
you  think  that,  however  horrible,  this  was  an 
intended  assassination,  and  nothing  mora ; 
that  the  conspirators  were  to  go  into  the  hons^ 
commit  the  murder,  and  then  separate,  and 
that  with  that  separation  all  operations  were 
to  cease — if  this  should  be  your  opinion — in 
the  honest  exercise  of  your  judgment  apply  it 
to  the  case,  and  acouit  the  prisoner.  Kit,  on 
the  other  hand,  if  it  be  impossible  fairly  to  Ibna 
such  a  judgment,  then  you  will  perform  that 
duty  which  in  the  name  of  that  Being  refened 
to  more  than  once  in  the  course  of  these  pro- 
ceedings, you  have  been  sworn  well  and  tin^ 
to  di^harge,  and  pronounce  the  prisoner 
guiltv  because  you  believe  him  to  be  sa. 
Finally,  if  you  have  any  doubt,  give  him  te 
benefit  of  it,  and  nobody  will  rejoice  mwe 
than  I  shall,  if  you  can,  with  satisfaction  ts 
your  consciences,  pronounce  him  not  gnilty. 

The  Jury  withdrew  at  twenty-five  miaoias 
past  eight,  and  returned  in  twentj*fiva 
minutes,  finding  the  prisoner  Gvii.tt  on 
the  first  and  thiid  counts. 


1177] 


Jw  High  Treoion, 


A.  D.  1S20. 


L1178 


704.  The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  John  Thomas 
Brunt,  for  High  Treason,  before  the  Court  holden  under  a 
Special  Commission,  for  the  Trial  of  certain  Offences  therein 
mentioned,  on  the  24th  and  S5th  days  of  April :  1  Geo.  I  Y. 
A.  D.  1820.* 


SESSIONS  HOUSE,  OLD  BAILEY, 
Monday,  April  24th,  1820. 

Praent 

The  Right  Hon.  Lord  Chief  Baron  [Richards.] 

The  HoQ.  Mr.  Baron  Garrow. 

The  Hon.  Mr.  Justice  Bkhardton, 

The  Common  Sergeant, 

And  others  his  Majesty's  Justices,  &c. 

[The  Prisoner  was  set  to  the  Bar.] 

The  Jury  Panel  was  called  over,  commen- 
cing with  No.  219. 
Bichard   Emery,  cooper,   diallenged  by  the 

Crown. 
Stolen  Gourd,  bricklayer,  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
John  Apple,  drug-grinder,  excused  on  account 

of  illness. 
Thomas  Bru^fne,  mason,   challenged  by  the 

t)risoner 
mUiam   Butler   Baker,   challenged  by    the 

Crown. 
WilUam   Benn,   farmer,   challenged   by   the 

Crown. 
John  Boper,  gentleman,  fined  for  non-attend- 
ance. 
William  Norton,  sawyer,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner. 
William  Blasson,  gentleman,  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
Alexander  Barclay,  gentleman,  and  grocer. 

Mr.  Barclay.— My  lord,  I  feel  so  completely 
influenced  by  the  facts  that  came  before  me 
on  the  former  tria],tthat  I  really  do  not  feel 
myself  a  competent  judge. 

Lord  Chief  Baron. — It  is  no  objection  unless 
the  parties  object. 

Mr.  Cunvood. — ^We  prefer  him,  my  lord, 
because  he  will  be  able  to  see  the  difference. 

Mr. .  Barclay, — I  trust  I  may  be  exempt 
under  these  circumstances. 

Mr.  Justice  Bichardton, — It  in  no  objection 

in  point  of  law. 

-£ i ^ 

*  See  the  preceding  and  following  Cases. 
t  He  was  one  of  the  Jury  on  the  trial  of 
Arthui  Thistlewood. 


Mr.  Barcli^  was  sworn. 

Edward  Hughes,  gentleman,  excused  on  account 
of  illness. 

Edward  Grant,  cow-keeper,  excused  on  ac- 
count of  illness. 

Thomas  Lester,  bookseller,  challenged  by  the' 
Crown. 

Joseph  Sheffield,  esq.  and  ironmonger,  challen- 
ged by  the  prisoner. 

Thomas  Goodchild,  esq.  sworn. 

Josei^  Baynes,  bricklayer,  challenged  by  the 
Crown. 

Robert  Stephenson,  anchorsmith,  challenged  by 
the  Crown. 

Mr.  Stq)henson, — I  am  sorry  to  be  under 
the  necessity  of  appealing  to  your  lordship,, 
but  I  should  think,  having  been  challenged 
twice*  I  may  claim  a  right  to  withdraw  alto- 
gether. 

Lord  Chief  Barons — Certainly  not. 

Mr.  Stephenson. — I  have  always  applied  mj* 
self  strictly  to  do  my  duty,  as  I  have  been 
taught  from  my  infancy,  but  I  conceive  I  am 
trifled  with. 

Mr.  SoUdtor-GeneroL — It  is  no  reproach  to 
any  gentleman  that  be  is  challenged,  either  on 
the  one  side  or  the  other,  and  ought  not  to  be- 
so  considered. 

Lord  Chief  Baron. — No,  certainly  not« 

BichardBbmt,  gentleman,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner. 
Isaac  Gunn,  baker,  challenged  by  the  Crown.   ■ 
William  Churchill,  gentleman,  and  win&4ner- 

chant,  challenged  by  the  Crown. 
Thomas  St^ld  lUersey,  esquire,  sworn. 
Thomas  Tfukinson,  fanner,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner. 
Simmel  Fi^,  tobacconist,  challenged  by  the- 

prisoner. 
Eim^  ColUngridge,  water-gilder,  challenged 

by  the  Crown. 
William  Shore,  farmer,  challenged  by  the  Crown. 
James  Herbert,  carpenter,  sworn. 
John  Shuter,  gentleman,  sworn. 
Josiah  BartMomew^  watchmaker,  challenged 

by  the  prisoner. 

*  Now,  and  in  the  case  of  Arthur  Thntle- 
wood^ 


IVn]       1  GBOKlG£  IT. 


Trial  ^Mm  TUmu  Brmrt 


UIM 


Join  JimOf  tiarpenter,  challenged  by  the  Crown. 
Hemy  Rtmney^  boaUbuilder,  excused  on  ac- 

coant  of  illness. 
Tkoma»  BriUaWf  ooaGhmaker,  challenged  by 

ihe  miaoaer. 
Samwu  Granger^  lighterman,  challenged  by  the 


George  Dickemom,  builder^  challenged  by  the 

itfisoiier. 
jinui  F«Mwm^  upholatareri  challenged  by 

the  prisoner. 
Thomm  Jihion^  esq.  and  ahip-chandler,  chal* 

lenged  by  the  prisoner. 
JsMKS  WUmot,  market-gardener,  sworn. 
Gtorge  FhUlip^  jeweUer,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner, 
^AofHos  JBird^  distiller,  challeogied  by  the  ptir 

soner. 
WiiUam  Johnttm^  bakesi  challeDg(Bd  by  tbt 

Crown. 
JioAn  EAoard  Shif^ardi  genlleman,  sworn. 
Samml  GoM^  caUoo-printer,  challenged  by  the 

Ciown. 
Jamti  Wadmort^  esq.  challenged  by  the  prispner. 
TlwrnM  BrmoMf  oilman,  chaUenged  by  the  pri»* 

w)ner. 
4S«frge  AUm^  brass-fbonder,  challenged  by^the 


pmaoneiu 

mi 


llSam  Reedf  esq.  challenged  by  the  prisoner. 

Gepf^e  Dqmt^  cooper^,  cludlenged  by  the  pri- 
soner. 

JiMii  JRnidi^  brewer,  challenged  by  the  pri- 
soner. 

JoAn  PTeHhrodky  t)ridi-maker,  ilned  f6r  non- 
attendance,  but  the  fine  afterwards  remitted 
on  proof  of  ittfkeAi* 

Jimatkan^Famnghami  fiumer,  challenged  by  the 
Crown. 

Joteph  DrakCf  draper,  challenged  l^  the  pri- 
soner. 

Jotq^  ClemeniSj  market-gardener,  excused  on 
aooamil  of  iUocss. 

JMit  FowUtt  itan-plaie  washer,  sMroen. 

SfmmlMkaim^  esq.  andeowhhaeper,  rhallenged 
bv  the  prisoner. 

WiUimn  GibU  Ho6eris,.  cooper,  «Mom. 

Biekard  Smkhf  esq.  diaRenged  l^  the  Crown. 

hupi  Ftthndf.  ii90i»«|date  wexket,  ehaBengai 
by  the  Crown. 

3!kwtt  GoniM^  4»pwifg^  cMlen^ad  by  tlK 
Goewn* 

Matthew  JfUoay  eoacb-vaslti^  chatteogad  by 
thepeisHmec 

gmlanrf  &^dtm,  esq,  md  fawwa,  chalieagad 
by  the  prisoner. 

JUbi  HicfanasB,  WIcLbc,  smoih. 

WUUam  Bttihbyf  esq.  fined  for  non-atteadance. 

Tkamm  Amtin^  esq.  eacused  «»  aceoMia  oC 
illness. 


Ji*»  IMmn,  leaq.  chattteged  by  tha  priaoner. 
Crown. 


y  tna  pnao 
Thomas  Dickt,  sdraiDudv  ebaUei^jad  bji  iha 

ShoMi  Wiodf  pmtBg,.  <hftliengad  by  th»  pii> 
soner. 

JuKtr  Goto:  joiner,  challeugttd'bytlie  Crown. 
Mm4  meii^  fiurmer,eliaHeagad^h<»eMWn. 
Mt^wd  Bracebridge,  watdimaker,  cballeMe* 
by  tiie  Crown, 


Johm  Jona,  Btock*broker,  dallenged  bj  Ai 

Crown. 
ThoKuu  Fmiriige^  farmer,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner. 
Ottfgt  Ham^  sUpMshaidUr^diaUeived  ^^ 

Crown. 
Xloaiv  Hflri^,  eaq.  and  BOpeHttifar,  diilkoged 

by  the  prisoner. 
Wmiam  Mrrett^  watdk-engfaTer,  challenged  \j 

the  pdsomsr. 
Samul  Wmdmdif  horse-dealer,  fined  for  noo- 

attendance. 
John  Btmtifg,  gentleman  and  tailor,  chsHesgcd 

by  the  Crown. 
WiUimm  JXpses,   farmer,   chaUenged  hf  tk 

Crown, 
WiUkum  Cooper^  gentleman,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner. 
Biheri  Gremxs,  gentleman,  excused  on  aocoe&t 

of  illness, 
Chnttopher  Dmmm,  sbip-bailder,  Mka§A 

by  the  Grown. 
Wiiiiam  Jama  Farmer^  baker,  chaUenged  b; 

the  prisoner. 
Daoid  Newman,  farmer,  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
George  Skvyr,  <liHk««se  aMbeiv  eluikBgei 

by  the  Crown. 
Bemy  Seaborn^  cooper,  excused  oa  sMoatt  d 

illness, 
Franeii  SherBom,  esq,  and  toner,  diaDesfW 

by  theprisonea. 
Edward  t&mpton^  shipwright,  challenged  by  the 

prisoner.  . 

Ttnutiam  Dovief ,  shopkeeper,  dialTeoged  by  the 

Crown,  . 

Richard  Frardss,  esq.  and  siflL-meicer,  cbal' 


lenged  by  the  Crown. 
>hn  SmitL  n 


John  Smith,  undertaker^  sworn. 
Thpma^Lmigl^  ahip-chandler,  cbaUeogediy 

the  Crown. 
Georgfi  Frieitf  esq^  challenged  hy  the  pcisoiK'r 
Samuel  JFlbon,  gentleman  and  merchsBtf 

Mr.  air«Nm{l--4ha«wiwca«wU>fheW|aT 
challenges  are  exhausted. 

Mt.  Attorney  General— The  prisoner  shift 
not  suffer  inconreoieoce  from  that  cuouf 
stance, 

CAaHenged  by  the  Cromn. 
Mkhad  AUdnst  taq^  challenged  by  tbeCmmir 
Alfred BaUoHi  esq.  and  porterHicaIer,cb«w«* 

ed  by  the  Crown.  . 

Gaonge  TaytoTy  bnoklayer,  ehsieogsd  Of  ^ 

Crown, 
John  fPoocJuMtrd,  giantlemaiH  sworn, 

Alexander  Batelayr       ^^  Shephaidi 
Thomas  Goodchild,       Max  Fowler 
Thos.Suffield  Aldjarsey,,  Wm.  Qibbj  Rob^ 
James  Herbert,  John  DiAanson, 

John  Shuter,  John  Siliith> 

James  Wilmot„  John  Woodward, 

Ifcei  J^  «9ew4baf9i^wiih  the  Fis>^^ 
the  usual  mrm. 


ll$ll 


JtMT  Uigfi  7rMMft« 


Mc  AUamey  C?«iera/.-^Beft>re  Mr.  BoUaD^ 
opens  Ui9  Gase^  I  Ihiok  k  my  duty  to  bring 
oefore  y^ur  lofdsbips  a  eireuautanee  which 
has  oocone4  sinoe  you  last  sat  in  this  place. 
The  Court,  from  aa  asxioufl  desire  thai  nothiog 
should  occur  during  the  course  of  these  trialsi 
which  could  by  any  meaus  operate  to  the  pro- 
jttdice  of  the  prieoaets*  at  the  commenceaieRt 
of  the  proceeoiiigs  directed  that  so  pubHcation 
of  the  proceedings  on  the  ftrsi  or  any  other 
trials  should  take  place  until  the  whole  of 
them  were  brought  to  a  oondusioa.  ^Viith  that 
U^uoction,  I  belioTe  I  may  state,  that  the 
daily  papem  have  most  prbp^ly  complied ;  but 
it  appears  br  the  paper  which  has  been  put 
into  my  haadsy  that  a  publication  was  made 
yesieidav  in  the  Observer  newspaper  of  the 
whole  of  the  trial  of  Arthur  Thistlewood,  and 
not  a  very  short  account  was  given  also  of  the 
yial  of  James  Ings,  and  my  lords,  this  publica- 
tion has  been  issued  with  a  full  knowledge  on 
the  part  of  the  publisher^  of  the  prohibition 
which  the  Court  had  nionounced,  for  I  find 
that  prohibition  pubUsoed  in  this  very  paper 
which  contains  the  account  of  the  trials  I  have 
mentioned. 

It  is  not  my  intention  at  thb  moment  to 
interrupt  the  proceedings  which  are  about  to 
take  place,  bj  calling  upon  your  lordships  to 
take  any  specific  step  upon  this  most  daring  and 
flagrant  contempt  or  the  authority  of  the  Court ; 
but  I  thii^  I  owe  it  to  the  dignity  of  the  Court, 
and  to  the  situation  which  I  hold,  to  state  thus 
fMiblicly,  that  this  conduct  cannot  pass  unno> 
ticed ;  and  that  undoubtedly  some  proceedings 
will  be  taken,  when  the  means  are  funiish«i 
to  bring  the  matter  in  a  proper  alwpe  before 
your  lordships.* 

JVisMsr.— Wonld  your  lordship  have  the 
(poodness  to  give  me  the  indulgence  of  a  seat, 
at  intervals,  when  I  am  tired. 

Lifrd  Ckkf  Bar<m.^-CeTtsdo\y. 

J.  H£  Indictment  was  opened  by  Mr.  Bolland* 

Mr.  Attomtg  GeneraL — Gentlemen  of  the 
Jury  ;-^ You  have  heard,  from  the  opening  of 
tbe  indictment  by  my  learned  fnend,  the 
nature  of  the  charge  which  is  preferred  against 
tbe  prisoner  at  the  "bar ;  and  as  the  circum.. 
stances  of  this  case,  aboot  to  be  laid  before 
vou  in  evidence,  have  already  come  to  the 
knowledge  of  some  of  yon  from  the  duty  you 
have  latehr  perfonaed,  and  may  probably  have 
reached  the  minds  of  the  rest ;  let  me,  in  the 
oatset,  beseech  you  to  dismiss,  as  for  as  you 
can»  all  recollection  of  what  you  have  heard  or 
read  upon  the  sul^eet  of  this  proceeding,  and 
ta  ooafine  your  attantioi  exclusively  lo  the 
fitf  ts  which  will  be  adduced  in  evidence  upon 
tbe  present  occasion*  I  am  convinced  that 
every  one  of  you  has  anticipated  me  in  this 

*  See  the  commencement  of  the  trial  of 
Arthur  Thistlewoody  April  17th,  a^j  and 
tbt  proceedings  at  the  dose  of  the  pijeauit 

laiaf,  m/9t^. 


A.  D.  1820.  [1189 

request,  and  that  therefore  it  is  unnecessary, 
but  in  justice  to  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  you 
will  forgive  me  for  having  made  it ;  and  I  am 
satisfied,  that  through  the  whole  course  of  this 
trial,  your  minds  will  not  be  influenced  by  any 
thing  but  the  evidence  in  the  case,  and  thal^ 
upon  that  evidence  alone  your  conclusion  wiU 
be  formed. 

The  chaige  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar 
is  that  of  high  treason ;  and  without  troubling 
yon  with  stating  the  different  counts  of  this 
indictment,  I  shall  content  myself  by  observing 
to  youy  that  it  is  necessary  by  the  law,  that 
the  acts  intended  to  be  given  in  evidence 
afiainst  the  accused,  shall  be  stated  in  the  i»* 
dictment.  Those  acts  consist  In  coasultatiooe 
and  deliberations  by  tlie  prisoner  at  the  bar^ 
and  othen»  to  overturn  the  constitution  of  the 
country,  to  excite  insurrection  against  the 
established  govemment-*in  having  actuallf 
prepared  means  lor  that  purpose  and  in 
oaving  formed  and  acted  upon  an  intention 
to  assassinate  all  his  m^es^'s  ministers.  Those 
statements  are  introduced  into  the  indictment 
as  indicating  and  evidencing  tbe  intention  har^ 
boored  in  thie  mind  of  the  prisoner  at  the  bar 
and  his  associates,  to  depose  the  king  from  hie 
royal  authority,  or  to  levy  war  against  him,  in 
order  by  force  to  compel  him  to  change  hie 
measures  and  counsels ;  and  I  believe  I  may 
state  with  perfect  confidence,  that  if  these  overt 
acts,  as  they  are  called,  shall  be  proved  to  youv 
satisfaction,  they  vrill  establish  the  charge  of 
high  treason  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar« 
I  consider  it,  therefore,  sufficient  at  present  to 
request  your  attention  to  the  nature  of  the 
evidence  which  will  be  laid  before  yon,  without 
troubling  you  further  upon  the  law  of  the 


The-  prisoner,  John  Hiomas  Brunt,  was  a 
shoemaiier,  residing  in  Fox^court  near  Gray's- 
inn-lane,  and  it  will  be  proved  by  the  witnesses, 
that  early  in  the  present  year,  plans  (which 
probably  had  for  a  period  long  before  existed 
in  the  mind  of  the  prisoner  at  die  bar,  and  the 
other  persons  who  were  associated  with  him)^ 
were  more  matured  and  brought  nearer  to  the 
point  of  execution.  One  of  bis  associates  was 
a  man  who  must  frequently  be  mentioned  in 
the  course  of  this  investigation,  of  the  name 
of  Thistlewood,  a  name  probably  not  unknown 
to  any  of  you,  and  it  is  a  duty  I  owe  to  the 
prisoner  to  revest  that  you  will  lay  out  of 
yourconsideration(any  thing  which  has  occvrwed 
with  respect  to  Thistlewood,  and  confine 
yourselves  strictly  to  the  proofs  which  will  be 
laid  before  you  in  support  of  the  particular 
charge  you  are  now  iinpanelled  to  try.  Ano- 
ther person,  included  m  tbe  pmseot  indict* 
meat,  James  Inga,  bv  trade  a  butcher,  will 
also  appear  to  you  to  have  been  an  intimate  of 
the  prisoner  Brunt.  At  the  oommencement 
of  the  present  yeax,  meetings  were  called  by 
tbese  three  individuals,  Thistlewood,  Ings,.and 
the  prisoner,  at  which  several  other  persons, 
who  will  be  inlKoduced  to  your  notice  in  .the 
coHne  pf  thia  trial,  were  assembled*   TImjf 


118^1 


]  GEORGE  IV. 


Tritd  ofJokn  Thomat  Bruni 


[1184 


were  held  at  the  White  Hart  in  Brook's-imaricet, 
not  in  the  public  house  itself,  but  in  a  room 
in  the  yaiti  belonging  to  it.  It  being  thought 
however,  for  some  reason  or  other,  that  this 
was  not  a  secure  place  for  their  meetings,  ano- 
ther room  was  obtained,  in  the  house  in  Fox- 
court,  in  which  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  lived;  and 
it  will  appear,  that  though  hired  for  the  ostensi- 
ble purpose  of  being  occupied  by  Ings  as  a  lodg- 
ing, it  never  was  applied  to  that  purpose,  but 
was  used  exclusively  for  the  meetings  which 
the  conspirators  daily  held,  in  order  to  consult 
upon  their  plans,  and  to  prepare  the  means  for 
tarrying  them  into  execution.  This  room  was 
on  the  same  floor  with  the  apartments  of  the 

Prisoner  Brant;  his  were  in  the  front,  that 
ired  for  Ings  was  at  the  back  of  the  house ; 
tlie  key  of  it  was  kept  at  Brunt's,  and  access 
to  it  obtained  by  applying  to  him  or  some 
member  of  his  family. 

'  It  will  be  in  your  recollection  that  at  the 
6lose  of  the  month  of  January,  his  late  majesty 
died.  It  had  been  part  of  their  plan  to  com- 
mence operations  oy  the  destraction  of  his 
majesty's  ministers,  and  it  was  thought  that  no 
opportunity  would  be  so  convenient  as  that 
which  the  assembling  of  those  distinguished 
persons  at  a  cabinet  dinner  would  afford.  Incon- 
sequence of  his  majesty's  death,  those  dinners 
were  suspended,  and  therefore  no  such  oppor- 
tunity was  at  that  time  likely  to  occur,  at  least 
ffae  prisoner  and  his  associates  so  believed ;  it 
was  therefore  proposed  at  one  of  their  delibera- 
tions, that  altnough  the  whole  of  their  scheme 
could  not  be  accomplished,  some  individuals 
of  his  majesty's  mmistry  should  be  cut  off 
either  at  their  own  houses,  or  at  other  places ; 
and  it  was  thought  that  the  night  of  the  king's 
foneral  might  be  a  convenient  time  for  the 
commencement  of  their  plan.  It  was  observed 
by  one  of  them,  that  the  soldiers,  or  the  greater 

Ert  of  them,  would  then  be  withdrawn  from 
»ndon   to  attend  his  majesty's  funeral   at 
Windsor,  and  that  many  of  the  police  officers 
would  be  necessarily  absent  upon  the  same 
duty;  and  from  these  considerations  it  was 
proposed  to  the  meeting,  that  that  night  should 
DC  6xed  as  the  period  for  beginning  the  projected 
operations.  This  proposal,  however,  either  was 
not  adopted,  or,  if  then  agreed  to,  was  not 
afterwards  acted  upon,  and  their  operations 
were  postponed  beyond  the  evening  of  his  ma- 
jesty's funeral.  Atlength  the  oon8pirators,heated 
and  inflamed  with  the  object  which  they  had 
in  view,  became  impatient;  and  you  ^ill  find 
that  on  the  19th  of  February  (a  day  to  which 
your  attention  will  be  particularly  directed), 
at  a  meeting  at  Brunt's  room,  at  which  Thistle- 
wood,  Ings,'  Brunt,  Davidson,  Harrison,  and 
others  were  assembled,  their  impatience  was 
exhibited.      Many  of  them   said,  that  they 
were  resolved  that  a  blow  should  be  struck 
without  delay,  and  that  if  no  convenient  op- 
portunity occurred  in  the  mean  time,  at  whi^ 
the  whole  of  his  majesty's  ministers  might  at 
one  blow  be  cut  off,  they  were  determin^  that 
Mmething  at  all  events  should  be  attempted  on 


the  evening  of  the  following  Wednesday. 
Thistlewood,  acquiesciog  in  this  opiDion,  pro* 
posed,  that  upon  the  ensoiag  moraing  (hey 
should  assemble  again,  and  that  a  committee 
should  then  be  appointed  for  the  purpose  of 
digesting  the  operations  of  Wednesday;  and 
it  will  appear  to  you,  that  on  Sunday  the  SOtli 
of  February,  the  party  met  more  nameioosly 
than  had  been  usual ;  twenty  penoos  or  more 
were,  I  believe,  collected. 

The  plan  of  these  conspirators  embraced 
other  objects  besides  the  destraction  of  his 
majesty's  ministers ;  different  parties  were  to 
be  posted  in  various  parts  of  tnis  metropolis; 
some  were  to  set  fire  to  buildings,  whidi  were 
to  be  pointed  out ;  others  were  to  seize  the 
cannon  deposited  in  Gray's-inn-lane  at  the 
Light-horse  Volunteer  stables,  and  in  the 
Artillery-ground  near  Finsbury-sqoare.  Iivas 
intended,  that  after  the  taking  of  those  caDum 
and  the  firing  of  different  places  in  the  metro- 
polis, they  should  meet  at  the  Mansion-house; 
which  was  to  be  the  seat  of  what  the^  tensed 
the  provisional  government  This  beio^ 
settlea  and  arranged  on  the  Sunday,  yon  wiU 
find  that  their  activity  increased  to  complete 
the  preparations  they  had  begun.  Ammunitioa 
was  procured  in  very  large  quantities ;  hand- 
grenades,  which  will  be  exhibited  to  yon,  were 
prepared ;  fire-balls,  to  which  they  give  the 
appellation  of  illumination  balls,  were  made, 
to  be  lighted  and  thrown  into  the  hooses  which 
were  to  be  set  on  fire ;  cartridges  for  the  canooa 
were  obtained  in  considerable  quantities;  arov 
of  every  description —guns,  blondeAusses, 
pistols,  and  swords— were  collected.  Othtf 
instruments  which  were  found  will  be  exhil>ited 
to  you ;  they  are  pikes  made  of  staves  of  ash 
and  beedi,  into  one  end  of  each  of  which  were 
to  be  screwed  bayonets  or  sharpened  files; 
thus  connected  together,  the  bayonet  ^^ 
staff  formed  a  very  formidable  weapon,  of  the 
length  of  eight  or  nine  feet. 

In  order  to  their  security,  fearing  th«t  Aeir 
motions  at  Brunt's  room  might  be  obseiwo, 
they  had  appointed  another  place  as  a  dep^ 
sitory  for  the  arms  and  ammunition  which 
they  had  procured,  and  you  will  find  that 
place  was  at  the  house  of  Tidd,  who  is  another 
of  the  persons  charged  in  this  indictment,  who 
lived  in  Hole-in-the-wall-passage,  in  Brooks- 
market.  They  met  again  on  the  following 
day,  Monday,  the  21st,  when  their  phtns  wtfC 
again  considered,  and  they  were  stiU  ^*»7 
eager  to  complete  them  on  the  Wednesday; 
and  you  will  find  their  delibferatioiis  tuw 
again  entirely  on  the  mode  in  which  their 
scheme  was  to  be  carried  into  effect. 

On  Tuesday  the  2lnd  another  meeting  w 
held.  At  that  meeting  a  man  of  the  name  « 
Adams,  who  will  be  caHed  before  you ««» 
witness,  communicated  to  them  somethnf 
which  had  occurred  with  respect  to  himwj 
and  which  excited  a  suspicion  in  his  rsm 
that  their  intentions  were  not  altogether^, 
known  to  the  government,  and  that  theirm^ 
tions  were  watched.    The  very  suspicton  « 


H8I>1 


Jw  High  Treason* 


A:  D.  1620. 


L1186 


this  excited  grMt  agitfttfen  in  the  minds  of 
those  Whd  Were  present ;  they  were  so  con- 
vinced of  the  fidelity  of  «ach  other,  so  con- 
fident in  the  means  which  they  had  prepared, 
that  they  could  not  brook  the  notion  that  there 
was  any  possibility  of  fiiilure.    Such,  at  least, 
was  the  general  impression  «pon  the  minds  of 
(he  persons  assembled  there ;  but  you  will  find 
that  one  of  them,  called  Palio,  who  was  to 
head  a  detachment  for  setting  fire  to  the  town, 
thought  that  the  suggestion  made  by  Adams 
ought  not  to  be   treated  with   inattention. 
Brunt  proposed,  in  order  to  ascertain  whether 
their  scheme  had  been  detected  or  not,  that  a 
watch  should  be  set  that  night.    Gentlemen, 
I  ought  previously  to  hare  stated  to  you,  that 
upon  the  morning  when  this  which  I  am  re- 
lating to  you,  took  place,  it  had  been  ascer- 
tained by  the  meeting,  from  a  newspaper,  that 
vpon  the  following  day  a  cabinet  dinner  was 
to  be  given  by  lord  Harrowby ;  an  event  long 
anxiously  wished  for;   an  opportunity  long 
desired  by  the  prisoners,  as  by  finding  all  his 
majesty's  ministers  assembled  at  one  place, 
they  hoped  the   more   easily  and   the  more 
effectually  to  perform  their  diabolical  work  of 
assassination.    Brunt  proposed  that  a  watch 
should  be  set,  and  the  spot  fixed  upon  was 
lord  Harrowby's  house.    Brunt  said,  *'Ifour 
plan  has  been  detected ;  if  there  be  any  ground 
for  this  suspicion  which  Adams  entertains,  no 
doubt  there  will  be  some  preparation  made  at 
lord  Harr6wby*s  house,  to  meet  the  intended 
attack;  and  if,  therefore,  upon  watching  his 
house  tO'Uight  and  to-morrow  morning,  it  shall 
appear  that  no  soldiers  are  intinoduced  into 
that  house  or  any  of  the  adjacent  houses,  that 
no  preparations  are  made  for  the  expected 
attempt,  we  may  be  quite  satisfied  that  our 
plans  remain  undivulged,  and  that  we  are  in 
p^ect  security."    I  will  not  repeat  to  you 
the  expressions  which  were  used  at  that  meet- 
tfig;   the  exultation  which  was  displayed  at 
finding  that  at  last  this  opportunity  they  had 
been  so  long  expecting  would  occur,  and  that 
at  last  the  day  had  arrived,  on  which  they 
^rbuid  be  able  to  perpetrate  their  nefarious 
crimes.    It'  will  b6  sufficient  for  yon  to  hear 
tlieok  once,  from  the  witnesses  who  will  be 
called  beibre  you. 

On  that  evening,  in  pursuance  of  the  sug- 
fg§si\on  of  Brunt,  a  watch  was  set  in  Orosvenor- 
sct^are  aC  sit  o\:10ck.  Two  persons,  one  of 
•M^fbwas  Davidson,  were  to  take  the  duty 
frtkV  IRX  till  nine,  when  they  were  to  be  re^ 
li^V«d'by  ttio  others,  who  were  to  remain  till 
twri^ ;  it  was  thought  that  firOni  that  time  till 
Ibor  in  th«  mornrng  no  observation  would  be 
netfesMiry,  but  that  at  the  last  mentioned  hour 
tik^.watdi  should  be  resumed.  Davidson  and 
}ni  aMtociate  Went  into  GrOSvenor^titee,  and 
leoti^tiftued  tlfei^  ft&ai  m  till  nine.  At' that 
hodf'thef  were  relieved  by  Briint  and  the 
wilrieftf  AdAtes,'&nd  a  remarkable  ciiicuihisiitmc^ 
&Mt^ff6d  up^th^t- evening,  which  puts' it  oiit 
of  'IdldduM'thiit  the  prisoner  Bru'iit  was  there. 
it-  'Wilf 'be^  proiM  ta^ou,  by  Witnetoei,*  ndt 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


only  that  he  was  seen  in  Grosvenor-square, 
but  that  he  was  engaged  in  playing  at  do- 
minos  in  a  public-house  at  the  comer  of 
Charles-iStreet,  which  is  close  to  theatre, 
with  a  young  man  of  the  name  of  GiHan. 

Upon  the  following  morning,  the  23rd,  the 
day  on  which  the  plan's  of  the  conspirators 
were  to  be  carried  into  effect,  you  will  find 
that  they  met  at  Brunt's  house ;  and  that  in 
the  afternoon,  between  two  and  three  o'clock, 
many  of  the  persons  again  assembled  there  for 
the  purpose  of  proceeding  to  another  place,  to 
which  I  shall  now  call  your  attention.  It  was 
thought,  by  these  persons,  that,  in  order!  to 
carry  into  effect  the  plan  of  assassinating  his 
majesty's  ministers  at  lord  Harrowby's  house, 
those  who  were  -  destined  for  accomplishing 
that  part  of  the  plot  should  be  brought  toge- 
ther at  some  spot  not  very  remote  from  Gros- 
renor-square ;  and  it  will  be  proved  to  you 
that  on  the  Tuesday  it  was  resolved  that  they 
should  meet  near  Tyburn  turnpike ;  and  tliat 
those  who  were  not  intrusted  with  the  whole 
of  their  schemes  should  have  a  word  given 
them,  by  which  they  might  be  able  to  ascerr 
tain,  at  their  arrival  there,  who  were  the  per- 
sons with  whom  they  were  to  act.  It  however 
so  happened,  that  before  the  Wednesday,  iht 
prisoner  Harrison  procured  a  stable  in  an 
obscure  street,  called  Cato-street,  leading  into 
John-street,  in  the  Edgware-road,  which  was 
considered  by  them  a  very  convenient  place 
for  assembling  and  making  their  preparations 
for  the  attack  at  lord  Harrowby's  house.  The 
access  to  Cato-street,  at  each  end,  is  under  an 
archway ;  so  that  it  has  the  appearance  rather 
of  a  mews  than  of  a  street ;  at  one  end  it  is 
accessible  only  by  foot  passengers,  at  the  other 
end  there  is  an  entrance  for  carriages.  This 
stable  was  prepared  for  their  meeting  on  that 
evening ;  Harrison  and  others  were  seen  car- 
rying things  into  it  in  the  course  of  the  after- 
noon of  the  23rd,  and  some  cloth  or  sacking 
was  nailed  up  against  the  windows  of  the 
building  on  the  side  looking  into  Cato-street, 
for  the  obvious  purpose  of  preventing  the 
persons  opposite  from  observing  what  was 
passing  witnin. 

On  the  afternoon  of  that  day,  Thistlewoocf, 
Ings,  Bradbum,  Hall,  and  others  of  the  party 
met  at  Brunt's  room,  and  you  will  find  that 
they  were  seen  putting  flints  into  their  pistols, 
accoutring  themselves,  and  arming  themselves 
with  blunderi)nsses,  j>bto]s  and  swords,  with 
which  they  were  to  proceed  to  Cato-street, 
and  afterwards  to  lord  Harrowby's. 

It  was  thought  by  Thistlewood  that  it  would 
be  proper  to  prepare  some  sort  of  address  to 
the  people,  which  should  be  exhibited  that 
night  in  different  parts  of  the  town,  for  the 
pur|i6se  of  exciting  disaffection,  and  of  in« 
ducing  {>ers6ns  to  join  their  party ;  and  he  sat 
ddWtf,  and  wrote  a  proclamation,  in  the  pre- 
paration of  which,  circumstances  occurred 
most  material  for  your  consideration.  It  .will 
appear  to  yoii,  •  that  there  being  in  th^  room 
no  i^p^  updii  '^hitbTUiitlewood  could  write 
^      4G 


1187]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  i^JJm  ThmoM  Bruni 


[1188 


the  proclamatioDy  and  itbaTing  been  rnggeited 

that  cartridge  paper  would  best  answer  the 
purpose,  BruDt,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  sent 
ois  apprentice,  Hale,  to  purchase  some.  Hale 
went  out,  and  bought  six  sheets,  which  were 
afterwards  carried  into  the  room.  Upon  that 
paper  Tliistlewood  wrote  the  proclamation, 
which  it  was  intended  should  be  stuck  up  near 
the  places  to  which  they  intended  to  set  fire 
on  that  night,  so  that  by  the  light  it  might  be 
made  Tisible  to  the  persons  collected  in  the 
street.  The  address  was  to  this  effect :  '*  Your 
tyrants  are  destroyed ;  the  friends  of  liberty 
are  called  on  to  come  forward,  as  the  provi- 
sional government  is  now  sitting.  J.  Ings, 
secretary.  February  23rd,  1820."  Three  of 
these  proclamations  were  prepared  by  This- 
tlewood,  for  the  purpose  ot  being  used  in  the 
manner  I  have  stated  to  you. 

After  this  was  done,  and  after  they  had  pro- 
Tided  themselves  with  arms,  they  proceeded  to 
the  stable  in  Cato-street. 

It  is  proper  that  I  should  in  this  part  of  the 
narrative  inform  you,  that  upon  the  preceding 
day,  intimation  was  given  to  lord  Harrow  by, 
of  the  plan  which  these  persons  had  in  con- 
.templation,  by  a  man  of  the  name  of  Hiden, 
a  cow-keeper,  living  in  '  Manchester-mews, 
Manchester-street,  and  who  was  known  to  one 
of  the  conspirators,  the  prisoner  WiUon.  As 
the  night  of  the  execution  of  their  plan  ap- 
proached, they  became  more  and  more  anxious 
to  procure  all  the  assistance  they  could ;  they 
endeavoured  to  enlist  associates  iroro  amongst 
those  with  whom  they  were  acquainted,  and  to 
whom  therefore  they  had  the  less  difficulty  in 
divulging  generally  the  schemes  they  had  in 
.agitation.  Hiden  was,  as  I  have  observed, 
known  to  Wilson,  and  it  will  appear  to  you, 
that  two  or  three  days  before  the  Wednesday, 
Wilson  bad  imparted  to  him  the  outline  of  the 
conspiracy,  the  taking  the  cannon  and  the 
assassination  of  his  majesty's  ministers,  hoping 
and  expecting  that  Hiden  would  join  them. 
Hiden,  when  he  came  to  reflect  on  the  com- 
munication made  to  him,  immediately  felt  the 
necessity  of  making  the  matter  known  to  thode 
more  particularly  interested  in  the  event,  and 
lie  wrote  a  letter  to  lord  Castlereagh,  and 
'communicated  to  him  the  intended  proceed- 
ings, which  had  been  imparted  to  him  by  Wil- 
son. He  was  unable  to  see  lord  Castlereagh 
personally,  and  he  was  fearful  of  being  ob- 
served to  go  into  lord  Castlereagh's  house  lest 
it  should  be  known  to  these  persons  that  he 
was  making  a  communication;  he  therefore 
took  an  opportunity  of  watching  lord  Harrow- 
by,  when  nding  in  the  park  on  Tuesday,  and 
be  delivered  to  him  a  letter  addressed  to  lord 
Castlereagh,  requesting  his  immediate  attention 
to  it,  stating  that  it  was  of  the  utmost  import- 
ance ;  by  these  and  other  means  the  plot 
iDecarae  known  to  lord  Harrowby,  and  to  the 
f^overnment  of  the  country.  On  the  follow- 
^g  day,  Hiden  saw  Wilson  again  in  the  strict, 
and  Wilson  then  told  him  that  they  bad  fixed 
|o  meet  that  tvenuigiiiCaU^tr«#C;  be 


ed  Hiden  to  join  them,  detailed  to  kiii  bor 
fully  the  objects  they  had  in  view,  andisqaoirf 
be  would  not  fail  to  attend  between  fix  ud 
seven  o'clock. 

In  consequence  of  their  plan  bang  dm 
known  to  my  lord  Harrowby  and  tbe  pnO' 
ment,  means  were  taken  to  preveot  its  vx» 
tion,  by  the  apprehension  ot  these  penou  ia 
Cato-street,  on  the  evening  of  the  Mii 
Between  seven  and  eight  o'clock  there  vet 
assembled  in  Cato-street,  Brunt  the  wMf 
at  the  bar,  Tbistlewood,  Ingi,  auoM, 
Davidson,  and  others  to  the  number  of  ibirt 
four  or  five  and  twenty.  I  should  here  Hale 
to  you,  that  the  prisoner  (who  like  tbeiot  f 
his  associates  was  anxious  to  iocreise  tbtf 
numbers,  and  to  procure  the  assistance  of « 
many  persons  as  possible)  bad,  oDthepRnd- 
ing  day,  the  Tuesday,  applied  to  tmanofw 
name  of  Monument,  a  shoemaker,  to  whoaK 
had  been  introduced  two  or  three  weeks  bewe, 
by  Tbistlewood ;  he  told  him  he  should  wirt 
his  aid  on  the  following  day,  he  imputed  tt 

him  the  watch-word  by  ^*>^ch**»*y^*'*!J?*! 
themselves  known  to  each  other  at  Tyw 
turnpike,  the  place  of  meeting  at  CatMBj 
not  having  at  that  tmie  been  fixed  upos.  Cn 
the  23rd  after  they  had  procured  *«.*^ 
Brunt  again  saw  Monument,  and  told  hiaiw 
he  was  to  accompany  Tidd ;  that  he  wis  top 
to  Tidd's  house,  in  Hole-in-the-wall  pawp^ 
who  would  take  him  to  the  place  o^  "^"^ 
on  that  evening.  You  will  have  it  pwiw  » 
you.  that  Monument  did  aocordinglj  m* 
Tidd's,  and  that  he  walked  wiihTidd  tod^ 
street,  and  that  be  found  Brunt  tbeie  oa  w 

arrival.  ,  l  •  «k»i 

At  Cato-street,  the  execution  of  '"[V PTJ 
was  brought  under  consideration.  Twy  ^ 
there  collected  a  quantity  of  anas  and  ijmm 
of  those  destructive  instruments,  grenw  "J 
use  of  which  1  will  now  state  to  y<»-  ",2 
intended  that  Tbistlewood  should  ki«»  •l^ 
Hanowby's  door,  under  pretence  of  haw* 
note  to  convey  to  his  lordship,  and  »<*^'t 
the  hall  being  thus  obtained,  o^^VvT 
party  were  to  follow  him,  secure  the  seW 
enter  into  the  room  in  which  the  cjwj 
ministers  were  sitting,  and  there  ^J**"  1^ 
murderous  plan  which  they  intended  to  »wj 

For  that  purpose  they  had  P^f"^^ 
grenades,  which  are  balls  of  considettW  "^ 
in  the  centre  of  which  is  a  quanu^r  « JT 
powder,  about  three  ounces,  inclosed  tRt^ 
case ;  round  the  case  are  placed  FJ^^j^J 
some  of  those  grenades  which  have  been  (^JJ 
contained  long  nails,  of  that  descnpUWJ  ^^ 
is  used  to  fix  the  tiresof  cart-wheeUlo  »«rr 
work  to  which  they  are  attached.  -^"^^J 
or  ten  of  these  nails  are  iiastened  >^°rV'yn 
they  can  be  round  die  tin-case  '^'Jpj, 
gunpowder,  with  tow  dipped  in  a  ^^^JJ 
of  pitch  tar  and  resin.    From  '^  ?JJ*^  ^ 


a  mse  communicated  with  the  --  _^  ^ 
ball,  which,  bein^  lighted,  "^^^^^^  d 
almoit  instanuneous  cxploeioo»  H^  ?^ 
iioa  wouU  b«  dispeoed  aiDund  »  »» 


11891 


J^  Hi§^  Treat<m. 


A.  D.  18M. 


(1190 


tioMy  and  the  oomeqneiicef  would  be,  that 
aojr  penon  who  should  unhappily  be  struck  by 
then  would  be  deprived  of  existence,  or  be  len 
wounded,  roaimed»  and  lacerated.  Betweea. 
•even  and  eight  o'clock  they  began  to  prepare 
Ihemselves  for  the  execution  of  their  desiens ; 
and  doubts  being  entertained  by  some  of  the 
party,  whether  their  number  was  quite  adequate 
to  all  the  objects  they  had  in  view,  1  histle* 
wood,  in  order  to  allay  their  apprehensions, 
stated  that  they  had  men  enough  there  for  the 
accomplishment  of  the  assassination  in  Gros- 
▼enor*square,  and  that  there  were  other  parties 
in  difierent  parts  of  the  town  for  the  accomplish- 
aient  of  the  duties  assigned  to  them.  This 
Statement  of  Thistlewood  was  founded  in  fact, 
fer  it  will  appear  that  after  the  party  had  taken 
their  departure  from  Brunt's  house,  other 
persons  were  expected  to  call  there ;  amongst 
them  was  a  man  named  Potter,  one  who  was 
deep  in  their  schemes,  and  was  the  intended 
iMMler  of  a  band  upon  that  night.  From  Brunt's, 
these  persons  were  to  be  directed  to  proceed 
to  the  White  Hart,  from  whence  they  were  to 
move  in  divisions  to  the  execution  of  the 
▼arious  tasks  they  had  to  perform.  Palin  was 
to  be  at  the  head  of  the  fire  party,  and  Cook 
was  to  command  the  detachment  that  was  to 
take  the  cannon  in  Gray's-inn-lane  and  the 
Artillery-ground. 

After  tins  had  been  stated  by  Thistlewood, 
he  proposed  that  a  selection  should  be  made  of 
fourteen  to  enter  the  room  at  lord  Harrowby's, 
to  destroy  his  majesty's  ministers.  Among 
those  who  were  to  go  into  that  room, 
were  Harrison,  who  had  been  forroeriy  in  the 
Liie-euards ;  Adams,  who  had  some  years  ago 
served  in  the  Oxford-blues ;  Ings,  the  butcher, 
who  had  prepared  himself  for  the  bloody  scene 
in  which  he  was  to  be  an  actor,  in  a  most 
vemarkable  way,  the  prisoner  Brunt,  and 
Thistlewood.  At  the  moment  when  they  were 
separating  themselves,  the  officers  entered  the 
stable  below,  and  discovered  Davidson,  one  of 
the  persons  included  in  this  indictment,  a  man 
of  colour ;  he  was  armed  with  two  pistols  in  a 
belt,  a  blunderbuss  in  his  hand,  and  a  cutlass 
«t  his  side,  and  wks  standing  as  sentry,  at  the 
f»ot  of  the  step  ladder  which  led  from  the 
stable  to  the  loft  above;  Ings  was  also  sta^ 
tioned  in  the  stable ;  he  had  a  black  belt  round 
his  body,  in  which  were  inserted  a  brace  of 
pistols,  and  also  a  remarkable  instrument, 
which  will  be  exhibited  to  you,  a  large 
butcher's  knife ;  he  bad  stated  upon  the  pre- 
ceding day,  and  also  upon  the  evening  of  their 
Diecting  in  Cato-street,  that  with  that  knife  he 
himself  intended  to  enter  the  room  in  which 
the  ministers  were  sitting,  and  that  he  h^d 
provided  himself  with  it  for  the  purpose  of 
PButilattng  the  bodies  of  loid  Castlereagh  and 
lord  Sid  mouth ;  he  had  also  fomished  himself 
with  two>  bags  or  haversacks,  which  he  had 
Gsstened  over  each  shoulder ;  in  these  he  in- 
tended to  carry  off  the  heads  of  those  two  dis- 
tiDgiiiahed  persons,  in  order  that  they  midit  be 
ghibitad  on  pikes  in  the  street,  to  ismriste 


the  people  and  to  excite  them  to  insurrection. 
The  leading  officer  directed  his  followers  to  lay 
hold  of  those  two  persons,  in  order  to  secure 
them;  but  the  officers  being  anxious  to  get 
into  the  loft,  Davidson  and  Ings  were   not 
taken  into  custody  at  the  moment,  although 
the  knife  was  taken  from  Ings.    The  first  of 
the  police  who  went  up  was  Ruthven  ;  and  it 
will  appear,  that  while  he  was  ascending  the 
ladder,  either  Ings  or  Davidson  gave  an  alarm 
from  below  to  their  associates  above.      On 
Ruthven's  gaining  the  loft,  the  first  object  that 
struck  his  notice  was  Thistlewood,  whose  per- 
son was  well  known  to  him,  Ruthven  having 
been   acquainted   with   it   for   some    years.  * 
Thistlewood,    on  seeing  Ruthven,   seized   a 
sword  which  was  on  a  carpenter's  bench  before 
him,  and  on  which  other  arms  were  ranged, 
and  retired  into  a  small  room  adjoining,  fenc- 
ing with  his  sword,  in  order  to  keep  off  Ruth* 
ven  and  his  supporters,  who  were  advancing, 
and  who  announced  to  the  persons  assembled 
that  they  were  officers  of  justice,  and  that  they 
were  come  to  apprehend  them.    Ellis  was  im» 
mediately  behind  Ruthven,  and  he  was  follow- 
ed by  an  unfortunate  man  named  Smithers.— - 
Smithers,  observing  Thistlewood  in  thisattitude 
in  the  small  room,  passed  his  companions,  and 
advanced  to  apprehend  him.    On  his  approach- 
ing, Thistlewood  came  forward  and  thrust  tlie 
sword  into  his  heart;  the  lights  were  extin- 
guished ;  a  cry  was  raised  of*  Kill  the  thieves, 
throw  them  down  stairs  I"  a  rush  was  made  to 
the  ladder ;  the  officers  were  precipitated  into 
the  stable ;  Thistlewood  followed  close  behind 
them,  discharged  a  pistol,  as  he  descended,  at 
another  of  the  officers,  then  made  his  way 
through  the  stable  and  escaped.    Several  or 
the  persons  succeeded  in  eluding  the  visilance 
of  the  officers  on  that  night,  others  of  them 
were  apprehended ;  amongst  them  Davidson, 
after  a  very  desperate  resistance  on  his  part ; 
and  I  only  call  vour  attention  to  him  now,  in 
order  to  state  his  conduct  and   expressions 
when  he  was  taken  into  custody— conduct  and 
expressions  evincing  most  clearly,    if  there 
could  be  the  least  doubt  upon  the  mind  of  any 
man,  what  was  the  object  of  this  conspiracy. 
On  his  being  apprehended,  he  immediatelv 
exclaimed,  ''who  would  not  die  in  liberty^ 
cause?"  ^at  *' he  cared  not  for  his  life,  that  ' 
the  cause  in  which  they  were  embarked  was 
that  of  freedom,  and  who  would  not  perish  in 
that  caused     These  expressions  must  con- 
vince yon  that  the  object  was  to  overturn  the 
government,  and  that  the  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers  was  only  the  first  step  to 
the  accomplishment  of  that  object. 

The  prisoner  Brunt  made  his  escape;  he 
retumea  home  about  nine  o'clock,  or  a  little 
after,  and  Hale,  his  apprentice,  happened  to  be 
in  the  house  on  his  arrival ;  he  came  back  with 
his  coat  and  boots  extremely  dirty ;  he  told 
his  vrife  (and  this  is  a  part  of  the  case  which 
it  is  most  material  for  you  to  attend  to)  that  it 
was  all  over,  that  they  had  been  attacked  by 
the  officers^  and  he  had  escaped  only  with  bis 


1191]       1  GSOBGE  IV. 


7na/  e^JMii  THdtm  Bnmt 


[Btt 


life.  Pfesendy  after  another  Inan  bame  id, 
who,  it  should  seem,  had  been  one  of  the  party 
in  Cato-st^et,  and  had  «effecled  his  escape, 
but  bad  received  in  the  contest  some  consider-  khat  it  will  be  argued  before  you,  that  the  pin 


able  blows  and  wounds ;  he  stated,  that  he  had 
been  knocked  down  and  hurt ;  they  both  ap* 
peared  to  be  glad  to  find  themselves  again 
in  the  society  of  each  other ;  and  the  prisoner 
Brunt  stated,  that  though  they  had  been  thus  dis- 
persed in  Cato-street,  <<  all  was  not  yet  over," 
alluding,  undoubtedly,  to  the  different  bodies 
colTected  in  other  parts  of  the  town.  And  he 
said  to  the  other  man,  **  come  along ;"  and  they 


to  you  on  his  behalf  by  UscouMiil,  vlMiitk 
period  arrives  at  which  they  will  have  to  li- 
dress  themseWes  to  this  case.     I  sstiopM* 


which  this  person  had  conceived  vas  wild  toi 
▼isimiary,  was  impracticable,  and  that  ttoefim 
yon  are  to  pay  no  attention  vrbatever  to  the 
evidence  which  shall  be  given  lo  yon  to  pcoK 
iu  existence.  Let  me  caution  yoo  as  to  the 
application  of  that  observation  to  the  pmol 
case:  whether  the  plan  was  pnictieableotMt; 
whether  they  had  overrated  their  force  ud 
their  means  of  accomplishiDg  it  or  not,  ii  art 


went  then  out  together;  he  was  absent  from    a  matter  for  3roar  inquiiy.   The  ODlj<)QBtioi 


that  time  till  near  eleven  o'clock,  when  he 
returned  again  to  his  house.  Before  he  retired 
to  rest,  he  directed  Hale  to  get  up  on  the  fol- 
lowing morning  to  clean  his  boots;  and  he 
himself  at  an  early  hour  avrakened  him,  and 
then  asked  him,  whether  he  knew  a  place 
5;alled  Snow's-fields,  in  the  Borough.  The  lad 
replied,  "  he  did  not  :**  the  prisoner  told  him 
where  it  was,  and  then  went  into  the  back 
room  (that  room  which  had  been  hired  under 


is,  does  the  evidence  vrhich  vriU  be  addacedis 
you,  satisfy  you,  that  the  scheme  I  have  detuicd 
was  harboured  in  the  mind  of  the  pmoBcr  it 
the  bar ;  if  it  were,  and  he  acted  in  Mm- 
ance  and  execution  of  it  in  the  maaner  lime 
stated,  however  wild,  however  vuBonaiT,  hot- 
ever  impracticable  it  may  have  been,  the  geih 
which  is  imputed  by  the  present  indietaoit 
will  be  established  and  fixed  open  him. 
But  even  in  our  own  experience,  other  phM 


the  false  pretence  of  being  a  lodging  for  Ings,    of  a  similar  nature,  equally  wild,havebeencflB- 

•      ■       .    .  -   c^iJfed  and  formed;  without  advertisgtoi^ 

particular  case,  you  will  recollect,  that,  !■«•»• 
mating  the  practicability  of  this  plan,  700  m 
not  to  reason  upon  it  in  the  ttSnaer  in  vfaNS 
you  or  myself  would  judge  of  it  «***y  *^*J 
closets,  but  you  are  to  remember  Aat  wt 
men  had  long  entertained  this  pn!H<^'_3 
they  had  brooded  over  it  till  they  owrWf 
all  the  difficulties  which  intervened  betvecaiti 
conception  and  its  execution ;  that  they  insi*' 
ed  a  blow  once  struck  by  then,  voold  exa» 
the  disaffection  which  they  vainly  \W9^ 
prevailed  in   this  laige  metropolis  aflMOfi 
great  number  of  its  inhabitants;  ^^^ 
should  be  joined  by  an  overwhelsisg  wc^ 
and  that  vrith  that  force  they  shonld  beaUett 
overturn  the  existing  government,  le*""f!: 
the  book  of  chance  what  odier  institutioB  inp 
be  substituted  for  it.    The  evidence  wfll  s^ 
you  what  were  their  preparations,  prepw^** 
wholly  inconsistent  with  the  idea  that  the  «j 
sassination  of  his  migesty's  n*''**^*"!^^!! 
only  crime  they  meditated.    You  will  nw  w^ 
at  Tidd*s  house  was  seised  00  the  days^ 
their  meeUng  in  Cato-street,  no  lessaqow 
than  twelve  hundred  rounds  of  baD-caitndfti 
they  bad  prtNmred,  as  I  have  stated,  »g^ 
number  of  grenades ;  they  bad  cartndg«J 
the  purpose  of  loading  cannon;  *'*^»  ."J.^ 
tion  to  these  things,  thqr  were  pro^r  ^ 
fire-balls,  intended  to  be  used  in  borpinP' 
different  buildinffs  wbidi  had  been  fixed  t^ 
and  amongst  o&ers  the  barrscks  n^Jy 
man-square,  well  known  to  Hsrrisoo,  w 
been  quartered  there.    These  pi«pa»^<*' "J: 
this  ammunition  shew  pkinly,  that  the  «o^ 
they  meditated  was  not  to  teminate  is  w; 
sassination  of  his  majesty's  ainisters,  w"*"^ 
these  coQspiratoia  bad  ulterior  o^^J^^^^ 
temptation,  and  that  they  were  bent^y""^, 
orertlinyw  and  destructiott  of  the  99^^^^ 
But  let  us  for  aooaent  «Mider  i»»r 


but  in  wlucb,  as  I  have  stated,  the  meetings  of 
the  conspirators  were  held,  and  their  prepar- 
ations were  made)  and  from  the  cupboard  in 
that  room,  he  took  out  several  hand-grenades 
and  some  fire-balls;  these  he  pack^  up  in 
two  baskets,  covering  one  of  the  baskets  vrith  an 
apron  belonging  to  his  wife,  and  which  had  been 
used  as  a  window  curtain  to  that  room,  telling 
the  apprentice,  he  was  to  take  them  and  their 
intents,  toa  manofthenameof  Potter,inSnovr's« 
fields.  Ue  had  just  finished,  when  Taunton,  the 
officer,  arrived  at  the  house  to  apprehend  him. 
Taunton  found  the  prisoner  in  his  own  room, 
and  you  will  hear  the  conversation  he  had  with 
him.    Brunt  affected  not  to  know  who  it  was 
that  had  taken  the  back  room  ;  said,  that  he  had 
nothing  whatever  to  do  with  it ;  pretended  to 
be  wholly  ignorant  of  the  two  baskets  which  he 
had  just  been  preparing,  and  denied  any  know- 
ledge whatever  of  any  thing  in  that  room. 
An  iron  pot  was  standing  there  belonging  to 
the  prisoner,  in  which  they  had  prepared  their 
pitch  and  resin,  and  other  combustibles;  of 
this  also  he  said  he  knew  nothing,  and  persist- 
ed in  his  denial  of  being  acquainted  vrith  the 
contents  of  the  baskets,  although  he  had  imme- 
diately before  been  engaged  in  the  act  of  pack- 
ing them,  for  the  purpose  of  being  sent  off. 
Upon  this  he  was  apprehended,  and  he  now 
stands  here  for  trial  before  you. 

Thistlewood  also  made  his  escape  on  the 
night  of  the  23rd ;  he  did  not  return  to  his 
own  home,  .but  fled  for  concealment  to  the 
house  of  one  Harris,  in  a  street  near  Moor- 
fields;  and  on  the  morning  of  the  34th,  at 
about  ten  o'clock,  was  apprehended  there  in 
bed,  with  some  of  his  clotnes  on. 

I  believe  I  have  now  detailed,  as  briefly  and 
as  clearly  as  I  have  been  able,  the  main  facts 
which  will  be  adduced  in*  evidence  against  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar.  I  oan  anticipate,  perhaps, 
some  of  the  observations  which  sriU  oe  made 


tisal 


Jor  Higk  Trmm* 


A.  0.  18fa 


[1194 


df  the  iclwoie  to  which  yom  attention  will  be 
my  much  directed  in  the  coune  of  thi»  in- 
quiry,  I  mean  the  amassination  of  his  majes- 
ty's ministers.    With  what  view  could  these 
conspirators  meditate  their  destruction  ?    Were 
they  persons  against  whom,  individually,  these 
men  nad  conceiyed  revenge  P    Was  it  against 
lord  LiT^rpool,  was  it  against  the  duke  of 
Wellington,  was  it  against  the  lord  chancellor, 
penoiuUfy,  that  their  hostility  was  directed? 
Who  were  the  parties  to  make  the  attack? 
Were  these  twenty  or  five-and-twenty  persons 
united  by  any  common  bond  of  interest?    I 
ask  you,  as  men  of  sense  and  understanding, 
whether  you  can  doubt  that  that  part  of  their 
plan  was  more  than  a  prdiminary  step  7  that 
their  swords  were  not  to  be  raised  against  his 
majesty's  n^nisters,  as  individuals  merely,  but 
as  distinguished  personages  filling  the  highest 
offices  in  the  state,  and  possessing  the  confi- 
dence of  their  sovereign.    In^that  character 
alone,  had  the  illustrious  guests  of  lord  Har- 
rowby  become  the  intended  victims  of  the  in- 
stigators and  supporters  of  this  horrible  plot. 
This  assassination  was  to  have  been  ^e  first  act 
of  the  tragedy ;  the  overthrow  of  the  govern- 
ment was  to  have  been  last. 

It  will  perhaps  be  said  that  in  a  case  like 
the  present,  the  testimony  ought  to  be  such  as 
to  leave  no  doubt  on  your  minds  of  the  truth 
of  the  story  which  is  narrated — that  it  should 
come  from  unpolluted  sources,  from  witnesses 
untainted  by  crime.    Undoubtedly,  in  all  cases 
anbmitted  to  the  consideration  of  a  jury,  it  is 
their  duty  to  be  satisfied  that  the  evidence  is 
clear  and  conclusive  before  they  pronounce  a 
verdict  against  the  prisoner.    But  the  secret 
machinations   and    designs    of   conspirators, 
planning  and  acting  in  a  scheme  like  the  pre- 
sent, can  only  be  developed  to  their  fnll  extent 
hf  the  evidence  of  some  of  those  who  have 
been  participators  in  their  guilt.    An  accom- 
plice in  these  cases  is,  generally  speaking,  the 
only  witness  that  can  be  produced  fully  to 
discover  and  make  known  to  the  court  the 
plans  and  machinations  of  his  associates.  That 
the  testimony  of  such  a  person  ought  to  be 
watched  with  the  utmost  anxiety  and  jealousy 
I  most  readily  admit ;  and  unless  it  receives 
confifmation  from  uncontaminated  sources,  a 
jury  is  never  advised  to  come  to  a  conclusion 
npmvourable  to  the  accused.    ITpon  his  evi- 
dence alone,  in  this  case,  however,  I  think  you 
^ill  agree,   when  you  have  heard  the  story 
which  the  accomplice  Adams  will  tell,  and 
the  confirmation  which  will  be  given  to  you  of 
thai  story— confirmation  of  the  strongest  and 
most  impregnable  kind,  not  as  to  one  or  tivo 
particular  circumstances  onlv,  but  I  might  say 
as  to  almost  ail  the  leadin|^  facts  which  he  will 
idate ;  I  say,  I  think  you  will  be  satisfied  that 
lie  is  the  witness  of  truth.    To  produce  con- 
firmation of  every  part  of  his  testimony  would 
he  impossible,  and  if  it  were  possible,  it  would 
render  the  evidence  of  the  accomplice  alto- 
gethei^  unnecessary,  because  the  account  he  is 
to  give  might  then  be  proved  by  wHoesses 


liable  to  no  objection*  The  confirmation  which 
you  ought  to  require  in'  this  instance  should 
be  such  as  to  convince  you  that  the  general 
tenor  of  the  narrative  of  Adamtf  is  true.  Such 
confirmation  you  will  receive  from  witnesses 
upon  whom  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  an  im- 
putation—witnesses upon  whose  veracity  you 
may^ith  confidence  rely. 

But  the  case  will  not  rest  upon  the  testi* 
mony  of  «n  accomplice,  though  fully  confirmed. 
A  witness  will  be  called  before  you,  who -was 
not  an  aocompliOe,  and  who,  if  his  account  be 
not  true,  was  a  man  endowed  with  the  spirit 
of  prophecy ;  I  mean  Hiden;  because  he,  be- 
fore Uie  Iransacdon  took  place,  communicated 
it  to  lord  Harrowby,  at  a  time  when  he  had 
no  interest  whatever  operating  upoii  his  mind 
to  induce  him  to  make  the  disclosure,  except 
a  desire  of  averting  that  evil  which  he  saw  im- 
pending over  the  person  of  that  nobleman  and 
his  colleagues  in  office.    Against  Hiden  no 
charge  could  have  been  or  can  be  preferred, 
because,  although  in  words  he  appeared  to  as- 
sent to  the  scheme  of  the  conspirators,  he  never 
acted  in  a  single  part  of  the  plot.    If  you  re^ 
ceive  from  this  person  not  only  an  account  of 
the  scheme,  but  one  completely  confirmatory 
of  the  testimony  of  die  accomplice,  it  appear^ 
to  me  that  it  is  no  longer  possible  for  you  to 
hesitate  on  the  conclusion  to  which  you  are  to 
arrive.    I  do  not  advert  to  the  testimony  of 
Monument,  because  the  observations  which 
apply  to  Adams  apply  equally  to  him.      I 
ought,  however,    to   remark,    that    although 
Monument  was  undoubtedly  found  in  Cato^ 
street,  and  had  agreed  to  meet  Brunt  and  Tidd 
there  that  evening,  he  does  not  appear  to  have 
been  fully  informed  of  the  extent  of  the  scheme 
till  bis  actual  arrival  in  the  ^apm,  and  does 
not  seem  therefore  to  be  so  deeply  implicated 
in  the  transaction  as  Adams. 

Such  being  the  case,  it  will  be  your  duty, 
after  you  have  heard  the  evidence,  calmly  an^ 
deliberately  to  weigh  the  effect  of  it.  If,  ailer 
the  observations  which  I  have  made  to  you, 
you  shall  think  that  the  proof  adduced  does 
not  fully  satisfy  your  minds  of  the  guilt  of  th^ 
prisoner  at  the  bar,  and  you  shall  entertain 
a  reasonable  doubt  respecting  it  Tbut  it  must 
be  a  rational  and  a  well-founded  doub\),  giv^ 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar  the  benefit  of  it ;  but 
if  on  the  contrary,  however  wild  in  your  esti- 
mation, and  however  impracticable  the  scheme 
may  have  been,  still,  if  upon  considering  the 
whole  of  the  evidence,  you  shall  be  convinced 
that  it  was  formed,  and  was  on  the  eve  of  exe- 
cution, then,  gentlemen,  it  is  a  duty  you  owq 
to  yourselves  and  to  your  country  to  act  upofl 
that  conviction,  and,  without  hesitation,  with- 
out regard  to  the  consequences  to  follow  from 
your  decision,  to  pronounce  a  verdict  of  guilty. 

Lord  Chkf  Baroigk--Bring  into  court  the 
other  prisoners  named  in  the  indictment  who 
have  not  been  tried. 

[William  Davidson,  Richard  Tidd,  James 
William     Wilson/     John     Harrison, 


l^ieS]       I  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qfJAn  Tk9mai  Bnad 


[1196 


Kichud  Bradburn,  John  Shaw  Stnttge, 
Junes  Gilchrist  and  Charles  Cooper 
were  placed  at  the  bar  behind  the  pri- 
soner on  trial.] 

EVIDEMCB  FOR  THE  PBOSECUTIOir. 

IMert  Adams  sworn  •—Examined  by 
Mr.  SoUcitor  General. 

I  believe  yoa  are  a  prisoner  in  costody?— * 
Yes, 

Where  did  you  live  before  you  were  appre- 
hended?—  No.  4,  Uole-in*the  wall  panage, 
firookVniarket. 

What  are  you  b^  trade  ? — ^A  shoe-naker. 

Were  you  ever  in  the  army  ? — Yes. 

In  what  regiment  ? — The  royal  regiment  of 
Hoft^guards. 

How  long  is  that  ago  ?— ^Eighteen  years. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner  John  Thomas 
Bmnt  ? — Yes,  I  do. 

Where  did  you  first  become  acquainted  with 
him  ? — At  Cambray  in  France. 

How  long  since  r— lu  1816. 

By  what  name  did  he  then  go  f — ^Thomas 
Morton. 

Was  the  British  army  aft  that  time  stationed 
at  Cambray  ? — ^Yes,  the  head  quarters  were  aft 
Cambray. 

What  were  you  doins  there  f — ^Following 
the  occupation  of  my  trade. 

With  the  army  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  calling  on  Brunt  eariy  in 
the  present  year  ? — Yes. 

Where? — ^At  his  lodgings  in  Fox-court, 
leadin|[  into  GrayVion-lane. 

H€  is  a  shoe-maker,  I  beliere  ? — ^A  boot- 
doser. 

Did  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  introduce  you 
to  Tbistlewood  T-Ile  did. 

Do  you  recollect  about  what  time  T^On  the 
13th  of  January,  a  Wednesday. 

Where  was  that  P— By  Clare-market ;  Stan- 
hope-street I  think  it  was, 

At  Thistlewood's  lodgings  ?— Yes. 

Did  Brunt  go  alone  with  you,  or  was  there 
any  other  person  ? — Inss  was  with  us. 

fell  us  what  passed  upon  that  occasion  ? 
—On  entering  the  room  of  Mr.  Thistlewood, 
Brunt  said  to  Thistlewood,  ''  here  is  the  man 
I  was  speaking  to  you  about.**  Tbistlewood 
said,  **  You  belonged  to  the  life-guards  for- 
merly, did  not  you  ^'  I  told  him  I  did  not,  I 
belonged  to  the  Oxford  blues,  that  was  the 
name  I  expressed.  '^No  doubt  you  are  a 
good  soldier,"  he  said ;  I  told  him  "  once  I 
was ;"  ^  and  can  use  a  sword  well  Y*  I  told 
him  I  could  use  a  sword  sufficiently  to  defend 
myself,  but  I  was  out  of  practice ;  I  conld  not 
•ay  I  could  use  a  sword  so  well  as  I  formerly 
could,  for  I  had  not  used  a  sword  or  any  arms 
for  a  considerable  time.  On  this  Mr.  Tbis- 
tlewood turned  his  discourse  on  the  different 
•hopkeepers  in  London,  saying  they  were  a 
•et  of  aristocrats  altogether,  and  were  working 
under  one  system  of  government,  and  he 
should  glory  to  see  the  day  when  the  shop- 


keepers should  have  their  shops  skat  op  isd 
well  plundered ;  he  next  turned  his  diieoiine 
upon  Mr.  Hoot,  saying  that  Mr.  Hunt  im  t 
man  that  was  no  friend  to  the  people,  ud  U 
had  no  doubt  could  he  enter  Whitehall,  iid 
overiook  the  government  books,  he  shosld  find 
his  name  there  as  a  spy  to  the  gOTemment; 
he  next  alluded  to  Mr.  Cobbett,  stying  tint 
he,  with  all  his  writings,  was  a  nsn  that  mi 
no  firiend  to  the  people,  and  he  had  no  dosbt 
he  was  the  same  as  Mr.  Hunt,  a  spy.  Bnat 
here  told  him  he  had  a  couple  of  other  nco  to 
call  upon  towards  Camaby-maiket,  sod  ukid 
Mr.  Thistlewood  whether  he  would  walk  vilk 
him  to  see  the  men. 

Did  he  go  ? — No ;  there  was  a  word  ortvo 
dropped  -  from  Mr.  Brunt  to  Thiitlewood 
respecting  the  attending  of  a  raffle. 

Has  that  any  thing  to  do  with  this?— Thii 
raffle  was  to  raffle  for  a  blunderbuss  with  i 
brass  barrel ;  I  do  not  recollect  that  Mr.  Thii* 
tie  wood  said  he  should  go,  but  we  left  the  roon. 

You,  and  Brunt,  and  Ings  ?~Yes. 

And  left  Tbistlewood  there  ?— -Yes. 

I  believe  sometime  after  this,  yoa  were  id 
prison  for  debt  in  the  Whitecroas-strcetpriMo? 
— I  was. 

When  did  you  come  out  of  prison?— Tbe 
day  after  the  death  of  our  late  king. 

The  30th  of  January  ?— Yes. 

After  you  came  out  of  prison,  did  yoa  sn 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar  .^•— I  saw  him  os  liie 
Monday. 

What  day  of  the  we^  was  the  90lh  <)f 
January,  when  yon  came  out  of  prison  ?— Hm 
Sunday. 

Where  did  you  see  him  ?— The  first  of  ny 
seeing  him  was  at  Hobbs*s,  the  White  Hart 

Did  you  afterwards  see  him  at  anyroou? 
-—I  saw  him  in  the  evening  at  a  room  takes 
on  the  same  floor,  the  hade  room,  where  be 
lived. 

Did  you  collect  from  the  prisoner  who  hid 
taken  that  room  f — ^I  heard  him  say  hiaisel^ 
that  be  had  taken  the  room  for  logs. 

Did  you  attend  any  meetings  al  that  room. 
— Several. 

Up  to  what  time  did  you  attend  these 
meetings  ? — Up  to  the  23rd  of  Febraarjf 

From  the  time  you  came  oat  of  pnsont— 
Yes. 

How  often  were  the  meetings  held  ?— lo^ 
were  held  twice  a-day .  . 

Who  were  the  persons  that  usually  stteoded  I 
—The  persons  that  usually  attended  were 
Tbistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings,  Hall,  Hairisoo. 

Harrison  had  been  in  the  Iife-gosrdS|  i 
believe? — Yes:  Davidson. 

Davidson  is  a  man  of  colour,  I  beheve  .^ 
Yes :  Wilson. 

James  Wilson  P— I  did  not  know  his  dir* 
tian  name,  I  only  knew  his  perMo  sndbii 
name :  Edwards,  Tidd. 

Where  did  Tidd  live?-In  the  next  hosn 
adjoining  that  in  which  I  hved.  „ 

Where  is   that   place  r—Hole^o-tbe-mU 

Passage.  ' 


1197] 


fir  Hi^  TrmuoH. 


A.  D.  1820. 


CllOS 


He  is  a  shoe-makerf — ^Yes. 

Do  yoQ  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Palin  ? 
—Yes ;  Palin  was  not  so  regular ;  be  attended 
from  the  Sunday. 

From  what  Sunday  ? — Sunday  the  20th  of 
February ;  that  was  the  first  time  I  saw  him 
there. 

Had  you  seen  Potter  there?— Yes,  I  had 
seen  him  before  that ;  but  I  cannot  charge  my 
memory  with  the  time. 

What  was  Hall  ? — A  tailor  by  trade. 
'  After  you  came  out  of  prison,  which  was  on 
the  30th  of  January,  will  you  tell  us  what 
passed  at  those  meetings  ? — ^1  called  up  on  the 
evening  of  the  Monday,  and  there  I  found 
aeveral  of  them ;  I  cannot  charge  my  memory 
that  any  thing  particular  passed  that  night. 

•  Direct  your  attention  to  some  meeting  where 
you  remember  what  passed? — On  the  Wed- 
nesday-night following  I  attended  there. 

Was  Thistlewood  there  then  f — ^Yes. 

•  Brunt?— Yes. 
Daridson  ? — ^Yes. 

•  Harrison  ? — ^Yes. 
Edwaids?— Yes. 

What  did  you  see  in  the  room  at  that  time  ? 
— I  saw  a  number  of  pike-stares. 

Was  there  any  furniture  in  the  room  ? — ^At 
the  time  we  were  there,  there  were  some  chairs 
brought  in. 

Was  there  any  furoiture  belonging  to  the 
room  ?-*No,  only  the  store  that  was  fixed. 

When  you  used  the  room,  where  did  you 
get  chairs  ?— They  were  brought  from  Brunt*s 
room,  the  adjoining  room. 

•  What  sort  of  things  were  those  pike>8taves 
you  hare  mentioned  ? — ^They  were  rough,  just 
as  if  they  had  just  come  from  the  country, 
quite  green. 

What  passed  as  to  these  pike-staves  ? — I  saw 
Bradbom  cut  the  ends  of  the  stares  ofi^,  and 
knock  the  ferrules  on. 

lord  Chief  Baron, — You  did  not  mention 
Bradbum  as  being  there  ? — He  was  there. 

Mr.  Btuwi  Garraw, — Do  you  mean  the  end 
of  one,  or  the  ends  of  more  of  them  f — One 
end  of  each  pike  staff;  after  they  were  all 
knocked  on  this  first  dozen,  it  was  considered, 
in  consequence  of  the  ferrule  being  too  small, 
that  in  boring  the  hole  and  cutting  the  stick 
down  to  it,  the  end  of  the  pike  staff  would  not 
be  strong  enough  to  support  it :  that  is  all  I 
can  speak  to  respecting  that  time. 

Mr.  Solkitor  Genera/.— >Was  any  thing  done 
afterwards  to  alter  them  ?— Yes ;  they  were 
cut  off  tigain,  and  some  ferrules  put  in. 

By  Bradburn  ? — Bradburn  baiid  instructions 
to  get  the  ferrules,  but  he  did  not  get  them^ 
and  afterwards  Brunt  bought  the  ferrules 
larger  and  deeper. 

Do  you  know  whether  Bradbom  is  a  car- 

f^ttter  ?— -I  suspected  he  was  a  carpenter,  but 
was  not  certain. 

Were  ^hose  new  ferrules  pat  on  in  the  room 
At  that  place  ?— They  were. 


Ltfrd  Chief  Baron. — ^Were  the  new  ferrules 
brought  in  that  evening  ?— No ;  Brunt  brought 
those  ferrules  in  the  course  of  the  day,  and  put 
them  on. 

Mr.  Solicitor  OenenU,  —  Do  you  mean  the 
same  day  ?— No ;  I  saw  them  afterwards. 

Do  you  remember  being  there  a  short  time 
before  the  funeral  of  the  king  ? — ^Yes. 

Whom  did  you  find  there  at  that  time  ?— I 
found  Thistlewood,  Harrison,  Davidson,  and 
Wilson. 

Tell  us  what  passed  at  that  meeting? — At 
this  meeting  Harrison  told  Thistlewood  that 
he  had  seen  one  of  the  Life-guards,  and  he 
had  learnt  from  him  that  erery  Life-guards* 
man  that  could  be  mounted,  was  to  attend  the 
funeral  of  the  late  king,  as  well  as  all  the  foot* 
guards  that  could  be  spared  from  London 
would  be  thero,  and  the  police  oflBcers  that 
could  be  spared  from  London,  were  to  be  there 
at  the  same  time. 

Harrison,  who  made  this  communication, 
I  think  yon  say  had  been  in  the  Life-guards  f 
—Yes. 

Do  you  know  how  long  he  had  left  the  Life« 
guards  T — I  cannot  say ;  I  have  heard  him  say 
he  had  been  in  the  Life-guards. 

Having  made  this  communication,  as  coming 
from  the  Life-guardsman,  what  did  he  say 
further  ? — He  said  that  after  he  had  left  the 
Life 'guardsman,  it  occurred  to  his  mind,  that 
this  might  be  a  farourable  opportunity  u> 
collect  what  men  they  had  amongst  themselres 
together  on  that  night,  with  an  intention  to 
kick  up  a  riot  in  London,  as  be  thought  all 
the  officers,  soldiers  and  what  not,  would  be 
out  of  London,  that  there  would  be  nobody 
left  in  London  that  could  protect  it  scarcely  ; 
on  his  coming  into  the  room,  seeing  Thistle- 
wood,  he  communicated  his  thoughts  to  Mr. 
Thistlewood. 

He  said  that  had  passed  in  his  mind,  in 
consequence  of  the  communication  of  the 
Life-guardsman  ? — Yes. 

And  on  Thistlewood  coming  into  the  room, 
he  communicated  those  ideas  to  Thistlewood  ? 
—Yes,  he  did,  it  meeting  with  Thistiewood's 
ideas:  Tbistlewood  inmoediately  improves 
upon  the  plan  how  it  should  be  done ;  he  pro- 
posed that  the  two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray's- 
inn-lane  should  be  taken,  and  the  six  pieces 
of  cannon  at  the  Artillery-ground  were  to  be 
taken  on  the  same  night ;  after  this  was  done, 
they  thought  it  highly  necessary  to  send  a 
party  up  to  Hyde-park  comer,  in  order  to  pre- 
veut  any  orderly  being  sent  from  London  to 
Windsor,  to  communicate  what  was  going  on 
in  London ;  at  the  same  time  he  proposed 
that  the  telegraph  orer  the  water  should 
be  taken,  in  order  to  prevent  this  telegraph 
communicating  any  intelligence  to  WooLwiob. 
of  what  was  goin^  oe  in  London ;  he  thought 
at  the  same  time  it  would  be  necessary  to  cut 
trenches  across  Uie  road,  in  order  to  pre- 
rent  any  caimen  from  Woolwidi  entering 
London. 


IfMJ        1  OBORGB  IV. 


TrioL^ 


u  Tk^ktatBmni 


tt9M 


Who  said  thatf  ^Thistlewood. 

TiM  wMe  of  wfaat  y<m  have  now  been 
fltetiDg,  WIS  said  b  j  Thiattewood  ?— Yes ;  on 
doing  thiSy  he  thought  the  soldiers,  being  so 
faf  distant  from  London,  in  coming  up  from 
Whidsor,  they  would  not  be  able  to  oome  up 
to  London  time  enough  to  fender  the  country 
MBistance,  that  they  woidd  be  so  knocked  op 
and  fatigued  that  they  would  not  be  able  to 
do  any  Uiiag.  Here  Mr.  Thistlewoody  for  the 
flat  time  that  I  can  Tooch  for,  said  that  there 
must  be  an  offer  made  to  the  soldiers,  in  order 
CV  bring  the  soldiers  over  to  them,  and  if  they 
ftmnd  that  the  soldiers  were  determined 
to  act  against  them  (Harrison  was  the  man 
that  proposed  the  hand-grenades,  that  were 
made  for  the  destructioB  of  human  creatures), 
they  were  to  enter  the  houses  in  the  streets, 
and  fling  those  hand-grenades  in  among  the 
Midiers  in  the  streets  to  destroy  them  as  haft 
as  possible. 

Was  any  thing  said  about  the  ports?— It 
was  proposed  1^  ndstlewood,  that  there 
should  be  men  sent  to  the  different  sea-ports, 
such  as  Dover,  Brighton,  Margate,  and  those 
diflhrent  places,  wi3i  an  express  order,  that, 
if  awy  persons  were  suffcrod  to  leave  the 
country  without  an  order  from  the  provisional 
govemmenr,  their  towns  were  to  be  blown 
down  over  their  heads;  he  mentioned  par- 
ticularly that  they  ought  as  soon  as  they  could 
gollect  force  enough,  which  he  had  no  doubt 
they  should,  to  send  a  rery  strong  force  down 
to  Brighton,  in  case  the  new  king  should  be 
tivere  after  tho  riot  was  kicked  up,  which  he 
did  not  suppose  he  would  in'  consequence  of 
hit  indisposition;  they  were  to  plunder 
Brighton,  and  as  for  his  being  crowned  as  king, 
Thistlevrood  said  that  was  all  nonsense,  for 
that  we  did  not  intend  tbtt  should  ever  be; 
this  finishes  the  subject,  I  believe. 

After  that  conversation  had  taken  place,  did 
the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  and  any  c4her  person, 
come  into  the  room  T>— Yes. 

Who  ?  —  Ings  and  Bnint  came  into  the 
room. 

Was  the  subject  of  the  prenoos  couvertation 
oommunicated  to  then?— It  was  communica- 
ted to  them  both  by  Thistlewood. 

Can  yon  tell  us  what  Brtnit  said? — Brunt 
and  Ings  expressed  thenseives  both  together, 
that  there  would  be  noUiing  short  of  the 
assassination  of  the  ministers  should  satisfy 
them. 

•  Had  Bnmt  at  any  lime  before  that,  told  you 
any  thing  about  any  phm  to  assaninaier  hisr 
mtjesty's ministers?— <hi  the  Snd  of'  JsMutry; 

W«s  tet  before  he  had  intredocM  you  t<^ 
Thistlewood  ?-^It  was: 

At  the  meeting  to  wliioh  you  spoke  when 
I  first  uked  yon*  the  question  ?'^Drhivo%m 
rooin«i 

Whete  yoo  celled  upon  hhtt^^Yet.'- 

Wa9  it  at  thtt  meeting  f—>^Thef6' was  ho 
neetifl^  Ibto.- 

UQi«iii<  yowand^h^  met  ipoa  that  oocftsikm, 
did  he  communicate  that  plan  to  yowK^-liv 


communicated  this  plan  to  me  on  the  2b8  of 
Jaduaity  in  the  street,  as  we  wen  wattdng 
afong. 

Then  upon  this  occasion  to  vthich  yds  bsrt 
now  been  speaking,  he  said  that  sotioBg 
would  satisfy  him  except  the  attssiinatioerf 
his  majesty's  ministers? — ^Yes. 

Mr.  Baron  Garraw.  —  You  do  not  ask  bin 
as  to  the  particulars  of  that  conversation. 

Mr.  Solicitor  GeiKre/.  r— No,  my  lord,  sst 
the  details  of  it.  Did  any  thing  foitkerpM 
at  that  meeting  after  he  and  logs  had  said  tial 
nothing  would  satisfy  them  but  the  a9saHiBa> 
tion  of  his  majesty's  ministers  ?--This  was  titt 
night  when  Ings  expressed  himaelf  is  the 
room,  that  he  had  been  to  the  Park,  with  the 
sole  intention  to  shoot  the  Prince  Re^t^ » 
he  was  at  the  time. 

Did  he  produce  any  thing  ?  —  He  pndoccd 
a  pistol  from  his  pocket,  and  said  that  vis  the 

£istol  that  he  had  taken;  he  puUedthe  pistol  fran 
is  left  pocket,  held  it  out  in  that  my,  vA 
said  **  Damn  my  mortal  eyes,  but  that  ii  the 
pistol  that  I  took ;"  that  was  the  veiy  eqif»- 
sion. 

Upon  what  occasion  was  it  he  said  he  vest 
into  the  Park  to  shoot  the  Prince  Regeot?- 
It  was  the  time  that  the  Prince  Rei^t  «<X 
to  open  the  Parliament. 

When  Bmnt  had  originiaiy  conniittBicit«> 
to  yon  this  intention  to  assassinate  his  oa* 

^'s  ministers,  did  he  say  when  that  was  t» 
one  ?— It  was  to  be  done  the  ii»|  one 
the  ministers  assembled  together  for  adioMr- 
What  diunerP—What  they  caU  a  cabaet 
dinner.  ^ 

Do  you  remember  a  meeting  dot  took 

flace  on  Saturday  the  19th  of  Febisaiy!- 
'erfectly  welL 

Who  was  present  at  that  meeting  W«J 
Thistlewood,  Brun^  Harrison  and  VlTihon;  ai* 
Ings  was  there. 

What  pashed  at  that  meeting?  irss  that  m 
the  forenoon  or  erening?— It  was  hetwte" 
eleven  and  twelve  o'docl^ 

Was  Davidson  there  at  that  time?— !»•: 
not  positively  say.  ^ 

Tell  us  what  passed  at  that  meeting  ?--0» 
my  going  into  the  room,  they  sat  with  th«f 
heads  together,  as  if  they  were  in  a  cowu^ 
ation  about  somethipg ;  I  P^tty  soon  wm 
out  what.  » 

What  was  it?— They  got  up  all  on  the  «»• 
den,  Thistlewood  said,  «  Well,  it  is  agreed ,;  tf 
nothing-  tianspire  between  this  and  WedoeH 
day«4iight,  we  intend  to  go  to  woric,  "[TJJJ 
all  so  poor  we  caimot  wait  any  longer*''  ^fjl 
aewood  proposed  direcdy,  that  tbait  diW 
be  acomnrittee  sit  at  ainfe  o'dook  toJOit^ 
motBiftg,  ift  Older  to  dmsr  up  a  ptatf  ^  ^ 


upon. 


oideis 


Was  ihat'ag^M  to?--Yer;  he  V^^ 
to  Brmtt  atthe  sasoc  titoi'tcteli  «h*  "^^1 
were  to  come  by  his  instructioias,  to  ««*^7; 
ed;  H^  Bmdt  exph»Rd  bimsrif;  ^l> 
« it  is  a  parcel  ofwaosensir''  ^^  ^^  *^ 


jaOll  Jor  Bigh  TreoiOfu 

«<  to  think  of  m  otken  coming  here  f  if  they 
were,  he  woald  execute  them  in  the  room,  or 
muvder  them :  he  expressed  himself  in  a  dif- 
ferent way,  language  that  it  is  not  proper  to 
use  here. 

That  if  they  came  to  the  room,  they  were  to 
be  murdered  ? — ^That  he  would  take  care  they 
should  be  murdered ;  and  he  would  take  good 
care  that  it  should  not  be  found  out 

Pritoner, — My  lord,  can  the  witness  look 
me  in  the  face,  and  the  jury,  and  state  that? 

Wiineu^ — I  can,  with  a  good  conscience. 

Prisoner.— Then  you  are  a  bigger  villain 
than  I  took  you  for  before. 

Lord  Chief  JBoron.-- You  will.be  at  liberty 
to  say  any  thing  you  choose  by  and  by,  but 
you  should  not  interrupt  the  examination. 

Mr.  Solieitor  General, — Look  at  the  jury, 
and  state  whether  that  is  a  fact  ? 

WUneu* — It  is  the  fact,  and  you  know  it 
yoofself  Brunt. 

Lord  Cfuef  Banm, — ^Do  not  get  into  any 
conversations  with  the  prisoner.  ^ 

Mr.  Solicitor  General, — If  the  prisoner  de- 
tire  it,  look  more  towards  the  jury,  so  that  the 
prisoner  may  see  you.  After  this  did  they 
separate  ? — ^Then  they  separated. 

You  spoke  of  some  pike-staves,  had  vou 
seen  any  other  arms  of  any  description  before 
the  Saturday?— I  had  seen  a  sword  $  I  had 
seen  those  hand-grenades ;  some  of  them  were 
then  in  the  room. 

One  sword,  or  two  ?^)ne  sword,  and  some 
hand-grenades  which  were  made  in  the  room ; 
and  I  have  seen  pistols  pulled  from  their  dif- 
ferent pockets. 

Were  those  things  that  you  saw  from  time 
to  time  in  the  room  kept  there,  or  were  they 
<«arried  on  to  some  otner  plsuce  ?— They  were 
removed  from  there  to  Tidd's  lodgings  in 
Hole-in-the-wall-passage. 

What  was  that  place  called  ?— The  d^p6t. 

Was  .any  reason  given  why  they  were  not 
kept  there? — The  reason  given  by  Mr.  Tliis- 
4lewood  that  he  wished  them  to  be  removed 
from  that  room  to  the  d^p6t  was,  that  they 
might  be  there  safe,  in  case  any  body  should 
«ome  into  the  room  who  did  not  know  any 
thing  of  their  intentions,  that  he  should  not 
Jttve  any  suspicion  what  their  intentions  were. 

Did  this  meeting  take  place  in  pursuance 
iof  the  arrangement  on  the  Sunday-morning  ?— 
Allow  me  one  moment,  as  Mr.  Brunt  has  de- 
nied what  I  have  said.  Brunt  was  the  man 
who  carried  the.  principal  part  of  those  hand- 
grenades  to  Mr.  Tidd^s,  «>r  I  followed  him 
.  there  myself;  I  followed  him  into  the  room 
of  Tidd,  and  saw  them  lie  on  the  floor;  and  I 
saw  Tidd's  daughter  put  them  into  the  box 
,  voder  the  window  with  my  own  eyes. 

Did  this  meeting  take  place  on  the  foUow- 
.  ing  morning  ? — ^Yes,  the  Sunday. 
^     Who  was  there  ?*-*There  was  Thistlewood, 

VOL.  xxjcni. 


A.  D.  1890. 


CISOS 


Ings,  Hall,  Brunt,  Harrison,  Davidson,  Brad- 
bum,  Edwards,  Cook,  and  there  were  three 
others,  that  came  ailerwards;  there  were 
twelve  in  all. 

Tell  us  what  passed  at  that  meeting?— 
Between  eleven  and  twelve  o'clock,  on  the 
20th  January,  Thistlewood  looking  round  the 
room,  seeing  twelve  men— •— 

Do  you  mean  January  or  February? — Fe- 
bruary ;  Thistlewood  seeing  twelve  men,  said, 
"  Well,  gentlemen,  we  may  as  well  proceed  to 
business ;  here  is  enough  to  form  a  committee;^' 
Tidd  was  proposed  to  take  the  chair. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrcw, — ^He  had  not  mentioned 
Tidd  as  being  present  at  this  meeting  P 

WUneu.^Ou  Tidd  taking  the  chair,  with  a 
pike  in  his  hand— — 

Lord  Chief  Baron, — Was  he  there  when  you 
went  in,  or  did  he  come  in  afterwards  ? — He 
was  there  among  the  first  I  might,  gentle- 
men of  the  jury,  possibly,  not  charge  my 
memory  as  to  all  that  might  be  in  the  room, 
at  the  different  times  I  was  there.  Though  I 
have  not  mentioned  Mr.  Tidd  being  in  the 
room,  he  certainly  was  there,  for  he  was  the 
first  that  spoke  to  me  in  the  room.  On  order 
beinc^  called,  Mr.  Thistlewood,  standing  on  the 
left  hand  side  of  Tidd,  said,  '<  Well,  gentle- 
men, as  we  are  all  met  here,  we  have  no  occa- 
sion," turning  his  head  to  the  door,  **  to  make 
mention  of  any  names ';  I  suppose  you  all 
know  what  you  are  met  for,  and  as  we  have  all 
waited  so  long,  with  an  expectation  of  the  minis- 
ters dining  together,  finding  there  is  no  likeli- 
hood of  their  coming  together,  we  have  come 
to  the  resolution,  that  in  case  nothing  occurs 
between  this  and  next  Wednesday-night,  we 
intend  to  take  them  separately;"  be  then 
begins  to  state  his  plan.  He  proposed  then 
the  west-end  job;  he  called  the  job  that  was 
intended  to  assassinate,  **  the  west-end  job." 
He  proposed  after  this  was  done,  or  at  least 
at  the  same  time,  that  the  two  pieces  of  can- 
non in  Gray's-inn-lane  should  be  taken 
and  the  six  pieces  of  cannon  at  the  Artillery* 
ground  should  he  taken,  and  that  Mr.  Palm 
should  take  the  command  of  another  party,  in 
order  to  set  fire  to  the  different  buildings; 
Cook  was  the  man  that  was  appointed  to  take 
the  lead  of  taking  the  six  cannon  in  the  ArtiU 
lery-ground. 

Mr.  Solicitor  General, — ^To  take  the  com« 
mand  of  the  party  that  was  to  take  them?— 
Yes. 

Was  Cook  at  that  meeting? — He  was,  I 
mentioned  him.  As  to  the  time,  he  said  we 
could  not  come  to  the  exact  time,  {or  the  pre^ 
sent,  but  we  should  have  an  opportunity  he•^ 
tween  that  time  and  the  time  of  its  being  ta 
be  executed,  to  fix  the  time,  but  he  thought 
forty  men  would  be  enough  for  the  west-end 
job,  and  more  if  he  could  get  them,  of  which 
he  said  he  had  no  doubt,  and  as  to  further 
proceedings  on  the  plauj^  that  would  be  too  a^t 
another,  time. 

4H 


laoeJ        1  (3B0iR«E  IV. 


Trid  ^JokK  fimmn  Brunl 


[ 


That  fttfther  partievlany  u  to  the  extMUaa 
of  tbe  plan  shoold  be  tettM  at  another  time  ? 
— ^Yes;  as  Mr,  Bnint  was  eomiog  Ibrwavd 
vith  a  motion  respecting  the  assassinatioBy 
bow  it  was  to  be  done.  Brunt  came  forward  to 
address  what  were  in  the  room,  but  was  put  a 
■top  to  by  Thistlewood  saying  that  the  motion 
be  had  made  ought  to  be  put  from  the  chair ; 
that  if  any  person  had  any  thing  to  say  upon  it 
they  should  state  it ;  the  motion  being  put  and 
agreed  to  by  all  in  the  room,  Brunt  came  for- 
ward and  stated  what  he  had  to  say.  Brunt 
proposed,  that  as  there  was  no  signs  of  getting 
ihem  all  together,  they  should  \^  taken  sepa- 
rately, and  that  it  shodd  be  done  in  this  way, 
as  many  men  as  could  be  raised,  or  rather  as 
many  as  they  thought  they  could  assassinate, 
they  were  to  divide  what  men  they  had  got 
into  as  many  parties  as  they  thought  they 
eould  get  men  to  assassinate;  if  they  had 
forty  men,  they  were  to  divide  them  into  so 
many  parts. 

How  many  was  each  party  to  consist  of? — 
That  was  not  said ;  when  these  men  were  so 
lotted  out,  he  proposed  that  a  man  from  each 
lot  should  be  drawn  out  for  the  purpose  to 
assassinate  whoever  they  might  be  appointed 
to  do;  that  it  should  be  done  regularly  by 
drawing  loU;  if  that  man  that  was  drawn  did 
not  execute  hisduty  from  any  signs  of  cowardice, 
he  was  to  be  run  through  on  the  spot ;  upon 
this  I  geU  up  myself,  and  told  him  I  wished 
to  ask  him  a  few  words  on  what  he  had  dropped, 
whether  it  was  not  possible  for  a  man  to  make 
an  attempt  in  a  thing  like  that  and  fail,  says  I, 
\*  do  yon  mean  to  say,  that  a  man  so  failing, 
IS  to  be  run  through  upon  the  spot  whether  or 
not?"  ^Certainly  not,  unless  there  is  proof 
that  the  man  is  a  coward."  I  sat  down;  this 
motion  directly  after  was  put  from  the  chair, 
and  it  was  agreed  to  in  the  same  way  as  the 
other ;  direcuy  after  this  in  came  three  other 
men. 

What  were  their  names?— Palin,  Potter 
and  Strange. 

Upon  these  persons  coming  in,  were  the 
matters  that  had  previously  passed  commu- 
nicated to  them  ?-— They  were  communicated 
as  before  to  them. 

They  were  commnnicated  as  they  had  pan 
sed  ?— They  were. 

Did  either  of  those  persons  make  any  ob- 
servation ?— Palin. 

Was  that  the  man  that  was  to  head,  as  you 
say,  the  fire  par^  ?— Yes. 

What  observation  did  he  make  ? — ^After  Mr. 
Pftlin  had  consented  to  the  plans,  he  got  up 
and  addressed  himself  to  the  chairman  on  the 
•ttbject  of  what  had  been  dropped,  saying, 
*''  agieeing  as  I  do  with  what  has  been  said, 
and  I  ha^  one  amongst  the  rest  agreed  to  it,  I 
wish  to  know  how  these  things  are  to  be  done, 
as  there  are  so  many  objects  you  talk  of  at  one 
time  provided  ;*"  lie  said,  they  could  all  be 
cvned ;  he  thought  Chat  it  would  be  a  great 
wqoisition  to  what  they  had  in  view ;  "  this 
is  what  I  wish  to  know^^iie  Mys^  ^'-jon  talk 


of  tAiQg  forty  IMS  lev  te  wtit4Bd  job ;  jn 
talk  of  taking  the  two  pieees  of  cunfls  ■ 
GrayWnfrJane,  and  six  atthe  AitiUsty-gMoi 
and  then  propose  me  with  my  laea  ssttjogfia 
to  the  different  buildings,  but  yoa  w^  ti 
know  better  than  myself  what  mes  yoicu 
command.  I  for  my  own  part  cu  gin  » 
satisfoction  what  men  I  can  bring  htmd, 
unless  I  may  be  intrustsd  from  this  cauiaK 
to  state  to  them  what  has  paiued  in  thisiNa 
thi9  morning.  If  I  can  have  tbat  power  (p 
tell  tbe  men  I  may  have  to  call  upon  what  it 
is  they  are  going  about,  ainl  when  tu^  viij 
be  wanted^  I  should  better  know  how  to  act" 

Upon  his  sUting  this,  vbai  was  said  toliial 
—Upon  his  stating  this,  it  was  stated  bj  Mr. 
ThuUewood,  Brunt,  and  Tidd,  that  if  It. 
Palis  had  men  that  he  covld  ]daoetbatcsi- 
Bdenee  ia^  Ihey  did  not  sea  when  tbtboi 
would  be  in  making  the  commanicatioa  tt 
them ;  upon  this  Mr.  Palin  sat  down  nsM, 
and  nothmg  particular  occurred  to  tbe  dnv 
aftevwmrds  to  tlia  heal  of  my  vecoUectim. 

After  the  chair  was  left,  what  thm  pMj 
—After  the  chair  was  lefji,  TWsUewood  tonrf 
himself  round  on  a  sudden,  and  said,  ^ Oh. 
Bruift,  now  as  Palin  is  here,  you  can  take  li» 
to  this  pUce  which  is  oloM  by,  sad  ietftbi 
see  whether  the  plaee  is  practicabU  to  dec 
not.** 

Upon  that,  did  Brant  aad  PsIib  9»«^^ 
the  room  tof«th«r?-«Bnmt  and  Palio  «c|| 
out  of  the  room  together  to  ejaoae  m 
place,  and  see  whether  it  was  pnctieable » 
Mr.  Pidin  «o  do.  . 

How  long  did  they  remaia  aliseatf-Te» 
best  of  my  recotleetion,  about  ten  b"^!- 

When  they  oame  back  what  ww*"** 
Mr.  Palin  gave  in  woid,  t«iat  the  ptece^* 
very  easy  job,  and  would  make  a  good  vt 

Was  &e  plaoemntiooedr-ThisFbctftf 

FomivalVinn^teildings.  ^^^ 

Was  it  mentaoned  ?-4t  was  net  «e^ 
at  that  tiaae ;  I  heard  Bnmt  tcU  Hr.  Th*^ 
wood  of  it  before  thattwa;  it  was  »«">* 
Tidd  found  out  ^e  place.  ^^^f 

That  was  mentionad  at  a  pMviooio*"'*' 

The  bnildiaff  was  going  oa  at  die<MJ| 
not  finished  f — The  baA  p«t  of  ihc  >^ 


ing  is  not  finished  now,  I  bslieft* 

I  believe  this  i^aee,  foMr^wn,  is  ^  ■* 
the  back  of  Funiivai'iHino  M^WT  ;"Lu{ 
What  tother  passed  at  thattioe?--^ 
tiiem  began  to  separau,  saying,  ^7\^ 
to  call  upon,  and  to  acqaaiat  **«■ '•r^ 
woQld  be  wanted;  after  this,  ^»*^ 
dropped  a  word  to  tiiai  Aot  ^  ^% 
think  we  had  better,  betwesuthisaDdifte^ 
of  going  to  wofk,  eoBect  ^*«*  »»f-J 
together,  in  oHIer  to  give  Ihcna  a  W ; 
Uewood  said,  he  did^oot  kmm  k<^  "'L- 
to  be  done,  for  Ihey  ivere  tH  to  P^^*^, 
this,  Bnmt  was  tbe  man  that  toni«*^^ 

walked  from  the  fire  and  ^<^  "g^  jhsii 
my  eyes,  I  have  a  pound  note,  *^v,-.  i 
d<^o  UUleomo  wo* lately,  Ml^"^ 


130^1 


Jar  Hi^  Treoitm. 


A«  D,  1820. 


[isoa 


pound  note  that  I  bavft  reserved  to  treat  my 
men,  and  I  will  do  it.'' 

What  furthet  passed  ?—ktliere  was  some 
other  communlcauoii. 

Was  any  thing  said  about  any  communica- 
tion to  Hobbs?— Yes;  Thistlewood  was  the 
man  that  said,  he  did  not  know  where  we 
could  take  them  to.  after  Brunt  expressed 
himself  that  he  would  spend  the  pound  note ; 
he  said,  ^*I  suppose  we  could  have  the  toom 
up  stairs  at  HobVs.*' 

That  was  at  the  White  Hart?— Yes. 

Was  that  the  place  where  some  meetings 
were  held,  before  thev  got  the  room  in  Fox- 
court  ?— The  very  housci  but  not  the  room. 

It  is  not  a  part  of  the  house,  but  a  back 
Toom,  in  which  you  used  to  meet  ?— A  back 
loom  in  the  yard.  Brunt  said,  he  did  not  like 
to  go  there,  in  consequence  of  what  I  had 
dropped. 

As  to  the  communication  that  had  been 
made? — ^Yes;  Brunt  said,  ''never  mind,  as 
time  gets  so  near ;  I  do  not  see  what  we  have 
to  fear,  for  if  any  officers  come  into  the  room, 
-we  will  take  care  ot  them.'' 

Did  you,  shortly  after  this,  separate? — 
Shortly  after. 

This  you  have  mentioned  was  Sunday  P — It 


Was  there  any  meeting  held  on  the  Mon« 
day  1 — ^Yes,  there  was. 

Was  there  any  meeting  held  on  the  Tuesday 
morning  7— rYes,  there  was. 

What  time  was  the  meeting  held  on  Tues- 
day morning  ? — At  about  ten  o'clock. 

Was  the  prisoner  Srunt  there  ?— -Yes. 

Thistlewood  ?-*Yes. 

Tidd  t—Yes. 

Ings  ? — Yes. 

Hall  ?— Yes. 

Yourself? — ^Yes ;  Wilson  and  Harrison  and 
Edwards;  there  were  Bradbum,  Palin,  and 
Potter  there  besides. 

After  they  had  mei  oh  fte  Tuesday-morning, 
was  any  communicatipu  made  as  to  a  dinner? — 
Tes ;  on  Mr.  £dWards  coming  into  the  room. 
Mr.  Edwards  was  the  man  that  communicated 
to  Thistlewood,  there  was  an  account  in  the 
paper  of  the  prime  ministers  being  to  meet  to 
dine  together  on  the  Wednesday-njgbt. 

Mr.  Oumey, — Where  was  that  to  be  ? — At 
lord  Harrowby's,  Grosvenor-square. 

Was  any  observation  made  by  any  one,  upon 
iImU  oommunicaUon  with  Edwards  ? — ^Thistle- 
wood made  an  observation. 

What  did  he  say  ? — ^He  said  he  had  seen  a 
paper  that  morning,  and  he  did  not  see  any 
SMCOUDt  of  it ;  in  order  to  satisfy  the  men  that 
were  then  in  the  room,  Thistlewood  proposed 
that  the  paper  should  be  fetched. 

Did  Edwards  say  how  he  came  to  know  it  ? 
^-Seeing  it  in  the  paper. 

That  was  tlie  communication  he  made,  that 
he  had  seen  it  in  the  paper  ?->-Yes. 

Was  the  paper  sent  for  and  brought? — It 
was ;  Hall  was  the  inao  that  fetched  the  paper. 


What  paper  was  it  F— The  New  Times. 

tJpon  the  paper  beintf  brought,  fiow  did  it 
turn  out  f — Exactly  as  Mr.  Edwards  had  said. 

Upon  that,  what  passed  ?— On  this  informa- 
tion being  communicated  from  this  paper,  it 
was  proposed  by  Thistlewood,  that  ti.ere  should 
be  another  committee  sit  to  alter  the  plan  of 
assassination,  as  it  had  been  proposed  on  the 
Sunday. 

Did  Thistlewood  say  any  thing  more  at  that 
moment? — No;  but  in  the  interval  of  this 
time  there  is  one  circumstance  I  wish  to  state ; 
Harrison  and  Davidson  came  into  the  room  in 
the  interval  of  the  paper  beiog  fetched ;  Har- 
rison brings  a  bag  of  muskel  balls,  Davison 
brings  the  balls,  Harrison  brings  in  the 
powder;  with  this  Thistlewood  calls  me  to  the 
chair,  as  I  was  not  yetv  well. 

Before  you  were  called  to  the  chair,  do  y6u 
remember  anv  observations  being  made  by 
Ings  ?— Ings,  m  the  interval  of  the  paper  being 
fetched,  pulled  out  three  daggers;  those  dag- 
gers, he  said,  he  had  prepared  with  the  sole 
intention  of  assassination  oy  themselves. 

You  mean  for  separate  assassination  ? — ^Yes ; 
taking  one  in  his  hand  at  the  same  time,  he 
ezprmed  how  he  intended  to  do  it. 

now  he  had  intended  or  now  intended  to  do 
it  ? — ^How  he  had  intended  to  do  it  making  use 
of  a  very  coarse  expression,  wliich  I  will  not 
repeat 

Do  you  remember  his  saying  any  thing 
more  ? — Not  at  that  moment. 

Any  thing  about  lord  Castlereagh  ?— In  the 
course  of  the  day. 

Go  on  and  reuite  what  took  place  next  ? — 
The  chair  was  taken  by  myself,  and  I  called 
to  order. 

Before  you  took  the  chair,  do  you  remember 
Brunt  saying  any  thing  after  the  paper  was 
brought  in  and  read,  and  it  was  found  there 
was  a  meeting  ? — Yes ;  on  the  news  that  was 
communicated  in  the  paper.  Brunt  expressed 
himself — '*  Damn  my  eyes,  now  I  believe  there 
is  a  God,  in  calling  these  thieves  together ;  it  has 
often  been  my  praver  that  they  would  all  meet 
together,  now  Uod  has  answered  my  prayer. 

Then  you  say  Thistlewood  proposed  there 
should  be  a  committee,  and  that  you  should 
take  the  chair  ? — Yes.  , 

Did  you  do  so?— I  did. 

What  passed  next,  upon  your  taking  the, 
chair? — Upon  Mr.  Thistlewood  coming  for« 
ward  to  express  the  plan  he  had  then  to  pro* 
pose,  I  called  to  order,  and  said,  '*  gentlemen, 
oefore  we  proceed  any  further  in  this  business,' 
I  hope  you  have  given  a  due  coiisideration  to 
what  fell  from  my  mouth  vesterday  morning.'* 

What  was  it  you  had  mentioned  on  the 
morning  of  the  day  before  ? — ^The  account  that 
Mr.  Hobbs,  the  landlord  at  the  White  Hart, 
Bad  given  me. 

Something  that  Hobbs,  the  landlord  at  the 
White  Hart,  had  said  to  you?— Yes. 

What  was  that  somethin$;r  ? — Hobbs  told  me 
privately,  by  myself,  that  there  had  been  two 
officers  there,  saying  that  there  wa!b  8om«thin|( 


13071       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  dfjohn  Tkmat  Bnaii 


[1908 


ia  band  more  than  there  ought  to  be ;  that  they 
had  got  information  at  Bow-street,  and  at  lord 
Sid  mouth's  office. 

You  referred  to  that  which  yon  had  stated 
upon  that  subject? — Yes. 

Upon  your  bringing  this  up  what  took 
place  ? — Upon  my  bringing  this  up,  Palin  was 
in  the  room ;  I  had  seen  him  before;  Thistle- 
wood  was  going  to  speak  again. 

I  am  not  asking  now  all  which  took  place 
on  the  momiuK  before ;  but,  on  your  saying 
**  gentlemen,  I  nope  you  have  considered  what 
I  said  yesterday,''  what  passed? — ^I  wish  to 
state  that  transaction,  word  for  word  as  it  oc- 
curred. 

You  have  given  me  enough  of  the  com- 
munication you  before  made ;  will  you  now  go 
on  with  what  passed  at  the  meeting,  when 
YOU  were  in  the  chair,  when  you  said  yon 
hoped  they  had  given  a  due  consideration  to 
what  had  fallen  from  you  the  day  before ;  who 
took  that  up?— Palin  took  it  up,  and  said  he 
wished  for  some  explanation  of  that  before  the 
business  proceeded  any  further;  upon  this 
Brunt  geu  up,  saying,  ''you  shall  have  an  ex- 
planation ;**  he  gets  up  and  communicated  to 
the  whole  room  nearly  the  same  as  I  had  to 
them;  after  he  had  done  this  he  proposed,  in 
•order  to  do  away  this,  that  there  should  be  a 
vatch  set  on  lord  Harrowby*s  house. 

Did  you  remain  in  the  chair  at  this  time,  or 
were  you  put  out? — I  was  in  the  chair  at  this 
time ;  this  watch  was  to  begin  at  six  o'clock 
that  night,  two  were  to  go  on  at  that  time; 
tlio«e  two  men  were,  to  go  off  at  nine,  and  to 
be  relieved  by  two  others,  who  were  to  remain 
till  twelve,  and  the  watch  to  commence  again 
the  next  morning  at  four  o'clock,  and  to  con- 
tinue till  the  evening,  when  they  intended  to 
go  to  work ;  those  men  on  watch  were  to  look 
to  see  who  entered  the  house  of  lord  Harrowby, 
such  men  as  police  officers  or  soldiers ;  if  they 
entered  the  house  they  were  to  communicate 
it  to  the  committee ;  if  there  was  nothing  of 
this  kind  seen  to  go  in,  he  was  determined 
that  the  work  should  be  done  to-morrow  night. 

Who  was  he  ? — Brunt. 

What  did  Thistlewood  say  ? — On  this  being 
done,  men  were  picked  out  for  that  purpose. 

Who  picked  them  f  ut  ? — Brunt  himself. 

State  in  what  manner  they  were  picked  out ; 
what  was  said? — Tliey  were  picxed  out  for 
the  purpose,  but  I  cannot  give  you  sufficient 
satisfaction  who  all  those  men  were  that  were 
appointed ;  Davidson  was  one  of  the  first  of 
them  that  was  to  go  on ;  Brunt  and  Tidd  were 
the  two  next  that  were  to  relieve  them. 

Davidson  would  be  from  six  to  nine,  apd 
Brunt  and  Tidd  Irom  nine  to  twelvp  that  night  ? 
—Yes. 

Was  any  arrangement  made  as  to  the  man- 
ner in  which  this  should  be  done  the  next 
night? — The  assassination;  yei. 

What  passed  upon  that  ?— Thistlewood  upon 
this  came  forward :  ''  As  to  what  has  fiulen 
from  Brunt's  mouth,  respecting  what  has  been 
Mid,  if  there  is  a  proof  that  there  has  nobody 


entered  the  house,  such  as  wMieTs  or  polia 
officers,  I  shall  propose  a  plan  in  order  to  take 
them  altogether  r*  He  proposed  himself  to  p 
to  lord  Uarrowby's  door  with  a  note  ui  lus 
hand,  to  deliver  to  the  servant,  saying,  be  not 
have  an  answer  to  this  note ;  on  his  going  iiio 
the  house  he  was  to  be  followed. 

By  how  many  T — ^The  others  were  to  rashii 
directly  after  him,  seize  upon  the  serrutt, 
present  a  pistol  to  them,  and  threaten  then 
vrith  instant  death  if  they  made  any  lesistaoce; 
at  the  same  time  others  were  to  go  and  take 
the  command  of  the  stairs. 

How  many  to  take  the  command  of  tb 
stairs  ?— Two  to  take  the  command  of  tlie  itaia 
leading  to  the  upper  part  of  the  hoose?  tm 
to  take  the  command  of  the  stain  leading  to 
the  lower  part  of  the  house ;  eadi  dib  « 
these  were  to  have  a  hand-grenade  and  ^M 
and  a  cutlass.  If  any  attempt  were  mideto 
retreat  from  the  upper  part  of  the  house,  tkii 
hand-ffrenade  was  to  be  thrown  among tbeii; 
and  if  any  attempt  by  the  serranU  ftom  the 
lower  part,  a  hana-grenade  to  be  thrown  among 

them. 

Was  any  thing  to  be  done  with  respedli 
the  area  ?— There  were  two  men  to  be  placel 
there;  one  with  a  blunderbuss,  andthcotw 
with  a  hand-grenade. 

What  was  to  be  done  with  w^J®2 
dining-room? — ^After  these  men  h*<^*^, 
the  servants  and  stairs,  Ings  P">pw*^  "Tj 
to  enter  the  room  first ;  he  was  to  be  folww 
by  two  swordsmen.  . 

Who  were  they  to  be  ?— Myself  one,  oA 
Harrison  the  other.  ^^ 

Did  Ings  say  what  he  should  ^J^lP] 
in  ?— Ings  said,  that  on  going  in,  he  ^^''^^^ 
«'  Now,  mv  lords,  I  have  as  good  n.^'^f 
the  Manchester  yeomanry;  enter  ciuien«» 
do  your  duty.**  i 

What  were  the  others  to  do?-OnthHfo» 
of  command  from  Ings,  thtey  were  to  rush »" 
the  room,  to  be  followed  by  ^^P.^^.^ 
broad  knife,  swearing  that  he  would  cat  i«» 
heads  off  as  fast  as  he  could  get  at  theo. 

Did  he  mention  the  heads  of  any  pei*»? 
particular  ?— The  heads  of  lord  Cwtiw 
and  lord  Sidmouth  he  was  determined  to  iw 
away  wiih  him  in  his  bags,  a«J^«i^ 
CasUereagh's  hands.  There  is  «^J^ 
cumsunce  I  have  not  stated  before;  tw»JJ 
he  intended  to  cure,  as  he  said  that  ^^ 
thought  much  of  in  a  future  day;  l^ 
state  this  one  cireumstance,  fOT^<*'",-J2 
slip  my  memory,  as  I  believe  I  haw  not  «^ 
it,  what  Ings  himself  at  a  sohsequent  oeewi 
to  this  had  proposed.  ^j^  ^ 

Do  you  mean  by  sabsequeot,  i»w« 

after  ?— Before  this  he  had  exp^^ 
after  he  had  got  the  head  of  lord  C^wje 
and  SidmouA,  that  be  would  exhiW  ^ 
heads  upon  a  pole  about  the  «***?**f.^|,tii 
wood  improved  upon  this  P>w  5 '^^Tj  be- 
better  to  put  them  on  a  pi«e,  P»^  ^  ^ 
hind  the  cannon,  and  cany  them  aown 
streets,  in  order  to  tcnify  the  people. 


112001 


for  High  Treason, 


A.  D.  isdcr. 


fiaio 


After  doing 'ihi3  sit  lord  Harrowbv's>  what 
was  it  proposed  you  should  do?-*  I  have  not 
finished  yet;  on  Thistlewood  saying  this, 
Bradbum  improved  it  immediately,  saying,  he 
vrould  immeaiately  after  it  had  been  exhibited 
here  inclose  the  head  in  a  box,  and  send  it  to 
Ireland. 

After  yon  liad  done  at  lord  Harrowby's, 
what  was  to  be  done  next  P — ^The  next  thing 
that  was  to  be  done  after  leaving  the  house, 
was  to  be  done  by  Harrison. 

What  was  he  to  do  ? — He  was  to  go  to  the 
Horse-barracks  in  King-street,  and  set  fire  to 
4he  shed. 

WiA  what  ? — ^A  ball  prepared  for  the  pur- 
^>ose. 

Who  was  to  support  Harrison  ? — ^Wilson. 

From  thence  where  was  that  party  to  pro- 
ceed to? — ^Tney  were  to  proceed  from  thence 
to  Gray's-inn-lane. 

To  what  place  in  Gray Vinn-lane  P — The 
City  Dght-horse  barracks. 

What  to  do  ? — ^To  take  the  two  cannon  from 
ihei%. 

Was  it  said  whether  the  party  were  to  go 
from  thence,  or  whether  they  were  to  meet 
any  body  else  f — There  was  to  be  somebody 
in  waiting  there. 

After  getting  those  cannon  at  the  Light- 
horse  Volunteer  barracks,  to  what  place  were 
you  to  proceed  next? — ^They  were  to  proceed 
irom  there  to  the  Artillery-ground,  unless  things 
'Occurred  afterwards  to  the  contrary. 

Whom  were  they  to  meet  there  ?— Cook. 

Whom  besides  ?— That  I  do  not  know. 

What  were  they  to  do  at  the  Artillery- 
ground  ? — To  take  the  six  cannon  from  there, 
and  after  they  had  got  them,  they  were  to 
load  them,  and  bring  them  into  the  street 
loaded. 

What  to  do?— If  Cook  found  himself  suffi- 
ciently strong  by  people,  as  it  was  supposed, 
coming  over  to  them,  if  he  thought  himself  ca- 
pable of  advancing  to  the  Mansion-house,  he 
was  to  do  it. 

If  the  Mansion-house  was  taken,  what  use 
was  to  be  made  of  it  ? — It  was  to  be  the  seat 
of  the  provisional  government. 

Was  any  arrangement  to  be  made  of  the 
cannon  that  were  there? — ^Tlie  cannon  were 
to.be  arranged  in  this  way;  there  were  to  be 
three  placed  on  one  side  of  the  Mansion-house, 
and  three  on  the  other. 

For  what  purpose? — For  the  purpose,  if 
they  refused  to  give  up  the  house,  of  firing 
into  it  on  each  side. 

After  that,  was  any  place  near  the  Mansion- 
bouse  to  be  attadced  f — ^The  Bank  of  England 
was  to  be  attacked,  and  taken  if  possible. 

What  was  to  be  done  there  ? — To  plunder 
the  Bank,  but  Thistlewood  said  not  to  destroy 
the  books. 

Did  he  assign,  any  reason  ?— He  assigned 
the  reason  to  secure  the  books,  in  order  that 
they  might  be  enabled  to  see  some  of  the  pro- 
ceedings of  government  before  that,  that  they 
were  not  then  in  possession  of.    There  are 


I  lome  few  woids  I  believe  I  hav«  not  stated 
yet  in  court,  with  respect  to  the  finisKipg  of 
the  concern;  Mr.  Thistlewood  and  Cook 
agreed  between  themselves  that  if  he,  Cook, 
found  himself  so  situate  as  to  go  to  the  Man- 
sion house,  he  was  to  send  an  orderly  man 
ft)rward  to  stand  against  the  door  of  saint  Se- 
pulchre's church,  to  wait  the  arrival  of  an 
orderly  to  be  sent  by  him,  Thistlewood ;  on 
this  l)eing  done,  they  were  to  return  to  their 
separate  parties,  to  give  instruction  to  the  dif- 
ferent parties  how  they  were  situated. 
'  Do  you  remember  uarrison  making  any  pro* 
position  about  any  sign  or  counter-sign  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  it? — Harrison  proposed  that  there 
should  be  a  countersign  agreed  upon,  to  give 
to  those  men  that  had  to  go  round  to  tell  the 
men  that  they  would  be  wanted  to-morrow 
night. 

What  did  he  propose  that  should  be  ?— He 
proposed  that  the  countersign  should  be 
button,  in  this  way  b,  u,  t — t,  o,  n. ;  there  was 
to  be  a  man  fixed  at  the  end  of  Oxford-street, 
that  the  party  who  should  go  up  and  say  6,  u,  ty 
was  to  be  considered  as  one  of  the  party,  and 
he  was  to  answer  t,  o,  n,  to  shew  that  he  be- 
lonffed  to  the  party  too. 

This  was  on  the  morning  of  Tuesday  ?— 
Yes ;  on  this  being  done,  Harrison  would  pro« 
cure  a  place  between  this  and  the  time ;  and 
the  men  that  were  to  come  up  so,  were  to  be 
conducted  from  the  end  of  Oxford-street  to 
that  place. 

Did  you  go  to  Fox-court  again  in  the  after- 
noon of  that  day  ? — ^Yes ;  I  did. 

Did  you  perceive  any  thing  as  you  entered 
the  room  ?— -On  my  going  up  stairs,  I  perceived 
a  strange  smell ;  on  my  going  into  the  room 
I  saw  Ings,  Hall,  and  Edwards. 

What  was  Edwards  doing  ?— Ed  wards  was 
making  ftises  for  the  hand-grenades. 

What  was  Ings  doing  ? — Ings  was  dipping 
those  thinffs  for  the  fire  balls  into  an  iron  pot, 
into  ingredients  that  were  mixed  for  that  pur- 
pose. 

What  was  Hall  doing? — Hall  was  laying 
the  paper  on  the  floor  in  order  to  receive  those 
balls  after  they  were  dipped  into  the  pot. 

Did  you  leave  the  room  and  call  again  ?— 
I  left  the  room,  and  called  again  in  the  evening. 

Whom  did  you  see  then? — I  found  Thistle- 
wood Uiere,  and  two  strange  men  that  I  had 
not  seen  before. 

Any  other  that  you  had  seen  before  ? — In 
the  course  of  the  evening  they  were  pretty 
well  all  there. 

Davidson  you  have  said  was  to  go  on  watch 
at  six  ? — Yes. 

And  Brunt  and  Tidd  to  relieve  him  ?~Yes. 

Did  Brunt  and  Tidd  go  to  watch  at  nine  ? — 
Tliey  started  for  that  purpose. 

After  they  had  started,  did  any  thing  occur? 
—After  they  had  started,  they  called  at  a  house 
to  meet  a  man  that  Tidd  was  to  have  met  be-> 
fore,  and  finding  this  man,  he  (Brunt)  caipe 
b«dc  again  to  take  another,  and  he  pitched 
upon  me  to  go  with  him. 


laii}       1  GEOBG&  IV. 


Trial  qfJohn  Thomat  Bruni 


Did  yoa  go  mth  him  in  Tidd'0  ttObd  ?— 

Tes, 

When  you  got  to  CrroaTenor-sciukre,  did  you 
fiod  BaTidson  on  the  watch  t*-Yei. 

And  you  relieved  him? — ^Yes;  we  did. 

You  went  about  nine  I  suppose  ? — Yes« 

l^rom  nine  to  tweWe  was  your  time  ? — ^Yes. 

While  you  were  on  the  watch,  did  you  and 
l^nt  go  into  any  publie-bouse  to  take  re- 
freshment ?— We  did. 

Where  is  that  public-bouse  situate  t — ^Itis 
at  the  corner  of  a  mews,  directly  at  the  back 

Sart  of  lord  Barrowb/s  house^  but  the  ikame  I 
0  not  know. 

How  long  do  you  think  Brant  and  you 
staid  in  the  house )  —  Ull  about  elevem 
o*c1oek. 

What  time  did  you  go  in) — I  suppose  a 
quarter  or  twenty  minutes  past  dine. 

Yoa  staid  there  about  an  hour  and  a  half  t—- 
Yes. 

Bid  either  of  you  play  at  any  gane  with 
any  person  there  ?-^Brunt  played  at  dominos 
with  a  young  man  that  was  there. 

At  about  eleven,  did  Brunt  and  you  leave 
the  public-house}  and  retura  to  your  watch  in 
the  square  t — We  did. 

About  what  time  did  you  leave  your  watch  ? 
—Turned  of  twelve. 

Did  you  stav  in  the  house  the  whole  of  the 
hour  and  a  halfy  or  so  out  occasionally? — ^I 
went  out  twice  myselL 

On  Wednesday,  did  you  go  to  Fox-court  ?—< 
I  did. 

At  about  what  time? — About  two  o'clock^ 
to  the  best  of  my  reeoUection. 

Did  you  first  go  into  the  back  room,  or  into 
tbe  other  room  ? — I  first  went  into  Brunt's  own 
room. 

Did  you  find  him  there  ? — I  did. 

Did  any  persons  come  into  that  room  to 
you?~*6tiange  came  in  first,  and  two  other 
stranger^  whom  I  did  not  know. 

Did  you  see  any  weapon  in  Brontes  room  ? 
—I  saw  pistols. 

Was  any  thing  done  with  them  ? — ^They  be- 
gan to  try  to  put  the  flints  into  them. 

Did  they  go  on  with  that  ? — On  those  two 
other  strange  men  coming  in,  Brunt  proposed 
to  go  into  the  other  room. 

Do  you  remember,  whether  any  observation 
was  made  while  they  were  putting  the  flints 
in»  before  he  desired  them  to  go  into  the  other 
room  ? — ^I  cannot  charge  my  memory. 

However,  he  proposed  they  should  go  into 
the  other  room  ? — Yes,  he  did. 

And  Strange  and  the  two  strange  men  did 
go  into  that  room  1 — Yes. 

Did  you  go  into  the  back  room  too  ?--Yes. 

Did  Brunt?— Yes. 

Did  you  see  any  weapons  there  ? — I  saw 
pistols,  cutlasses,  and  blunderbusses. 

Did  any  persons  come?*- Just  afterward^, 
Th^ttewood  came. 

Did  any  others  come  after  him  ? — Ves. 

Who  came  in-  next  after  Thistlewood,  as 
well  as  you  can  remember  ?«*-To  the  best  of 


[131S[ 


my  recollection^  Ings  and  Hall  came  alUr- 
wards,  kod  other  strangers  after  that 

When  Thistlewood  oame  iii,  do  yoa  leGol. 
lect  what  he  said  ?— When  TbisUewobd  caoe 
he  looked  roand  and  said,  '*  now  ny  iids, 


in 


this  looks  somethiog  like )  it  looks  as  if  w( 
were  going  to  do  something." 

Did  he  address  you  ? — He  clapped  his  band 
upon  my  shoulder,  and  said,  '^  how  do  yoa  do 
Mr.  Adams  V  I  told  him  I  wa^  not  veiy  vcQ, 
abd  I  was  very  low  in  spirits.  He  said,  **  what 
is  the  matter?  you  are  not  low  spirited  in  coo- 
sequence  of  wluLt  we  are  going  to  do,*^  I  taU 
him  I  wanted  soine  refreshment. 

Did  Brunt  send  out  for  any  thing  ?--By  tk 
ordets  of  Thistlewood  he  did. 

What  did  he  send  for  ?'— Some  gin  and  Mae 
beer. 

What  passed  next  ?— Mr.  Thist&wood  sud, 
he  wanted  some  paper. 

For  what  purpose  ?-*-In  order  to  draw  op 
some  bills ;  ne  wanted  such  papar  as  tke 
newspapers  were  printed  on,  hot  he  did  sot 
know  how  to  ask  for  it ;  what  was  the  aami  6f 

It* 
By  bills,  what  kind  of  bills  do  you  mean?-- 

Large  posting  bills. 

Did  you  propose  any  paper  to  biinl-;-!  told 
him  cartridge  paper  would  answer  his  par* 
pose. 

Upon  that,  did  Brunt  say  any  thing  ?—UpoB 
this.  Thistlewood  gave  Bnml  some  money  to 
fetch  this  paper,  he  saying,  that  either  bis  ap- 
prentice or  his  boy  should  fetch  it 

Did  Brunt  sendf  for  it  f — Yes. 

Was  it  brought? — ^Itwas. 

When  the  paper  came,  what  did  Tbist]^ 
wood  do? — ^He  sat  down  to  write  llie bills, 
after  a  table  and  a  chair  being  brought  in> 

From  what  place  ? — ^From  the  front  rooo; 
Brunt's  room. 

Did  he  write? — Ves,  three  bills. 

^fler  he  had  done  Uiat,  did  he  say  what  be 
had  written  ?— He  read  it  to  those  that  were  w 
the  room. 

After  those  three  copies  were  written,  ^ 
was  done  with  them?— After  the  bills  wen 
written,  I  saw  them  laid  down  ^^'^^ 
then  afterwards  I  saw  one  in  the  bands  01 
Thistlewood,  and  another  in  the  hands  of  lop* 

Mr.  Garaey.— We  have  given  them  notice 
to  prodooe  thwem  my  lord. 

Mr.  Addpfm,--!  admit  the  noUce  ny  ^• 

Mr.  Oume^.-^ive  us  the  words  he  ^ 
nounced  ?— "  Your  tyrants  are  destroyed ;  t» 
friends  of  liberty  are  called  upon  to  come  tor- 
ward  as  the  provisional  governuient  are  no 
sitting,  James  Ings,  secreury,  February  jw» 
1820/' 

Did  Thistlewood  write,  or  attewpt  to  wn»^ 
any  more  than  those  three  ?— No ;  Tbistlewow 
expressed  himself,  in  writing  the  last  biU,  tin»» 
he  did  not  know  what  was  the  matter  wwb 

What  appearance  did   he  exhibUr-* 
seemed  to  be  rather  agitated. 


Iftls] 


jbr  Hfgk  IVmcm. 


A.  D.  1890. 


[1314 


Were  Oioet  written  small  or  l»vge?»~lB 
larjirisb  letters ;  writing  letters. 

Writing  letters,  but  large  f ••-Yes. 

Was  it  said  in  aoy  part  of  the  conversation 
where  they  were  to  be  placed  ?-*They  were 
to  be  placed  against  the  different  buildings 
that  were  set  on  fire,  in  order  to  let  the  peo- 
ple, who  caoM  to  those  fires,  know  what  was 
done. 

After  that,  did  Thistlewood  propose  for  any 
other  person  to  write  ? — He  proposed  to  Hall 
to  take  the  pen. 

Did  Hall  do  itf-He  refased  it. 

Upon  that  did  any  other  person  take  it  ? — 
Upon  that  another  person  took  it;  he  had  at 
first  refused  it. 

Do  you  know  who  that  was  ?*«-No,  I  do  not. 

He  wrote  somethiog,  we  will  not  ask  what? 
— ^He  did. 

Who  dictated  to  him  ?•— Thistlewood. 

After  this,  did  you  see  Ings  do  any  thing?—' 
Yes. 

Did  he  accoutre  himself  in  any  way  7 — ^He 
accoutred  himself;  he  first  put  a  black  belt 
round  his  loins ;  after  that  he  hung  another 
over  his  shoulder;  this  belt  round  his  loins 
was  to  contain  a  brace  of  pistols,  the  olie  over 
his  shoulder  was  for  a  cutlass. 

Did  he  put  anv  thing  else  over  his  shoulder  f 
-—He  put  a  couple  of  bags  over  his  shoulder  in 
the  shape  of  a  soldier's  haversack. 

What  did  he  then  say  ?-^n  viewing  him- 
self,  he  perceived  he  had  not  got  his  steel ;  he 
said  he  thought  himself  not  complete  without 
his  steel. 

Did  he  produce  any  thing  else  he  had? — He 
pooduced  a  very  large  knife. 

What  kind  of  a  knife  P — ^A  knife  with  a  very 
broad  blade,  and  a  handle  with  wax^-eads 
wound  round  it. 

Did  he  mention  what  was  the  use  of  those 
wax-ends  ? — ^To  keep  his  hand  from  slipinng. 

Did  he  say  what  he  would  do  witn  £is 
knife  ?-^That  this  was  the  knife  he  had  pro- 
cured for  the  sola  purpoee  of  cutting  off  the 
heads  of  loids  Caalleres^h  and  Sidmouth. 

Did  the  othexs  who  were  in  the  room,  do 
ttsy  thing  with  respect  to  the  weapons  that 
were  there  ? — They  all  took  an  active  part  in 
procuring  themselvies  pialols  and  cntlasseSy  and 
diierent  things. 

Do  you  remember  nj  coming  in  late  in  the 
meeting  ? — PaBn  came  tn. 

Did  Thistlewood  and  Brunt  stav  after  that,  or 
did  they  go  away  ?-«-Tb^  left  we  room  after 
this. 

About  what  time  did  tfaev  leave  the  room  f — » 
It  oonld  not  want  a  great  deal  of  five  o'clock ; 
it  might  want  twenty  minutes  or  half  an  hour. 

Do  yon  recoUecf  Fftlin  swing  ai^  thing  to 
thejnuty  that  were  there  .'•^-Yes. 

What  did  he  say  ?— He  said  he  hop«d  that 
sdl  present  knew  what  they  had  mp t  there  upon; 
he  hoped  if  tbev  knew  what  they  were  met 
vDon  that  they  had  given  it  a  consideration 
wW  they  were  going  to  do ;  in  the  first  place 
be  wished  them  to  mom  themselves^  whether 


the  assassination  of  the  ministere  was  Ukely  to 
be  a  benefit  to  the  country,  **  if  you  find,  or  if 
you  think  that  it  is  likely  to  be  a  benefit  ti» 
your  country,  and  the  people  will  come  ever 
to  you  in  consequence  of  doing  it ;  yon  ought 
to  come  to  the  determination  between  your- 
selves, for  every  man  to  stiok  true  que  to  ano- 
ther ;  if  it  should  be  proved  that  any  one  of 
you  is  in  danger  from  the  opposite  party,  the 
others  ought  directly  to  go  to  his  assistance." 

If  any  man  flinched,  did  he  say  what  should 
be  done  with  him  f — ^That  if  any  man  flinched, 
that  man  ought  to  be  run  through;  he  wav 
here  interrupted  hy  a  tall  man,  that  was  in  the 
room,  saying,  he  could  see  the  meaning  of  his 
speech;  but  he  spoke  as  if  all  in  the  room,  he 
ttkought,  knew  what  Ihey  were  met  there  for. 

The  tall  man  said  that  to  Palin  ?--Yes. 

**  I  see  pretty  well  the  meaning  of  vour 
speech ;  but  you  seem  as  if  you  thought  all  in 
the  room  knew  what  wo  were  going  to  do? — 
Just  so. 

What  was  said  next  ?-^That  was  what  he 
wished  to  know  himself,  and  some  bthere. 

**  That  is  what  I,  and  some  others,  want  to 
know  ?" — Yes ;  ''  I  myself  am  not  afraid  of 
myself,  nor  ought  any  man  that  turns  out  on  a 
thing  like  this.^' 

To  be  afaid  of  what  ?— To  be  afraid  of  hie 
life  ;  there  were  some  other  words  that  I  caiw 
not  charge  my  memory  with,  but  Palin  was 
going  to  speak  agfun,  but  Brunt  came  in. 

What  did  he  say  ? — Seeing,  as  I  thought,  an 
alteration  in  the  countenances  of  the  men,  he 
wished  to  know  the  cause. 

Did  he  sav  that  be  observed  an  alteration, 
or  what  did  he  say  ? — ^Ko,  he  did  not  say  that^ 

Give  us  his  words ;  ^  what  is  the  matter,'^ 
or  what?-«>He  asked,  what  wa^  the  matter. 

Upon  his  asking  what  was  the  mattes,  who 
answered  him  ?^This  tall  man. 

What  did  he  sav  ^-^He  said  there  weve  soma 
in  the  room,  and  himself,  who  arished  to  kaoss 
fiirther ,  what  they  were  going  to  do. 

What  answer  did  Brant  give  ?-^He  told  him 
this  was  not  the  worn  where  they  were  to 
know  that;  that  if  ^^ey  would  go  vrith  him  to 
a  room  in  the  Edgware-road,  iSbert  they  should 
know.  * 

What  did  Brant  say  then  r-^He  said,  that  aU 
that  weal  idong  with  him,  he  would  take  care 
they  should  have  eoiaething  to  drink  to  pot 
them  ia  spirits. 

What  did  the  tall  laan  say  to  thatF-^The 
^  man  said,  he  hoped  that  oa  man^  |^iaga« 
such  a  piece  of  buriness  as  this,  would  gel 
drank ;  ror,  in  so  doiag,  the  man  who  placed 
himself  in  the  hands  of  his  eaemies  would  ba 
of  no  use  to  nobody* 

Did  any  thing  nirther  pats  before  you  left 
the  90om?*-Kot  that  I  recollect. 

Was  there  a  cupboard  ia  that  room  ^«~There 
was. 

What  was  kept  ia  that  cnpbaaid  ^— I  have 
seen  a  sword  in  it. 

Any  thing  else  P^I  have  seen  tar  and  pitch, 
and  same  of  this  oahmm  stuff. 


13151        IGBORGEIV. 


trtai  qfjckn  Thomat  Brwd 


[\m 


The  materials  for  the  fire«balU  T — Yetf*  * 

Any  thing  else  ? — ^Those  hand-grenades  were 
kept  there  till  they  were  removed. 

With  whom  did  you  go  away? — ^I  went 
down  stairs  by  myself;  I  was  followed  by 
aome  strange  men. 

Did  youy  that  evening,  go  to  Cato-street? — 
Yes. 

What  did  yoa  take  with  you?— I  took  a 
blunderbuss,  and  a  broomstidE  that  was  pre- 
pared to  receive  a  bayonet,  that  was  Brunt  s. 

Who  showed  you  the  way  to  the  stable  in 
Cato-«treet? — ^Thistlewood  and  Brunt. 

Where  did  yoa  meet  with  themf — In  die 
£dgware»coad. 

When  you  got  to  the  stable,  whom  did  you 
find  there? — On  going  through  the  stable,  I 
found  Davidson  and  Wilson ;  Davidson  ntting 
down,  and  Wilson  standing  up. 

Did  you  go  up  into  tlie  loft  ?— Yes. 

Whom  did  you  find  there  7—1  found  several 
men  there. 

This  stable  is  the  first  building  in  Cato- 
street  ?—  Yes. 

Cato-street  is  a  little  street  turning  out  of 
John-street  ? — ^Yes. 

You  enter  it  under  an  archway  ? — ^Yes. 

When  you  get  through  that  archway  you 
turn  to  your  right,  and  directly  enter  that 
steble  ?— Yes. 

At  the  further  end  of  the  stable  you  found  a 
ladder,  by  which  you  got  up  into  the  loft  ? — 
Yes. 

And  in  that  loft  there  was  a  carpenter's 
bench  ? — ^There  was  a  bench  in  the  loft. 

Were  there  any  weapons  upon  that  carpen- 
ter's bench  ? — There  were. 

Oi  what  kind  ? — I  saw  pistds  and  cutlasses. 

Was  there  any  light  ? — Yes,  a  dandle  on  the 
bench.  • 

Before  any  persons  came,  who  afterwards 
added  to  your  numbers,  do  you  recollect  any 
thin^  being  said  about  your  numbers  ? — ^Yes. 

What  was  said?— On  Thistlewood  looking 
round,  he  said,  ''  There  were  eighteen  in  the 
loom,  and  two  below  stairs.'' 

What  did  you  do  with  your  blunderbuss?—* 
Leid  it  on  the  bench. 

Can  you  give  roe  the  names  of  those  who  were 
there,  or  many  of  them ;  Thistlewood  yon  have 
mentioned  was  one  ?— Thistlewood  was  one. 
Brunt,  Ings,  Hall,  Bradbum,  Davidson,  WU- 
son,  Harrison,  Stranger,  Cooper,  and  Tidd. 

Tidd  was  not  there  in  the  earlier  part  ?— I 
am  stating  them  all  now,  all  that  I  haTe  any 
knowledge  of  by  name. 

You  stated,  that  Thistlewood  said,  ^  There 
are  eighteen  of  us  now  in  the  room,  and  two 
down  stairs  V — Yes. 

How  were  any  of  them  employing  them- 
selves f —They  were  all  preparing  themselves 
with  their  different  arms. 

Did  Thistlewood  remain  in  the  toft  or  did 
he  go  down  after  you'  w^nt  up?**He  went 
down. 

Did  you  go  down?— Yes. 

On'  going,  whom  did  you  find  below  ?^0n 


S»ing  down,  I  foond  Thistlewood,  fimiit, 
avidson,  Harrison,  and  Wilson. 

Was  Ings  there? — ^I  cannot  charge  my  B^ 
moty  whether  be  was  below  at  that  time. 

Do  you  remember  any  thing  being  iaid  or 
your  going  below,  or,  perhaps,  it  was  whea 
you  returned  ? — ^Below  stairs,  when  they  per- 
ceived that  I  was  coming  down  the  Udder, 
and  coming  into  the  stable,  ^ey  turned  them- 
selves round,  and  expressed  themselves  all  oo 
a  sudden  what  good  news  they  had  got;  tbt 
there  were  six  or  seven  carriages  seen  abeady 
coming  to  lord  Harrowby's  house,  and  Bnst 
expressed  himself,  saying,  *<  What  a  ran  haul 
we  shall  have  to-night  V* 

At  this  time  had  Tidd  arrived  ?— No. 

Did  any  thing  pass  about  Tidd  befoie  «e 
came  ? — Up  in  the  loft. 

You  and  the  others  went  up  into  the  loft 
again?— Yes;  but  Brunt  proposed  before  ve 
went  up  again,  that  there  should  be  a  doaUe 
sentry  put  upon  the  stable  door,  and  that  no 
one  should  be  admitted  unless  he  could  give 
the  counter  sign. 

Did  any  thing  pass  about  Tidd  not  hario; 

oome  ? — Up  in  the  loft. 

What  was  said  about  him  P— Some  fear  was 
expressed  lest  Tidd  should  not  comei  wbkh 
Brunt  noticed ;  he  came  up  to  the  bendi|  vA 
said  there  was  no  occasion  of  any  fear  o* 
account  of  Tidd's  not  coming  for  be  wookt 
venture  his  life  on  Tidd's  comii^. 

Do  you  recollect  Ings  saying  any  thin? 
about  dropping  or  not  dropping  the  plan^- 
Ings  expressed  himself  like  a  madman  Qpoo 
this;  he  said  he  would  rather  hang  himself  of 
cut  his  throat,  if  they  talked  of  giving  op  » 
plan  now. 

Did  Thistlewood  say  any  thing  ?--Thww- 
wood  said,  he  hoped  they  would  not  drop  tw 
concern ;  if  they  did,  it  wooM  turn  oat  another 
Despard's  job. 

Did  Tidd  come  ?— Just  after  that. 

Any  body  with  him  ?— I  do  notknow;  I W 
not  see  him  come  up  the  ladder. 

But  you  found  him  among  yon  ?— Yes. 

Did  Thistlewood,  after  Tidd  arrived,  m»wn 
to  you  how  many  there  were  ?— Afterhc  had  too 
some  little  conversation  with  Tidd,  be  goes  i* 
the  stable,  and  expresses  himself  by  sayofr 
'^Supposing  lord  Harrowby  to  bafe  sfftej 
servants  in  the  house,  what  is  thai;  they  «o*'^ 
not  be  prepared,  and  we  should.''  , 

Did  he  say  how  many  there  were  of  y«^- 
— This  was  the  time  he  k>ofced  them  oter. 

How  many  did  he  make?— Eighteen wt« 
room,,  and  two  below  stain.  « 

That  was  what  he  said  before  IBdd  earner 

How  many  did  he  make  out  »^ J'*^^ 
came  ?— He  said  there  were  twenty »»  •"•  ^^ 


I  he  say  how  the  business  ^^r!T, 
r— He  proposed  that  there  sbooW  oj 
en  men  pi^ed  out  of  the  twenty  to  f« 


Did 
done  P- 

fourteen  men  pid^ed 
into  the  room. 

Did  he  begin  picking  out?-The  »«  ^^ 
begun  to  be  picked  out  by  11iisttew««  «» 
Brunt. 


fn» 


1«191 


f^  High  ZW^^fi. 


A.  D.  18^. 


a2i« 


WfccM  Ml  l¥M  doing  did  ^ou  liettf  any 
thing  below  ? — Atiet  tliiiy  on  this  being  done, 
Bninl  introdoGed  i,  gin  bottle^  he  ofers  me  a 
glas^,  and  called  nie  among  the  foatteeo. 
(Sometime  before  thn,  on  Brant  finding  the 
men  rather  apprehensiye  tiiey  had  not  eufii^ 
t^nt  strength,  Brant  came  np  to  the  table  and 
addressed  then  in  a  few  words. 

What  dkl  he  8ay)-^H«  alluded  to  those 
persons  that  were  in  the  room  that  did  not 
Know  eiactiy  the  fyteparations  they  had  got ; 
he  saidy  ^  we  have  got  things  here  along  with 
us  that  we  ean  take  tiiat  will  blow  their  house 
down  oter  their  heads ;  so  bent  am  I  on  doing 
the  job,  that  if  there  were  onl/ eight  or  nine 
men,  I  am  determined  to  go  and  do  it;*^  he 
mfs  again,  '*  if  there  are  only  five  or  six  that 
will  go,  I  mil  be  one'*  and  should  he  find 
himself  in  danger,  he  would  take  those  things 
with  him  and  set  fire  to  them,  and  blow  the 
house  oTer  their  heads  all  together,  and  perish 
aQ  together;  just  at  the  time  where  we  left  off 
beibre,  I  heard  a  noise  below  stairs. 

That  was  after  the  men  were  picked  out  and 
Uie  gin  bottle  handed  round  T— -Yes. 

All  the  fourteen  men  were  picked  out  f — 
Yes. 

Did  you  hear  any  words?— Some  one  comes 
to  the  bottom  of  the  ladder,  and  cries,  **  Holloa, 
show  a  light  1"  'Thistlewood  takes  a  light  got 
from  the  bench,  comes  to  the  stairs  and  looks 
down,  and  seeing  who  they  were,  sets  the 
candle  down  again. 

Did  you  remaik  any  thing  in  bis  appearance 
at  that  time  ?-^He  seemed  rather  confused. 

Upon  that  who  came  up  the  ladder? — ^The 
officers  ascended  the  ladder  and  came  into  the 
room. 

Do  you  recollect  what  either  of  the  officers 
said  on  entering  the  lofL?— On  entering  the 
loft,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  they  said, 
**  here  is  a  pretty  nest  of  you  gentlemen,  we 
.  have  got  a  warrant  to  apprehend  you  all,  and 
as  suOT,  I  hope  you  will  go  peaceably.'' 

^After  this  did  either  of  tne  officers  do  any 
thing  in  particular? — At  this  time  an  officer 
that  was  on  the  ladder,  b^ind  the  man  that 
had  entered  the  room,  cried  out,  **  let  me  come 
up." 

Did  he  go  ibrward  ? — He  came  fbrward. 

Did  you  then  observe  any  room  going  out 
of  the  loft? — Those  that  were  on  that  side  of 
the  room,  sidled  off  into  a  little  room  that  there 
was. 

Did  that  officer,  who  came  forward,  go  t6» 
wirds  the  little  room?-^I  did  not  perceive 
him  advance  into  the  room. 

Did  h^  ^  towards  the  doorP-^No ;  to  the 
best  of  my  recollection,  I  think  not. 

Was  Thhtlewood  one  of  those  that  went 
into  this  room  ? — ^Yes ;  (  saw  him  go  into  this 
fuom. 

What  passed  upon  that?>-On  this  officer 
coming  into  the  room,  the  others  rushed  to*- 
wards  the  doorway ;  at  that  moment  I  saw  an 
^nn  ru^  fbrward ;  at  that  moment  I  saw  a 
pisstol,  and  this  pistol  fired  off  immediately. 

VOL.  xxxiir. 


Wliat  became  of  that  officer?— I  cannot  say 
tliat  I  saw  the  officer  fire ;  for  no  sooner  was 
the  pistol  fired,  than  the  candle  was  out  di- 
raetly. 

I  suppose  there  was  a  good  deal  of  confu- 
sion ?— A  great  deal  of  confusion. 

In  the  result,  did  you  get  down  the  ladder 
and  into  the  stable  P — Yes, 

Did  you  get  away  ? — ^Yes, 

Did  yon  go  home  to  your  lodgings  that 
night  P — Directly. 

When  were  you  taken  up  ?— On  Friday  the 
tl5th.  ' 

The  day  but  one  after  P — ^Yes. 

Did  you  go  out  after  you  went  home  till  you. 
were  taken  ?— After  I  left  Cato-street,  I  went 
into  my  room ;  never  did  I  lay  my  hand,  to 
the  best  of  my  recollection,  even  on  the  latch 
of  my  door,  nor  was  I  out  till  the  officer  took 
me  out* 

And  you  have  been  in  custody  ever  since? — 
I  have. ' 

Robert  Adams  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Cvrwood, 

I  have  very  little  to  say  to  you.  I  think  you 
told  us  the  last  time  you  were  here,  that  after 
you  had  escaped  and  got  home,  then  it  was 
that  you  repented  of  your  iniquities  ? — I  did. 

And  that  was  the  fact,  was  it  ?  you  repented 
when  you  got  home? — I  certainly  did ;  and 
before  that  my  mind  was  convinced  that  I  was 
wrong :  I  was  afterwards  more  convinced  of 
that,  and  my  mind  received  a  conviction  of  it. 

Did  you  receive  that  conviction  after  you 
returned  to  Christianity,  or  before  ? — I  received 
it  after  I  had  received  a  conviction  of  the 
error  of  my  ways  r  I  can  adcnow ledge  Chris- 
tianity, but  before  that  I  could  not  do  it. 

You  told  us  the  other  day  that  you  studied 
religion  a  little,  and  that  made  you  a  deist  ? — I 
can  tell  you,  that  until  the  time  that  I  received 
that  infernal  publication,  which  I  did  from  Tidd, 
and  I  will  speak  of  that  before  I  ha^^e  done,  I 
had  been  as  carefbl,  I.  vrill  not  say  always,  but 
I  had  been  very  particular  in  those  things. 

And  you  mean  to  say  you  were  a  good 
christian  till  you  l-eceived  that  Infernal  publi- 
cstiofi,  which  corrupted  you  ? — I  cannot  say  t 
was  so  good  as  I  ought  to  be. 

But  you  were  a  diristian  in  profession  ?*^ 
Yes. 

Then  that  book  made  you  a  deist  ?*—Yes,  it 
did. 

flien,  when  a  halter  got  about  your  neck, 
you  became  a  christian  again  ?^-«That  book, 
and  the  principles,  Mr.  Brant,  the  prisoner  at 
the  bar,  wished  to  instil  into  my  mind :  the 
sole  intent  of  Mr.  Brant  was  to  Knock  dovm 
the  pillars  of  Christianity  aHogedier,  and  I  can 
prove  it. 

And  you  at  one  time  lent  him  your  aid  to 
knock  down  tlie  pillars  of  Chrisiianity  ? — More 
to  my  shame. 

You  admit  that,  do  you  ?— I  do. 

More  than  I  expected.  What  age  were  you 
when  you  changed  your  religion  r — Between 

41 


15^19]        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  John  Thmas  Brunt 


[}JHO 


forty-five  and  forty-six,  and  now  I  am  between 
forty-six  and  forty-seven. 

Vou  are  sure  you  are  entirely  convinced  of 
your  religion  now  f — I  am  convinced  of  this ; 
I  have  felt  an  inward  satis&ction  from  what  I 
have  done. 

You  find  an  inward  satisfaction  from  having 
slipt  your  neck  out  of  the  halter  f — Not  on 
that  account;  I  find  a  satisfaction  in  the 
atonement  I  have  made  to  my  maker,  in  ac- 
knowledging the  error  of  my  ways. 

In  the  worst  state  of  your  religion,  did  you 
feel  it  morally  right  to  murder  any  man  in 
cold  blood  ? — ^I  never  had  an  idea  of  murdering 
any  man,  and  I  thank  my  maker  it  was  not  my 
wish. 

You  acknowledge  that  you  were  one  of  a 
party  to  do  this?— I  acknowledge  that.  Do 
you  wish  to  know 

Mr.  Gumey, — Answer  questions,  but  do  not 
ask  them. 

Mr.  Curwood. — I  hare  no  objection  to  it. 

fFiAiest.— I  will  answer  you. 

In  the  worst  state  of  your  reprobation,  did 
you  think  it  morallv  right  to  murder  any  man  ? 
— I  never  did ;  I  thought  it  inconsistent  with 
reason  altogether. 

Inconsistent  even  with  your  reason  ? — ^Yes. 

Then  how  came  you  to  join  any  party  that 
had  that  ibr  its  object  ? — ^Well,  I  do  not  know 
that  that  might  not  make  it  worse  for  the  pri- 
soner, it  might  bring  out  some  unpleasant  con- 
cerns for  his  family,  and  I  do  not  want  to  load 
the  man  further  than  be  deserves,  or  than  is 
necessary. 

It  is  mercy  to  the  prisoner  that  restrains 
von  ?— I  think  of  them  that  may  be  left  be- 
hind him. 

You  may  have  some  meaning  but  I  cannot 
understand  it. — ^To  t^l  you  the  truth  in  a  few 
words,  I  will  not  pretend  to  say  it  was  that 
altogether,  my  mind  was  very  curious  upon 
Mr.  Brunt ;  I  had  a  doubt  upon  my  mind  that 
that  man  was  not  as  he  ought  to  be. 

What  do  you  mean  by  that? — After  this 
going  from  Thistlewood  to  Camaby-market, 
tiiis  man  substantiated  the  supposition  I  had 
of  him ;  he  candidly  told  me  there  in  Leicester- 
square,  that  he  met  a  friend,  as  he  said  an 
acquaintance,  this  acquaintance  came  up  to 
him  to  shake  hands,  and  in  pulling  his  hands 
from  his  pockets  he  grasped  his  hand,  he  had 
got  his  hand  full  of  pound  notes ;  this  was  a 
likely  thing;  when  he  gets  home  he  finds 
liimself  seven  pounds  the  better;  I  think  if  I 
shook  hands  with  a  man  I  should  not  find 
mprself  seven  pounds  the  better  for  that ;  if  jrou 
wish  me  to  go  further,  I  will  do  it 

Mr.  Gumty. — Confine  yourself  to  the  ques- 
tions asked  you. 

Mr.  Ctinooo(2.->The  first  time  yoo  saw 
Thistlewood  was  the  12th  of  January  ?— Yes. 

Before  that  you  have  told  us  there  was  a 
design  to  murcler  his  majesty's  ministers  ?— As 


I  have  not  told  you  all  that  pamd  betsea 
me  and  him,  I  wiU  explain  it 
•  Was  it  or  not  on  the  Sndof  JaDmiytk 
the  prisoner,  in  an  interview  with  y<m  in  tl^ 
street,  told  yon  of  a  design  to  unrder  b 
majesty's  ministers  ? — Yes. 

And  on  the  12th  of  Janvary  you  were  in- 
troduced to  Thistlewood?— Yes. 

You,  with  ten  days  consideiation,  tbooght 
proper  to  join  the  people  that  were  to  cooBit 
this  nefarious  deed  ? — I  joined  them  from  ^ 
motives  I  have  told  you,  and  that  day  coi- 
vinced  me  that  Brunt  was  a  rogue. 

You  have  told  me  no  motive?^!  Indi 
motive,  but  for  the  sake  of  his  fiunily  I  wnI^ 
wish  not  to  enter  into  it 

How  came  you  to  join  Thistlewood  on  *• 
12th  of  January  to  aid  in  a  plot  which  ra 
communicated  to  you  on  the  Sod?— Thioajii 
the  insinuations  of  Brunt,  I  joined  them. 

And  you  continued  until  you  were  taken  isitf 
custody  ? — I  did. 

Attending  meetings  sometimes  twice  a^^ 
—Sometimes  twice  a-day,  I  will  admit      ^ 

Yourself  being  occasionally  the  chaima 
— Once  in  the  time. 

And  as  you  told  us,  communicatiogto  tw 
that  their  design  was  suspected  at  lord  »a- 
mouth's  office?— Yes. 

Therefore  you  did  all  you  coold  to  dtfesi 
detection  ?— I  went  that  rooming  with  »« 
others,  to  aid  me  to  put  a  stop  to  it, «» 
Palin,  Potter  and  Bradbum,  one  of  t« 
prisoners  at  the  bar ;  if  the  man  had  caadwr 
enough  to  acknowledge  it,  he  would  sayit«» 
so.  ^ 

Did  you  not  say  the  other  day,  t'^^f^'^ 
them,  that  you  felt  it  your  doty  to  all  to  w 
thait  which  concerned  all? — ^Yes.        ^^ 

And  added,  "What  would  yon  have  tboy» 
of  me,  if  I  had  suflfered  you  aU  to  be  taken . - 

Yes.  ,  ,  i^ 

All  this  you  did,  meaning  boncsUy  to  b" 

nothing  to  do  with  such  a  ^?'"'®^fp2 
would  not  enter  into  any  ^^°?»j     ^ 
wanted  to  protect  me  upon  it,  and  to»I 
word  upon  it,  but  as  soon  as  I  mentioneai»»» 

they  were  all  like  a  set  of  »«!««»  "P*Xl 

Palin  was  a  particular  friend  ^J^\a 

never  saw  Palin  tiU  the  Sunday  beloie,  ^ 

you  never  heard  me  say  so.         •  v  .  ke 

Do  you  recollect  Mr.  E^^^^Vni  «jeeB 

was  there  from  the  beginning,  and  1 »«  ^ 

Mr.  Edwards  pull  a  pair  of  pw^'j^IT 

pocket,  and  say,  he  never  ''«n^'""^iJJ. 

And  you  saw  him  very  busy  m  Jsxvsx^ 

ing  the  grenades } — ^Yes.  ^ 

Was  there  any  regular  committee,  » ;^ 

have  mentioned  a  committee?— p^^^ 

committee  regular,  tiU  the  Sunday  »on»^ 

the  20th.  %  um 

What  did  you  caU  yo^Kolw*  |-^"  ^j, 

was  any  particular  name  given  to  tbein, 

more  than  I  heard.  .  _  ^ 

You  vrere  chairman  of  the  coinn»t»f».^,^ 

you  do  not  know  what  was  the  name  w     j 

Yes,  I  was  very  careless  of  it  at  Uie  on 


12211 


for  High  Treatyit 


A.  D.  1820. 


C1222 


knew  I  should,  on  my  plan,  be  very  soon  be 
put  out  of  it. 

You  were  careless  of  it?— Yes,  I  wished  to 
put  a  stop  to  it. 

How  came  you  not  then  to  report  it  at 
proper  places  ? — I  wished  to  save  the  trouble 
of  being  exposed  in  this  sort  of  way. 

You  wished  to  save  the  trouble  of  these 
trials  here  ?  —Yes. 

And  you  wished  to  save  the  interference  of 
the  officers  ? — ^Yes ;  you  do  not  believe  I  am 
such  a  fool  as  not  to  wish  that. 

Mr.  Cwicood, — ^No,  I  do  not  take  you  to 
be  a  fool  I  assure  you. 

Robert  Adams  re-examined  by  Mr.  Gvmey, 

You  spoke  of  certain  publications  which  had 
]>erverted  your  mind  ;  what  publications  were 
those  ? — Paine's  Age  of  Reason,  and  the  pub- 
lications of  Carlile. 

Ekanor  Walker  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gvmey. 

I  believe  you  are  the  niece  «nd  ser^'ant  of  Mr. 
Rogers,  of  No.  4,  Fox-court,  Gray's-inn-lane  ? 
—Yes. 

Has  the  prisoner  Brant  lodged  in  your  house 
for  any  length  of  time  ?— Yes ;  a  twelvemonth 
it  would  have  been  at  Easter. 

What  rooms  did  he  occupy  ? — ^The  two  front 
rooms  on  the  two-pair  of  stairs ;  he  lived  in 
^ne  and  worked  in  the  other. 

Do  you  remember  any  back  room,  two-pair 
of  stairs,  being  taken  by  a  roan  of  the  name  of 
logs  ?— Yes. 

Who  introduced  that  man  to  you  ?— 'Brunt 

The  prisoner  at  the  bar  P-— Yes. 

Was  it  a  furnished  room  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  logs  say  any  thing  (to  you  about 
fdmitare? — ^He  said  he  might  bring  hb  goods 
in,  in  a  week  or  better. 

Did  he  ever  bring  any  goods  in  ? — Not  to 
mtj  knowledge. 

Yoor  master  keeps  a  shop  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  your  lodgers  enter  at  the  shop  door, 
or  a  back  or  side  door?— A  side  door. 

Docs  that  door  lead  to  the  staircase  ? — Yes. 

Can  persons,  therefore,  go  up  and  down  those 
stairs  without  yon  in  the  shop  knowing  any 
lUog  about  the  matter  ? — Yes. 

Mmy  Rogfin  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey. 

We  widerstand   yon   live   in   Fox-ooort, 
Gngfa-imi-laiie  ?— Yea. 
fio  yoa  veeoHect  a  man  of  the  name  of  Ings 


a  lodnng  io  your  house?— I  recollect 
it  bow;  I  did  not  know  his  name  then. 
Tcm  allenraids  fcond  his  name  to  be  Ings  ? 


— Yi 


ftve^I 


He  paid 


weeks  did  he  pay  you  ?  ^Four  or 
be  posiiive  which, 
left  vipnd?— Yes. 

',m  possibly  five  ?— Yes. 
week?— Three   shillings   a 


Do  you  recollect  any  evening  when  you 
were  about  putting  your  children  to  bed; 
seeing,  any  men  go  up  stairs  ?— Yes,  three 
men. 

Was  there  any  thing  particular  in  the  per- 
son of  either  of  the  three  ? — The  middle  one  I 
perceived  was  a  black  man. 

During  the  time  that  Ings  had  this  lodging, 
did  you  inquire  of  Brunt  who  and  what  he 
was  ? — I  did. 

What  account  did  he  give  vou  of  him  ?— He 
said  that  he  knew  nothing  of  him,  only  seeing 
him  at  the  public-house,  and  hearing  him 
inquire  for  a  lodging. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  he  understood  him  to 
be  by  trade  ? — A  butcher. 

No  furniture  was  brought  in,  I  believe  ? — 
Never  to  my  knowledge. 

Lord  Chief  Baron. — He  never  slept  there, 
did  he  ? — ^Never,  to  my  knowledge. 

Mr.  Gtprney. — No  bed  was  ever  brought?— 
No,  nothing  of  the  kind. 

Jotepk  Bale  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gumey. 

You,  I  believe,  are  apprentice  to  the  pri- 
soner Brunt? — Yes. 

Did  you  live  with  him  in  Fox-court,  Gray's- 
inn-lane  ? — ^Yes. 

We  understand  he  had  two  rooms  there, 
one  a  living-room,  and  one  a  workshop  ? — Yes. 

You  slept  in  the  workshop,  and  he  and  his 
wife  in  the  living-room  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  remember  a  person  of  the  name  of 
Ings  coming  there,  and  taking  a  room  ? — Yes. 

What  room  was  that? — A  two-pair  back 
room. 

Who  looked  at  it  with  him  ?— Brunt. 

After  they  had  looked  at  it  together,  did 
you  hear  Brunt  say  any  thing  to  Ings  ? — Yes. 

What  ? — ^He  said,  **  It  will  do,  go  down  and 
give  them  a  shilling." 

How  long  before  that  day  had  you  known 
Ings  ? — About  a  fortnight. 

That  was  the  first  time  you  remember  to 
have  seen  him  ? — Yes. 

In  whose  company  had  you  seen  him  before 
that  timef — He  was  with  Thistlewood,  in 
Brunt's  room. 

The  evening  upon  which  Ings  had  taken  it, 
did  he  come  again  ? — Yes. 

Did  he  go  into  your  master's  room  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  he  ask  for  ?— He  asked  Mrs.  Brunt 
for  the  key. 

She  had  the  key  then  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  she  give  it  to  him  f — Yes,  I  believe  she 
did. 

Did  he  go  into  it  ? — Yes. 

Who  was  with  him  ? — ^A  man  of  the  name 
of  Hall,  a  tailor. 

Did  they  go  into  it  ?— Yes. 

In  the  course  of  that  evening,  did  you  hear 
other  persons  come  into  that  room  ? — I  believe 
there  were. 

Not  having  seen  them,  did  you  hear  them 
come  and  go  into  that  room ? — xts,  1  did. 


1333]       1  GE<MIGE  IV. 


Trial  ^Jdm  Thomat  Brunt 


CltS4 


Fren  Ihit  time,  vatil  jonr  nMter  wu 
taken  «py  were  there  meetiDgs  hekl  in  th^ 
rooiB  ?^Ye8. 

Can  you  give  me  the  names  of  some  of  the 
person^  whom  you  saw  resort  to  it  ? — Yes. 

Who  were  they  P— Thistlewood,  logs,  Tidd, 
Hall,  Davidson,  Bradbum,  Strange,  Edwards. 

Did  yon  see  Potter  ? — Yes. 

Did  you  see  Adams  ?— Yes. 

Besides  those  you  have  named,  were  there 
many  others? — Itiere  were  others  at  different 
times  in  this  room,  and  coming  up  and  down  ? 

Did  your  maater  use  to  be  with  them  f — 
Yes.   ' 

Always,  or  generally  T — Generally. 

Upon  any  occasion,  when  you  passed  that 
room,  was  the  door  open  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  in  the  room  T— Yes. 

What  did  yon  see  ?— -I  saw  some  long  poles, 
like  the  branches  of  trees,  rough-cut. 

You  mean  not  trimmed,  bat  with  the  baik 
on  ? — ^Yes. 

flow  many  should  yon  jadge  ? — There  were 
about  twenty. 

At  what  time  of  the  day  were  those  meet- 
ing^that  you  obserredt— 'Mostly  in  the  even- 
iiig. 

Did  you  ever  hear  any  work  going  on  in 
that  room  ? — Yes. 

What  sort  of  work? — Hammering  and 
sawing. 

Do  you  mean  that  you  have  heard  that  ODce> 
or  several  times? — ^I  have  heard  that  more 
than  once,  I  believe. 

Your  muter,  I  believe^  was  taken  up  on 
Thursday  the  24th  of  February  ?-—Yes. 

Did  those  people  call  each  other  by  dieir 
names,  when  they  were  there  P~  Sometimes. 

By  what  name  did  they  usually  call  Tliistle- 
wood  ? — Sometimes  T.  and  sometimes  Arthur, 

On  the  Sunday-morning  before  your  master 
was  taken  up,  was  there  any  meeting  in  that 
room  ?— Yes. 

Was  that  a  larger  or  m  smaller  meeting  than 
usnal  P — Rather  larger. 

Were  all  the  persons  you  have  named  tome 
there?— Yes. 

Did  they  go  away  all  at  OBcey  or  not  ?•— One 
or  two  at  a  time. 

Was  your  master  with  them  ? — Yes. 

After  the  meeting  was  ever,  did  you  see 
any  of  them  in  your  masters  room,  with  yoor 
master? — Yes. 

Who  was  that  ?->Strange. 

Was  there  another  meeting  on  the  Monday  ? 
— ^Yes. 

And  on  the  Tuesday  ?— Yes. 

In  the  afternoon  of  Wednesday,  was  there 
another  ? — There  were  several  people  up  there. 

Did  all  of  them  go  into  the  back  room,  or 
any  into  the  front  room  ? — Some  of  them  omne 
sometimes  into  the  firont  room. 

Do  you  remember  the  name  of  any  who 
came  into  the  front  room  ? — ^Yee,Thistlewood ; 
and  I  remember  Ings  came  in  once. 
,  Do  you  remember  Strange  being  then  ? — 
Yes. 


Abo«t  whnl  time  ?^Abeiit  two  VoMk. 

Were  any  |>ersons  with  him  ? — Yea. 

Whidi  room  did  they  come  into  ?  —  They 
came  into  Bmnt*s  living-room,  and  then  kit* 
his  workshop. 

Do  you  remember  Strange  and  tka  othem 
with  him  doing  amy  thing  in  the  wodeabopf 
— ^Yes,  they  were  flinting  pistols. 

Do  you  know  who  those  were  that  wot 
with  hmi? — ^No. 

How  many  pistob  were  they  fliatiag?^* 
There  were  five  or  six. 

Did  they  finish  them  ? — ^No. 

What  prevented  tfieir  finishing  them  ?— One 
of  the  men  said  there  were  peiswis  overlook* 
ing  them  from  the  opposite  hooMy  and  Bnnt 
told  them  to  go  into  the  back  room. 

And  they  did  so  ? — Yes,  they  did. 

In  the  course  of  the  aAemoon  did  Tlasli^ 
wood  come  o«t  of  the  back  room  and  aak  yea 
for  any  thing  ? — Yes. 

For  what  ?— 'He  asked  me  if  I  oould  get  him 
a  piece  of  writing  paper. 

Did  you  give  htm  some  ? — ^I  did. 

To  what  plaoe  did  he  take  it  ^«i-Illlo  the 
back  room. 

After  that,  did  Brunt  come  into  the  ftoet 
seom  to  tell  you  to  get  «n^  thing  K^Yte. 

What  9 — Some  cattridgo-papev. 

How  much  ?— Siv  eheeta. 

Did  he  give  yon  the  money  to  heylt }— Tcs. 

Did  yon  go  end  buy  ii?— Yes. 

To  whom  did  yon  give  it  f «-»To  BrlbU 

Whatdidhedowithit?«--He  toek  itinto 
the  back  room. 

At  about  what  time,  to  the  best  of  your  i^ 
collection,  did  Bnint  leave  the  be^  room 
finally,  and  come  into Usowa roeea r  *^  Afadat 
six. 

Wu  there  any  persea  wi^i  Urn?— Yes, 
dwre  was  apenoBy  bet  I  Ad  not  kxMw kink 

Did  he  and  that  penRm  go  asray  together  f 
—Yes. 

Before  that,  had  you  heard  othin  go  dove 
stairs  ? — ^Yes. 

After  he  was  gone,  bed  year  eusrtieaa  eeca- 
sion  to  make  tea  f— Yes. 

Where  was  her  tea^taUe  then  I  -^  ]»  the 


Whet  did  she  desire  yea  to  do  ^  ~  fike  tstt 
me  to  go  and  get  it. 

Whal  did  vou  do? — ^I  went  and  knodced  at 
the  door,  ana  got  it. 

Who  gave  it  you  out  at  Ae  door  ?  -^  A  man 
of  the  name  of  PoOer. 

When  the  door  opened,  did  you  pereeave 
whether  there  was  any  other  peraoo  there 
besides  Potter?— Yea. 

How  many  do  you  (hiek?«-«'Ibere  were 
Ibttr  or  five. 

Was  there  a  fire  ?— Yes. 

After  thaty  in  the  coiiree  ef  the  eveniM;^  did 
Tidd  call  ?— Yes. 

Did  he  come  into  yoar  rooaa?^-Yea. 

Did  any  thing  past  between  him  aad  Mrs. 
Brunt  ?-«Yes. 

What  ?— Mrs.  Brant  took  him  to  the 


1836! 


Jvt  High  Trtaiaiu 


A.  D.  IfiaOk 


USftf 


board,  and  showed  hiift.  a  pilfe4iMd  tmd  « 
sword. 

"What  did  she  ask  him  about  them? --She 
tolced  hfim  what  she  covld  do  with  them. 

What  did  he  say  ? — He  said  if  she  would 
give  theiii  to  him,  he  would  take  them  away. 

Where  did  he  take  them  to  .^«-^iiito  the  back 
iroom. 

Tliese  were  in  your  liTiDg-room,  were  tbey  ? 
—Yes. 

After  that,  did  yon  bear  any  person  go 
down  stain  ? — ^Yes. 

As  from  the  back  roomt-^Tes. 

To  the  best  of  y6tr  recollection  what  time 
wns  this  ?--It  was  near  eight  oVlock. 

It  was  after  seven,  you  are  sure  ?— Tes. 

After  that  did  any  person  come  and  give 
Mrs.  Brunt  any  message?— Yes. 

What  was  that  message  ? — He  told  her,  that 
if  any  persons  came,  they  were  to  be  sent  to 
the  White  Hart. 

Shortly  after  did  any  persons  come  ?-^Yes. 

Were  they  sent  to  the  White  Hart  ^-.Yes. 

Did  they  know  their  way  ? — No. 

Who  showed  them  ?— I  did. 

Upon  your  return  from  the  White  Hart^  did 
you  find  any  persons  at  the  door  ? — ^There  was 
a  person  came  up  after  I  had  been  at  the  door 
a  few  minutes. 

Any  body  with  bim  ? — ^Yes,  some  others. 

Did  you  send  them  4e  Um  White  HaKt— 
Yes. 

You  did  not  go  to  show  them  the  way } — ^No. 

Did  they  apoear  to  know  the  way? — ^Yes. 

At  about  wnat  time  did  your  master  goom 
borne  ? — About  nine  o'cloek. 

Was  his  dress  in  the  same  state  as  it  was 
when  he  went,  or  in  what  state  ? — It  was  dirtier 
than  when  he  went  o«^  partioularly  his  boots 
and  his  great  coat. 

Did  he  appear  to  be  in  a  composed  stale?— 
No. 

How  tben  ? — ^Be  seemed  rather  conteed. 

What  did  he  say  to  his  wife  ?— He  said,  that 
where  he  was  a  lot  of  officers  bad  been. 

Can  you  give  us  bis  esaet  words;  did  he  tett 
her  any  thing,  in  short,  as  to  the  sesnU  ?— He 
said  it  was  all  up,  or  words  to  that  effect ;  thai 
where  he  had  been  a  lot  of  officers  had  come 
in,  and  that  be  had  saved  huUfe,  and  that  was 
all. 

Directly  after  this  did  aay  other  person  come 
in  ? — ^Yes. 

You  do  not  know  that  person's  name?— 
No. 

Upon  his  earning  in,  what  did  Brunt  say  to 
hkar— He  shook  hands  wiiii  him,  and  asked  if 
be  knew  who  had  iafonned. 

What  did  he  say  P— He  said  «<  No." 

Did  the  other  man  say  what  had  happened 
to  bim  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  be  sav? — ^He  said  he  had  had  a 
dreadfal  Idow  on  the  side,  and  was  knocked 
down. 

From  the  manner  of  their  spenlriwg  to  eack 
otber,  did  it  appear  to  ymx  as  if  they  bad  baen 
together  ?«-Yes. 


After  that,  did  ^amt  say  aay  Unftg  ^-^Hesaid 
^  ihete  is  sefmethbig  to  be  done  v^** 

Upon  his  sayinff  that,  what  did  Brant  and 
the  other  man  do  ?— They  went  awa^  together. 

After  they  were  gone,  did  your  mistress  and 
you  go  into  the  bade  room  ? — Yes. 

What  did  vou  tod  diere  ?-«-There  wtere 
several  rolls  of  brown  paper  in  the  cupboard, 
with  tar  in  them. 

Any  other  things? — Yes,  there  were  fbor 
large  balls  made  of  string,  with  tar  on  them. 

Wbat  do  you  now  andentand  theos  to  be  ? 
— I  have  heard  sinoe  they  aie  called  kauim 
gveaaoes. 

Any  iron  pot  ?— *Yes. 

To  whom  did  that  belong  ?— To  Brant. 

Did  yon  find  any  begs  ?— Yes. 

Of  what  ?— Made  of  bits  of  Hvrntd. 

Full  or  empty  f--Two  ^  them  were  Ml  o. 
something. 

Was  there  any  pole  or  stick  in  the  room  ? — 
There  was  a  long  pda. 

Did  your  mistress  leave  them  there  ? — ^Yes. 

About  what  time  did  your  master  come 
home  P— About  eleven  o'clock. 

Did  he  give  you  any  directions  wbat  todo  ii^ 
the  morning  ?— Yes ;  he  told  me  to  get  up,  and 
dean  his  boots. 

Did  you  get  up  early,  and  dean  his  boots  ?-^ 
xes. 

Did  he  then  ask  you,  whether  youlmew  ai|y 
place? — ^Yes. 

What  place  did  he  ask  you  whether  you 
knew? — lie  asked  me  whether  I  knew  the 
Borough ;  I  told  him  **  yes.'' 

What  did  he  ask  you  next?-^He  asked  ae 
if  I  knew  Snow's-field's ;  I  told  him  «  no." 

That  is  a  sticet  in  the  Boreagh  ?— Yes. 
.    Whatdirection  did hegiveyou  ? — ^He  directed 
me  to  go  to  Kirby-street,  Snow's-fields. 

To  whom  f — To  a  person  of  the  name  of 
Potter. 

IVhat  did  he  tell  you  ytra  were  totaSce  there  ? 
— ^He  said  he  had  got  some  things  in  the  back 
room  for  me  to  take. 

Did  be  and  you  go  together  into  the  badk 
room  ? — ^Yes. 

Taking  with  you  what  ?— We  teok  eadi  a 
rush  basket. 

What  did  he  do,  or  direct  you  to  do  with 
respect  to  these  baskets  ? — He  told  me  to  put 
the  things  that  were  in  the  cupbond  into  the' 
basket. 

Were  all  the  things  put  into  thetwo  beskets  t 
—Yes. 

Except  the  pole  "whidt  was  too  latge  t— Tes, 
and  the  iron  pot. 

After  that,  was  any  thing  done  with  either  of 
the  baskets  7— Yes. 

Whatf— Oneof  (hem  was  tied  up  ln«i>lne 
apron. 

Belonging  to  whotn'?^TD  Mrs.  Brunt. 

What  use  had  been  made  of  that  blue  aprihr 
beft>Te  ?— It  had  been  made  use  of  as  a  curtain, 
to  the  window  of  that  room. 

Wacte:oterticd  €ip?^No,  <wawrantinto 
Brunt's  room  to  look  for  somelldflg4e^it  aipy> 
and  two  officers  cue  in« 


13S71 


)  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  John  Thomai  Brunt 


Lisas 


And  took  him  ?— Tbey  did» 
Did  the  officers  go  into  the  back  room  and 
lake  the  things  ?-^Yes. 

7^4WMif  Smart  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  BoUand. 

Are  you  one  of  the  watchmen  of  the  parish 
•f  St.  George»  HanoTcr-square  ? — ^Yes. 

Were  you  on  duty  on  the  night  of  the  22nd 
of  February,  in  Grosyenor-square  T — ^Yes,  I 

tvas. 

Did  you  observe  any  persons  there  ? — ^I  ob- 
served four  about  the  square. 

Was  there  any  thing  particular  about  those 
men  that  made  you  recollect  them  ? — I  thought 
that  they  were  after  no  good,  and  I  went  up  to 
them ;  two  were  very  tall  men  and  one  was  a 
man  of  colour. 

Do  you  mean  a  black  man  ? — ^Yes. 

Ckarlei  Bittur  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  BoUand. 

You  are  a  watchman  of  St  George's  f — ^Iam» 
in  Grosvenoi^quare. 

Were  you  on  duty  in  Grosvenor-square  on 
the  night  of  the  22na  of  February  ?— I  was. 

Was  your  attention  called  to  any  persons 
particularly  ? — As  I  was  calling  half-pa^t  eight 
o'clock,  that  would  be  a  quarter  before  nine, 
there  were  two  men  passed  me,  one  was  a  man 
of  colour. 

What  were  they  doing  ?— Taking  particular 
notice  of  the  houses. 

Of  what  house  P — ^They  took  particular  no- 
tice of  lord  Harrowby's,  and  likewise  of  Mr. 
Maberley*s  in  Grosvenor-square. 

Hemy  Gillan  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  BoUand. 

You  live  at  No.  15,  Mount^treet,  Berkeley- 
aqnare  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  Rising  Sun  public-house  ? 
—Yes. 

Where  is  that? — ^The  comer  of  Adams 
Mews,  in  Charles-street,  Grosvenor-square. 

Were  you  in  that  public-house  on  the  22nd 
of  February  last  ?— Yes. 

While  you  were  there  did  you  see  any  per- 
sons come  in  ? — ^Yes. 

Who  were  theyP — ^Two  men;  Brunt  was 
one,  and  Adams  was  the  other. . 

Had  they  any  thing  to  eat  and  drink  ? — 
Yes ;  a  pot  of  beer  and  some  bread  and  cheese. 

Did  any  thing  pass  between  you  ?  did  you 
amuse  yourselves  in  any  way  ? — ^No,  nothing 
more  than  while  we  were  playing ;  there  was 
no  particular  conversation. 

"What  did  you  play  at  ? — Brunt  challenged 
me  to  play  at  dominos,  and  I  played  him  two 
games. 

What  time  did  they  go  away  ? — I  do  not 
know;  I  went  away  first. 

At  what  time  did  you  go  ? — I  went  about 
ten  o'clock. 

Mr.  Baron  Gorroio.— Yon  mean  ten  at  night 
I  suppose  7— Yes. 


Edward  8imp$on  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mt.  BoUand. 

You  are  corporal-major  of  the  2nd  regiment 
of  life-guards  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner  Harrison  ? — ^Yca. 

Was  he  in  that  regiment  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  he  ever  at  the  barracks  in  King-streeif 
—Yes. 

Was  he  quartered  there  ? — ^It  is  not  a  bas- 
rack  for  men,  it  is  only  for  horses. 

Was  he  acquainted  with  those  barracks,  ajid 
the  interior  of  them  ? — Perfectly  so. 

Have  you  any  windows,  or  had  you  any  win- 
dows wtuch  looked  out  into  the  Mews  ? — Yes; 
into  Gloucester-mews. 

Are  they  walled  up  ? — Yes ;  they  have  been 
since  the  affair  in  Cato-street. 

Are  those  windows  so  situate,  that  fire-balls 
could  have  been  thrown  into  them  ? — ^Ves,  into 
one  of  them  particularly. 

Was  there  any  hay  or  straw  there  ? — ^There 
was  some  quantity  of  straw  within  about  two 
feet  of  the  window. 

Mr.  Adolphus. — What  do  you  mean  by  some 
quantity  f  —  Perhaps  two  or  three  'waggon 
loads. 

John  Sector  Moriton  sworn.  ^Examined  by 

Mr,  BoUand. 

Are  you  a  journeyman  to  Mr.  Henry  Thomas 
Underwood,  of  Drary-lane,  a  cutler? — ^Yea. 

Were  you  so  at  Christmas  last  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  any  of  the  prisoners  coming 
with  a  sword  there?  — The  prisoner  Ings 
brought  one  to  be  ground  at  Christmas. 

What  sort  of  a  sword  was  it  ? — A  small  one  ; 
a  scimitar. 

Have  yon  seen  that  sword  since  ? — I  have. 

In  the  possession  of  the  officen  ? — ^Yes. 

What  airection  did  he  give  with  it  ?^It  was 
to  be  ground  sharp  from  the  heel  to  the  point, 
and  likewise  the  back  of  the  point  to  he 
ground. 

Who  called  for  it  ? — ^The  prisoner  logs  call- 
ed for  it,  about  three  days  after  he  left  it. 

Did  he  approve  of  the  manner  in  whicb  it 
was  ground  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  he  bring  you  anyone  after  that  ? — ^Yes ; 
in  about  a  fortnight  afterwards,  he  brought  me 
a  very  lodg  one. 

Who  called  for  that  ?— He  called  for  it  him- 
self. 

What  directions  did  he  give  as  to  that  ? — 
He  said  the  first  one  was  ground  to  his  liking, 
and  I  was  to  grind  that  in  the  same  manner. 

Did  he  leave  any  name  ? — He  left  a  name, 
as  I  understood  him,  Eames ;  the  second  time 
I  did  not  ask  him  his  name. 

Jama  Aldout  sworn. —  Examined  by 
Mr.  BoUand. 

You  are  a  pawnbroker,  I  believe  f — ^I  am. 

Do  vou  know  the  prisoner  Davidson,  the 
man  of  colour  ?— I  do. 

Did  he  ever  pawn  with  you  a  brass-barreOed 
blunderbuss?— He  did. 


12391 


fur  High  Treaton, 


A-D..1S«0. 


[1980 


Do  you  .recollect  on  wliat  d&y  he  pawned  it? 
—In  January. 

Did  he  redeem  it ;  and  if  so,  when  ? — On 
the  23rd  of  February. 

Have  you  seen  that  blunderbuss  since  ? — I 
have ;  Mr.  Ruthven  shewed  it  to  me ;  I  be» 
lieve  it  to  be  the  same  that  was  pledged  and 
redeemed* 

John  Momiment  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  SoUcitor  General, 

You  are  at  present  a  prisoner  in  the  Tower  of 
London? — ^Yes. 

What  are  you  by  trade  ? — A  shoemaker. 

"Where  did  you  live  before  you  were  con- 
fined?— No.  8,  Garden-court,  Baldwin's-gar- 
dens. 

That  is  near  BrookVmarket,  I  believe  P — 
Yes. 

Do  you  remember,  at  any  time,  seeing  This- 
tlewood  at  a  person  of  the  name  of  Ford's  ?— 
Yes. 

As  nearly  as  you  can  tell,  how  far  back  is 
that  from  the  time  when  you  were  apprehend- 
ed ? — I  suppose  near  three  months. 

In  consequence  of  your  meeting  Tbistlewood 
at  Mr.  Ford*s,  did  Tbistlewood  afterwards  call 
upon  you  ? — ^Yes. 

How  long  was  that  after  you  had  seen  him  ? 
—I  believe  about  a  fortnight  or  three  weeks. 

Did  he  call  alone,  or  in  company  with  any 
person  ? — In  company  with  Brunt. 

The  prisoner,  John  Thomas  Brunt  ? — ^Yes. 

Were  you  at  home  alone  at  that  time,  or  in 
company  with  any  person  ? — My  mother  and 
my  brother. 

What  is  your  brother's  name? — ^Thomas 
Monument. 

After  Tbistlewood  had  been  in  your  room 
for  some  little  time,  did  Tbistlewood  make  any 
proposal  to  you  to  go  out? — He  said  he 
wished  to  speak  with  me. 

In  consequence  of  that,  did  you  and  Tbis- 
tlewood go  out  of  the  room  ? — Yes. 

Leaving  Brunt  in  the  room,  with  your  bro- 
ther Thomas  Monument  ?— Yes. 

When  you  went  out  of  the  room,  with  Tbis- 
tlewood, will  you  tell  us  what  Tbistlewood  said 
to  you } — Yes ;  he  said  that  great  events  were 
at  hand,  that  people  were  everywhere  anxious 
for  a  change,  that  he  had  been  promised  sup- 

Sort  by  a  great  many  men  who  had  deceived 
im,  but  now  he  had  got  men  who  would  stand 
by  him. 

What  further  did  he  say? — ^He  then  asked 
me  whether  I  had  any  arms. 


(( 


What  did  you  say  to  that? — ^I  said,  *'  no , 
he  said  that  every  one  ought  to  have  arms ; 
^  all  of  us,"  says  he, **  have  got  arms;  some,'' 
savs  he,  **  have  got  a  pistol,  some  have  got  a 

Fike,  and  some  have  got  a  sabre."  He  said 
could  buy  a  pistol  for  about  four  or  five 
shillings.  I  told  him  I  had  no  money  to  btty 
pistols;  he  then  said  he  would  see  what  he 
could  do. 

Do    vou    recollect   any    thing  more   that 
passed  r— I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  more. 


Did  you  return  again  .  into  the  room  ? — 
Yes. 

Did  you  find  Brunt  there  ? — Yes. 
.  Did  Tbistlewood  and  Brunt  go  away  toge- 
ther?—Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  Brunt  calling  upon  you  on 
Tuesday  the  22nd  of  February? — Yes. 

Did  be  call  alone,  or  in  company  with  any 
person  ?— In  company  with  Tidd. 

Were  you  alone  in  your  room  when  he  call- 
ed, or  in  copspany  with  any  other  person  ? — 
My  brother  was  with  me. 

Thomas  Monument? — ^Yes. 

What  did  you  say? — I  said,  on  his  coming, 
**  I  thought  I  had  lost  you ;"  and  he  said  **  the 
king's  death  has  made  an  alteration. in  our 
plans." 

What  did  you  say  to  that  ?— I  asked  him 
what  plans ;  he  said  there  was  to  oe  a  meeting 
the  following  evening  up  at  Tyburn-turnpike, 
where  I  should  hear  all  the  particulars;  he 
then  turned  to  Tidd,  and  asked  him  whethev 
he  should  give  me  the  word. 

What  said  Tidd  to  that  ?— Tidd  said,  yes,  he 
supposed  there  was  no  danger. 

upon  that  did  he  give  you  the  word ? — Yes; 
he  told  me  when  I  came  to  the  place,  if  I  saw 
any  people  about  to  say  6,  «,  U 

What  was  the  place  r— Tybum-tumpike ;  he 
did  not  tell  me  any  particular  place,  and  if 
they  were  friends  they  would  answer  t,  o,  n. ; 
he  said  he  should  be  at  our  house  again  in  the 
morning  to  tell  me  more  about  it,  and  at  what 
time  it  was  to  take  place. 

By  the  morning,  do  you  mean  the  next 
morning  ? — Yes,  the  Wednesday  morning. 

Did  he  call  again  the  next  morning  ?^No, 
he  did  not  c^l  till  about  half-past  four 
o'clock. 

Did  he  come  alone  ? — ^Yes. 

What  did  he  say  when  he  came  there  ? — Qe 
called  me  down  stairs. 

Was  your  brother  Thomas  Monument,  there? 
— Yes,  he  called  me  down  stairs,  and  told  me 
I  must  go  with  him  in  half-an-hour ;  I  told  him 
I  could  not  go  so  soon  as  that ;  he  asked  me 
'^why  ?*'I  told  him  I  had  got  some  work  to  do  that 
must  be  done ;  he  asked  me  at  what  time  it 
would  be  done ;  I  told  him  about  six  o'clock ; 
he  said  he  could  not  wait  so  late  as  that,  so 
that  I.  must  go  with  Tidd,  the  person  whom  he 
brought  the  day  before,  and  he  told  me. where 
he  lived. 

Where  was  that? — ^In  Hole-in-the-wall  Pas- 
sage, leading;  to  Dorrington-street. 

Did  you,  m  consequence  of  this,  go  to  Tidd's 
house  ?— Yes. 

About  what  time  ? — ^About  half-past  six. 

Did  you  find  Tidd  at  home  ?— Yes. 

What  did  he  say  to  you?— He  said  he  had 
been  waiting  for  some  more  people  to  go  with 
him  that  he  expected  would  be  there,  but  if  no 
one  else  came  before  seven  o'clock,  we  should 
go  toffether. 

Did  any  persons  arrive  before  stven  o'clock  ? 
—No. 

Then  when  seven  o'clock  came,  what  did 


iMl3       IGEOKOBIV. 


IVirf^JUbi  Tk0imBniU 


ilVH 


Tidd  #»r— Ae  mnt  to  a  cotmt  of  tiie  reem, 
and  took  a  pistol. 

What  did  U  do  wilh  it  ^--Put  it  iB  a  belt 
dial  ho  had  got  rovnd  his  body,  ondeniealh  his 
great  coat. 

What  dso  did  ho  do  F^Ho  took  about  iia  or 
eight  pikosy  wrapped  up  in  brown  paper. 

Do  yott  mean  pike-handles  or  pike-heads  f — 
Pike-heads ;  and  a  staff  aboni  A>Qr  fleet  long» 
with  a  hole  in  one  end  of  it. 

Wat  that  hole  adapted  to  receive  one  of  thi 
piko-heads  T — ^Yes. 

After  he  had  eqnmped  himself  in  this  way, 
flhnt  did  he  do  ?«— lie  went  down  stairs. 

Did  yon  go  with  him  ?— Yes,  into  Brook's* 
iH^eet,  and  from  Brook's*street  into  Holboniy 
and  along  into  Oxford-street. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  you  w^re  going  to  do  ? 
—No. 

What  paewd  between  you  ?— When  we  were 
hi  Holbom,  he  gav«  me  the  pike-lwndle,  and 
lold  me  to  earr^  that  •  as  we  were  going  along 
Oxford-street,  I  think  it  was^  I  asked  him  to 
tell  me.  where  we  were  going  to ;  ho  said  I 
should  know  when  I  got  to  the  place;  I  had 
asked  him  before  we  came  out  of  the  room 
what  plaee  it  was  up  at  Tybum-tumpike  we 
were  going  to ;  he  said  it  was  at  a  mews  up  by 
the  Edgwara-road. 

In  gaing  up  Oaford-street,  he  told  you 
you  would  know  what  you  were  going  to  do 
when  you  got  to  the  place  ?^  Yes;  I  taked 
Mm  whether  we  wefe  going  to  the  House  of 
Commons ;  he  said  no,  there  were  too  many 
soMSers  tfa^e ;  I  then  asked  him  again  where 
we  were  going  to,  and  he  told  me  we  were 
going  to  Orosrenof -square. 

Did  he  say  to  whose  house  in  Oroerenor* 
square?— No,  he  did  not;  I  asked  him  whe- 
ther any  one  in  particular  lived  in  Grosrenor- 
sqaare ;  he  said  there  was  to  be  a  cabinet  din- 
ner there. 

Did  any  Airtfaer  eonversation  that  you  re- 
member, pass  between  you  before  you  got  to 
Caio-street  ?*— No,  I  do  not  recollect  any. 

Did  you  go  under  an  archway  P— Yes. 

Were  there  any  persons  under  that  archway  ? 
—Two  penotas  stood  under  that  archway. 

Had  they  any  conrersalion  with  Tidd  f — 
There  were  some  few  words  passed  which  I 
eould  not  nndemtand ;  he  was  before  me. 

How  far  is  the  stable  from  (he  archway  ?— - 
It  is  directly  under  the  archway ;  you  turn  to 
the  right  hand. 

Did  you  go  into  the  stable  t— Yes. 

What  did  you  see  when  you  first  went  into 
the  stable  ? — ^There  were  three  or  four  ssen 
there. 

Did  Tidd  go  into  the  stable  with  you  1-^ 
X  es. 

Were  those  men  in  the  stable  armed  ?— 1 
cannot  say. 

Wu  there  any  light  ia  the  steble  P'— Yes, 
one. 

Did  you  go  up  the  ladder  f^Tes. 
That  is  at  the  further  end  ?— Yes,  on  the  left 
hand. 


You  w«at  up  into  (he  loft?^Ym. 

Did  you  find  people  there?— Yes. 

How  many  nuc^t  there  he  ia  the  whole,  d» 
you  suppose,  below  and  up  stairs?— I  sbiaU 
AaTe  supposed,  from  the  appearaace,  tv»  or 
three-andktwenty ;  but  some  one  spoke  im 
after  I  got  in  about  counting  then,  and  Tbiille- 
wood  said  there  was  no  occasion  for  oooati^ 
them,  there  were  five-and-twenty. 

Was  there  any  thing  like  a  table  or  cir- 
penter's  bench  ? — Yes. 

What  was  upon  that  ?— A  quantity  ef  svords 
and  pistols. 

Was  there  a  tight  there?— Yes,  there  vu 
oue  light;  I  do  not  know  whether  theie  were 
anymore. 

You  obsenred  but  one  light?— No,  I  doost 
recollect  any  more. 

Was  that  light  on  the  bench  ?— Yes. 

After  you  got  up  into  the  loft  what  passed? 
— ^There  was  a  man  in  a  brown  great  cmt,  sit- 
ting on  a  low  bench,  on  the  other  side  of  the 
oarpenter^s  bench. 

Near  the  ladder  ?--No,  on  the  other  side; 
he  was  speaking  of  the  impropriety  of  goiogte 
lord  Harrowby's ;  that  was  the  irst  time  I  beud 
the  name  I  think ;  he  sp^^e  of  the  impropriety 
of  going  to  lord  Harrowby*s  with  so smili 
number  as  fi?e-and-twenty  men.  Ihistlevood 
said,  that  number  was  quite  sufficteat,  for  tbeit 
only  wanted  fi>urteen  men  to  go  into  the  rooot 
and  supposing  that  lord  Harrowby  had  sixtett 
men  senrants,  that  number  would  be  quite  sof- 
fieieat ;  the  man  in  the  brown  coat  said,  '^  Whee 
we  come  out,  of  course  there  will  be  ft  crowd 
of  people  round  the  door,  how  are  we  to  mate 
our  escape?''  Thistlewood  said, '< Yot knot 
the  largest  party  of  us  are  already  gone. 
Davidson  then  said,—* 

Davidson,  the  black f— Yes;  be  told  ta* 
not  to  throw  cold  water  upon  their  prooeedios'i 
for  if  he  was  afraid  of  his  tife,  be  might  ^ 
they  would  do  without  him ;  and  Brant  fliot 
sooner  than  they  should  go  from  the  bnsines' 
they  were  about,  he  woiild  go  into  the  bojie 
by  himself  and  blow  them  aH  up^  if  he  penshed 
with  them;  says  he,  •'you  know  we  saw  got 
that  that  can  do  it/'  and  after  that  the  mu  » 
the  brown  great  coat  said,  that  though  be  did 
not  like  goiug  with  so  small  a  numberi  xettf 
they  were  all  for  it,  he  would  not  be  agaiDStB. 
he  then  proposed  that  diey  should  all  pot  di^ 
selves  under  the  orders  of  Thistlewood. 


posed  that  die  fourteen  who  were  to  go»^ 
the  room  should  volunteer  from  the  peijow 
that  were  there  assembled*  . 

In  conseqoence  of  that  proposal  of  Tw^- 
wood's,  what  was  done  P— About  ^^^Ji 
thirteen  ki  a  few  ihinutes  toluirtecred,  w» 
tfiose  tlat  were  to  do  that  were  to  g*]*  jr 
Wher  side  of  the  room ;  the  right  head  si«f 

Can  you  gife  us  the  names  of  lome  of  »»• 
that  so  volunteared  ?—TWd,  Brunt-*-* 


12331 


for  Hi^  Treai<m* 


Brunt,  the  pdaoQer  ?— Tes ;  DaTidson,  Wil- 

Ings  ? — ^No ;  I  do  not  recollect  seeing  him 
there. 

Hall  ?-^I  do  not  know  Hall's  person. 

Do  you  know  Harrison  f — I  was  brought  to 
the  Tower  with  him,  but  I  did  not  know  him 
befbre,  till  I  saw  him  at  the  Secretary  of  State's 
office* 

These  you  have  mentioned  were  among  the 
twelve  or  thirteen  ?— Yes. 

What  took  place  about  this  time  ?— Thistle- 
wood  stepped  down  stairs,  and  he  came  up 
stairs  again,  and  said,  that  they  had  received 
intellif^ence  that  the  duke  of  Wellinffton  and 
lord  Sidmouth  had  just  arrived ;  I  do  not  re- 
collect any  thing  more  passing  till  the  officers 
came  up. 

When  the  officers  came  up,  what  took  place  ? 
•-They  came  into  the  room;  t  did  not  see 
them  till  there  were  two  or  three  in  the  room ; 
they  told  them  to  surrender,  that  they  were 
officers ;  they  told  them  there  was  a  guard  of 
soldiers  below. 

You  yourself  were  taken  into  custody  when 
the  soldiers  came  f— Yes,  I  was  taken  into 
custody  up  stairs. 

John  Monument  cross^xamined  by 
Mr.  Curwood, 

Have  you  been   reading  Paine's  Age  of 
Reason  f — ^I  have  read  it. 
-  Did  that  turn  you  from  Christianity  ?— No, 
it  did  not,  because  the  bishop  of  LlandaflTs 
answer  was  with  it. 

You  had,  then,  an  antidote  t— Yes ;  after  1 
bad  read  that,  I  got  a  person  to  lend  me  the 
bishop  of  Llandaff 's  answer,  which  I  have  now. 

Then  you  mean  to  represent  vourself  as  hav- 
ing been  a  Christian  all  along  f — ^I  cannot  say 
but  that  that  book  shook  my  faith ;  but  I  kept 
on  reading  the  bishop  of  Llandaff  all  alonff  with 
it,  till  I  saw  that  he  completely  answered  him. 

And  it  had  no  ill  effect  upon  your  principles  ? 
——No. 

What  political  society  have  you  belonged 
to  ?— I  have  not  belonged  to  any. 

You  never  mixed  at  all  in  those  political 
neetings  ? — ^Yes,  I  was  at  two. 

You  took  no  part  with  them? — ^Yes,  at  two 
flaeetings. 

And  at  onW  two  f — ^At  only  two! 

Bow  long  have  you  known  Brunt  ? — I  never 
saw  him  till  Thistlewood  brought  him. 

How  long  have  you  knovm  Thistlewood  ? — 
I  never  saw  him,  except  at  the  public  meetings, 
tin  I  saw  him  at  Mr.  Ford's. 

fiTaving  known  very  little  of  Thistlewood, 
and  nothing  of  Brunt,  you  consented  to  go 
with  Brunt  and  Tidd,  not  knowing  what  you 
were  going  about,  as  I  understand  you  ? — ^No, 
I  did  not.  • 

You  saw  Tidd  arm  himself  ?— Yes. 

And  you  accompanied  him  ?— Yes.    * 

As  yon  went  up  Oxford-road,  you  asked  him 
whether  you  were  going  to  the  House  of  Com- 
mons?-—Yes. 

VOL.  xxxin. 


A.  D.  1820*  [123^ 

Seeing  him  going  armed,  and  to  meet  others, 
and  supposing  you  were  going  to  the  House  of 
Commons,  what  did  you  suppose  you  were 
going  about  ?-«I  naturally  thought  they  were 
going-  to  attack  it. 

You  thought  they  were  going  to  murder  the 
members  of  the  House  of  Commons,  that  is  a 
delicate  way  of  putting  it ;  did  you  think  they 
were  going  to  murder  the  members  ? — I  did 
not  know ;  that  was  the  reason  I  asked. 

Still  you  went  vrith  him  ? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

Having  reason  to  believe  that  something 
vras  intended  ? — Yes. 

But  you  had  no  reason  to  believe  wh&t  was 
going  to  be  done  till  you  got  to  Cato-street  ? — 
No. 

Now,  remember  what  you  told-  me  the  other 
day,  ^'He  told  me  it  was  a  cabinet  dinner 
and  then  I  knew  what  ffe  was  going  about  ?''— 
I  certainly  thought  it  could  be  for  no  other 
purpose  but  to  destroy  the  persons  there. 

And  you,  a  Christian,  wnose  principles  had 
never  been  shaken,  joined  them  in  it  ? — I  was 
forced  to  join  it,  I  could  not  get  away. , 

What  forced  you  to  Tidd*s,  and  forced  you 
along  the  streets? — ^Fear. 

You  told  us  just  now,  that  a  man  in  a  brovm 
coat  was  told  he  might  retire ;  why  did  not  you 
retire? — ^I  should  luive  been  loth  to  take  him 
at  his  word. 

It  was  fear  brought  you  into  it,  and  fear 
kept  you  in  it  ? — ^Yes,  it  was. 

Tkomas  Monument  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Solicitor  General. 

You  are  the  brother,  I  believe,  of  the  last 
witness  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  remember  Thistlewood  at  any  time 
coming  to  his  house  ?^-Yes,  he  did ;  he  came 
one  evening. 

Did  he  come  alone,  or  in  company  with- 
some  person? — He  came  in  company  with 
Brunt. 

With  Brunt  the  prisoner? — Yes. 

After  they  had  been  some  little  time  in  the 
room,  did  your  brother  go  out  with  Thistle* 
wood  ?  nvhat  did  Thistlewood  say? — He  asked 
if  he  could  speak  with  him. 

In  consequence  of  that,  did  Thistlewood 
and  your  brother  go  out  ?'-*Yes,  they  did. 

Did  Brunt  remain  behind  in  the  room  ? — 
Yes,  he  did. 

About  how  long,  as  well  as  you  can  recol- 
lect, were  Thistlewood  and  your  brother  out  of 
the  room  ? — ^I  do  not  suppose  they  were  out 
above  two  or  three  minutes. 

After  they  returned  into  the  room,  did  Brunt 
and  Thistlewood  go  away  together? — Yes, 
th^  did. 

Do  you  remember  on  Tuesday  the  22nd  of 
February  Brunt  calling  again  upon  your  bro- 
ther P — Yes. 

Did  he  call  alone,  or  in  company  with  any 
person  ?— He  called  in  company  with  a  man 
of  the  name  of  Tidd. 

Tell  us  what  passed  when  he  came  in  ;  what 
did  your  brother  say  to  Tidd  ?— When  Brunt 

4K 


12351       1  GBOBGB  W. 

came  io,  my  brotW  taidy  **  I  thouglit  I  had 
losi  yoa  ;**  there  was  something  passed  con- 
oeraing  the  king's  death.  Brunt  said,  that  the 
king's  death  had  made  soxQie  alteration  in  their 
plans.  My  brother  made  answer,  and  asked 
mm  what  plans;  he  said,  they  had  different 
objects  in  view. 

Do  you  recollect  any  thing  j&irther  ? — No ; 
I  recoUect  Brunt  asking  Tidd,  whether  he 
should  give  us  an  outline  of  the  plan ;  I  do  not 
know  whether  Tidd  made  any  answer,  I  did 
not  hear ;  but  Brunt  then  said  he  would  give 
us  the  pass-word,  which  consisted  of  the  lettera 
hfUjt;  that  we  were  to  meet  oq  the  following 
evening  at  Tyburn  turnpike  at  six  o'clock,  and 
if  any  of  their  party  were  there,  they  would 
answer  I,  o,  n. 

Were  you  asked  to  eo  ? — Yes ;  I  ^^as  a^iked 
to  go. 

Did  you  refuse  or  consent  7 — I  did  neither 
the  one  tM>r  the  other ;  I  suppose  they  expected 
me;  but  they  chiefly  directed  their  discourse 
to  my  brother ;  I  suppose  they  did  not  know 
me. 

Do  you  remember  on  the  following  day,  the 
Wednesday,  Brunt  caUing  again  on  your  bro* 
ther  ?— ^Yes,  he  called  between  four  and  five 
0>'clock  ;  he  could  not  go  just  then* 

Tell  us  what  passed ;  what  did  Brunt  say  ? 
—He  only  asked  him  if  he  was  ready  to  go ; 
we  were  busy  at  work ;  my  brother  told  him 
he  could  not  go  then;  and  Brunt  told  him 
when  he  was  ready  to  go,  he  was  to  call'  in 
Uole-in-the-wall  Passage  on  Tidd,  and  he 
would  take  him. 

After  Bnint  had  said^  this,  did  he  go  away  ? 
—Yes,  he  did. 

What  timiB  did  your  brother  go  out? — It 
was  nearly  seven  o'clock,  as  nearly  as  I  can 
recollect. 

Did  you  yovrself  go?— No,  I  did  not. 

Your  broiAier  did  not  oome.  home  ag^n  ?•— 
No ;  I  never  saw  him  afterwards,  till  he  was 
in  custody. 

Mr.  Sofidtor  Qeneral.^lt  your  lordship 
irill  permit  me,  I  will  ask  John  Monument 
one  question  which  I  forgot. 

lord  CA^JBiflro?!.— If  you  please. 

Joi^  Monument  called  again. — Examined  by 
Mr,  SoUcUor  Oeneral, 

Do  yQu  remembei  bieing  taken  to  White- 
hall ?— Yes. 

Were  you  i^Qured  in  any  way  ? — ^I  was  kept, 
with  about  two  or  three  officen. 

Were  you  handcuffed  to  any  person? — 
When  I  was  taken  to  Whitehall  the  first  day  ? 

Either  day  ? — I  cannot  exactly  say ;  I  know 
I  was  put  into  a  room  by  myself. 

Did  any  conyersation  pass  between  you  and 
Thistlewood?-^Yes,  that  was  the  last  day;  I 
thought  you  were  asking  as  to  the  first  day^ 

Was  Brunt  in  the  room  then  P — Yes. 

Were  the  other  prisoners  in  the  room?-*- 
Yes. 

Tbiey  went  for  the  purpose  of  being  ex- 


Tkofitljl  Brunt 


nm 


anHned?-«-Ye^;  weweie  all  put  mtheim 
together. 

^an  joo  recollect  irhat  ThisQesood  toU 
you  ? — ^Ile  told  me,  when  I  came  to  bs  a* 
arained  before  the  pnvy-«ouncil,  I  vss  to  nj 
that  it  was  Edwards  led  me  into  the  meetiB^ 
that  it  was  through  Edwards  I  came  there. 

What  did  you  say  to  that?—I  said,  bof 
can  I  tell  that  falsehood  when  I  never  saw  tJK 
person ;  hfi  said  it  was  of  no  eonMqacoce;  if 
you  are  asked  what  sort  of  a  penoa  he  «1^ 
yoa  mzv  say  that  he  was  not  ntach  tsU^i  ^ 
yourself  of  a  sallow  comp^zioB,  vA  ^rw4 
m  a  brown  great  coat. 

Do  you  ?emeraber  being  seated  wiaA^ 
room  at  Whitehall  F^Yes. 

What  did  Thistlewood  say?-He  told  m 
that  Edwards  was  the  person  thai  l^^W 
them,  and  to  pass  it  round  amoag  tie  ^ 
prisQners ;  I  did  not  like  to  do  it ;  I  toU  kin 
I  should  be  noticed^  «»^  he  Vm^  Q^tQ 
another  prisoner. 

Who  was  tbatV-pradbura  wa3  sitting  ^»t 
to  me,  but  Bradbum  would  not  take  opticioi 
what  Thistlei^ood  said. 

Did  hft  lean  pa^t  for  the  purpose  of  conni* 
nicating  it  beyond  ? — Yes. 

Did  you  ever  see  Edwards  ?— I^o. 

Thomas  Hid^ sw^fi)— S^iuiuned by 
Mr.  Gvmey. 

I  believe  you  have,  carri^  oa  t|tf  l>*jj 
of  a  cow»keeper  and  dairyman  in  Unt^ 
ter-mews  ?  -» I  have. 

You  have  now  the  misfortune  to  be  is  P** 
for  debt?— I  have. 

When  were  you  arrested?— A  week  ^ 
last  Wednesday-morning. 

You  were  taken  in  execution  for  dewH 
Yes  s  I  had  a  law^ui^  and  lost  the  cans^ 

Do  you  know  the  pnsoner  Wiboa?— **»* 
do,  perfectly  well. 

Did  Wilson  make  any  prppositioa  to  job  » 

be  one  of  a  party  to  do  an^  thing  ?-t^  ^ 
days  before  the  23rd,  he  asked  me  if  I  wj 
be  one  of  a  pa^ty  to  destroy  alibis  n^pV* 
ministers. 

Did  he  say  wbeue  they  were  tobedejW 
ed  P— He  said  at  a  caibinet  dinner;  ^^.r^ 
tbey  had  got  all  things  ready,  and  *«*2^ 
for  a  cabinet  dinner,  and  that  they  m  gw 
such  things  as  I.  never  saw.  . , 

Did  he  say  what,80rt  gf  thi»gs?-B?  s«J» 
large  things  bound  round  with  tgrpaw*  JJJ 
cords,  and  fiUod  full  of  naiU  »d »«»«?" 
other  thingi»  and  that  the  stMXO^  <»  »^^ 
very  strong.  . 

Did  he  96^  what  effect  they  woald  w«- 
He  smd  if  they  were  ligbted,  they  ^^^ 
up  one  of  th^  walla  of  thja  houses  on  the  owf 
side  of  tbe  way  in  t^e  street  thai  w«  ^^ 
walking  in.  ,  i .  Ai? 

Did  he  say  what  more  tb^  ^^^^Jj|^ 
— ^He  said  they  were  wailing  for  a  ctf^ 
dinner ;  thai  they  meant  to  set  fi»  to  wj 
houses,  and  by  keeping  the  town »»  ■JJ^. 
confusion  for  a  few  days,  it  would  6W 


10873 


ydf  H^l  Trea^oa. 


A.D.  !«». 


C1339 


^b«ril;  ft^  iiUA  lhos6  thiftfi  inere  to  be  pnt  into 
ibt  h>6Hi  whtirt  the  gentlemen  ifrere  at  dinner. 
The  things  w^th  the  tarpanUn  ? — Yea ;  and 
th^  meant  to  set  fire  to  lord  Harrowby*s  hoase. 
What  did  they  say  wduld  be  the  effect  of 
putting  them  into  the  room  where  the  gentle- 
idM  wei^e  at  dinner?— He  said  that  sdl  who 
escaped  the  ex(>lteion  wer^  to  die  by  the  edge 
of  the  sword  y  or  some  other  weapon. 

Did  he  mention  to  yon  the  names  of  any 
persons  whose  booses  were  to  be  set  fire  to  ?— 
The  duke  of  Wellington's,  lord  Harrowby's, 
lord  Sid  mouth's,  lord  Castlereagh*s,  the  bishop 
of  London^a,  Imd  one  more  that  I  ctonot  re- 
member. 

Did  yon  tell  him  you  would  be  one  7 — He 
told  me  they  should  depend  upo^  me  for  mak- 
ing one,  and  I  told  him  I  would. 

Before  the  23rd,  did  you  write  a  letter  to 
my  lord  Castlereagh  ? — I  did. 
Did  yoU  go  to  his  house  ? — I  did. 
You  did  not  get  access  to  him  f— I  did  not. 
After  you  had  done  that,  did  you  go  and 
watch  loitl  Harrowby  out  of  bis  house  to  Hyde- 
park  f — ^I  did ;  I  went  two  or  three  times ;  at 
fast  I  saw  a  gentleman  mount  his  horse,  and 
go  towards  the  park. 

DM  you  deliver  to  hiih  the  letter  yoU  had 
written  to  lord  Castlereagh  ? — I  did. 

Is  that  the  letter?  ($howmg  d  Utftr  io  the 
wUnest^J — ^This  is  the  Tery  letter. 

i  do  not  ask  you  what  passed  between  his 
l^ship  and  you ;  the  next  day  did  you  see 
\^ilsdn  sigaid  r — Between  four  and  five  o'clock 
id  th^  eftenlo6n,  I  was  (oing  up  Manchester- 
stfeet  \9ii\i  one  of  my  little  ^rls,  he  said, 
^  Hldjen,  y(>u  are  the  man  I  want  to  see.'' 

What  nldre  did  he  say  ?— I  said,  "  Wilson, 
mMt  if  there  going  to  be  ?"  and  he  said,  there 
IS  a  Cabinet  dinner  to-night  at  lord  Harrow- 
by's  in  Orosveiior-square ;  I  asked  him  where 
tbey  Were  going  to  meet ;  he  told  me  I  was  to 
go  up  into  John-street,  and  at  a  public-house 
the  comer  of  Cato-street,  the  si^n  of  the 
Hotse  and  Groom ;  and  there  I  was  to  stop  in 
the  public  house,  or  to  stop  at  the  comer  at 
tbe  post  till  I  was  shoved  into  a  sthble  close  by. 
Wh&t  did  yoil  ask  him  next? — I  asked  htm 
what  time  I  wal  to  meet  him,  and  he  said  I 
wiis  to  meet  therit  at  a  quarter  before  six,  or 
hfOx  o^clock  at  fiirthest;  and  if  I  did  not 
make  haste,  the  grand  thing  would  be  done 
befete  I  came. 

Upon  thiS)  did  you  ask  him  any  fuHher  ques- 
tions ? — I  asked  how  many  there  were  to  be ,  and 
he  §taA  between  twenty  and  thirty ;  I  asked 
him  if  that  was  all  the  party  that  was  in  Cato- 
street,  and  he  said  there  was  another  party ; 
o^cf  piiHy  in  Gray's-inn-lahe,  another  party  in 
thi  Borough,  another  in  Gee*s-court,  or  in  the 
city,  I  am  not  cei^ain  Which. 

I>i4  he  say  any  thing  more  abbuf  Gree's- 
codtt? — He  told  me  I  had  no  occasion  to  be 
alamied,  all  Ge^'s^cotirt  wak  iii  it. 

-What  descHptioH  of  persons  lire  in  Gee's- 
co«tt?-rI  b^tteVe  then!  to  bi  almost  all  Irish, 
what  I  know  of  tbem« 


It  il  ill  Oxford-street  ?— One  end  of  it  runs 
into  Oildrd-street. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  about  the  Itishmen  ? — 
He  said  the  IriaSimen  were  all  in  it,  but  they 
would  not  act  till  the  Englishmen  began  first : 
as  the  Englishmen  had  so  often  deceived  the- 
Irish,  they  would  not  begin  before  the  English 
had. 

Did  he  mention  what  places  those  parties 
were  to  go  to  ? — He  said  our  party  was  to  go  to 
lord  Harrowby*s,  and  do  the  grand  thing,  and 
then  all  parties  were  to  retire  and  meet  some-' 
where  about  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Man- 
sion-house. 

Did  he  mention  what  was  to  be  done  in 
other  places? — He  told  me  there  was  two- 
pieees  of  cannon  that  would  be  very  easily 
taken  by  knock ihg  in  a  small  door. 

Did  he  mention  any  others  to  be  got  else- 
where?—He  skid  there  were  four  others,  at 
some  Artillery-ground — I  do  not  remember- 
where — ^which  were  easily  to  be  gbt  at  by 
killing  a  sentry. 

Did  you  theft  leaye  him?-~I  then,  I  believe, 
left  him. 

Did  you  go  to  John-street  that  evening  ? — 
I  did. 

At  abonf  what  timeP — Betweeti  six  and 
seven  o'clock,  I  believe  it  to  have  been  near 
seven  when  I  got  there. 

When  you  got  near  the  gateway  by  the 
itorse  and  Groom,    whom  did  you  see? — 
When  I  got  near  the  gateway,  I  there  met 
Wilson  and  Davidson  m^  coloured  man  stand- 
ing near  a  post. 
Had  you  known  Davidson  before  ? — Yes. 
And  conversed  with  him? — ^Yes,  many  times. 
I  do  not,  at  present,  ask  you  what  had  pas- 
s^  between  you;  what  did  Wilson  say? — 
Wilson  said,  **  You  are  come ;"  I  said,  "  Yes, 
I  am  come,  but  I  am  behind  my  time  $"  I  told 
him  that  I  had  to  get  some  cream,  which  I 
was  obligated  to  go  and  get. 

Did  Ihividson  then  say  any  thing  f — David- 
son asked  me  if  I  was  going  in ;  he  said  if 
I  wak  going  in,  Mr.  Thistle  wood  was  in  there. 
Did  you  ask  them  any  question  ? — I  asked 
them  what  time  they  would  go  away  from 
there,  as  I  must  go  and  get  some  cream ;  nnd 
he  told  me  they  meant  to  leave  that  place 
about  eight  o'clock. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  you  were  to  do,  if  they 
should  be  gone  ? — They  told  me,  if  they  were 
ffone  from  there  before  I  came  back,  I  must 
follow  them  to  Grosvenor-sqnare,  the  fourth 
house  fVom  the  comer,  at  the  bottom,  on  the 
other  side,  I  should  find  them. 

ThomoM  Hiden  cross-examined  by  Mr.  Curwood, 

How  long  have  you  known  Wilson  ?— Four 
or  five,  or  six  months. 

You  must  have  been  very  intimate  with 
him,  I  should  think? — I  have  been  a  good 
deal  with  him,  at  a  master  tailor's,  a  friend  of 
mine  that  worked  for  me,  Mr.  Clarke's.  * 

I  observed,  the  very  thing  he  asked  you  was, 
wb^th^r  yoa  would  be  one  of  a  pAhy  to  lull 


13301       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ^John  Ihumu  Brunt 


[1340 


his  muesty's  miiiisten?^He  did;  he  asked 
me,  whether  I  would  be  one  of  a  party  to 
destroy  his  majesty's  ministers. 

And  yon  told  him  you  would  ? — I  did. 

Had  you  been  at  those  political  meetings } 
•^I  had  never  been  to  any  but  two ;  I  went  to 
what  they  called  a  shoemakers'  club  twice. 

I  do  not  ask  as  to  shoemakers'  clubs  ? — I 
was  induced  by  my  friend  Mr.  Clarke  to  go 
with  bim  to  it  on  a  Sunday-evening. 

And  you  found  yourself  mistaken  when  yon 
got  there  ? — ^There  was  nothing  particular  that 
evening. 

You  went  again?— Yes,  another  Sunday 
night ;  and  those  were  the  only  two  times  I 
was  ever  there. 

You  never  did  attend  those  private  meetinn? 
— ^I  never  was  at  a  private  meeting  in  my  lire. 

You  will  swear  tnat  ? — Yes. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Ben- 
nett ?— I  do,  perfectly  well. 

What  is  the  Bennett  you  k|iow? — I  know 
one  Bennett  a  bricklayer. 

Did  you  ever  persuade  him  to  attend  those 
meetings  ? — I  never  persuaded  him ;  I  said 
one  evening,  when  Mr.  Clarke  called  on  me, 
**  I  dare  say  Mr.  Bennett  will  go  with  us." 

Did  not  you  tell  him  something  was  to  be 
done  for  the  good  of  your  countiy,  and  per* 
suade  him  to  go  ? — I  said  perhaps  he  would 
go ;  there  was  Mr.  Clarke  as  well  as  me. 

Did  you  not  persuade  him  to  go,  and  tell 
him  something  was  to  be  done  for  the  |food  of 
this  country  ? — I  cannot  swear  that  I  did,  nor 
that  I  did  not ;  I  asked  him  to  go  down  to  the 
shoemakers'  club  widi  us. 

Look  at  the  jury  P — I  ean  look  at  them. 

Did  you  not  persuade  him  to  go,  and  tell 
him  that  something  was  to  be  done  for  the 
good  of  the  country  } — I  cannot  say  positively 
that  I  did. 

Will  you  swear  you  did  not  ? — ^I  asked  him, 
whether  he  would  go  down  with  my  friend 
Clark  and  me  to  a  club ;  we  were  all  neigh- 
bours together. 

He  will  be  called  to  contradict  you  if  you 
deny  it ;  did  not  you  persuade  him  to  go  and 
tell  him  that  something  was  to  be  done  for  the 
good  of  the  country  P — I  cannot  say ;  I  asked 
liim  if  he  would  go  with  me. 

Will  you  deny  that  you  told  him  something 
was  to  be  done  for  the  good  of  your  countiy  r 
— Upon  my  oath,  I  do  not  think  I  did. 

Will  you  deny  it,  or  admit  it? — 1  can  say 
no  more  than  I  recollect. 

You  will  not  deny  it,  nor  admit  it  ? — ^I  can- 
not say  further. 

The  first  time  that  you  saw  Wilson  was  the 
23rd  of  February?— It  was,  till  I  came  into 
this  court. 

Ii  was  not  till  the  23Td  that  you  knew  the 
meeting  was  to  ber  in  Cato-street? — ^Yes,  it 
was  before  the  23rd  I  knew  there  was  to  be  a 
meeting. 

Was  it  told  you  where  till  the  23rd  ?— No, 
it  was  not. 

You  did  not  know  it  till  the  23rd?— I  did 
not,  liU  thfe  afternoon  of  the  23ni« 


And  joa  made  your  oomnnmcation  to  kad 
Harrowby  on  the  22nd } — ^I  have  not  said  that. 

Mr.  Gumey.— No,  he  has  not  fixed  the  day. 

Mr.  Curtoood.-^It  was  before  the  23rd? — 
Yes. 

You  did  not  communicate  to  his  lordship 
the  place  where  the  meeting  was  to  be?— -x 
did  not. 

You  wrote  the  letter  yourself? — ^I  did. 

Take  a  pen  and  write  a  word  or  two? 

Mr.  Ovmey. — It  should  be  at  the  table. 

Mr.  dcnooocL — ^I  am  told  he  cannot  write 
at  all ;  I  may  be  misinformed. 

IFt^iett.— There  is  my  name — (hamdmg  im 
the  paper) — is  that  enough  ?  I  am  not  muck 
of  a  scholar. 

Mr.  Curwood. — Yes;  it  is  a  mistake  cer- 
tainly ;  1  was  told  he  could  not  write. 

BnoU.— My  lord,  I  desire  that  witness  may 
leave  the  court. 

Wilton, — Turn  him  out  of  court. 

[nepmoneri  kitted  the  tokneuoikepamei 

the  bar.^ 

The  Earl  of  Hamnob^  sworn. — KTamined  by 
Mr.  AUanuy  GeneraL 

You  are  a  privy  councillor,  and  one  of  his 
majesty's  ministers  ? — I  am. 

Be  good  enough  to  enumerate  the  noUesien 
and  gentlemen  who  compose  what  is  called 
the  cabinet?— My  lord  chancellor;  the  etoA  of 
Westmoreland,  lord  privy  seal;  the  eail  of 
Liverpool,  first  lord  of  the  Ttreaaoiy;  Mr. 
Vansittart,  chancellor  of  the  Exdieqner;  vy 
lord  Castlereagh,  secretur  of  state  Ibr  tlie 
foreign  department;  lord  Sidmouth,  eecretair 
of  state  for  the  home  department ;  my  Una 
Bathurst,  secretary  of  state  for  the  colonial 
department ;  lord  Melville,  first  lord  of  die 
Aamiralty;  the  duke  of  Wellington,  maHei- 
general  of  the  Ordnance ;  Mr.  Bobineon,  pie- 
sident  of  the  Board  of  Trade;  Mr.  Btwggt 
Bathurst,  chancellor  of  the  duchy  of  Lancas- 
ter; Mr.'  Canning,  president  of  the  India 
bo8^;  Mr.  Well^ey  Pole^  master  of  te 
Mint ;  and  the  earl  of  Mulgrave. 

Has  it  been  usual  for  these  noblemen  and 

Jentlemen  to  give  what  are  called  cabinet 
inners  ?-^It  has. 

In  consequence  of  the  deaUi  of  his  late  ma- 
^ty,  had  those  dinners  been  suspended  f— 

ey  had. 

Had  your  lordship  intended  to  give  aci^ 
binet  dinner  on  the  23rd  of  February  last  f-^ 
Certainly. 

How  long  before  that  day  had  the  cards  of 
invitation  been  issued  by  your  lordship  ? — ^K 
believe  on  the  Friday  or  the  Saturday  pre- 
oedinff ;  probably  on  the  Saturday. 

Did  your  lordship,  before  the  23rd  of  Feb- 
ruary, see  the  witness  who  has  been  jest 
examined,  Hideu? — ^I  saw  him  in  the  Fm, 
near  Grosvenor-gate ;  he  is  the  same  penoa 
whom  1  hare  just  seen  eiainined. . 


S 


I 


14411 


Jor  High  IWoMM. 


A.  D.  1820. 


C134I9 


Oq  wliftt  dty  was  it  P-— On  Tuesday^  the 
32nd  of  February. 

At  what  time  of  the  day?-— I  believe  be-, 
tween  two  and  three  o'clock,  but  I  am  not 
quite  poettiye. 

Did  he  give  you  any  letter  addressed  to  my 
lozd  Castlereagh  ?— He  did. 

Is  that  the  letter  ?  (thomng  a  tetter  to  hii 
^0nitAtp>— That  is  the  letter. 

Had  your  lordshin  any  conTersation  with 
faim  at  that  time } — 1  had. 

Did  you  ask  him  for  his  name  and  address  ? 
—I  asked  him  whether  he  had  put  his  name 
and  address  in  the  letter,  as  he  had  expressed 
a  wish  to  have  further  communication  with 
me ;  he  told  me  he  had  not,  and  he  then  gave 
me  his  card,  containing  his  name  and  address. 

When  did  you  see  this  person  again? — I 
saw  him  again  by  appointment  the  next  mom* 
iag,  in  the  ring  in  Hyde-paric, 

You  appointed  to  meet  him  there  to  avoid 
observation? — Aa  he  appeared  to  me  to  be 
afraid  of  continuing  the  conversation  with  me 
when  I  met  him  at  Grosvenor-gate  (having 
appointed  to  meet  him  at  Grosvenor-gate), 
when  I  came  there  I  told  him  to  go  on  to  the 
ring,  and  I  met  him  there  on  the  Wednesday- 
morning. 

Was  the  dinner  given  at  your  lordship's 
house  on  the  Wednesday? — It  was  not 

Did  the  preparations  for  the  dinner  go  on 
until  the  evening  of  the  Wednesday  ?— The 

g reparations  for  the  dinner  went  on  as  if  it  had 
sen  to  take  place. 
At  what  hour  did  your  lordship  apprize 

rur  servants  that  it  would  not  take  place? — 
wrote  a  note  from  the  earl  of  liverpool's, 
where  I  was  dining,  between  seven  ai^d  eight 
o^dock  on  the  Wednesday-evening,  to  inform 
my  principal  servant  that  the  dinner  would 
not  take  place. 
'  I  forgot  to  ask  your  lordship  whether  those 
noblemen  and  gentlemen,  whom  your  lordship 
lias  named,  are  privy  councillors? — ^They  are. 
Ther  are  all  principal  servants  of  his  majes- 
ty in  the  administration  of  the  government  ?— 
Yes,  they  are  privy  councillors,  and  form  what 
is  called  the  cabinet  ooondl. 

> 

John  Baker  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Attorn^  Oeneral. 

1  believe  you  are  a  butler  to  the  earl  of  Har- 
rowby  ? — ^I  am. 

Do  you  remember,  by  his  direction,  sending 
out  cards  of  invitation  to  a  cabinet  dinner  to 
be  had  at  his  house  on  the  23rd  of  Febmaiy  f 
—I  do. 

On  what  day  were  those  cards  of  invitation 
issued  ?-»The  18th  or  the  19th;  I  believe  on 
Saturday  the  19th. 

When  did  you  first  receive  intimation  that 
Out  cabinet  would  not  dine  at  lord  Harrowb/s 
house  ?— About  eight  o'clock  on  the  Wednes- 
day-evening, or  it  might  be  ten  minutes  after 
eight 

Up  to  that  period,  bad  the  preparations  for 
aho  ainaer  gone  on  in  the  expectation  that  the 


cabinet  would  dine  there  ?--£Tery  thing  en- 
tirely ;  nobody  had  an  idea  to  the  contrary. 

Do  you  remember  whether  on  that  night 
there  was  any  party  at  the  ardibishop  of  York's, 
whose  house  adjoins  lord  Harrowb/s? — I 
believe  there  was;  I  saw  carriages  stopping  at 
the  door. 

About  the  dinner  hour  ?— It  was  rather  be- 
fore the  dinner  hour  that  was  to  be  at  lord 
Harrowb/s;  it  was  between  six  and  seven 
o'clock. 

Lord  Chief  Baron.^The  archbishop  of  York 
lives  the  next  house  to  the  earl  of  Harrowby's? 
—Yes,  the  next  house  coming  out  at  the  door.. 

Bi^ard  Munday  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  LUtkdaU. 

Where  do  you  live  ?— At  No.  3,  Cato-street. 

Do  you  know  a  stable  in  that  street  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember^  on  the  23rd  of  February 
last,  seeinp;  any  body  go  into  that  stable  ? — ^Yes. 

What  time  of  the  day  was  it  when  you  first 
saw  any  body  go  there  ? — ^About  three  o'clock 
in  the  afternoon. 

Whom  did  yoo  see  then  ? — ^I  saw  Harrison 
in  the  stable. 

Whom  did  you  see  afterwards  ?— rl  came 
home  from  work  about  half  after  four,  or  twen* 
ty  minutes  after  four,  and  I  saw  Davidson 
walking  up  and  down  the  archway  that  leads- 
to  the  stable. 

Where  did  he  go  to  after  he  had  been 
walking  up  and  down? — ^I  do  not  know;  I 
went  in  and  got  my  tea,  and  ^ame  out  again ; 
and  I  had  occasion  to  go  to  the  chandler's 
shop  to  get  some  cofiee,  and  after  that  I  re« 
turned  and  got  a  pint  of  beer,  and  after  that 
I  bad  occasion  to  come  out  opposite  to  the 
stable,  and  I  saw  Davidson  pass  with  two  can- 
dles in  his  hand. 

What  time  might  this  be  P— A  quartes  after 
six. 

Did  he  do  any  thing  with  those  candies  ? — 
Yes,  he  went  and  lighted  one  of  them,  and. 
took  it  into  the  stable. 

How  many  people  did  you  see  go  in  an4> 
out  of  this  stabler-- 1  saw  two  going  in  and. 
three  coming  out  as  I  passed  for  the  cofiee 
and  back  again. 

Did  yon  see  more  people  than  those  at  any 
time?— Not  at  that  time;  after  Davidson,  I 
saw  two  go  in,  and  then  one  go  in. 

Did  you  observe,  in  the  course  of  the  day, 
whether  any  thing  had  been  put  up  ? — Yes  p 
when  I  came  home  to  watering  in  the  after- 
noon, I  heard  a  knocking,  and  looked  up,  and 
they  were  nailing  up  a  coarse  bread  bag,  or 
something  of  that  kind,  to  prevent  any  person 
looking  in ;  I  thought  it  was  to  keep  out  the 
coldness  of  the  weather. 

Do  you  know  whether  that  stable  had  been 
occupied  shortly  before  that? — ^Mr.  Firth  re- 
moved his  cows  just  before  Christmas. 

Had  it  been  unoccupied  from  that  time  ? — 
Yes,ithad. 


1049}      ^  GBOMB  IV. 

Ur.UHMtk. 

Where  do  you  live?— ^At  No.  2,  Cato-etit«l. 

Did  you  8«f  any  pecson  on  the  $3rd  of 
Tebruaiy,  who  attracted  your  attentioa  f — ^Yei; 
a  man  of  the  name  of  Harrison. 

Where  did  you  see  him? — ^I  saw  him  go 
into  the  stable. 

Did  ke  say  any  thing  about  the  stable  ? — 
He  said  he  bad  taken  two  chambers,  and  was 
cleaning  them  up. 

Did  yoa  see  waj  p«Mons  fO  into  tfiait  hAXb 
Ibal  evening f— Yet;  I  supirase  ffom  tt^edt^ 
to  tweBty-i?e  I  saw  go  in  and  oet. 

G«0ifs  Tk$mat  Jimfk  JRartAwn  sWQn&.*---£x- 
amined  by  Mt.  MoUaniL 

Yen  are  a  conltable  at  the  pablfc  office  at 
fiow^stiaett^Iam. 

Wei%  yoa  diracted,  on  the  29rd  ef  Febmdry 
Ipet,  to  go  to  Calo^stieety  Sdgwve-road  ?-«-l 
wa4. 

▲t  what  time  did  y<m  get  there  ?--^Abeut 
six  o'clock,  when  I  first  went. 

DM  yoa  go  alona^  or  with  Any  pvrCy  of 
police  oflScers  ? — I  had  three  then. 

Were  yon  afterwards  joined  by  more  ? — I 


Tritd  qfJoMn  Tkdnuu  BnaU 


[15144 


Did  you  go  to  thb  Horso-and-Ght)oia  pubiio- 
Imius^  whea[  yoa  first  went  ?— I  did. 

When  you  were  in  that  house,  dUf  yon  Sea 
either  tf  the  prisoaers  at  the  bat  dame  in  ?— 
Ooppes  a^d  Oilofari^ 

Did  Cooper  bring  any  thing  witk  Urn  l^^A 
stiek< 

What  sort  of  a  itsok  ?-^A  mcip^iidc. 

Did  ha  leave  that  stickf-^He  did^ 

Did  yon  take  possession  of  that  stiek  t — I 


You  baye  it  ?— I  have  it. 

After  this  did  yoa  go  into  any  stiible  t-^I 
did. 

At  i^bat  tine  didr  yoo  eater  thd  stift)]e  ?^ 
About  half«>piat  eight,  U  near  as  can  be. 

Upon  going  in,  what  did  yau  observe? — i 
observed  a  man  with  a  gnn  on  his  shookier, 
alid  a  aword  by  his  side. 

What  was  he  doin^?-i->Wa]kin^  backwatdi 
and  forwards,  appearing  as  a  sentinel. 

Do  yon  know  at  all  who  that  man  was  t — ^I 
dD  not. 

What  did  yon  do  J^l  called  oa  the  |laTty 
following  ne  to  seize  tbat  man,  scad  take  Osire 
of  him* 

What  did  yoa  yonnell  do?'-^t  went  up  a 
lidder  in  the  stable. 

Tberd  ^km  a  ladder  from  the  stable  conmth 
nieating  with  the  room  above  P^-^There  was. 

When  yoa  reached  th^  icp  of  the  hdder, 
what  presented  itself  to  you  r^^i  saw  seveml 
men ;  I  tkw  a  bench,  arid  heatd  the  olattsiliig 
of  arms. 

Did  Ton  pereelve  any  ariif  P— I  did. 

Of  wWoescriptioii  f-^wordi  and  pistoll 

Did  any  of  the  officers  go  up  witlt  "^I-^ 

They  did. 


Whidl  of  (lem  ^— EUU  and  Smiteta. 

Dia  yon  see  any  body  in  the  room  wbom 
you  kaeW  t-^Yed. 

Sutt  Who  tha(  person  wis?— TbisUewood. 

Where  was  Thistiewood  f — He  stood  on  the 
right  of  the  behch,  as  we  went  up  stairs. 

Had  you  known  Ibistlewood  before?— I 
hAd. 

Did  you  say  any  tiiiajp  on  having  gained  tba 
loft  ?^-:l  did ;  I  said,  **  we  are  officeis,  tcse 
their  arms/' 

Did  Thiitlewood  do  any  thing  opoa  Uiat?— > 
He  did ;  he  drew  i  sWord  from  the  table,  and 
retired  into  thtf  smidl  room  on  one  side. 

With  his  sword  in  his  hand  ?— Yes. 

Was  there  any  Hi^t  in  die  first  room,  in  the 
loft  ^-^There  wast. 

Was  there  any  lig^t  in  tiie  small  room  ? — 
There  was* 

What  did  Thistiewood  do  with  that  iwwsd  I 
-^He  stood  fencing  with  it ;  shaking  bis  mtm 
round  in  that  sort  of  way. 

Whilst  he  was  so  fencing  with  it,  did  Smi* 
thers  advance  towards  him? — He  did. 

On  Smitbers  advancing  to  bim,  what  did 
Thistiewood  do  ? — He  put  his  arm  Ibrwaid  in 
that  manner  {deuriking  tt),  and  stabbed  htoi. 

What  became  of  Smitbers  ?~He  fett  bade, 
saying,  ^  Oh,  my  God  1''  or^  <"  Ob,  I  am  done ;' 
I  do  not  know  whieh. 

He  was  killed  P—s^He  fell  against  ma,  he£^ 
directly,  I  believe ;  I  beard  no  more* 

What  ibrtber  passed  ?-'A  pistol  waa  fired, 
and  the  lights  were  put  out. 

What  Imppened  after  the  Hghts  weif^  jpnt 
out  ?--In  Uie  room  labere  Thistiewood  was,  I 
heard'^  rake  cry  oat^  ^  Kill  the  b  <  sa,  tliiww 
th^m  dbwo  stain.*' 

What  did  you  do  npon  taeariage  ibal  ciy  ? — 
There  was  a  rusb  towaids  the  staii^ ;  I  joined 
in  the  cry,  and  got  down  with  them. 

Yoa  joined  in  the  cry,  **  Ayef,  kill  thein  laH^" 
and  got  down  with  thent^— Yes. 

Ob  going  ent^  did  yon  meet  the  aoldiefa? — ^I  • 
did,  in  JohD*street 

Did  yoa  retnm  ?-~I  did; 

Upon  your  return,  did  yon  see  eitber  of  die 
prisoners  at  the  bat  ? — I  did ;  "Hdd. 

Where  was  Tidd  ?--*He  was  then  abou|  dglit 
or  ten  feet,  I  should  think,  not  mucli  inore 
from  the  stable-door. 

What  wo  he  doing  ?-^Ht  appeared  to  me 
endeavouring  to  get  away. 

HtMi  be  any  di&^in  his  bud?— I  did  net 
obeerva  it  then,  till  i  said  te^seinebody  **  Sciia 
thai  man  ;*'  he  tben  lifled  his  arm  as  if  to  fite, 
and  I  saw  he  had  a  pistol  in  his  hand. 

Did  you  seize  him  i^I  laid  b«M  <tf  te  grta 
iawMdihe  had  the  pistol,  aaU  swung  Hm 
round,  and  fell  upon  a  dung  h^,^  and  be  apOtt 
nie. 

Did  vof  one  rslsase  yml  fn>m  thai  sit«atioQ'f 
-^The  soldiers  we^  up'  diteetfy,^  attd  the  pirtol 
went  off. 

Was  Tidd  taken  into  custodvP — ^He  was. 

Did  yoa  saanh  tum' ^^I  diA. 

SuiiebvirtaiiiPU  «Dioiitrfd»  aiiilMlfM 


*i 


ifti$i 


jfor  High  Tnr«o«i. 


A,  p.  189Q. 


11046 


leather  belt  round  bim^  ^n^  two  baU-«atin4s^* 
Where  were  they  ?— In  his  pocket. 
Wd  yaagptprt»Q  UoT?e  apd  Groom  ^r-Tt 

was  in  the  Horse  and  Groom  wh^r^  |  searched 

him. 

Waf  Bradbum  brought  in  ? — ^He  was. 

Pld  you  search  him  I — I  did- 

How  was  he  accoutred  ?— tie  had  a  string 
ti^  found  bis  waist  four  or  five  times,  and  be 
bad  six  ball  cartridges  in  his  pocket,  and  tbre^ 
loose  balls. 

A  String  was  tied  round  his  waiit  a«  a  belt 
or  sash  I — ^It  would  act  as  a  b^U  to  carry  fivj 
thing  in. 

Where  ware  the  ball  ca^tqdga^  ?-^i\  bis 
breeches  pocket. 

Where  were  the  bullets  ? — In  his  breeches 
fkPcKet. 

Was  Davidson  brought  in  ? — He  was. 

Was  Davidson  searched  in  your  presence  ? 
«— ^e  was  searched,  while  I  waif  searching  the 
other,  I  believe. 

Was  Wilson  brought  in? — ^^e  was. 
.  Did  you  search  Wilson,  or  not  ? — I  did  9al« 

Did  Davidson  say  any  thing  whan  ha  waa 
brought  in  ? — He  did ;  he  damned  and  s^ore 
against  any  man  that  would  not  die  in  liberty's 
caufie ;  he  gloried  in  it ;  he  likewise  sung  part  of 
the  song,  "Scots,  wha  ha'  wi'  Wallace  bled.'' 

Pid  Wilson  say  any  thing? — He  said  it  was 
aB  up ;  they  might  knock  him  on  the  head  now. 

Did  you  return  to  theloft  after  this? — ^t  did. 

In  what  state  did  you  find  the  loft  ? — I  found 
several  soldiers  there,  and  some  of  the  police 
th^re. 

Any  of  the  prisoners  T — ^Four  of  the  prisoners. 

After  the  candle  had  been  put  out  in  the  loft 
when  ^ou  made  your  escape,  was  there  any 
firing  in  the  roaa  or  from  the  loft? — Many 
shots,  I  should  think  between  twenty  and 
thirty. 

From  the  loft,  and  in  the  road  ? — Some  of 
fbe  shots  appeared  fired  out  of  the  loft ;  the 
noise  was  not  similar  to  those  within. 

Out  of  the  window  ? — Yes. 

Did  the  shots  proceed  from  the  party  that 
yoQ  saw  in  the  loft  ? — I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow^ — Not  from  your  party  ? 
— Certainly  not. 

Lord  G^ Boron.— Did  they  shoot  imto  the 
stable,  any  of  them  ?*-!  am  not  aware* 

Had  any  of  your  pacty  gained  the  loft  be- 
sides yowraelC^.  BUis»  and  Snlthers  ?-r-I  was  not 
aware  myself  of  any  more. 
.   Dlid  VQU  fire  ai^  sbot?^— I  did  not;  I  at- 
temtea,  but  Ae  p^Hol  missid. 

Bibs  did  &r8  oncaP — ^I  bave.UBdentaod  ha 
4id.;  I  do  not  know  it  nyaaUl 

And  Smithers  not  at  allf-^-Certaialx  aot ;  i 
fSUk  answer  lor  him,  far  be  was  ladier  befibre 
ai  tbia  time  ota  mgr  ngbL. 

James  ElUt  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  AUmnty  GeieraL 

I  believe  you  are  a  conductor  of  patrol  at 
the  publk  office  in  Bow<«trtet?«*I  urn* 


JM  f^  SO  with  Eutbveii  on  iha  $v«DUig  of 
tl^  2ZH  of  February  to  CatoHitreei  ?•*-!  did.- 

Were  you  with  him  wben  be  entaifd  fke 
atabla?-^As  ol<i#a  t^  him  as  I  c^uld  possibly 
follow. 

Wban  you  oama  into  tba  stable^  did  yon  see 
any  men  in  the  stable  ? — I  did. 

Where  did  you  see  any  one?— There  was 
one  man  between  the  foot  of  the  Isddar  and 
th^  door,  with  hi^  face  towaids  the  door. 

Did  you  observe  whether  he  had  any  bdltt 
on  ^— He  b«d  two  belts  aoros^  bis  shoulders, 
white  ones. 

^ad  be  any  thing  in  bis  baad  ^t-Id  bis  right 
band  be  bad  a  catbina  or  short  piece,  sobm- 
thing  of  that  kind ;  and  at  his  left  sidei  a  long 
swonl. 

Pid  you  observe,  whether  be  was  a  man  bi 
colour  or  not  ?— On  passing  him,  I  turned  him 
half-round,  and  looked  in  bis  ibce,  and  ob- 
served be  wss  a  man  of  colour. 

What  sized  man  ? — A  tall  stouiish  man. 

Have  you  seen  the  prisoaei  Davidson  )-rI 
b^^ve  $  I  believe  it  to  be  him. 

Did  you  see  any  other  person  in  the  stable? 
•— Thera  was  another  near  tha  manger,  ia  tb# 
furthest  stall. 

Near  the  ladder  P^Between  the  foot  of  the 
ladder  and  the  manger  of  the  further  stalL 

Did' you  observe  what  sort  of  person  that 
was  ?— I  bad  a  very  slight  view  of  htm,  but  he 
bad  a  brown  coat  on,  and  appeared  shorter 
than  tft«e  man  of  oolour,  at  least  a  dark-colattvai 
coat. 

I  believe  Entbven  mounted  the  Udder  first  f 
— He  did. 

And  you  followed  him? — ^l  did. 

As  you  were  going  up  the  ladder,  did  yoia 
boar  any  person  from  the  staMe  say  any  thing 
by  way  ot  abirm  to  the  parsons  above  ?^l  did; 
I  beard  some  person  below  say,  ^  above  men  ;^ 
tbe  l;»t  words  Ware  men,  but  I  cannot  ba  oes» 
tain  to  the  expression. 

Wh&t  did  ybu  observe,  when  yen  got  up  the 
ladder  into  the  loft  ?— I  observ^  a  nvmbaic  of 
men  falling  back  between  the  bench  that  stood 
in  the  room,  towards  the  wall  on  the  side  of 
the  room. 

Did  you  observe  what  was  i^pan  that  beach? 
—I  observed  there  were  lights  tipoo  it. 

Did  you.  observe  any  thing  ebe  $  were  there 
any  arms? — ^Xhare  were  aome  airaos^  hot  ^^dit 
I  cannot  say. 

Do  you  know  Tbistlewood  ?— I  know  him 
now. 

bid  you  see  bm  in  A«  loft  when  yon  got 
up? — I  did ;  he  was  at  the  end  of  ihe  car- 
penter's benchi  with  two  of  three  men,  near 
the  door  leading  into  the  little  room. 

Had  he  any  thing  in  his  hand,  or  did  you 
sde  bin  take  any  tbing  in  bis  band  T-— Ha  bad 
a.  sword  in  his  band. 

Did  be  move  fnun  the  fdaoe  where  he  was 
when  you  came?— Not  in  tbe  fiist  instaiteet 
not  materially  so ;  ba  held  the  sword  at  Ine, 
and  shook  it  in  bb  band  in  a  tUcateoing  afr 
titude* 


1347]  1  GEORGE  IV-  Trial « 

What  did  ycra  do  upon  that  ?— I  dedred  lum 
to  desist,  or  I  would  fire  at  him,  at  the  sane 
time  presenting  my  pistol. 

What  did  he  do  vpon  that?— He  hacked 
into  the  little  room. 

He  retreated  backwards  into  the  little  room? 
—Yes. 

Did  yon  see  Smithen? — ^Yes,  at  that  time 
he  gained  the  top  of  the  ladder. 

Smithen  followed  yoo  then? — Yes,  up  the 
ladder. 

.  And  by  that  time  he  gained  the  top  of  the 
ladder  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  Smithers  adrance  towards  Thistlewood  ? 
<— He  went  straight  forward,  to  the  door  of  the 
little  room. 

In  the  direction  of  the  little  room?—- From 
the  top  of  the  ladder  to  the  little  room  is 
straight. 

He  was  advancing  towards  the  door?—- Yes. 

Upon  his  adrancing,  what  did  Thistlewood  ? 
—Made  a  posh  with  his  sword,  and  stabbed 
him  in  or  near  the  right  breast. 

What  happened  noon  that?— Upon  that,  I 
saw  Smithen  throw  his  hands  up  m  this  way 
[idacribwg  tf],  his  head  fell  back  on  bis  shoulder, 
and  he  exclaimed,  ^  Oh,  my  God  I" 

What  did  you  do  ? — 1  instantly  fired  at  the 
person  who  aid  it,  Thistlewood. 

Your  fire  did  not  take  effect  ?— It  did  not. 

Upon  that  were  the  lights  extinguished  ?— 
At  tne  moment  that  I  fired,  the  lights  were  put- 
iog  out ;  the  flash  of  my  pistol  was  the  last 
light  that  I  saw. 

What  ensued  upon  that  f — Smithen  fell  past 
me,  slightly  against  me;  and  a  rush  was  made 
towards  the  iMder^  and  I  was  foroed  down  the 
ladder. 

Upon  your  getting  down  the  ladder,  did  you 
go  down  by  the  stable  into  Cato-street? — I 
went  to  the  door,  when  two  shots*  I  belieTe, 
were  fired  from  some  part  of  the  stable,  and 
passed  me  in  the  door-way. 

They  were  fired  towards  the  door? — ^Yes. 

And  passed  you  as  you  were  gaining  the 
door  ?— Ves. 

Was  there  any  firing  from  the  window  of  the 
little  room  ? — Yes,  there  was ;  but  after  I  saw 
those  two  shots,  I  saw  a  man  fire  from  under 
the  ladder  in  the  stable  up  towards  the  manger. 

In  what  direction  did  ne  fire  ?— Up  towards 
the  manger  of  the  furthest  stall ;  I  observed  he 
was  a  taU  man,  but  I  could  not  see  any  more. 

Was  he  coming  down  the  ladder?— He  was 
standing  with  his  side  under  the  ladder  in  this 
direction,  and  firing  into  the  stall. 

,  Lord  Chief  Bartm, — ^Towards  your  men  ? — 
Towards  the  manger  in  the  stall;  I  do  not 
know  who  were  there. 

•  Mr.  Attorn^  GenenU, — On  your  gaining  the 
stable-door,  did  you  find  any  firing  from  the 
amaU  room  ? — ^Yes :  some  shots  were  fired  out 
of  the  window  of  the  small  room. 

In  what  direction?  —  Towards  the  stable 
door,  as  if  the^  were  pointed  at  me. 

Did  you  assist  in  taking  any  of  the  prisonen  ? 


Tk$mai  Bruni 


[124s 


—I  heaid  the  cry  of  ^  stop  him,*^  and  saw  a 
man  of  colour,  and  pursued  him,  and  took 
him. 

He  ran  in  the  direction  towards  Qneen^ 
street?— He  did.  . 

Was  that  Davidson  ?— That  was  Davidson. 

Did  he  make  any  resistance  ? — ^He  made  a 
cut  at  me  on  my  fint  closing  in  upon  hiaa^  bdt 
afterwards  he  inade  no  resistance. 

What  had  he  upon  his  perscm  vffaen  joa 
took  him  ?*— He  haa  a  carbine  at  his  side,  and 
a  sword  in  his  hand. 

Was  that  carbine  slung  to  him,  or  had  be  it 
in  his  hand  ? — I  do  not  know  whether  it  was 
or  not ;  I  almost  think  it  was  slung  to  him. 

What  did  Davidson  say  upon  his  being 
taken? — ^I  do  not  recollect  any  precise  vrodis 
at  that  time. 

I  believe  you  assisted  in  taking  some  of  the 
other  persons? — ^When  I  went  back  to  the 
stable,  after  leaving  Davidson  with^two  of  oar 
people,  I  tied  three  or  four  of  them  together  in 
the  stable. 

Do  you  know  who  those  were? — Wiboa 
and  B^nument  were  two  of  them ;  but  tibe 
othen  I  am  not  any  vfray  acquainted  with. 

WUliam  WeUcaait  sworn. — ^Eacamined  by 
Mr.  Gvmey. 

You  are  a  Bow-street  officer,  I  believe  ?— I 
am. 

On  the  night  of  the  23rd  of  Febmaiy,  did 
you  accompany  the  other  officen  to  C«bo- 
street?— I  did. 

We  undentand  that  Ruthven  and  Ellis  and 
Smithen  went  up  the  ladder?— Yes,  th^  did. 

Did  you  observe  any  person  in  the  rarther 
end  of  the  stable  ? — I  did. 

Who  did  that  turn  out  to  be  ? — ^Ings. 

I  believe  you  had  some  conflict  with  Ings  ? — 
Yes,  I  had. 

While  that  was  taking  place,  did  joa  hear  a 
confusion  and  firing  in  the  loft? — I  did. 

And  the  officen  came  tumbling  down? — 
They  did. 

After  they  came  down,  did  you  observe  any 
person  come  down  that  you  knew  ? — I  did. 

Who  was  that  ?— Thistlewood. 

What  did  he  do,  or  attempt  to  do  to  you! — 
He  presented  a  pistol  at  my  head. 

£Hd  he  fire  at  you  f — He  did. 

Did  you  throw  up  the  pistol  he  had  at  all  ? 
— I  put  up  m  V  left  band  to  save  my  head. 

Did  the  ball  go  through  your  coat  ?— Yes ; 
and  wounded  my  hand,  and  went  thiwigh  my 
hat. 

Did  he  do  any  more  to  vou? — I  made  a 
thrust  to  seize  him  as  he  fired,  and  I  received 
a  blow  on  the  right  side  of  my  head,  and  I  im, 
and  he  made  a  blow  at  me  with  a  swovd^  and 
rushed  out  of  the  door,  and  escaped. 

You  afterwards  went  up  stairs,  and  tend 
poor  Smithen  dead,  and  the  aims  tiiefe  T— Yi% 
afterwards. 

John  Wright  sworn.— Examined  by 
Mr.  Gurney, 

You  are  a  Bow-street  patid  ?— Yes« 


fiMdl 


ffSt  Hi^  Trtason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1250 


You  tceompuded  the  other  officers  to  Cato* 
street?— Yes. 

I  will.  Dot  so  throngh  the  particulars ;  did 
you  ttfterwann  assist  in  securing  Ings  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  search  him  T — No,  I  did  not. 

t>id  you  see  him  searched  ? — No,  I  did  not. 
'  Had  you  any  conflict  with  any  mah  in  the 
•ti^le  T — ^Yes,  with  the  prisoner  Ings ;  I  took  a 
loufe  find  a  sword  from  him. 

Was  that  while  your  brother  officers  were 
to  the  loft?— It  was. 

What  kind  of  knifie  ?— A  butcher's  knife. 

Any  thing  particular  with  the  handle? — 
Tied  round  with  wax  end. 

After  that,  I  believe  tou  were  knocked 
down,  and  be  escaped  from  you? — I  was 
knocked  down,  and  received  a  stab  in  my 
side. 

He  was  taken  shortly  afterwards? — ^He  was 
taken  diat  night. 

Jo$eph  Champion  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  LUtUdak. 

'  I  believe  you  are  one  of  the  Bow-street 
patrole?— Yes. 

Were  you  in  Cato-street  on  the  evening  of 
the  2drd  of  February? — I  was. 

Amongst  others,  d6  you  remember  seeing 
Ings  there  ? — I  do ;  he  was  standing  at  the 
ibot  of  the  ladder  when  we  went  into  the 
^ble,  and  as  Ruthven  was  going  up  the 
ladder,  he  cried  out  take  care  above. 

Wflls  Westcoatt  endeavouring  to  secure  him 
then  ?'^Yes ;  and  as  I  was  proceeding  up  the 
ladder  I  saw  Westcoatt  knodk  him  down ;  and, 
ks  I  was  goinff  up  the  ladder  I  looked  behind 
tae,  and  saw  the  lower  part  of  a  man's  body  in 
the  hay-rack. 

At  this  time,  were  there  any  shots  fired  ? — 
Several  from  up  stairs;  and  imagining  this 
person  wlu  going  to  lire  at  us,  I  proceeded  to 
the  rack  to  beat  him  on  the  legs,  to  drive  him 
back  into  the  loft  again. 

Who  was  that  ? — I  do  not  know. 

After  this,  did  you  see  any  body  in  Cato-. 
Street  with  a  sword  ?^— I  saw  Inistlewood 
tunning  up  Cato-street  waving  his  sword  as  he 
weot  along;  during  this  time  Ings  had  es- 
caped, and  I  pursued  him  up  John-steet  into 
the  £d^ware  road,  where  I  found  Ings  in  the 
possession  of  Brooks  and  the  watchman;  I 
assisted  in  securing  him,  and  took  him  to 
Mary-le-bone  watch-house,  there  we  searched 
him. 

What  £d  you  find  upon  him  f  —  On  taking 
off  his  great  coat,  he  hsul  two  haversacks  across 
his  arms,  one  on  each  arm,  slung  by  cross- 
belts. 

What  did  you  find  in  his  pockets  ?-rThere 
trai  a  tin  case  with  some  loose  powder  in  it : 
three  pistol  balls,  a  pistol  key,  and  the  case 
of  a  large  knife. 

Lord  Chief  Baron» — In  one  of  the  haversacks 
yoa  found  something?— A  tin  case  of  loose 
powder. 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


Lieutenant  IVederick  fttzdarenee  sworn. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  Bolland, 

You  are  in  the  Coldstream-guards  ? — ^^I  am. 

On  the  23rd  JPebruary  were  you  applied  tOy 
to  go  with  a  picquet  to  Cato-street? — I  was. 

What  time  did  you  reach  it? — ^About  eight 
o'clock. 

What  did  you  first  perceive  on  arriving 
there  ?— In  John-street  1  met  a  police-officer, 
who  cried  out,  "  Soldiers,  soldiers  1  the  door- 
way, stable  !*'  I  ran  on,  and  met  two  men  at 
the  door,  one  of  whom  presented  a  pistol,  and 
the  other  made  a  cut  at  me ;  I  parried  his  cut, 
and  exchanged  several  cuts,  but  seeing  the 
body  of  the  picquet  coming  up,  he  ran  into 
the  stable  ;  I  followed  him  ;  and  on  entering 
the  stable,  I  ran  up  against  a  man  who  cried 
out,  [**  Do  not  kill  me  and  I  will  tell  you  all  ;*' 
I  gave  him  over  to  the  picquet,  and  went  into 
the  stable  into  one  of  the  stalls,  where  I  took 
another  man,  I  gave  him  also  to  the  soldiers ; 
I  then  led  the  men  up  the  ladder  into  the  hay- 
loft, where  I  found  three,  four,  or  five  men, 
and  a  quantity  of  arms  on  the  table;  the 
soldiers  came  up  and  took  them  all  into  cus- 
tody. 

Did  you  see  any  person  lying  upon  the  floor 
of  the  loft  ? — Yes,  I  did,  he  was  rising ;  half 
lying  and  half  rising. 

Did  you  find  any  person  ?— Yes,  I  did ;  on 
lifting  my  feet,  I  touched  the  feet  of  poor 
Smithers. 

Samuel  Heradei  Taunton  sworn.—    * 
Examined  by  Mr.  Oumey. 

You  are  an  officer  of  Bow-street  ?  —  Yes,  I 
am. 

On  the  morning  of  Thursday  the  24th  of 
February,  did  you  go  to  the  lodgings  of  the 
prisoner  Brunt  ? —  I  did. 

Did  you  apprehend  him? — I  did. 

At  about  what  hour  ?  -^  Between  seven  and 
eight  in  the  morning. 

What  room  did  you  find  him  in  ? — In  a  front 
two-pair  of  stairs  room. 

You  had,  I  suppose,  another  officer  with 
you? — ^There  was. 

Did  you  leave  him  in  the  front  room  in 
custody  of  that  officer,  and  go  and  search  the 
back-room  two  pair  of  stairs  ? — Yes,  I  did. 

I  need  not  take  the  enumeration  of  that 
now,  but  did  you  find  a  quantity  of  fire-balls, 
grenades,  gunpowder  and  other  things?-— I 
did. 

In  two  baskets? — ^In  two  baskets. 

Did  you,  upon  that,  return  to  his  room, 
and  question  him  upon  the  subject  of  these 
thinss  ?— I  did. 

What  did  he  sav?— He  denied  having  that 
lodging ;  he  said  he  had  nothing  to  do  with 
that  room. 

Did  you  ask  him  about  these  things? — ^I 
did ;  he  said  he  did  not  know  any  thing  of 
them. 

Did  you  ask  him  who  had  had  thMroom  ?•— 
No,  I  did  not  at  that  time;  I  sent  down  for 
the  landlady;  Mary  Rogers. 

4L 


1251]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  John  Thamoi  Brunt 


[\m 


She  came  up  ? — Yes. 

Did  you  ask  her  any  questions  in  his  pre- 
sence ?— I  did. 

What  did  you  ask  of  her  P — ^I  asked  of  her, 
who  occupied  that  room ;  she  answered,  diat 
some  man  had  taken  it  in  company  widi  the 
prisoner,  Brunt;  I  inquired  of  the  prisoner, 
who  is  that  man ;  he  denied  havii^  any  know- 
ledge of  him  ;  he  had  only  seen  him  once  in  a 
puhlic-house. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more  about  htm  ?— 
No ;  that  was  all  that  passed. 

You  took  him  into  custody  and  took  him 
away  P— Yes,  I  did. 

Did  you  then  proceed  to  the  lodging  of 
Tidd  ?— I  did  so. 

Did  you  there  find  some  more  grenades,  and 
cartridges,  and  bullets  ? — I  did. 

Mr.  Gumey, — ^That  is  all  I  propose  to  ask 
him  at  present ;  the  enumeration  we  need  not 
go  through  twice. 

Lord  CiU^Bortm.— No. 

Daniel  Biihop  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Chtmey, 

You  are  an  officer  of  Bow-street  ?»I  am. 

Did  yon  apprehend  the  prisoner,  Thistle- 
wood  ? — I  dia. 

When  ?— On  the  24th  of  February. 

That  was  Thursday,  the  momiug  after  the 
Cato-street  affair  ? — ^Yes. 

At  about  what  time? — Between  ten  and 
eleyen. 

Where?— At  No.  8,  White-street,  little 
Moorfields. 

At  a  house  kept  by  whom  P — Kept  by  Mrs. 
Harris. 

Where  was  his  own  lodging  ?— In  Stanhope- 
street,  Clare-market. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — Does  his  family  reside 
there  P 

Mr.  Gtim^.— Did  his  wife  and  son  lire 
in  Stanhope-street  with  him? — I  understand 
they  did. 

Mr.  Gtinify.^That  will  be  all,  except  the 
production  of  the  amnunition  and  the  arms. 

Lord  C%i^Baron.-^entlemen,  there  is  no 
other  evidence  to  be  produced  but  the  arms, 
and  as  we  cannot  possibly  conclude  to-night, 
and  you  must  necessarily  therefore  be  kept  for 
the  night,  it  is  better  to  rise  now  than  have  the 
arms  and  a  great  deal  of  powder  produced 
now ;  we  shall  meet  to-morrow  morning  at  nine. 

[A^aumed  ta  ta-tnorrow  momingf  at  nmeo*clocL'] 


SESSIONS  HOUSE  OLD  BAILEY. 

TuzsDAT,  Apbil  35th,  1820. 

The  Prisoner  was  set  to  the  Bar;  William 
Davidson,  Richard  Tidd,  James  William 
Wilson,  John  Harrison,  Richard  Bradbum, 
John  Shaw  Strange,  James  Gilchrist,  and 
Charles  Cooper,  being  placed  behind  him. 


George  Tkomat  Jootfk  JUrfAoM  called  agiiiL- 
Examined  by  Mr,  GanKy. 

Do' there  now  lie  upon  the  taUt  the  vu 
found  at  Cato-street  ?~There  do. 

Except  some  of  the  pike^iSTBif-Tk 
dozen  oipike-staves. 

I  obsenre  these  pike-staves  sie  kmk^ 
except  some  from  which,  owing  to  the  glees' 
ness  of  the  wood,  the  ferrules  have  falleD  of! 
— ^Yes,  they  were  all  ferraled  at  the  time  tkej 
were  found. 

And  holes  bored  for  the  purpose  of  leeeifng 
something  ? — ^Yes. 

Mr.  Banm  Oorroio.— Were  they  takes  iitke 
loft  ?— In  the  loft,  or  in  the  stable. 

Mr.  Gvmey, — Did  you  also  find  these  pike 
heads,  some  of  them  being  bayonets,  and  smk 
of  them  old  files  ?— The  soldiers  foond  thesi. 

Mr.  Guniey. — ^We  have  here,  my  lord,eTB7 
person  who  found  each  article,  but  mylemed 
niends  do  not  exact  our  calling  them,  'te 
holes  are  made  for  the  reception  of  iQchtlDip 
as  the  pike  heads  ?--Yes.  \0m  wancntdolt 
a$laf.]  ^   . 

What  quantity  of  other  things  were  tbenr 
-—I  have  not  the  list. 

This  is  the  list ;  thirty-eight  boU-caitniifeSr 
fire-lock  and  bayonet,  one  powder-flask,  tlu^ 
pistols  and  one  sword,  with  six  bayonetspibi 
and  cloth  belt,  one  blunderbuss,  pistol,foQrte« 
bayonet  spikes  and  three  pointed  filev^ 
bayonet,  one  bayonet  spike  and  one  s***^ 
scabbard,  one  carbine  and  bayonet,  tv* 
swords,  one  buUet,  ten  hand-grenades,  tMV*' 
balls,  one  large  grenade  and  bavooet,  nfe 
ladder,  one  sword^tick,  forty  baJl-cirtndJ 
and  one  bayonet,  thiee  loose  balb:  tu  »• 
things  were  found  in  the  loft?— Yes. 

Found  in  the  pocket  of  Bradbum,  sno*^ 
cartridges,  three  balls  and  some  stiios  P 
round  him  to  act  as  a  belt ;  a  pistol  that  Tm* 
fired,  a  pistol  that  Wilson  attempted  to  ^ 
blunderbuss  in  the  stable,  sword,  beM» 
scabbard  in  the  stable,  one  pistol  in^^ 
another  pistol  in  the  sUble,  one  sworn  »» 
stable,  twelve  sticks  with  fewdei;  »"JJ; 
pocket  of  Tidd,  two  baU-cartridges,  vAim 
him  a  leathern  belt ;  two  ball-cartridgtfWJ 
the  stable,  and  ten  ditto  in  Newnbai^JWj 
one  musket  cut  down ;  and  one  swtf*  *"" 
Davidson,  one  haversack,  c'^jjjjj^-i 
pricker,  bayonet,  scabbard,  cartooche^ 
a  belt  round  his  body ;  two  haferrt«»»  ^ 


belt,  and  tin  powder  case  fi"'"  *"& 
pistol  balls,  one  pistol  kev,  and  a  kmie 
irom  Ings ;  one  haveisack,  «>n*'""?y j^ 
teen  ball-cartridges,  three  balls,  on«P^ 
one  pricker,  one  worm  for  drawing  ^JJia 
one  knife  and  a  turn  screw,  one  ftwjw 
receive  a  bayonet,  left  in  the  publiH»oo* 
Yes ;  that  is  correct.  .  ,  ^x^ 

Have  you  the  knife  f-Thatis  it.  [p*^ 

Has  that  the  appearance  of  a  butcher's  kfl*' 
—It  has. 


i 


13591 


far  High  Treason. 


A.D.  1820. 


[1254 


Do  you  find  the  handle  worked  round  with 
wax-eods  ? — It  is. 

Have  you  also  the  knife  case  ? — ^Yes. 

Pot  that  also  into  the  knife-case.  [It  um 
dcme.]  Does  that  belt  appear  to  be  of  the  same 
doth  as  the  case  for  the  knife  ? — ^It  does. 

Mr.  Baron  Gorrou;.  —  This  is  not  a  case 
made  by  a  cutler,  but  a  cloth  case  ? 

Mr.  Otamof, — ^Yes,  my  lord,  it  is  made  of 
Uoe  cloth ;  the  witness  seeing  it  by  dark  took 
i  t  for  black.  [Several  cf  the  artideiwert  handed 
to  tke  Jury.'] — Produce  the  two  haversacks 
found  on  the  person  of  Ings,  and  slung  to  his 
shoulders.  [IVy  vjere  handed  to  the  Jury,] 
Produce  now  the  hand-grenades  ?  [The  tott- 
net^ produced  the  jmie.]— This  is  the  large  one. 

That  has  a  fuse  in  it,  like  the  other,  I  be- 
lieve ? — It  has. 

Three  have  been  opened  ? — ^Yes. 

And  you  now  produce  the  remainder  here  ? 
— ^Ihere  have  been  four  opened. 

John  Hedor  Moriton  called  again.*— Examined 
by  Mr.  Gutney, 

Yon  have  spoken  to  two  swords  having  been 
brought  by  Ings  to  you  to  be  ground  and 
sharpened;  look  at  that,  and  state  whether 
that  is  one  of  them } — Yes,  that  is  one. 

What  were  the  instructions  he  gave  yon  re- 
specting it? — ^To  nrind  it  at  the  edge  from 
heel  to  pointy  and  likewise  at  the  back  of  the 
point. 

And  you  had  it  done  ? — ^Yes. 

That  was  at  Christmas  Eve  ? — ^Yes. 

&Miie^  Eercula  Taunton  caUed  again. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  Gwmey, 

You  mentioned  yesterday,  that  upon  search- 
ing the  two-pair  back  room  in  the  house  in 
which  Brunt  lodged,  you  found  two  rush  bas- 
kets?—Yes. 

Produce  those  two  rush  baskets? — These 
tore  the  two  baskets,    [yrodwang  them]^ 

What  does  that  basket  contain?  —  Nine 
diiferent  papers  of  tar,  rope-yam,  and  things 
of  that  description. 

Are  they  what  you  call  the  fire-balls  ? — ^They 
jure ;  and  there  were  some  steel  filings. 

Lard  Chief  Boroit.— For  what  purpose  were 
the  steel  filings  ? 

Mr.  Cfumey. — We  suppose  them  to  have 
been  the  result  of  the  filing  which  had  taken 
place.  Supposing  files  had  been  filed  to  a 
riiarp  point,  would  that  operation  have  pro- 
duced the  filings  you  have  before  your — I 
■faovld  think  it  would. 

Have  yon  now  the  basket  which  was  tied  up 
in  a  blue  apron  ? — ^Yes. 
'  What  have  you  in  that  basket  ?— There  are 
foior  grenades,  three  papers  of  rope-yarn, 
ter,  and  more  ing^redients,  two  bags  of  gun- 
powder, of  one  pound  each. 

Produce  those  bags  of  gunpowder  ? — ^These 
ire  they ;  and  five  empty-  ba^,  a  paper  of 
wwder,  one  leathern  bag  withsixty«three  balls 
a  it  [producing  them]. 


Those  were  all  you  had  in  the  basket?^  Yes. 

Besides  that,  was  there  an  iron  pot? — ^Yes. 

Does  that  iron  pot  appear  to  have  been  used 
for  the  boiling  of  tar  F — It  does. 

Did  you  also  find  a  pike-handle? — I  did, 
this  is  it  [producing  it]. 

These  were  all  the  things  you  found  in 
Brunt's  ?— Yes. 

Are  the  four  grenades  you  found  there  the 
same  as  those  which  are  upon  the  table? — 
Exactly  the  same. 

You  stated  yesterday,  that  after  you  had  ap- 
prehended Brunt,  and  found  those  things,  you 
went  to  the  lodgings  of  Tidd  ?— Yes. 

Produce  the  things  you  found  at  Tidd's;  iu 
the  first  place  give  me  the  haversack  [It  was 
produced,] — What  articles  are  there  in  that  ha- 
versack P— There  are  434  bullets,  171  ball- 
cartridges,  69  ball  cartridges  without  powder, 
a  brown  paper  parcel  with  three  pounds  of 
gunpowder. 

Produce  the  coarse  canvas  cloth.  [It  wa$ 
produced,]~^lu  that  what  did  you  find? — ^Ten 
grenades. 

Are  they  of  the  same  description  as  the 
other?— They  are. 

All  fitted  with  fuses  ?— Yes. 

Eleven  bags  of  powder,  one  pound  each  ? — 
Yes. 

How  many  empty  bags  7 — Ten. 

What  else  ? — ^A  small  tin  powder  fiask,  with 
powder;  sixty-eight  bullets;  four  flints,  and 
twenty-seven  pike  handles,  which  are  these 
[producing  them] ;  and  these,  all  of  ihem,  had 
iron  ferrules  round  them  the  same  as  this>  but 
some  have  dropped  off  in  consequence  of  the 
greenness  of  the  wood. 

Besides  that,  did  you  find  a  trunk  ? — Yes, 
this  is  it. 

What  did  that  trunk  contain?— 965  ball 
cartridges,  done  up  in  parcels  of  five  each. 

Oeorgt  Thomas  Joseph  Butkoen  called  again. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  Qvmey, 

When  these  several  fire-arms  were  found  in 
Cato-street,  were  they  for  the  most  part  loaded } 
— ^They  were. 

Were  the  charges  drawn,  in  order  to  produce 
them  here? — They  were. 

Were  they  loaded  with  ball?— They  were; 
one  of  the  guns  with  largish  shot. 

Edward  Haison  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gvamof, 

You,  I  believe,  are  seijeant  in  the  Royal 
Artillery  ?— Yes. 

Take  in  your  hand  some  of  these  flannel 
bags  of  powder;  what  do  you  call  them? — 
They  are  in  imitation  of  a  six-pound  cartridge. 

A  cartridge  for  a  six-pounder  ? — Yes. 

For  a  piece  of  Artillery  to  carry  six  pounds } 
— ^Yes.  Thisis  gunpowder.  I  have  examined 
some  of  these  before,  and  there  was  exactly  a 
pound  of  powder  in  each  bag. 

Is  it  very  good  powder  ?— Yes ;  it  is  ex- 
actly the  same  as  the  hand-grenades  were  made 
of. 


1255]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


TrM  ^Jah»  Homt  ^^nmt 


USfiQ 


In  the  Artillery  you  make  up  tho^  bags, 
not  in  flaDDel  ?— No,  it  is  a  twilled  serge ;  it 
is  rather  stronger. 
,        This  would  answer  the  same  purpose  ?— It 
would* 

Look  at  these  fire-balls ;  have  you  examined 
them  before  ? — ^Yes. 

Of  what  do  they  appear  to  be  composed  f — 
There  is  a  difference  in  some  of  them ;  they  are 
in  general  oakum,  tar  and  rosin ;  one  I  liaTC 
examined  I  found  without  brimstone ;  all  the 
others  I  have  examined  were  with  brimstone. 

Would  any  admixture  of  steel  filings  increase 
the  effect  of  those  fire-balls,  by  increasing  the 
heat? — ^No;  the  steel  filings  would  be  part  of 
the  composition  of  the  priming  of  the  fuse. 

Would  these  fire-balls,  if  they  were  thrown 
into  a  window  of  any  house  or  building  of  any 
kind,  be  likely  or  certain  to  produce  fire  ? — 
Yes ;  they  would  set  any  wood  on  fire. 

What  length  of  time  would  they  bum? — 
Three  or  four  minutes,  according  to  their  size. 
If  thrown  into  the  hay-loft  of  the  King-street 
barracks,  do  you  thinx  they  could  possibly 
avoid  being  burnt?— If  there  was  forage  there, 
it  would  have  produced  a  conflagration  most 
undoubtedly. 

Take  one  of  these  grenades  to  pieces ;  there 
is  an  outer  coating  of  rope-yam  ? — Yes. 

[The  wiinen opened  one  of  tkem  in  the  praence 
qftheJwy,] 

A  Juryman  (Mr.  Aldeney), — Is  that  the 
usual  outer  coating? — ^Yes,  they  are  all  the 
same. 

Mr.  Gurneif, — Is  that  the  usual  outer  coating 
of  hand-grenades  of  military  men  ?— No,  not  of 
ours ;  that  is  iron  metal. 

Have  these  tlie  appearance  of  having  been 
made  by  military  men  7 — ^No,  by  no  means. 

But  mough  not  so  constmcted,  are  they  so 
constmcted  that  they  would  have  a  great 
effect  P — Yes ;  the  more  hard  they  are  bound 
the  greater  will  be  the  explosion  and  the  effect 
resulting  from  it ;  this  I  4taye  come  to  is  a 
piece  of  paper  cemented ;  here  are  some  nails ; 
here  are  a  number  of  pieces  of  iron. 

What  is  that  you  have  come  to? ^ Dry 
oakum. 

Cemented  at  the  bottom  ? — ^Yes. 

Now  you  have  come  to  a  tin  box,  or  case  ? 
--Yes. 

There  is  a  fuse  to  it?— Yes. 

Is  that  fuse  brazed  in  ?— Yes. 

Break  it  off  and  see  whether  the  case  is  filled 
with  gunpowder  ?^[  The  wUness  took  out  thejute 
and  poured  out  the  powder.] — ^Here  is  a  number 
one  round  shot  in  it,  with  the  gunpowder. 

What  quantity  of  gunpowder  does  that  con- 
tain ?— One  I  before  opened  contained  three 
ounces  and  a  half,  and  this  appears  to  be  th§ 
same. 

That  18  as  much  powder  as  you  use  for  a 
nine-inch  shell? — ^Yes,  rather  more. 

Would  it  be  su6&cient  to  explode  the  grenades 
you  have  taken  to  pieces?— Yes,  it  would. 


Do  you  find  several  piaoes  of  icoft  in  that! 
— ^Here  are  twenty-five  pieces  in  munber. 

In  the  ey«nt  of  explosion,  would  those  pieces 
of  iron  fly  about  a  room  like  so  many  ahoi? 
— ^Yes  they  would. 

And  if  thrown  into  a  room  in  whidi  that 
were  fifteen  gentlemen  at  dinner,  in  joer 
judgment,  would  it  most  likely  prove  destruc- 
tive to  the  lives  of  many  ? — ^Y^  it  would,  no 
doubt. 

What  length  of  time  would  it  take  from  iSkt 
lighting  of  that  fuse  to  die  explosion  ?— Neaily 
half  a  minute. 

Mr.  Attorn^  (SjenerdL—lHj  lord,  that  is  te 
case  o^  tl^  part  of  the  pros^ution* 

[The SoUcUorOai^ handed^ a i9ote  totk 
Omrtf  and  their  lorAhtpe  contuked  tegetikr.l 

Lord  Chirf  Baron, — Mr.  Solicitor-geoeral: 
we  shall  certainly  take  an  opportunity  ol 
noticing  this  circumstance  of  the  sheriA  coa- 
ceming  the  students,  who  are  not  allowed  ts 
come  to  the  place  whiph  ought  to  be  kept  ea- 
tirely  for  them. 

Sheriff  Parkini^ — Certainly,  my  lord,  it  is  a^ 
desire  that  it  should  be  so ;  I  have  vrished  it 
should  be  so  from  the  commencement;  it  b 
not  my  fault. 

Lord  Chief  Boron.— I  do  not  say  there  his 
been  a  fault  any  where. 

Sheriff  Parhm, — ^Yes,  there  has  beeoa&ilt; 
an  authority  has  been  exercised,  but  not  wilk 
my  authority  at  all,  but  against  my  antbority. 

Lord  Clvief  Baron, — ^This  box  is  for  them, 
and  you  find  it  so  laid  down  in  Mr.  Justice 
Foster's  publication,  and  also  b^  Mr.  Justice 
Kelynge ;  we  must  insist  that  it  aliall  he  at- 
tenoed  to ;  accommodation  must  be  made  ibr 
those  gentlemen. 

Mr.  Baron  Gamno^ — I  was  yeiy  mavj  yaaa^ 
ago  in  the  habit  of  attenduojg  here  vhea  a 
student,  and  it  occurred  to  us  that  upe  wan 
intenrupted,  on  which  t  had  oonfisrenoe  vidi 
other  gi^tlemen,  and  we  mrbposed  this  rcgaia- 
tion,  which  was  immediately  madfl^ — that  eve^ 
gentleman  who  presented  himself  with  his 
certificate  that  he  was  a  student  of  one  of  the 
Inns  of  court,  and  in  his  gown,  should  he  ad* 
mitted,  and  no  other  pemoii  admitted,  unless 
there  was  ample  room  for  the  students.  I  re- 
member one  occasion  on  which  an  applicatiflai 
was  made  to  the  cburt,  and  I  was  the  author 
of  that  applicatioiL 

A  Student, — ^We  are  very  mudi  obliged  ta 
your  lordship. 


.     Lord  Chi(^ Baronj^J^ isof  great  nuVUe im- 
portance, that  gentlemea  wLo  stu47  the  law 
should  have  access  to  the  court. 
[All  who  were  not  gtudents  were  tsMiedisft^ 
cofi^U  to  retire  from  the  ttvdemtt  ioT*] 

DBFENCB. 

Mr.  CSMnoood.— <}tntl^9aa9  of  UpA  joxyclf 


13A7!] 


far  High  Tnmov* 


A.  D.  1890. 


UfW8 


YOU  had  been  iecluded  for  the  Ifai  week 
from  a  knowledge  of  what  has  been  passing 
in  this  court,  some  at  least  of  the  observations 
which  I  shall  feel  it  my  duty  to  make  to  you, 
would  be  unnecessary.  But  as  you  know  well, 
not  only  from  your  knowledge,  but  from  what 
has  been  proclaimed  to  all  the  world  through 
the  medium  of  the  public  press,  that  this  is 
the  third  time  that  it  has  been  my  duty  to  rise 
to  address  juries,  on  nearly  similar  occa- 
sions ;  the  Court  and  you  must  feel,  that 
however  oppressive  the  dn^  was  in  the  first 
instance,  it  has  become  more  oppressive  by 
what  has  since  taken  place. 

In  reviewing  (and  1  assure  you  I  have  done 
tt  with  anxious  consideration)  my  own  conduct 
in  these  i^uses,  the  coarse  that  suggests  itself 
as  fit  for  me  to  pursue  in  this  particular  case 
(and  I  adopt  it  upon  the  best  consideration  I 
am  able  to  give  the  matter)  appears  to  me  to 
be  not  to  attempt  to  address  you  in  what  may 
be  called  a  speech,  but  rather  to  consider 
myself  in  your  situation,  as  a  juryman,  and 
calmly,  deliberately,  and  with  the  utmost  care 
and  attention,  weigh  the  evidence  that  has 
been  given  in  this  case,  and  see  how  far  it 
lupplies  to  the  issue  which  you  have  to  try. 
\Voatever  may  have  passed  on  former  occasions, 
whatever  former  verdicts  may  have  been,  I  am 
sure  I  need  not  tell  you,  that  you  are  to  judge 
of  this  case  according  to  the  impression  which 
the  evidence  in  this  case  shall  make  on  your 
minds ;  and  it  is  not  without  some  degree  of 
confidence,  tbatl  hope,  upon  adueconsideration 
of  thee?idence,youmay  nnd  youiselvesjustified 
in  giving  a  verdict  of  not  guilty  in  favour  of 
tliis  prisoner.  Because  I  confess  thai  when 
I  first  heard  the  evidence  which  has  been  now 
thrice  repeated,  detailed,  it  produced  a  con« 
▼ictiou  in  my  mind,  which  upon  more  serious 
consideration  (and  I  have  turned  it  over  in  my 
mind  repeatedly)  I  do  not  think  it  deserves. 
And  if  an^  of  you  should  think  as  I  do,  not- 
withstanding what  bi^  pass^  on  former  oc^ 
casions,  you  will  be  bound  t/o  act  upon  ypur 
present  amended  judgments,  and  not  upon 
your  former.  However,  before  we  can  apply 
the  evidence,  it  is  necessary  that  you  should 
consider  the  charge  to  which  that  evidence  is 
to.be  applied ;  and  you  will  consider  (I  will  not 
go  now  into  the  details  of  the  indictment),  that 
the  charge  you  have  to  t^,  is  whether  the 
prisoner  is  guil^  or  not  guilty  of  laces  which 
anvmnt  to  high  treason ;  it  is  not  enough  for 
you  to  be  convinced  that  he  meditated  to  corn- 
mi^  a  very  atrocious  crime;  it  is  not  enough 
ibr  you  to  be  convinced  that  he  mesMit  to  raise 
a  great  commotion  in  the  town;  it  is  not 
enough  even  for  you  to  be  convinced  that  he 
medimed  that  m.Q^  honid  crime,  as  every  man 
iaasX  feel  it  to  b^,  the  assassination  of  all  his 
majesty's  ministers.  If  you  believe  all  this, 
and.  stiU  do  not  b^eve  there  is  evidence  in 
the  caie  which  satisfies  your  minds  tha^t  he 
meditated  rebellion^  o^  in  the  la^guag  of  the 
record,  th%t  he  ^onspired  to  Hvy  ^v  ^^i^l 
kin  ms^^ty  in  hit  doiffinioQi^  €p;  tl^  porpp^ 


of  compelling  him  by  force  lo  change  his  mea- 
sures, you  will,  notwithstanding  all  the  horror 
you  must  feel  at  his  conduct  in  other  respects, 
in  the  discharge  of  your  duty  to  your  country 
and  to  yourselves,  find  him  not  guilty  of  thift 
charge. 

The  two  charges  in  the  indictment  which 
we  now  understand  are  relied  upon^  are,  that 
the  prisoner  conspired  to  depose  his  ipajestyi^ 
and  that  he  conspired  to  levy  war  against  him. 
Those  are  the  charges  in  questioui  and  are 
both  made  treason  by  a  late  statute,  the  36th 
of  his  late  miyestv's  reign.  ^  Foir  many,  very 
many  years,  the  law  of  treason  did  not  in? 
elude  those  offences;  for  by  a  statute,  to 
which  all  Englishmen  have  looked  i|p  with 
veneration  as  the  best  protection  of  their  libera 
ties,  I  mean  the  famous  statute  of  ^ward  the 
3rd,  treason  was  so  correctly  defined,  as  con« 
sisting  in  acts  and  not  in  intentions,  that  my 
lord  Coke,  in  commenting  upon  that  statute,, 
calls  it  a  blessed  statute,  because  i^  defined 
men's  duties  as  to  treason  so  clearly  and  so 
accurately,  that  no  man  could  fall  into  the 
guilt  of  treason  by  any  thing  like  implication 
or  inference ;  and  that  statute  also  contained 
another  very  important  provision,  for  it  de- 
clared, not  only  tha^  there  must  be  specific 
facts  to  constitute  the  guilt  of  treason,  but  a 
man  must  be  pnvabfy  convicted  thereoi.  And 
the  same  learned  writer  expends  a  whole 
section  in  commenting  upon  the  word  provably, 
which  word  means,  as  he  says,  that  he  must  be 
clearly,  ^nequivocally,  undeniably,  by  evidence 
that  cannot  be  doubted,  convicted  of  their  of* 
fences,  and  not  by  the  testimony  of  fov(l  an4 
guilty  accomplices,  orby  that  sort  of  ^stimoQjt 
which  juries  do  and  must  and  ever  wUl  receive 
with  the  greatest  doubt;  but  he  says,  it  must 
be  by  testimony  clear  and  unequivocal :  and 
although  this  indictment  is  not  framed  upon 
that  statute,  yet  vou  will  bear  in  your  minds 
the  spirit  of  the  (aw  upon  that  subiect;  an4 
though  you  have  a  most  serious  charge  (found- 
ed, it  is  true,  upon  another  statute)  to  Uy,  yet 
you  will  expect  the  treason  to  be  proved  ac- 
cording to  the  spirit  of  the  treason  law  in  thii^ 
country,  namely,  by  evidence,  pure,  unequir 
vocal,  uncontaminated,  and  by  witnesses  09 
whose  testimony  no  suspicion  can  be  thrown  ; 
or  if  you  are  obliged  to  resort  to  a  witness  of 
that  sort,  you  will  expect  him  to  be  ooQfirme4 
by  witnesses  who  are  pure  aud  unsuspected. 

Although  at  various  times  since  the  passing 
of  that  admirable  act  (in  the  diseased  times  of 
the  state  I  may  say)  sjubsequent  laws  have 
produced  many  enactments  of  new  treasons, 
yet  it  has  ever  been  the  effect  of  the  British 
constitution,  when  it  has  revived  from  those 
convulsions,  and  has  recovered  the  vigoui;  of 
health,  to  sweep  away  all  Uie  new-&ogled 
treasons,  and  to  revert  to  its  ancient  ^d  wholes- 
some  law  on  this  subject,  and  I  tru^^  it  m%y 
again. 

But  to  the  law  as  it  is.  Now,  as  ifig  charge 
9ppn  this  ij^dictment  is  the  levying  ifrar,  or 
i^tfier  a  qf^avgimfy  to,  \n^,  ^ar,  it  if  jtm  ^ 


12591       1  GEORGE  IT. 


Trial  qfJokn  Thomas  BrutU 


fl260 


to  consider  first  (supposing  you  belicre  all 
tbe  evidence),  ivbether  the  facts  there  stated 
would  amount  to  a  levying  of  war,  if  the  in- 
tention had  been  carried  into  effect.  What 
Aall  or  shall  not  be  said  to  be  levying  war 
is  a  pure  question  of  fact,  which  is  entirely  in 
the  judgment  and  discretion  of  a  jury  to  decide 
Qpon.  I  do  not  know,  except  in  some  few  cases, 
diat  it  has  been  decided  precisely  what  shall 
or  what  shall  not  amount  to  a  levying  of  war. 
But  this  I  know,  that  a  very  great  and  a  very 
learned  judge,  and  one  most  eminent  not  only 
for  his  legal  knowledge  but  for  his  piety,  his 
honour,  and  his  wisdom  in  all  respects,  has 
given  an  opinion  upon  it ;  I  mean  lord  Hale, 
and  his  opmion  ought  to  have  great  weight,  for 
he,  gentlemen,  was  a  judge  of  such  great  in- 
tegrity, as  well  as  learning,  that  living  in  the 
time  both  of  Cromwell  and  of  Charles,  he  was 
employed  by  both  of  them.  His  learning  was 
so  extensive,  and  his  integrity  so  valued,  that 
even  the  usurper  called  him  into  his  employ, 
although  he  had  the  boldness  to  tell  that 
usurper,  that  he  doubted  the  legality  of  his 
commission,  and  constantly  refused,  on  that 
ground,  to  sit  on  the  crown  side  of  the  court 
at  the  assises.  But  even  with  that  protest,  and 
in  those  times,  Cromwell  would  not  lose  his 
services,  and  Uiought  his  character  would  add 
lustre  to  his  judicial  bench.  And  afterwards, 
when  he  was  tailed  into  the  service  of  his 
legitimate  monarch,  he  equally  opposed  him- 
self to  the  tyranny  of  the  monarchy,  and  was  the 
haX  and  firm  friend  of  the  liberties  of  his  country. 
That  learned  judge,  in  commenting  on  con- 
structive treasons, — and  here  perhaps  I  should 
explain  a  little  more  what  the  law  has  called 
constructive  treasons ;  and  I  take  leave  to  say, 
that  constructive  treason  is  a  departure  from 
the  common  sense  and  the  plain  language  of 
that  admirable  statute  of  Eaward  the  3ra : — 
Constructive  treasons  are  the  inventions  of 
servile  lawyers  in  bad  times  (I  must  of  neces- 
sity recur  to  things  I  have  said  before);  to 
support  the  oppressive  designs  of  wicked 
statesmen.  While  we  adhered  to  the  letter  of 
that  famous  statute  of  which  we  have  been 
speaking,  no  man  could  raise  a  question  what 
was  levying  of  war,  or  what  was  not ;  the  facts 
themselves  would  speak  for  themselves;  but 
when  you  come  to  constructive  levying  of  war, 
you  do  not  know  whether  in  time  every  com- 
mon riot  may  not  be  considered  as  a  levying  of 
war.— Lord  Hale  ffoes  through  a  great  number 
of  instances,  whicn  have  been  held  to  be  con- 
structive levyjngs  of  war ;  and  many  of  which, 
in  common  sense,  would  amount  to  nothing 
more  than  great  and  enormous  riots ;  and  he 
has  these  remarkable  expressions:  he  says 
**  Every  riot  is  not  a  levying  of  war,  because  if 
so  a  great  number  of  acts  of  parliament  would 
be  useless ;  but''  he  says  ^  these  last''  (alluding 
to  certain  instances  which  he  quotes)  ''  have 
been  decided  to  be  a  levying  of  war;  but  we 
ought  to  be  very  carefol  indeed  how  we  let  in 
constructive  treasons,  for  no  man  knows  where 
they  will  end;"  indeed,  gentlemen,  no  man 


does  know  where  they  will  end ;  ^  those  cir- 
cumstances," he  says,  ^  have  been  decided  to 
be  a  levying  of  war,  and  being  so  decided  we 
must  acguieKC  in  them."  Now  I  pray  yoa, 
mark  that  expression,  we  must  acquktce  in 
them ;  when  a  man  says  he  acquiesces  in  a 
thing,  he  means  that  he  gives  a  reluctant  con« 
sent  to  it ;  it  is  not  convincing  to  his  mind, 
but  the  circumstances  compel  him  to  give  a 
reluctant  assent;  and  he  says,  ''if  any  new 
case  applies,  it  is  safer  to  go  to  the  wisddm  of 
parliament,  than  further  to  extend  constructive 
treasons.''  Now  the  way  in  which  I  mean  to 
apply  the  doctrine  of  that  great  man,  who  in 
the  words  of  wisdom  thus  lamented  the  exten- 
sion of  law  by  construction,  is  this :  if  my 
learned  friend,  the  Attorney-general,  cannot 
show  you  a  precedent  exactly  in  point,  where 
the  courts  or  law  have  ruled  that  a  riot,  or  an 
attempt  of  this  kind,  has  been  distinctly  held  to 
be  a  treason  and  a  levying  of  war;  then,  I  say, 
you  will  follow  the  advice  of  that  great  and  leann 
ed  judge,  and  not  for  the  first  time  enlarge  con- 
structive treason,  by  declaring  the  circam- 
stances  in  evidence  to  be  a  levying  of  war, 
which  never  before,  that  I  know  of,  has  been 
so  held.  For  if  this  be  so,  every  resistance  to 
lawful  government  may  be  considered  a  levy- 
ing of  war ;  and  every  riot  in  a  play  hovae, 
where  the  guards  are  called  in,  and  a  resistance 
is  made  to  them,  may  be  held  to  be  high  trea- 
son, by  resisting  the  king's  troops.  Such 
being  the  destructive  consequences  of  con- 
structive treason,  whatever  you  may  think  of 
the  moral  conduct  of  a  person,  do  not  enlarge 
the  law  of  constructive  treason,  but  fiilfil  your 
duty  and  say,  it  is  not  treason. 

liaving  considered  what  the  charge  is,  whidi 
you  are  to  try,  of  course  the  next  thingis,  that  yon 
should  consider  the  character  of  the  evidence 
by  which  it  is  supported.  And  my  learned 
friends  on  the  other  side  admit  that  they  are 
obliged  to  resort  to  the  evidence  of  accom- 
plices. And  here  in  order  that  I  may  set  myself 
and  ray  learned  friend  right  in  one  respect  in 
which  we  have  been  misrepresented,  it  may  be 
said  and  supposed  (because  it  has  been  sap- 
posed  alreaay)  that  we  have  argued,  an  ac- 
complice is  not  to  be  believed  under  any  cir- 
cumstances; that  we  have  asserted,  that  an 
accomplice  is  totally  incredible  in  every  thing 
he  states.  Now,  I  never  meant  so  to  aiigue, 
nor  did  I  understand  my  learned  fnend  so  to 
argue;  but  we  said  in  discriminating  the 
evidence  of  an  accomplice,  you  will  consider 
how  far  you  can  believe  him;  it  does  not 
follow  that  every  fact  that  he  has  stated  from 
beginning  to  end  is  false ;  but  we  sav,  if  he  is 
not  confirmed  in  any  of  that  part  of  his  tes- 
timony which  ofpUcM  to  the  cAorge  of  high  trtmtam, 
and  in  which  he  ought  to  be  conSrroed,  to 
substantiate  the  charge  on  this  indictment, 
although  he  may  be  confirmed  as  to  some 
circumstances,  and  you  believe  him  to  be  so 
confirmed,  still  you  will  be  warranted  in  pro- 
nouncing a  verdict  of  not  guiHy,  unless  yon 
felt  that  he  was  confirmed  up  to  that  point 


1361] 


Jw  High  TrMscn* 


where  the  crime  of  treason  beg^ios.  Peibaps 
no  accomplice  that  ever  came  into  a  court  of 
justice,  inyeiDted  a  story  fahie  in  ail  its  par- 
ticulars ;  and  if  he  is  to  be  believed  in  every 
particular,  because  he  is  confirmed  in  some 
particulars,  why  then  the  necessaiv  conse- 
quence would  be,  that  an  accomplice  may 
build  upon  a  narrow  foundation  of  truth,  a 
proof  01  the  grossest  system  of  falsehood.  And 
yet,  if  one  or  two  of  his  immaterial  facts  are 
confirmed,  you  are  therefore  to  believe  him  in  all 
the  system  of  falsehood  he  builds  upon  that 
narrow  foundation.  What  therefore  I  would 
have  you  most  particularly  to  bear  in  mind, 
will  be  to  search  whether  you  can  find  the 
accomplice  confirmed  by  pure  testimony,  in 
any  oi  those  facts  from  which  you  can  infer 
the  crime  of  high  treason:  if  you  find  him 
confirmed  in  other  respects,  and  do  not  find 
him  confirmed  in  any  one  of  those  respects 
which  go  to  the  guilt  of  treason,  then  our 
argument  is,  that  he  is  not  confirmed  in  that 
necessary  and  material  part,  which  would 
warrant  yon  in  returning  a  verdict  against  the 
prisoner. 

In  considering  bow  far  an  accomplice  is 
confirmed,  it  is  not  immaterial  also  to  con« 
sider  how  &r  he  might  have  been  confirmed, 
supposing  that  bespoke  the  language  of  truth ; 
and  if  from  any  source  or  means  whatever  you 
see  and  know  that  there  are  other  witnesses, 
who  might  confirm  him,  and  who  are  not 
called  to  confirm  him,  that  of  itself  must 
necessarily  raise  in  your  minds  a  strong 
suspicion  that  if  those  witnesses  were  called 
they  must  have  told  something  which  would 
detract  firom  or  perhaps  totally  destroy  bis 
credit.  If,  therefore,  you  should  see  that 
there  are  other  witnesses  on  the  part  of  the 
Crown  that  could  confirm  him  as  to  that  which 
is  most  material,  namely  as  to  those  foots 
which  constitute  the  guilt  of  high  treason,  and 
they  are  not  put  into  the  witness-box,  judging 
safely  and  wisely,  you  will  say  you  will  not 
convict  on  evidence  which  is  unconfirmed,  and 
which  might  be  confirmed  if  true. 

It  may  be  said  there  are  also  vritnesses  who 
might  be  called  by  the  prisoner  to  contradict 
the  accomplice  if  bis  evioience  be  false ;  and  if 
tbey  are  not  called,  it  must  be  taken  tliat  his 
evidence  is  true. — If  you  do  not  find  those 
witnesses  called,  I  admit  you  will  ask  your- 
selves why  are  they  not  called?  Is  it  in  the 
Eower  of  the  prisoner  to  call  them  P  Could 
e  easily  obtain  them  ?  But  if  in  answer  to 
that  question,  you  find  that  he  could  not  bring 
Ids  vritnesses  here  without  a  halter  about  their 
own  necks,  is  it  probable,  you  will  say,  that 
be  could  use  sufficient  influence  to  induce 
witnesses  to  come  forward  under  those  circum- 
stances to  give  evidence  in  his  fiivour?  It  is 
not  to  be  expected  that  any  process  of  the 
court,  or  any  process  that  is  issued  to  bring 
-witnesses,  or  even  any  inducement  of  friend- 
ship will  prevail  upon  men  to  come  forward 
and  put  themselves  into  so  perilous  a  situation. 
I  observe  my  learned  friend,  the  Solicitor- 


A.  D«  1820«  [1262 

general^  makes  a  note  of  what  I  now  say,  bom 
which  I  suppose  he  feels  the  argument  may^ 
be  easily  answered ;  it  might  be  so,  if  these 
were  witnesses  of  perfect  innocence,  but  I  do 
not  put  them  as  witnesses  of  perfect  innocence 
though  they  may  not  have  been  guilty  of  high 
treason,  they  may- have  been  guilty  of  enough 
to  make  it  a  fearful  thing  for  them  to  appear 
here.  And  they  will  not  come  here  either  to 
disclose  their  own  crimes,  or  hazard  their 
personal  safety ;  though  if  they  had  eome  and 
bad  admitted  their  own  crimes,  they  might  safelv 
swear  they  had  participated  in  nothing  which 
amounted  to  the  crime  of  high  treason.  There 
is  that  peculiarity  in  this  case — ^and  it  is  the 
misery  and  wretchedness  of  the  thing — that  a 
man  standing  here  in  my  situation,  as  advo- 
cate for  the  prisoner,  cannot  go  to  the  jury  as 
in  a  case  of  perfect  guilt  or  perfect  innocence, 
but  here  I  am  bound  to  admit  there  is  proof 
of  much  guilt  and  enormous  crime,  at  least  a 
meditation  of  guilt  and  enormous  crime; 
though  I  think  I  am  justified  in  contending,  as 
I  do  contendi  that  it  b  not  the  guilt  oi  high 
treason. 

As  I  said  before,  in  the  execution  of  my 
duty  to-day,  I  shall  endeavour  to  reason  upon 
the  evidence  as  though  I  were  one  of  your* 
selves.    I  hope  I  shall  not  be  betrayed  even  to 
raising  my  voice  from  that  pitch  necessary  fbr 
you  to  hear  me.    You  will  consider  if  yotf 
please  what  the  plot  is,  that  is,  the  plot  of 
treason,  and  who  it  is  that  states  the  main 
parts  of  it,  indeed  all  of  it  which  constitutes 
the  treason.    All  the  particulars  which  relate 
to  treason  are  stated  by  the  witness  Adams 
alone.    You  have  had  before  you  three  wit- 
nesses, who  speak  distinctly  to  certain  parts 
of  the  plot,  and  of  certain  things  to  be  done : 
Adams,  Monument,  and  Hiden.   I  admit  they 
all  speak  to  so  much  of  the  transaction  as  is 
confirmed  by  the  state  of  things  in  Cato-street ; 
but  there  is  a  material  distinction  to  be  taken 
between  what  passed  at  Cato-street,  and  what 
is  supposed  to  have  passed  in  the  course  of 
the  pnor  deliberations  at  Ings's  committee- 
room.    I  hope  I  shall  be  able  to  convince  you 
that  all  that  passed  at  Cato-street  is  confir- 
matory only  of  so  much  of  the  supposed  de- 
liberations as  related  to  that  horrid  deed,  the 
assassination,  which  I  am  afraid  was  in  contem- 
plation ;  all  that  passed  there  is  confirmatory 
of  that  statement  only,  but  I  say  is  not  confirm 
matoryofthe  supposed  deliberations  to  over- 
throw the  government ;  that  I  say  rests  solely 
upon  the  testimony  of  Adams.    Now  who  is 
Adams?— Let  us  pause,   and   consider  the 
manner  in  which  he  represented  himself.    I 
take  his  character  accoraing  to  his  own  ac- 
count of  it.    That  he  was  implicated  in  the 
whole  of  the  plot  whatever  it  was,  cannot  fbr- 
a  moment  be  denied ;  he  avows  that  he  unhe« 
sitatingly  mixed  with  those  conspirators  whose 
object  was  cold-blooded  assassination  (when 
I  speak  of  the  thing  I  always  tell  you  I  want 
words  to  express  the  degree  of  horror  every 
man  must  feel  at  that  dreadful  plot  of  asnssi- 


190S]       16B0R6BIT. 


Trial  ^Jokm  Tkmmu  Bnna 


C1S64 


mtMa  of  wkicft  wo  haveKmd m miM£);bat 
bo,  withovt  nmoi9%  joued  in  it;  he  next 
betityi  his  compuiioiis.  Thtt  does  BOt  add 
■lochy  I  think,  to  his  recommendation,  ibr 
amongst  the  most  depraved  of  mankind  there 
is  sndi  a  contempt  of  treachery,  that  those 
who  have  lost  every  other  bond,  still  haTO 
something  like  a  sort  of  feeling  of  hononr  to 
those  who  hare  embarked  with  them  eren  in  a 
oommoB  caose  of  wickedness,  tliat  it  is  the 
greatest  reproach  to  such  a  man  that  he  be-> 
trays  his  companions.  What  is  he  in  religion  ? 
A  OMB  who  at  the  a^  of  forty-five  avows  to 
you  that  he  forsook  his  religion  and  disbelieved 
the  truths  of  Christianitv ;  then  you  hkve 
before  yon  a  traitor  to  his  king,  the  Mtrayer  of 
his  companions,  a  man  who  has  apostatised 
from  his  religion,  and  denied  his  God ;  this  is 
the  man  upon  whose  testimony  the  whole  of 
the  facts  which  constitute  the  treason  rest. 

Then  what  is  the  stoty  which  such  a  witness 
tells  you  ?  always  bearing  in  recollection  that 
yott  are  the  jndges  of  how  far  he  is  to  be 
oredited.  Why  the  plot  which  he  tells  you  for 
effecting  rebellion  is  one  so  very  ridicidoosi 
that  it  conld  do  nothing  more  than  excite 
laughter  and  ridicule  in  the  minds  of  sensible 
men,  if  it  were  not  mixed  up  with  so  much 
borror  in  other  respects,  as  bears  down  all 
inclination  to  langh,  and  stifles  all  propensity 
lo  ridicide.  But  if  it  were  not  mixed  up  with 
other  matters  of  more  serious  aspect,  the 
thing  is  so  ridiculous,  that  if  it  were  told  upon 
the  credit  of  the  most  unexceptionable  witness 
living,  you  would  not  believe  it  for  a  moment, 
you  could  not  receive  it  with  a  mve  conn  to* 
nance,  and  yet  von  are  required  to  believe  it 
because  it  is  told  you  upon  the  testimony  of  a 
nan  against  whom  I  do  not  say  too  much 
when  I  say  that  he  is  one  of  the  most  base  of 
mankind.  As  for  as  relates  to  the  treason  of 
this  case,  he  tells  you  that  their  first  delibe« 
ration,  as  I  have  taken  it,  was  a  few  days 
before  the  burial  of  the  late  king.  There 
they  first  broached  this  idea,  and  nowhere  do 
th^y  state  that  they  expect  to  have  above 
forty  men.  It  was  then  he  says  they  first 
broached  the  ridiculous  story  that  they  were 
to  take  the  two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray's-inn- 
lane.  Now  as  to  that,  all  the  use  it  is  possi- 
ble they  could  make  of  them  roust  have  been 
veiy  small  indeed ;  because  it  does  not  appear 
that  thev  had  any  balls  or  any  ammunition ;— * 
th^  had  half  a  doien  flannel  bsigs,  which  it  is 
said  were  meant  for  cannon  cartridges ;— they 
are  to  take  six  other  pieces  of  cannon  from  the 
Artillery-ground ;— they  are  to  assassinate  his 
majesty  s  ministers; — they  are  to  fire  the  town; 
—they  are  to  snrronnd  LoDdon ; — ^for  that  is 
part  of  their  plan ; — ^for,  vou  recollect,  not  an 
orderly  was  to  go  to  Windsor  to  recal  the 
troops ; — they  were  to  prevent  even  one  ordev- 
ly^  by  any  rout,  reachmg  Windsor,  of  giving 
notice  to  the  soldiers  there ; — and  even  if  he 
did  ^et  there,  they  were  of  opinion  that  the 
soldiers  would  be  too  tired  to  return  to  rescue 
this  great  dty,  and  they  should  easily  hold 


London ;— they  ifere  to  send  to  nio  sen-ports  $ 
—and  then  he  throws  in  that  which  be  bas 
somehow  or  other  found  to  be  veiy  neoeannryy 
tbey  were  to  take  the  Mansion-house  as  the 
seat  of  provisional  government!  I  ha:ve  not 
written  the  evidence  three  times  orer,  but  I 
think  it  was  on  this  occasion  he  said  tbey  were 
to  dig  a  trench  round  London  to  impede  the 
march  of  cavalrv.  If  such  a  plot  as  mis  were 
told  you,  could  you  believe  it  to  be  adopted 
by  men  out  of  Bedlam.  My  learned  frieodsy 
the  Attorney  and  Solicitor-generals,  both  fetU 
ing  the  ridicule  whidi  must  foil  on  sndi  a 
statement,  say,  men  of  ardent  minds  (I  do  net 
affect  to  use  their  exactexpressions,  and  tbevs* 
fore  I  shall  not  do  it  so  forcibly)^  bent  on  their 
ultimate  objects,  oveilook  all  intermediaie 
difficulties.  I  sive  my  learned  friend  eredit 
for  the  truth  of  Uiat  observation.  I  adnrit  aseii 
bent  on  ultimate  objects,  will  overlook  inter* 
mediate  difficulties,  but  they  must  be  objects 
which  come  within  the  reach  of  probability 
or  possibility.  Men  who  walk  about  the  town 
wittioot  a  strait  waistcoat  cannot  oveikwA 
some  things.  There  are  certain  diffio^ies 
which  men  with  even  the  gUmmenngs  of  an 
understanding  cannot  overlook.  If  the  pri- 
soner and  his  confoderates  had  been  statea  to 
have  met  and  conspired  to  batter  down  Mew- 
gate  with  peashooters,  it  is  not  a  wbit  more 
ridiculous  1  for  they  might  as  well  attempt  to 
batter  dovm  the  massy  walls  of  that  prison 
with  peashooters,  as  they  could  attempt  to 
attain  their  supposed  ol^ects  with  tbe  force 
and  means  detailed  in  evidence. 

Now,  gentlemen,  the  inference  is  that  the 
thing  is  not  only  improbable  and  impossible, 
but  so  improbable  and  so  impo!»ible,  that  yon 
cannot  believe  it  to  be  true.  And  yon  cannot 
believe  it  to  be  true,  more  particulaLiiy  coming 
out  of  the  mouth  of  such  an  infomous  witness. 
You  may  very  well  conceive  that  a  witness  of 
this  sort,  coming  up  with  a  halter  aboot  hm 
neek,  and  with  the  terror  of  his  own  gnihy 
conscience  appalling  him  and  disordering^  his 
understanding,  may  invent  all  kinds  of  ab- 
surdities and  fictions,  because  (however  erro- 
neously) he  may  conceive  it  is  the  wish  of  those 
who  employ  him  to  convict  certain  persons  of 
high  treason.  I  say  however  erroneously  As 
may  conceive  it ;  for  do  not  let  it  be  suroosed 
that  I  am  myself  insinuatisg  any  thing  ot  tfiat 
sort;  r firmly  believe,  indeed  I  know  and  am 
satisfied  that  neither  of  my  honourable  and 
learned  friends  would  appear  here  to  ask  a 
verdict  from  von  whkh  they  did  not  con- 
scientiously think  the  benefit  and  advantage  of 
the  country  called  upon  ihem  to  demand. 
They  have  done  right  to  lay  the  case  before 
you ;  they  have  done  right  to  lay  all  the  evi- 
dence they  bald,  sudi  as  it  is,  heme  yon ;  end 
you  will  do  riglit,  and  will  dischai^pe  your 
duty  if  in  judging  of  that  evidence  you  shall 
decide  that  it  does  not  prove  that  which  tbey 
charge  to  be  the  legal  effect  of  it,  if  you  ahaH 
think,  upon  due  deliberation,  it  frdb  short  of 
its  intenaed  objitct. 


laei] 


for  High  Treason* 


A.D.  1820; 


[1266 


I  do  not  think  it  if  ill  be  necessary  for  me  to 
^o  through  all  the  absurd  details  which  this 
man  has  given :  when  I  have  taken  this  gene- 
tal  outline  of  the  case,  you  may  say  it  is  very 
absurd ;  but  is  there  such  evidence  as  compels 
\is  to  believe  it,  however  absurd  it  may  oe  ? 
I  ask  the  same  question,  is  there  such  evidence 
as  compels  you  to  believe  it,  however  absurd 
it  may  be?    Surely  if  it  rest  solely  upon  the 
testinkony  of  such  a  witness  as  Adams,  you 
^U  not  believe  it.    Then  you  will  ask,  whom 
is  it  confirmed  by?  is  it  confirmed  by  Monu- 
ment? is  it  confirmed  by  Hiden  ?    Now,  both 
these  two  witnesses  stand  implicated,  to  a 
certain  degree,  in  something;  in  what  they 
are  implicated,  we  shall  see  by-and-by ;  both 
stand  implicated,  at  least  in  so  much  moral 
guilt,  that  you  cannot  look  to  them  as  wit- 
nesses fit  to  confirm  an  infiimous  witness ;  then 
recollect,  gentlemen,  neither  of  those  witnesses 
Were  present  at  the  consultation,  a  little  before 
the  king's  fiineral,  at  the  consultation  on  the 
122nd  of  February,  at  the  consultation  on  the 
23rd  of  February,  and  it  was  at  tliose  three 
consultations  that  all  that  could  make  this  plot 
high  treason,  is  said  by  Adams  to  have  taken 
place ;  all  that  could  convert  their  guilt  into 
the  guilt  of  high  treason,  took  place  only  at 
those  three  consultations.    Then  if  neither  of 
those  witnesses  were  there,  so  much  of  the 
plot  as  gives  it  the  character  of  being  a  plot  for 
the  purposes  of  high  treason,  rest  upon  the  sole 
and  unconfirmed  testimony  of  that  witness 
Adams.    Now,  let  us  see  what  confirmation 
Adams  receives ;  and  here  I  will  not  go  into 
the  details  of  the  evidence,  but  just  look  at 
the  facts  as  they  are  confirmed.    Permit  me  to 
remark  to  you  upon  one  part  of  the  case, 
where  you  might  have  expected  confirmation, 
if  he  spoke  true,  and  find  none.    He  comes 
here  certsunly,  to  prove  a  case  of  high  treason, 
that  is,  to  prove  a  case  of  intention  to  over- 
turn the  government,  and  exciting  to  insurrec- 
tion against  the  constitution  and  the  govern- 
ment ;  and  therefore  he  savs,  that  at  one  of 
their  meetings,  I  think  on  the  morning  of  the 
23rd,  Thistlewood  sent  out  for  some  paper, 
for  the  purpose  of  writing  certain  proclama- 
tions ;  now  first,  as  to  the  absurdity  of  vnriting 
ft  proclamation ;  he  sends  out  for  three  or  four 
sheets  of  paper;  three  or  four  proclamations 
were  to  be'  written,  and  stuck  up  in  different 
parts  of  the  town ;  conceive  the  absurdity  of 
such  a  measure.    This  was  to  be  the  mode  of 
informing  the>whole  of  this  great  town  of  Lon- 
don, that  the  government  was  overthrown,  and 
that  a  provisional  government  was  sitting ;  to 
be  universally  diffused  by  three  or  four  written 
hand-bills.    But  what  was  the  motive  of  the 
iritness  in  this  piece  of  absurd  evidence  ?  his 
motive  here  was,  to  give  a  character  to  the  meet- 
ing, other  than  it  really  was;  he  is  here  erecting 
their  scheme,  whatever  it  really  might  be,  into 
a  scheme  of  high  treason,  and  thereibre  be 
I^Bves  vou  this  bill.    **  Your  tyrants  are  de- 
stroyed.   The  friends  of  Uberty  are  called 
upon  to  oome  forward,  as  the  provisional  go- 
VOLXXXUI. 


vemment  is  now  sitting.    James  Ings,  secre- 
tary."   Now,  gentlemen,  observe  this  bill ;  if 
it  had  really  been  in  contemplation,  or  if  it 
were  distinctly  proved  to  your  satisfiiction,  it 
would  give  a  decided  character  to  the  meet- 
ing, and  would  certainly  implicate  them  all  in 
the  guilt  of  high  treason.  •  But  have  you  a 
tittle  of  confirmation  of  this  important  docu- 
ment; have  you  a  tittle  of  evidence  of  the 
existence  of  it,  except  as  far  as  Adams  chooses 
to  state  it  P    It  is  supposed  there  is  a  confir- 
mation of  this  fact,  because  at  one  of  those 
meetings,  indeed  at  the  very  meeting  a  lad 
was  sent  out  to  get  six  sheets  of  cartridge 
paper;  but  the  mere  foct  of  procuring  six 
sheets  of  cartridge  paper  I  apprehend  you  will 
not   consider  as   confirmation   of.  what  was 
afterwards  supposed  to  be  written  upon  that 
paper;  if  a  trace  of  one  of  those  bills  had 
been  found  in  existence, — if  there  had  been 
the  slightest  firagment  left,  so  that  it  could 
appear  to  have  been  written  on, — ^if  you  found 
the  name  of  **  James  Ings,  secretary,''  or  the 
words  "  provisional  government,"  or  one  word 
of  the  kind,  I  would  have  said  the  witness  was 
confirmed ;  but  when  there  is  not  the  slightest 
evidence  of  confirmation  as  to  what  was  writ- 
ten on  this  paper,  this  bill  being  almost  the 
only  piece  of  evidence  to  give  a  character  to 
the  meeting,  when  you  find  this  to  be  the  only 
piece  of  decisive  evidence,  and  that  resting 
solely  on  the  testimony  of  such  a  man  as 
Adams,  what  can  you  say  to  it  ? 

There  are  other  parts  of  his  evidence,  which 
if  he*  had  spoken  truly,  must  have  been  con- 
firmed.   If  there  had  been  rebellion  as  well 
as  assassination  in  the  plan,  there  must  have 
been  a  greater  number  of  men  engaged;  it 
was  not  the  twenty  or  forty  men  that  were  to 
go  to  lord  Harrowby*s  that  were  to  take  the 
cannon  at  Gray's-inn-lane,  next  to  take  the  can- 
non at  the  Artillery-ground,  from  thence  to  go  to 
the  Mansion-house,  &c.    But,  if  he  is  to  be 
believed,  there  were  to  be  simultaneous  opera- 
tions by  other  bodies  than   the   Cato-street 
assembly ;  and  this  was  so  near  their  time  of 
action,  that  the  others  must  have  begun  their 
action  also.    Now,  is  there  a  tittle  of  evidence 
to  show,  that  either  at  Gee's-court,  at  the  Bo- 
rough, at  the  Artillery-ground,  or  any  where 
else,  any  bodies  of  men  were  in  motion,  that 
any  attempt  was  made  to  take  the  cannon,  or 
that  they  were  acting  in  any  other  part  of  the 
town,  or  that  any  suspicious  movement  was 
observed  any  where?     Here  is  confirmation 
wanting,  where,  if  the  story  told  had  been 
true,  most  probably  there  would  have  been    . 
some  confirmation;  I  infer,  therefore,  from 
this  also,  that  so  much  of  his  story  is  a  fabri- 
cation.   And  remember,  and  never  let  it  pasa 
from  your  minds,  that  it  is  not  the  believing 
part  of  Adams's  story  which  will  convict  the  man  • 
at  the  bar  of  high  treason.    You  must  believe 
this  story  to  its  whole  extent ;  you  may  believe  it 
to  be  confirmed  in  every  part  of  the  assassination 
plot,  and  yet,  if  you  oelieve  no  further,  yoa 
cannot  find  the  prisoner  guilty  of  high  treason^ 
4M 


I267J        1  OEORGB  IV. 


Tru^^Jtlhn  TkamuBnvA 


[I96t 


After  biB  e^ideoce  is  finiabady  thi69  wit- 
nesses are  called  who  coDirm  him  aerely  aa 
to  the  fuct,  that  a  room  was  taken  ia  Fox- 
court.  NoWy  I  admit  he  is  confirmed  as  to  the 
facty  that  these  conspirators  (for  so  I  will  call 
them  J  took  a  room  id  Foz-coart ;  but  do  noi 
Ibrgety  gentlemen^  that  that  fact  is  not  decisive 
of  the  question.  It  is  not  that  these  men  met 
in  a  room  in  Fox-court ;  it  is,'  what  ww  the 
subject  of  their  deliberations  when  they  were 
there  assembled,  thai  you  have  to  ioTestigate  ; 
that  is  what  yon  must  take  into  your  consi- 
deration beftue  yon  can  arrive  at  a  conclusion 
ef  guilt.  Now,  I  will  put  this  question :  Sup. 
pose  they  had  met  for  any  purpose,  lawitil  or 
mnlawful,  and  one  infamous  witness  had  come 
and  slated  that  in  their  deliberations  they  were 
tonsulting  on  certain  specific  matters  (say 
matters  of  high  treason) ;  could  it  be  any  con- 
firmation of  this  story  to  prove  tiiese  men 
bad  met  together  ?  What  would  be  the  situa^ 
lion  of  mankind  ?  A  dub  of  the  most  inno* 
cent  of  men  may  be  the  subjects  of  an  inform- 
ation to  government.  You  and  I  may  be  all 
members  of  a  club;  one  io£unous  man  may 
aay  that  our  deliberations  are  all  treasonable, 
and  the  confirmation  of  that  fact  is,  that  true  it 
^  we  were  members  of  a  dub,  and  the  club 
did  BBeet  there ;  now,  is  it  confirmation  at  all 
ef  what  Passed  in  the  room  that  men  went 
there  ?  Then,  the  next  head  of  confirmation 
appliei  certainly  to  so  mudi  of  the  statement 
as  goes  to  the  plot  to  be  executed  at  lord 
Harvowby's.  The  wafecbmen  in  the  square  are 
ealled,  and  they  trol^  prove  (for  there  is  no 
impntatioA  upon  their  evidence)  that  foorof 
th«Mie  men  were  seen  watching  about  the 
house ;  is  that  a  confirmation  of  the  purpose 
for  which  they  were  alleged  to  be  watching  ? 
What  is  that  purpose  ?  That  purpose,  it  is 
stated,  was  the  destruction  by  violence  of  some 
of  the  highest  and  most  valuable  men  of  the 
oountiy ;  but  base  as  that  act  is,  it  is  not  high 
treason.  Then,  if  those  two  facts,  confirmed  as 
I  admit  by  unsuspected  witnesses,  do  not  go 
to  confirm  that  part  of  the  case  on  which  alone 
yomr  verdict  can  be  founded,  see  whether  it 
ean  be  confirmed  by  any  other  evidence* 

The  next  witness  adled  was  Monnnent; 
and  he  was  put  forward,  I  suppose,  as  a  wiu 
ness  toconnrm  the  former  witness,  Adams. 
The  observation  I  before  made  to  you  upon 
lus  testimony,  you  will  hear  in  mind.  Mouup 
nent  was  at  none  of  those  deliberations,  and 
therefore  neither  then  nor  now  does  he  affisct 
to  relate  what  pa^d  at  those  deliberations  ; 
bat  he  says  Oiat  he  is  a  shoemaker  in  Bald- 
winVgardens,  that  he  met  Thistlewood^  and 
had  a  oonversation  with  Thistlewood— there  is 
nothing  very  important  in  that  oonversation. 
Afterwards  Brunt,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar, 
called  upon  him  with  Thistlewood,  and  Thie- 
tlewood  at  ooee  told  him  they  had  something 
great  to  do,  and  asked  him  if  he  would  be 
one ;  that  he  had  been  promised  support  bjr  a 
gveet  many  men  who  had  deceiveahim,  but 
now  he  had  got  men  who  would  stand  by  him. 


Brunt  called  again  in  the  aftmnoosik;  «ndhe 
not  being  then  ready,  went  to  Tidd^s  house 
about  half-past  six  o'ctock.  Tidd  said,  he  had 
been  waitii^  for  some  more  people  to  go  with 
bira  that  he  expected  would  be  these  ;  b«a  if 
no  one  else  came  before  seven  o'clock,  th^ 
should  go  together.  Whea  he  came  to  Tidd'v 
he  saw  Tidd  arming  himself;  he  potabmce 
off  piatoia  into  his  belt;  and  as  they  west 
going  along,  he  desired  to  know  where  ib«j 
were  going  to ;  were  they  going  ta  the  Home 
of  Commons  ?  Tidd  told  hin^  no^  they  wess 
not  going  there,  for  there  were  too  asany 
soldiers  there*  Now,  what  do  you  think  of 
this  witness,  who  avows  thai  he  went  out  wnh 
an  armed  man,  and  thought  he  was  going  t» 
the  House  of  Commons  ?  for  what  jnucDom 
youare  left  to  guess.  Buthesays^  Tida  al 
last  told  him  there  was  a>  cabinet  diiuMr  ^  and 
then  he  adds,  he  was  fuUy  awace  whas  was 
meant— 4e  being  fully  aware  what  they  were 
about,  joins  them  in  this  neforiona  sdbene* 
Now,  I  should  Uke  to  ask  my  learned  fiiend, 
whe^er  they  mean  this  witness  to  oonfism  the 
witness  Adams  ?  Isaot  this  rathe?  a  man  who 
wants  confirmation  himself  I  Then  do  ihi^ 
call  him  to  confirm  another  iiJamoiis  vitnemf 
Gvi  you  consider  a  man  a  pnae  wncan- 
taminated  witness,  who^  according  to  \m  one 
avowal,  is  going  out  to  commit  mnrder  ?  and 
then  when  he  is  cross-examined  as  In  what  he 
thinks  of  his  own  conduct,  he  says,  to  be  sure 
he  acted  very  fiolitkUf  I  that  is  the  leader  waf 
in  which  he  speaks  of  his  own  atsodooa  eoo- 
duct*  But,  gentlemen,  you  heard  him  fiuihcr 
crose-eKamined.  If  asi  accompUoe  be  sin- 
cerely contrite  and  repentant  of  hmciiaea,and 
comes  to  tdl  a  story  of  tnuh»  at  least  hie  con- 
duct and  demeanor  should  be  sudi  as  to  eosk 
viace  yov,  that  he  is  so  sepentant  thai  evciy 
tittle  that  he  speaks  is  consistent  witk  tt« 
most  rigid  truth.  When  I  asked  bin,  whe> 
ther  he  himsdf  did  not  attempt  to  aediaoe  aae- 
ther  man,  whose  name  I  do  not  now  laceUeeW 
you  heard  the  manner  in  which  be  ^ifv^uft^ 
that  question.  He  shuffled ;  he  woiyd  gise 
me  no  direct  answer,  he  could  not  reeoQect. 
Do  you  believe  he  could  not  xeeoULect?  he 
dare  not  deny  it;  and  I  will  teU  yon  why  he 
dare  not  deny  it,  becanse  that  nan  aoidhlbt 
called. 

A  Junman  (Mr.  OsoddW).-*!  heliwie  yea 
are  mistaken,  sir;  you  will  paidosknc^  I  bdsBW 
that  came  from 


Mr.  Cunoooif.— (Gentlemen  of  the  Jury;  I 
hope — 

Mr.  SoUeUor  Genera/; — ^It  is  mcieily 
dental. 

Mr.  Guncood.— These  wilnessei  have  .^ 

changed;  they  have  not  come  in  tha  asflM 
order  as  they  did  in  the  last  case»  which  tod  mm 
into  the  error  ef  supposing  that  wl^at  '"**-^ 
(O  the  first  witness  applied  to  th^  seen 

Mr.  GoodMd.^1  auk  peifeetitraMn  e< 
that;  yoa  will  excuse  th^  inteiniptieB. 


13891 


JIW*  Hif^  TreoBon* 


A.  D.  1890. 


[1270 


Mr.  CftmMi^I  am  obKged  to  yoit,  lir,  for 
it  But  this  be  said,  Aat  being  Infornred  there 
wai  a  cabinet  diiiDer>  he  wm  ffeiCactly  awane 
irtwt  tbey  were  about.  When  he  was  eiked, 
why  he  did  not  desert  these  m&Of  the  comsioii 
sHd  fliMBjr  answer  presents  Itaeli^  ^I  was 
aInML"    Could  a  man  be  afraid  of  leaving  his 


oonpanlone  m  the  niddls  of  the  streets  of 
Loadooy  and  ^ng  to  die  fifst  magistiate  forth- 
withy  and  iostaBitly  idisdosing  swsh  a  homble 
ecen^  f  D^  yott  bekLeve  he  mtired  from  fear, 
or  do  ]rou  not  rather  belteTe,  that  he  ceme  fc4r* 
ward  to  speak  what  he  says,  because  the  halter 
is  about  ms  neck  ? 

What  he  says  is  not  however  so  very  im- 
portant in  my  view  of  die  question,  because  he 
does  not  speak  to  that  which  constitutes  the 
guilt  of  high  treason ;  it  is  true,  he  gives  con- 
firmation to  so  much  of  the  story  as  relates  to 
the  assassination  of  bis  majesty's  ministers; 
but  as  to  all  that  which  makes  high  treason, 
namely,  the  deliberations  to  overturn  the  go- 
▼emment,  and  the  proclamation,  there  he,  bad 
and  infamous  as  I  may  call  him,  gives  no  con- 
ftmation  to  that  part  of  the  story. 

The  nesDt  witness,  Hideo,  is  put  up  as  one  on 
wlKMn  you  may  rely,  because  he  is  the  witness 
irlio  told  lord  Harrowby.  I  ask^  must  not  this 
witness,  from  his  own  acoount,  be  deeply  Im- 

Cicated  in  the  iniquity  of  some  plan ;  because 
I  represents  to  you  that  Wilson  came  to  him 
itt  the  open  street^  and  without  any  hesitation, 
witheot  any  ve^  or  disguise,  at  onee  addressed 
liim  upon  the  subject,  and  asked  him,  whether 
he  would  be  one  to  assassinate  his  majesty's 
ditnisters?  That  they  were  waiting  for  a  cabi- 
net dinner,  and  all  things  were  ready.  He 
showed  no  horror  and  no  aversion  to  this  plan; 
bnt,  on  the  contraiy,  aceerding  to  his  own  ac- 
ooont,  he  readily  assents.  The  use  I  make  of 
this  avowal  of  his,  is  this,  that  he  at  least  must 
be  so  infamous  a  man,  who  could  so  conduct 
himself,  that  he  is  not  fit  to  be  set  up  to  con- 
firm the  testimony  of  another  infamous  man ; 
he  is  not  that  imre  and  unsuspected  witness, 
wiM>  ought  to  be  caUed  to  confirm  an  absurd 
and  ridiculous  story  coming  out  of  the  mouth 
of  another  infamous  witness.  Thus  mudi  ap- 
peals upon  the  testimony  of  one  of  those  two 
men  (I  do  not  immediately  reooUect  which) 
that  in  a  conversation  Thistlewood  had  with 
him,  Thistlewood  told  him  it  would  be  neces* 
sary  for  them  to  get  arms  (I  understand  this 
was  MonusMnt),  for  all  his  friends  got  arms. 
This  wiU  he  stated  as  evincing  hostile  inten- 
tions against  the  government  of  the  country. 
Geatlemei^  be  it  so ;  take  that  fact  as  proved, 
thai  Thistkfweod  desired  thmn  to  get  arms ;  does 
it  psove  the  factef  a  deliberation  and  consulta- 
tion to  ievy  war  against  the  king  ?  For  such  is 
Hk  Baaguage  oi  the  indictment,  to  levy  war 
afahnst  his  majesty.  Are  there  not  other 
known  circumstances  to  account  for  this  desire 
to  procure  arms  1  You  cannot  bk>t  out  of  your 
minds  all  the  knowledge  that  you  have  ac- 
quired in  your  intercourse  with  mankind ;  it  is 
a  Mstaftdioly  thing,  bnt  il  isao  lets  true  than 


melaiMholy,  that  there  was  a  great  ferment  i» 
the  country,  and  particularly  among  the  lower 
orders  of  ^e  people,  who  unfortunately  for 
themselves  and  for  the  countiy,  have  taken  to 
die — study  it  would  be  absurd  to  say— but 
have  taken  to  the  consideration  of  politics^ 
You  cannot  fail  to  recollect,  that  in  August 
last,  in  Manchester,  where  there  was  one  of 
those  meetings  of  which  we  have  had  so  many, 
a  very  singular  scene  took  place,  of  which, 
standing  here,  I  would  refrain  from  speaking  in 
any  terms  that  might  be  likely  to  excite  feelings 
of  irritation  is  any  breast;  but  ^s,  is  very 
certain,  that  it  was  a  transaction  on  which  the 
feelings  of  mankind  were  very  much  agitated 
and  much  divided,  and  many  persons,  welU 
wishers  to  government,  thought  that  an  un* 
armed  mob  (however  mudi  they  might  dis* 
approve  of  the  proceedings  of  that  mob)  having 
been  attacked  by  an  armed  force,  it  was  a 
matter  of  serious  regret,  and  they  altogether 
did  not  Quite  with  government  in  considering 
as  proper  certain  votes  of  approbation  they 
had  given  before  inquiry  bad  taken  place ;  but^ 
on  the  other  side,  there  were  muiy  of  the 
lower  ordem  of  people  who  were  quite  out* 
ra^eous,  v?ho  gave  it  a  name  of  great  oppro- 
brram,  ^the  Massacre  at  Manchester;''  and  it 
was  publicly  given  forth,  that  inasaauch  as  the 
military  had  attacked  an  unanned  force  in  their 
delihemtions,  they  would  in  future  go  armed 
themselves.    This  will  serve  as  a  clue  to  ex- 

5 lain  tliis  part  of  the  conversation ;  it  is  not 
enied  that  Thistlewood  was  deeply  embarked 
widi  those  persons  who  evinced,  I  admit,  a 
determined  intention  to  resist  certain  laws 
against  such  meetings ;  and  it  vras  natural,  with 
their  feelings,  that  £ey  should  procure  arms  to 
prevent  their  dispersion;  but  still  that  does 
not  amount  to  the  crime  here  charged  on  the 
prisoner,  namely,  high  treason;  and  that  ex- 
plains satisfectorily  why  diose  parties  should 
have  been  so  anxious  to  procure  arms,  without 
the  necessaiy  consequence  being  that  dl  those 
arms  were  for  the  purpose  of  overturning  the 
government. 

I  have  said  something  upon  the  absurdity 
and  ridicule  that  must  necessarily  follow  any 
supposed  plan  of  overturning  the  government 
with  such  forces  as  these  men  could  raise.  You 
see  before  you  pretty  nearly  die  whole  armoury; 
formidable  I  admit  it  is  for  the  purposes  of 
mischief,  but  for  the  purpose  of  overturning 
the  government— a  government  supported  by. 
the  i^venues  of  all  die  world  I  may  say,  and 
by  thousands  of  armed  men-~the  parish  watch 
would  have  been  sufficient  to  have  put  them  all 
down ;  not  bnt  that  they  might  have  dooe  a 
great  deal  of  private  mischief  much  to  be  de- 
plored ;  but  still  it  comes  back  to  the  question, 
was  it  meditated  to  overturn  the  government  ? 
You  oannot  overlook  the  evidence  that  their 
means  were  so  very  inadequate  as  to  throw  a 
contempt  and  to  faisten  ridicule  on  any  plan  of 
the  kind,  and  dierefore  it  is  not  likely  that  they 
really  had  such  intendons ;  and  so  fully  am  I 
conviJMied)  that  if  tlus  imputation  had  not  been. 


1371 3        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Triid  tfJiAm  Thmat  Brwd 


[1»3 


nixed  op  with  much  at  whidi  the  heart  refoltty 
there  are  hardly  twelve  men  to  be  found  in  the 
British  empire,  who,  if  put  into  a  jnty-boz, 
would  not  have  disbeUeved  the  whole  tale. 

I  have  DOW  endeanroured,  and  I  intreat  you 
to  do  the  same,  to  look  through  the  evidence ; 
some  amongst  you  have  heard  it  before ;  re- 
consider whether  ^oo,  like  myself,  have  not  in 
your  fint  impressions  given  it  too  hasty  belief, 
and  a  credit,  which,  on  minuter  examination,  it 
did  not  deserve.  And  here  let  me  observe 
also,  as  I  stated  in  the  outset,  it  is  necessary 
to  consider  how  far  the  evidence  might  have 
been  confirmed.  Ask  yourselves,  who  else 
might  have  been  called  P  Yon  have  in  evi- 
dence before  you,  that  among  these  conspirators 
there  is  a  man  of  the  name  of  Edwaros,  who 
was  one  of  the  motft  active ;  he  is  stated  to 
you  to  have  been  a  man  peculiarly  busy  in 
making  those  hand*grenades.  The  govern- 
ment have  given  him  tp  the  prisoner  among 
the  list  of  witnesses,  but  he  is  not  called. 
Now  he  is  a  man  that  could  not  only  have 
confirmed  all  that  Monument  and  Hiden  have 
told  you,  but  he  would  have  told  you  all  that 
passed  in  those  secret  deliberations  which  now 
rests  solely  on  the  testimony  of  Adams.  If 
he  is  not  called,  ask  yourselves,  why  he  is  not 
called  in  a  case  of  high  treason,  where  it  is 
most  desirable  that  every  man  should  be  called 
that  could  by  any  possibility  support  the  case  f 
And  I  do  not  say  too  much,  when  I  say,  that 
in  the  great  learning  and  discretion  that  existed 
in  the  learned  gentlemen  on  the  other  side, 
they  did  not  call  him  because  they  feared  that 
in  calling  him  something  might  have  come  out 
that  would  have  discredited  or  totally  destroyed 
all  their  other  evidence. 

There  is  also  another  man^  of  the  name  of 
Dwyer,  who  is  given  us  in  the  list  of  witnesses; 
and  I  may  state  it  because  I  can  prove  it  in 
evidence  to  you  if  necessary.  Dwyer  was 
called  upon  a  former  occasion ;  and  Dwyer 
was  represented  as  a  witness  on  whom  the 
jury  might  safely  rely,  because  he  disclosed  to 
a  major  James  immediately  what  was  told  him. 
Why  is  he  not  called  to-day?  Because  to-day 
there  is  evidence  in  court  that  would  show 
you  he  is  a  witness  wholly  unfit  to  be  put  into 
the  witness-box ;  my  learoed  friends,  therefore, 
in  their  discretion  did  not  call  him ;  so  that 
now  they  rest  their  case,  as  far  as  it  relates  to 
hiffh  treason,  solely  upon  the  testimony  of  that 
infamous  witness,  Adams. 

Many  other  ol^ervations  present  themselves 
to  my  mind,  which  I  forbear  to  state,  as  they 
will  equally  strike  you.  I  hope  I  have  observed 
my  promise;  I  have  endeavoured  strictly  to 
keep  my  mind  cool  and  calm ;  I  have  not  at- 
tempted anything  that  looks  like  declamation; 
I  have  met  the  evidence  fairly  as  it  presents 
itself  to  my  mind ;  I  entreat  you  to  do  the 
same;  and,  even  if  there  should  be  some 
amongst  you,  as  I  said  before,  like  myself, 
whose  first  impression  was,  that  the  evidence 
was  stronger  than,  upon  a  reconsideration,  you, 
loow  find  it  to  be :  I  do  -not  entreat  you,  be- 


cause  I  know  you  will  do  it  witlMNU  mjren- 
treattng  you — ^I  say  so  from  idnt  i  fasicsm 
of  you  upon  former  ooGasioii8--£  koov  jn 
will  not  hesitate  boldly  to  do  yoordstr:  ad 
if  to-day,  with  the  variation  there  it  in  ute  pn- 
sent  case  from  further  circomsUaices,  w'ijn 
think  the  evidence  weaker  than  yon  fonwif 
thought  it ;  or  if  you  do  not  think,  apos  noa 
mature  deliberation,  that  the  eiideoce  eitab> 
lishes  the  case,  I  know  yon  will  hare  the  oai- 
lioess,  notwithstanding  fonner  o^jaam,  to 
find  a  verdict  of,  Not  Guilty. 

Jo/mBenneUswani, 

Mr.  Gtm^.—Will  my  learoed  frieodsua 
to  what  point  be  proposes  to  eianiioe  tkii 
witness  P  I  am  not  aware  of  the  poiot « 
which  his  evidence  can  apply. 

Mr.  CKTiuood.— To  prove  that  whcD|Hiil« 
invited  him  to  the  meeting,  he  told  bim  joa^ 
thing  was  going  to  be  done  there;  be  deon 
that  he  said  that. 

Mr.  Gtffn^.— No,  I  beg  yonr  puto;  I 
have  my  note  here.  "  I  asked  Beosett  to  fh 
and  said,  perhaps  Mr.  Bennett  wooU  go  m 
me  and  Mr.  Clarke,  beinga  neighboar  ofaiBC- 
I  cannot  say  that  I  told  him  somethiosr  w^ 
be  done  -there ;  he  and  I  were  nei#«w 
together.  I  asked  him  if  he  would  go  wittae; 
I  do  not  think  I  could  say  so,  but  I  wiUirt 
swear  I  did  not ;"  bow  his  sUtementis  tobia 
contradiction  of  that  I  do  not  apprehend. 

'  Loftf C^/'Bflron.— It  isconsistent,ccrtaiB^i 
wiih  his  saying,  that  he  could  not  swear  tW 
he  did  not  say  so. 

Mr.  Boron  Gavynp.— It  was  pwjed  ■?• 
him,  but  he  would  not  say  that  hedidBflt««f 
so ;  he  declined  doing  that. 

Mr.  CttTwoorf.— Then,  my  lord,  we  do  w* 
ofl^r  any  other  witness. 

Mr.  ili&>/pibttf.— Gentlemen  of  the  jmT)J|^ 
case  for  the  prisoner  having  dosed  win* 
the  calling  of  any  witness  on  hb  bekal^" 
nevertheless  falls  to  my  lot  to  addres  to  p 
a  very  few  observations,  and  that  arisei  nj 
the  peculiar  benevolence  of  the  law  «  * 
subject  of  high  treason ;  and  when  I  ^ 
that  benevolence  of  the  law,  I  »"*  ^^jj^ 
that  addressing  mvself  to  such  >  J^^^ 
now  the  honour  of  speaking  to,  the  P^^^^ 
of  the  legislature  in  forming  the  sUtutt  •■» 
granU  me  such  a  privilege,  will  not  w^ 
tend  iUelf  to  your  bosoms ;  and  in  prop*^ 
as  you  see  our  wise  ancestors  were  auwj 
that  the  prisoner  should  have  erciy  »«[■  , 
defence,  you  wiU  afford  h"«i€Tcryb»J 
that  defence,  and  will  assist  him  as  sma 
you  can,  consistently  with  your  oaths,  m  IPJ 
effect  to  the  deficiency  of  proof  on  ™^?L 
the  prosecution,  or  to  whatever  you  w*^ 
ceive.favoumble  in  his  case.  ™ jTi! 
of  which  I  am  now  availing  J"/*^^ 
doubtedly  was  intended  as  a  barnflfV^ 


12731 


fiv  High  Trea$dti. 


A.  D.  1820. 


fia74 


tbe  influx  of  convictioiis  from  any  cause  what- 
ever in  a  case  oftreason,  much  more  than,  in 
any  case  of  felony. 

Ify  as  my  learned  friend  observes,  you, 
living  amidst  mankind,  and  your  powers  of 
obsenration,  and  your*  experience  not  being 
circumscribed,  may  be  supposed  to  have  en- 
tertained, even  as  members  of  the  British 
public,  some  pre-conceived  notions  of  the 
merits  of  the  present  case,  if,  I  say,  in.  that 
general  character,  by  whatever  means,  you 
must  have  some  ppinions,  and  have  acquired 
some  knowledge  on  the  matter  about  which 
you  are  shortly. to  pronounce  your  verdict — I 
know  the  majority  of  you  have,  in  a  more  par- 
ticukir  manner,  the  means  of  forming  such 
opinions,  you  having  before  sat  on  the  trial  of 
some  individuals  implicated  in  these  very 
Masons ;  and  being  aware  that  tbe  evidence 
90 w  brought  before  you  varies  but  little  from 
that  which  has  been  produced  on  the  former 
occasion;  and  knowing  perfectly  well  what 
was  then  adduced,  and  which  has  not  been  so 
now— :to  such  a  jury,  even  if  it  were  .my  in- 
clination to  make  a  speech  of  any.  great  length, 
it  would  be  fruitless  and  unavailing ; — ^those 
who  have  been  present  on  the  former  trial, 
know  how  much  I  laboured,  and  perhaps  if  I 
can  avail  myself  so  far  of  their  goodness,  I 
may  pray  of  them,  if  there  were  any.  argument 
upon  those  occasions  which  can  be  made  use 
qt  with  advantage  to  the  prisoner  on  this,  that 
they  will  import  it  into  the  present  cause,  and 
give  him  the  benefit  of  it. 

Gentlemen,  when  I  say  that  I  shall  follow 
the  example  of  my  learned  friend  in  addressing 
you  very  shortly,  it  is  not  because  I  shun 
taking  upon  myself  any  trouble  which  the  exi- 
gency of  the  case  may  require ;  but  I  have  not 
lived  to  my  present  age  without  learning,  that 
be  who  desires  that  his  efforts  shall  be  useful 
to  any  considerable  number  of  his  fellow-cresir 
tures,  must  learn  to  proportion  his  exertions  to 
something '  like  the  probability  of  effect,— 
that  he  who  shows  himself  equally  ready  at 
equal  length,  and  with  equal  earnestness,  to 
urge  every  topic,  may  be  censured  as  deficient 
in  judgment, — and  that  we  do  not  advance 
yur  hope  of  convincing  others,  by  showing 
that  we  are  incapable  of  being  convinced  our- 
«elves.  Now,  although  I  entertain  the  same 
opinions  that  I  held  before,  still,  as  I  know  that 
Boy  two  learned  friends,  the  Attorney  and 
Solicitor  generals,  have  made  observations 
upon  them — as  I  know  what  observations  have 
been  made  elsewhere  upon  some  parts  of  them 
—I  shall  not  advance  all  those  arguments 
ag^in,  not  because  I  do  not  entertain  in  my 
own  mind  tbe  prinoiples  on  which  they  are 
iouqded,  but  because  after  a  certain  time  I 
may  despair  of  using  those  arguments  with  the 
effect  I  have  always  vrished,  and  at  one  time 
«aoguinely  expected.  But  let  me  not  be  nn« 
^ierslood  by  that  to  abandon  the  cause  of  my 
client;  you  know  the  case  as. well  by  your  at- 
tention on  this  as  on  the  former  occasions; 
and  you  know.th^  every  tittle  of  evidence 


which  has  now  been  brought  forward  as  ap- 

EHoable  to  this  prisoner,  has  been  used  against 
is  two  unfortunate  predecessors,  and  will 
equally  apply  to  all  the  other  eight,  who  re- 
main to  be  tried  under  the  present  indictment. 
To  make,  therefore,  certain  observations,  sup- 
nosing  they  are  applicable  to  each,  would 
be  of  little  or  no  avail,  if  you  remember  all; 
which  has  been  said  upon  the  former  occasions, 
and  make  the  distinctions  which  my  learned 
friend  has  made  .to-day,  and  which  it  will  be 
my  endeavour  to  enforce  by  a  very  few  ob- 
servations. 

The  nature  of  the  offence  being  pointed  out 
to  you,  leads  to  the  single  consideration-'  by 
which  you  can  be  influenced  in  making  up 
your  judgment;  is  there  in  this  case  consistent, 
positive,  supported  evidence  of  an  intention  to 
commit  high  treason,  that  is  to  say,  to  depose 
the  king,  either  virtually  or  personally,  or  to  levy 
war  against  him  for  the  purpose  of  com|(^lling 
him  to  change  his  measures  ?  Is  there  evidence 
upon  that  subject  so  clear  and  broad,  that  you 
can  rely  and  stand  firmly  upon  it,  dischs^ging 
from  your  minds  (and  so  I  pray  you  to  do)  all 
the  horror  you  must  feel  aoout  that  which  I 
take,  for  the  purpose  of  this  case,  to  be  indis- 
putably proved,  an  intention  to  do  a  guilty  act, 
but  of  a  different  nature  from  high  treason  ? 
I  am  almost  afraid  I  ask  an  impossibility,  when 
I  ask  a  jury  of  Englishmen  to  discharge  from 
their  memories,  for  the  purpose  of  this  cause, 
that  there  was  a  conspiracy  to  murder  fourteen 
men  of  the  first  eminence  and  character  in  tbe 
state,  in  cold  blood ;  and  that  in  the  progress 
of  the  events  arising  out  of  that  design,  one  man, 
in  the  execution  of  his  dutv,  lost  his  life ;  but 
in  order  to  determine  whether  this  is  high 
treason  or  not,  it  is  necessary  you  should  dis- 
charge that  from  your  minds,  so  far  as  it  may 
operate  in  convincing  you  that  there  was  an 
intention  of  high  treason;  for  if  they  MX-  in 
proving  that  by  other  means,  whatever  your 
detestation  or  horror  of  the  crime  may  be,  yet 
of  high  treason  the  man  at  the  bar  will  remain 
not  guilty,  whatever  you  may  think  of  other 
offences  with  which  he  is  charged. 

Although  I  shall  not  dwell  upon  all- the 
points  in  this  case,  yet  I  implore  you  to  take 
the  whole  of  the  matter  fully  into  your.con.i 
sideration;  to  reflect  upon  the  sort  of  witnesses 
this  case  is  proved  by;  and  to  consider  whether 
those  witnesses,  unsupported  by  others  as  to 
any  treasonable  act  or  intention,  are  suchk  as 
entitle  themselves  to  your  belief  to  the  extent 
which  the  indictment  charges,  and  to  which 
your  verdict  is  required  to  go. 
'  When  I  have  said  on  former  occasions,  that 
this  plot,  of  which  Adams  is  the  witness,  de- 
stroys itself  by  its  improbabitity,  I  mean  only 
to  say,  that  improbability  alone,  if  the  fact 
should  be  distinctly  attested,  is  not  a  ground, 
for  disbelief;  but  that  when  a  man  tainted  to- 
the  degree  Adams  is  (and  he  alone  speaks  of 
the  plot);  when  he  alone,  tainted  to  such  a 
degree,  is  brought  forward,  it  behoves  ^a  juty- 
to  collider  whether  they  can,  upon  his  evi- 


ItTAl       1  GfiOlOA  IV« 


TfMi^JUbi  TimuiiBrmd 


C1S76 


deaoe^  dMsldt  the  ftte  <ol  twelve^  or  itxttab, 
•r  fife  •nd'twiity  »»,  wbo  mre  wippoiod  to 
Imve  ooMpiied;  or  whether  they  have  only 
the  ficiieQS  of  a  0001,  who  ai  the  means  bj 
which  he  shall  hesl  teeune  hie  owa  safety,  and 
laostsiirelyreeoiiiiBeiidhisselftojthepioteetioa 
of  others,  has  iavented  a  story  so  grossly  im- 
fiobable  thai  no  ooe  caft  believe  it. 

I  am  not  insensible  to  the  efieci  of  an  ob> 
aervalioQ  which  has  been  made  in  the  coarse 
«f  these  triala,  Uiat  when  yon  are  to  try  a 
proposition  of  this  kind,  the  rale  of  probability 
tf  a  very  fidlacious  tnt,  because,  ss^  die 
penoni  allttdelo(I  will  not  fl^y  who  ii  was), 
tt  it  were  pat  lo  me,  do  I  or  do  I  not  be- 
lieve that  twenty-five  Irishmen  met  for  the 
Eipose  ^  assassinating  fonrteen  or  fifteen 
l^lishmen,  in  cold  blood,  I  should  say  the 
improbability  is  snch,  that  I  am  obliged  to 
r^iect  it  from  my  mind ;  and  if  I  can  believe 
Aai  on  the  eviMnee  given  (and  it  does  not 
appear  to  be  met  by  any  attempt  at  contradio- 
tionXIoanalso  believe  an^  other  improbabilitv; 
at  least  I  cannot  refect  it  from  my  mind  only 
becanse  it  is  improbable.  I  know  that  I  am 
not  giving  the  verv  words  in  which  these  ob- 
aervatioas  were  delivered ;  I  am  incapable  of 
doing  justiee  to  the  speaker ;  bat,  on  toe  other 
hand,  I  am  not  purposely  diminishing  their 
Ibrco,  merely  becanse  th^  make  agaust  my 
interest.  Itisimpemible  for  an^  man  who  heard 
this  argument,  not  to  feel  it  deserving  of  the 
luglMet  eoosideialion,  were  it  only  for  the 
respect  doe  to  the  indindual  who  produced  it, 
who  adorned  it  not  by  studied  elocatton,  but 
by  a  beautiful  simplicity  which  has  never  been 
exceeded,  and  which  has  all  the  elbct  of  labour 
without  its  eflEbrt.  This  aignment  it  became 
necessary  for  me  to  take  seriously  into  con« 
aideration,  as  it  proceeded  from  the  highest 
authority  in  this  court ;  I  admit  the  weight  of 
it,  but  yet  I  think  it  is  pomible  for  men  goaded 
by  personal  feeling,  misled  by  writers  of  the 
very  worst  description,  by  arguments  the  most 
atrocious,  to  have  conceived  the  rash  and 
detestable  project  of  removing  oertain  persons 
as  obnoxious  to  public  opinion ;  that  they  may 
have  wrooght  themselves  up  to  the  pitch  of 
believing,  that  by  so  doing  they  should  exe^ 
cute  a  great  act  of  public  justice,  and  render  a 
meritorious  service  lo  the  present  age  and 
to  posterity,  and  jrel  never  have  meditated 
that  which  is  so  improbable,  so  destructive 
of  itself,  and  so  incapable  of  execution  as 
the  ptlot  charged  upon  them.  Gentlemen, 
what  is  the  cause?  My  learoed  friend  has 
pointed  it  out  to  you  exactly ;  the  transaction 
which  had  been  publicly  and  rashly  denomi- 
nated, '^Ihe  Massacre  at  Manchester/'  was 
particulariy  thrown  out  for  the  discnssion  of 
the  lower  ordera,  and  when  they  had  been  thus 
inflamed,  every  particle  of  discontent  or  dis- 
affection that  could  be  found  any  where  was 
brought  together  and  practised  upon  by  design- 
ing intriguers,  who  inflamed  and  seduced 
those  whom  they  intended  afterwards  to  betray. 
One  was  peculi^riy  fitted  to  be  a  leader,  and 


that  WM  Tlustiewood--^i 
for  jaan  to  have  been  apresatngbbuBNtmi 
dissatisfaction  against  goveraaisBt— a  im 
who^  for  the  share  he  took  in  oestaiD  gnitaid 
notorions  paMic  meetings,  was  the  mlqeettf 
prosecution  for  high  treason— a  man  whs  ksi 
been  looeally  liberated  for  haring  tfansttssi 
the  life  of  one  public  minister,  and  Nnt  t 
challenge  to  anotner. 

Mr.  Gumey.-^The  same. 

Mr.  ilrfD^vto.'*-!  brieve  it  was  so,  tad  Alt 
lord  Sidmottlh  was  the  sahjeet  both  sf  fie 
threat  and  of  the  challenge.  It  is  aotneotf* 
sary  to  go  into  the  particulars  fiiither;  M 
thoe  were  the  elements  on  which  those  pnt- 
tioes  could  be  dTectually  used ;  and  acosid- 
ingly  yon  will  see,  when  you  come  to  ennisi 
a  little  the  testimony  of  the  witness  Adas, 
how  Thistlewood  and  the  wretcbsd  ignonit 
elements  of  that  conspimcy  have  been  |h» 
tised  on  by  a  perpetual  instigator,  sod  htie 
been  watched  ny  a  peipetnal  spy.  The  efi- 
dence  in  the  preaent  case  rests  entiiely,  n  I 
hope  to  show,  on  men  who  are  to  a  certiii 
degree  implicated  in  the  conspiracy,  ^^ 
have  only  this  inoet  extraordioary  merit « 
having  no  one  of  the  mock  or  inferior  viitsn 
which  distinguish  persons  on  similtroecf 
sions.  if  men  enter  into  a  conspitieT} 
fidelity  to  eadi  other  (how  aracfa  ssercr  • 
crime  in  itself)  ;  seems  a  virtue  if  A^  ^  * 
quality  requisito  in  a  conspirator,  i^  i>  ^ 
courage  which  shall  lead  hiai  throsgh  thi 
undertaking  in  whidi  he  is  embariied.  nit* 
the  recommendation  of  the  wttoeises  «M 
oome  before  you  to-day,  is,  that  tbej  bm 
been  conspirators,  and  therefore  is  bad  « 
those  whom  they  accuse;  but  thw  ^1^  ^ 
die  latent  sparks  of  courage  or  of  hosoor,  17 
having  been  covrards  in  action  and  tfujos 
to  each  other,  for  the  purpose  of  secorisglhtf 

»fety.  ^, 

With  respect  to  the  witness  Adtrw,  M 
alone  has  given  you  the  secrets  of  bis  ^J* 
science ;  but  his  character  has  been  ^™^  !j 
my  learned  friend,  and  I  shall  attempt  to  Ida 
a  little  to  in  You  who  have  had  thst^ 
called  before  yon,  have  heard  that  iHii^iti| 
important  for  you  to  Uke  into  yoor  con»^ 
tionto^ay,  that  he,  at  the  age  of  forty-fi'VJ' 
nonnoed  his  Redeemer,  and  rejected  the  nflff 
of  Dfe;  it  is  by  his  swearing  opoo.thstWi 
alone,  that  you  are  to  give  him  credit;  W  J^ 
not  hear  it  said,  that  on  him,as  00  msny  of^ 
persons,  suffering  has  wrought  contrltioo,  w" 
that  he  has  become  penitent  ifi  P««J»'^ 
be  has  perceived  himself  in  danger.  ^ 
U  the  evidence  of  that  in  bis  conduct  f  woew 
is  there  any  thing  that  shall  vo^^Tf^ 
believe  in  him  who  professes  that  he  dj«  ^ 
believe  in  his  God,  and  giws  »o/«?f  J 
beUeve  that  he  has  returned  to  ^  frij^" 
the  firet  place,  contemplate  bis  tw^Sir 
those  whom,  at  the  moment  of  ha  im^ 
he  seems  to  have  seduced  into  »«°I  JV^ 
aclionsy  and  whom  be  now  csmei  i»^ 


1277] 


Jbrl^b  TrMMM. 


A.  D,  teisa. 


C1478 


to  betny.  Wert  he  an  infideL  ke  was  at 
laast  a  subject  of  tbe  waJm,  wui  had  been  a 
soldier;  for  him  to  join  in  sack  a  conspuracy^ 
shows  he  had  neither  the  valour  of  a  soldier, 
the  loyalty  of  an  finglishmaiiy  nor  the  virtue 
of  a  man ;  and  that  when  he  reuounced  his 
Kedeemer^  he  anticipated  only  that  sacrifice 
of  himself  for  which  nis  conduct  throngh  life 
had  been  preparing  him.  What  reason  have 
youy  then,  for  belicTing  the  incredible  story  he 
tells,  what  out  of  his  mouth  he  ranks  himself 
among  the  most  infiunous  of  mankind,  unless 
it  is  to  be  said,  that  your  condosion  is  to  be 
aided  by  the  very  incredibility  of  the  witness, 
who  comes  to  tell  you  a  story  having  no  re- 
commendation but  its  ineredibilitjr?  Gentle- 
aaen,  of  Mr.  Adams  it  is  impossible  to  speak 
without  horror ;  and  if  I  ever  saw  an  instance 
in  which  in&my  was  carried  to  its  utmost,  it 
was,  when  refusing  a  question  put  to  him  by 
my  learned  friend,  he  used  the  most  esUraor- 
dina^  eipreasion,  '<  I  abstain  from  saying 
what  induced  me  to  do  such  a  thing,  because 
I  do  not  wish  to  do  the  prisoner,  Brunt,  more 
misehief  than  my  evidence  must  do ;  I  consider 
his  family.*'  Good  God !  Gentlemen,  a  man 
with  whom  he  had  been  walking  about  arm- 
io-arm,  eating  and  drinking  with  him,  and 
sharing  the  morsel  his  povertv  could  iU  afford 
for  months  together,  comes  here  to-day  to  lay 
upon  him  every  aggravation  that  can  be  laid 
Upon  thn  name  and  character  of  man,  to 
swear  to  a  moftt  inciediUe  discourse  of  his 
about  not  believing  in  God,  and  yet  praying 
to  God  (a  ciccumstance  totally  unnecessary 
bk  the  present  case^  and  a  ficti<m  inlro*- 
dttced  only  to  give  countenance  to  the  lest 
9i  the  stoiy);  and  then  affecting  to  oobh 
passionate  the  case  of  that  woman  whom  he 
will  make  a  widow  if  he  succeeds,  and  those 
babes  whom  he  will  at  the  same  time  make 
orphans ;  while  he  is  engaged  in  the  task  of 
wholesale  destruction,  aul  will  bring  to  the 

eUows  eleven  individuals,  with  eight  of  whom 
professes  to  have  had  some  acquaintance, 
with  more  as  he  would  make  you  believe; 
although,  with  respect  to  one  whom  he  has 
sepresented  as  having  been  present  at  two 
9i  their  meetings,  when  he  is  presented  be- 
fore his  face,  he  is  obliged  to  confess  that 
4iB-'dM6  not  know  him.  Adams's  story  has 
been  alreadjr  dissected,and  its  improbability 
—its  impossibility  indeed — pointed  out,  and 
k  is  upon  feith  in  his  story  that  the  whole  case 
rests. 

•  If  Adams  wants  confirmation  in  any  ^t, 
yon  •naiurallv  and  necessarily  ask  yourselves^ 
can  that  confirmation  be  given  to  him  }  It  has 
been  already  observed  to  you  that  according  to 
Adams's  account,  there  is  in  the  list  a  witness 
«£  the  name  of  Edwards,  who  has  been  not 
^nly  pieaent,  but  a  material  adviser  and  activei 
agent  in  eve^  thing  dene^  and  Edwards  stands 
tba  most  pioBunenl  man  in  the  wh^  trwsae* 
tira.  Yon  see'*  him  fint,  him  last,  him  midst, 
^witlM>tttend."  Whatever  is  «aad,£dw«ds 
kaa  a  share  in  it;  whatever  is  done>  fidwaids 


has  a  hand  in  it;  and  yet  the  incredibla  AIn 
Adams  alone  is  called.  Edwards,  asAdama^ 
has  expressed  himself,  had  the  title  of  aide^ei* 
camp,  and  yet  he  is  not  called  to  support 
Adams.  Wm  my  learned  friends  say  any 
thing  upon  the  subieot? — ^I  have  no  reason  to 
believe  they  will  from  any  thing  which  haa 
passed.  Will  they  merely  say,  that  Edwards 
would  onW  add  to  the  number  of  accomplices^ 
and  Uiereiore  oiUy  add  to  the  number  that  want 
confirmation?  Then  let  us  see  whom  hav* 
they  brought  to  us  ?  Is  Monument  less  aa 
accomplice,  do  you  believe,  at  this  moment^ 
however  he  may  have  stood  on  former  occar* 
sionst  or  is  Hiden  less  an  accomplice?  Let 
US  see  how  thai  is,  and  then  we  shall  prove  to 
demonstration  who  are  accomplices.  Is  Monu* 
meat  an  accomplice  ?  That  is  beyond  a  doubt, 
for  he  admits  he  did  enter  into  the  scheme ; 
and  he  has  diown  no  one  virtue  to  induce  you 
to  believe  him  upon  his  oath,  except  his  ex- 
cellent  care  for  his  own  preservation^  which, 
when  the  conflict  had  b^n  at  Cato-atfeet, 
led  him  to  bide  himself  in  the  manger,  that  he 
might  be  prepared  to  give  information.  Mr. 
Adams  pursued  the  same  conduct ;  for  whether 
we  are  to  believe  him  sincere^  or  to  believe 
as  I  believe  him,  a  sfy  inm  the  v^  beginning', 
who  obtained  confidence  only  to  betray  it,  and 
entered  into  those  plans  merely  for  the  fuirpoaa 
of  disclosing  them,  still  his  care  for  bis  own 
preservation  was  such,  as  to  lead  one  very 
modi  to  believe  that  his  escape  waa  favoured 
by  those  who  made  ^  assault  upon  the  places 
Then  does  Mr.  Monument,  if  he  could  do  i^ 
support  Adams,  or  is  he  himself  supported  in 
that  which  he  advances?  Monument  is  brought 
to  support  the  evidence  of  Adams,  by  showing 
that  It  was  part  of  the  plan  of  the  conspirators 
to  be  armed,  and  that  they  had  declared  that  all 
their  adherents  were  so,  or  ought  to  be  so,  for 
that  Thistlewood  had  made  that  declaration. 
When  did  he  make  it  7  Why,  when  they  were 
going  to  the  public  meeting  at  Finsbniy-market, 
where  it  was  to  be  part  of  the  design  of  the 
day,  to  show,  that  the  meeting  at  Manchester 
equally  legal,  with  supporters  equally  respecU 
able  with  their  own,  was  attacked  and  dis- 
persed;  this  was  long  before  Adams  gives  the 
date  of  the  supposed  conspiracy,  which  you 
are  called  upon  to  try ;  it  was  in  October,  long 
before  the  taking  of  the  room  or  the  meeting 
of  parties ;  it  was  at  a  time  when  their  opera- 
tions seem  to  have  been  confined  to  the  hold* 
ing  of  a  meeting. 

It  baa  been  argued,  and  peihapa  may  be 
hereafter,  that  however  improbable  the  plan . 
which  Adams  has  disclosed,  still  it  was  formed ; 
far  diat  they,  being  such  rash  enthusiasts,  con-* 
oeived  that  tiie  British  piiblic  enteied  into 
their  schemef » and  that  they  would  adopt  them, 
and  bear  down  all  opposition  by  accumulated 
force;  and  tbis»  too,  is  to  be  supposed  the 
opinion  of  men  who  had  called  and  held  the 
meetings  in  Smithfield  and  Fiaabury,  whem 
they  were  hooted  and  derided^  and  made  a 
sport  of  by  that  very  populaee  who  woid4i  it 


1270!]        1  GfiORGE  tV. 


Trial  nfJdm  Tkmai  Bruni 


[im 


is  supposed,  afterwards  aid  and  assist  tbenf  in 
the  carrying  into  effect  the  itl-jadfed  a^d  pre* 
posterous  plans  which  have  been  impated  to 
them.    Gentlemeo,  rashness  and  enthusiasm 
will  not  go  so  for ;  no  one  can  be  an  enthosiast 
after  a  conriction  that  his  plans  mast  neces- 
sarily fail  for  want  of  support ;  and  no  man 
would  expect,  with  twenty  pike-staves,  to  arm 
men  sufficient  to  overawe  the  metropolis,  when, 
after  having  assembled  in  a  pool  and  a  quag- 
taire,  after  retiring  from  their  meeting  pelt«l 
with  mud,   their  ensigns  defhced,  and  their 
persons  insulted,  it  was  impossible  tbev  could 
expect  numbers  to  support  them,   who  had 
never  seen  numbers  assemble  but  for  the 
purpose  of  deriding  them— that  they  could 
expect  men  to  risk  their  lives  in  their  plans, 
.  who  had  risked  nothing  but  rotten  apples  and 
eggs  to  evince  their  hatred  and  contempt  for 
their  persons.    That  such  men  may  have  en« 
tertained  a  project  of  murder;  that  they  may 
have  furthered  it  by  a  plan  of  plunder,  I  can 
readily  conceive,  and  readily  believe ;  the  de- 
pravity of  human  nature  does  not  permit  me 
to  withhold  that  admission  from  you ;  and  that 
disclosed  in  the  case  not  by  Adams,  but  by  all 
the  circumstances  connected  with  the  case,  and 
by  the  information  collected  in  various  quarters. 
I  do  believe  that  much  mischief  was  intended 
to  be  done,  and  much  terror  intended  to  be 
excited,  and  many  houses  to  have  been  burnt 
to  further  those  plans  of  venffeanoe  and  of 
plunder  which  they  had  formed ;  but  that  a 
thought  so  foolish  as  that  of  overturning  the 
government  entered  their  minds,    I  cannot 
believe ;  you  have  no  evidence  of'  it  but  from 
Adams,  and  his  evidence  is  refuted  by  his  own 
infamy,  by  the  experience  the  supp<Med  con- 
spirators had  already  had,by  the  impracticability 
of  the  [riot,  and  the  utter  want  of  combination 
or  support  adequate  to  the  purpose. 

I  will  merely,  in  passing,  touch  upon  the  plan 
stated  by  Adams;  here  are  twenty  or  thirty 
men,  who  choose  to  suppose  they  have  adherents 
in  the  Borough ;  who  choose  to  suppose  they 
have  adherents  in  the  city;  who  choose  to 
supjM>se  forty  or  fifty  Irishmen  inhabitants  of 
Gee*s-court  will  rise  and  support  them;  and 
they  are  hence  to  proceed  on  this  project  to 
murder  the  ministers.  I  am  afraid  that  per- 
sonal vengeance,  and  the  desire  of  assassina- 
tion, which  had  been  too  long  fostered  in  their 
minds,  have  wrought  them  up  to  that ;  to  bum 
houses  may  also  have  been  a  part  of  their  plan : 
but  observe  what  is  fixed  upon  that  by  Adams ; 
-—one  witness,  called  expressly  upon  that  sub- 
ject enumerated  the  houses  which  it  was  pro-^ 
posed  to  bum,  and  to  which  their  numbers  and 
their  preparations  might   be  somewhat  oom- 


which  the  witness  added  tliere  was  one  more, 
but  that  is  all.  There  is  no  high  treason  in 
that,  however  atrocious  the  act  may  be;  but 
how  dp  they  attempt  to  make  it  high  treason  ? 
why  they  get  the  stoiy  of  the  PorCtPan-street  I 


bftrraeks,  intented  by  Adsms,  tvtio  Mas  good 
ntutm  to  know  what  he  was  tsAking  stostu 
Harrison,  together  with  the  bnraiug  of  Fni- 
vai's-inn,  which  no  one  besides  bimsetf  Mens 
to  have  known ;  for  he  who  enniBeratei  th« 
placet  one  by  one,  does  not  include  that,  lod 
yet  it  coidd  not  have  escaped  the  obaemtioo 
of  any  man ;  but  that  which  is  tnerelj  ficdos 
cannot  be  the  subject  of  proof;  and  thitwbieb 
Adams  invented,  of  course  no  other  oan  loott 
either  attend  to  or  observe :  sack  is  tbegreaid 
on  which  a  charge  of  treason  is  erected. 

We  next  come  to  the  ridiculoos  story  of  Ik 
cannon  to  be  seised  without  force,  to  be  con- 
veyed without  horses  to  besiege  the  Ifaonoii- 
house,  and  then  to  take  the  fitok,  in  whidia 
guard  is  always  placed,  more  than  safficieatt^ 
destroy  ten  times  over  such  a  paltiy  force; 
even  if  they  had  twenty  times  die  osmber. 
Twenty  soldiers,  standing  in  the  form  inwindi 
they  would  stand,  with  stone  walls  before  iImBi 
and  muskets  in  their  bauds,  would  htfeKSt 
them  scattered  to  every  part  of  the  tova ;  jot 
as  was  done  in  the  year  1780,  wbeo  a  strnihr 
attempt  was'  made :  the  narrative  was  pm 
me  once  by  a  noble  lord,  who  bad  been  tke 
officer  commanding  a  division  of  troops  ootte 
occasion,  in  beautiful  simplicity.  Od  tbeiitit 
firing  of  the  guns,  a  wonderfbl  '^^^^^^  "Jfl 
ceeded  to  antecedent  clamour;  you  eow 
see  your  way  all  down  the  streets,  whidi  W 
the  moment  before  been  crowded;  andtheie 
was  not  a  murmur  to  be  heaid,  except  of  tt| 
multitude  seeking  their  retreat;  so  that  tte 
first  fire  from  the  Bank  would  have  disposei 
them  just  as  efl^ctually  93  the  appearaaceot 
that  brave  young  gentleman,  lieeteMiJ 
Fttaclai«nce,  did  at  Gato-street,  wheo  all  die 
arms  and  ammunition  served  only  for  an* 
attempt  on  the  lives  of  one  or  two  indinda» 
There  was  nothing  which  devek>ped  that  com- 
bination or  consistency  which  would  comtitatr 
high  treason,  but  a  rash  and  ill-digestedpi^' 
datory  attempt,  totally  distinct  from  the  eiwtt 
of  those  who  seek  to  subvert  a  gow"*^ 
This  is  the  plan  which  Adams  wooW;l«« 
you  believe,  on  bis  single  testimony,  the  Ci«« 
not  calling  those  who  were  present  attw* 
consultations,  not  producing,  *^^p^ 
active,  i ntrepid,  and  persevering  Mr.  Ed**'*'  ^ 
who  could  best  of  all,  if  there  were  any  »?*»  | 
in  it,  give  you  an  account  of  every  thing  p«^  ij 
jected,  and  every  thing  transacted. 

With  respect  to  Monument,  I  belicfe  I »« 
irade  the  necessary  observations;  ^^'S 
remark  5n':bne  part  of  his  evidence,  «[* 
may  be  relied  on.  It  is  said  ^\JT 
Monument  had  his  interview  wid»  l**"- 
wood,  Thistlewood  made^use  of  ^^^ 
sionfr— <*Grcat  events  are  at  hand ;  *•  J*Je 
are* every  where  anxious  for  a  change;  1  *7 
been  promised  support  by  a  great  msj^  *■ 
have  deceived  me,  but  now  I  l»»»«SJy. 
who  will  stand  by  me;"  tie  then  a*edwj- 
ther  Monunient  had  any  amis,  and  v^ 
that  they  all  bad  arms;  "Some,"^"^ 
"  hav«  a  pistol^  some  have  a  pike,  and  v^ 


as8i3 


fair  High  TteoMoiu 


A.  D.  18^« 


[1282 


have  got  a  sabre ;  he  nid  I  might  bay  a  pistol 
for  alwQt  four  or  five  tbillings ;  I  told  him  I 
had  no  money  to  buy  pistols ;  he  then  said  he 
would  see  what  he  coald  do ;  I  do  not  recoU 
lect  more  of  that  matter."  Now,  gentlemen, 
all  this  was  for  the  Finsbury  meeting :  and  be 
says,  that  on  Bnmt  first  accosting  him,  he. 
Monument,  said,  you  hare  been  absent  so  long 
I  thought  I  had  lost  you.  This  related  to  cer- 
tain meetings  which  were  expected  to  be 
general  all  orer  the  kingdom;  out  they  are 
assnmed  as  the  plots  of  an  after-formed  con- 
apiracy,  and  as  supportiDg  the  testimony  of 
Adams,  who  at  that  time  did  not  know  the 
parties,  nor  had  even  seen  the  fisce  of  Thistle- 
wood.  Then  how  does  it  stand  ?  why  thus : 
in  October  or  September,  for  I  do  not  know 
exactly  when  the  meeting  was,  before  the 
meeting  in  Finsbwy-oarket,  these  great  events 
andffreaf  changes  had  been  announced;  the 
meeting  in  Finsbnry-market  had  taken  place, 
and  the  people  who  attended  it.had  been  com- 

5 lately  discouraged ;  their  connexion  had  been 
tssolTcd ;  so  much  so,  that  when  they  came 
together  again,  Monument  said  to  Brunt,  I 
thought  I  bttd  entirely  lost  you ;  and  now  he 
aeems  to  connect  the  two  plans,  that  for  the 
meetings,  and  this  for  the  assassination  of  min- 
isters, which  I  am  sorry  to  say  was  prepared, 
and  thus  it  is  that  Adams  is  sought  to  be 
supported. 

We  have  befmre  us  next,  a  most  material 
witness,  Hiden,  who,  it  is  said,  is  not  an  ac- 
complice, and  therefore  ought  to  be  believed. 
I  was  not  present  yesterday,  for  a  reason 
which  it  is  unnecessary  to  state,  when  my 
learned  friend  cross-examined  him;  but  I 
vftderstood  he  did  not  deny,  at  least,  having 
been  so  far  imfdioated  in  transactions  of  this 
kind — and  I  beg  to  be  corrected  if  I  mis-state, 
because  when  i  avow  that  I  am  speaking  of  a 
time  at  which  I  was  not  present,  I  cannot  be 
snppoeed  intentiomiUy  to  mbrepresent ;  I  had 
rather  be  set  right  now  than  replied  to  here- 
nfker;  but  I  uiklerstand  that  witness,  being 
pteased  upon  the  subject,  did  not  go  to  the 
€stent  of  denying— that  he  had  invited  one 
•ther  person,  or  odier  persons,  to  join  a  meet- 
ing of  this  kind. 

.  Mr.  SoHcUor  Genera/.— To  |;o  to  a  meeting 
of  a  shoemakers'  club,  where  it  was  said  some- 
thing was  to  be  done  for  the  good  of  the 
country;  he  will  not  undertake  to  say  that 
aooiething  of  that  kind  was  not  said. 

'  Mr.  Adolphtt^ — ^I  am  very  glad  to  have  the 
fgiy  words  from  Hw  Solicitor-general;  this 
■lan' waa  inviting  another  upon  the  very  eve  of 
ihe  «xeeution  of  this  conspiracy;  he  does  not 
deny  upon  his  oath,  that  he  was  the  inviter  of 
some  othev  persons  to  join  a  meeting  which 
hat  been  described  to  you  as «  pretended  dob 
&t  shoemaker^  that  ia  a  dub  where  shoe^ 
snakers  and  tailors  and  others  went.  When 
Aoemakera  and  tfUon  have  great  mfatters  ia 
skgitfttion  for  the  reform  of  the  state,  the  state 
iB  oud^ohiiied  to  thei%  it  is  doing  die  atate 
VOL.XX£lU. 


much  honour  to  devote  their  boun  to  tobacco, 
porter,  and  reform.  But  this  man  does  not 
show  that  he  is  incapable  of  inviting  another 
person ;  he  is  not  therefore  that  innocent  dis- 
interested person  which  I  supposed  him  to  be 
from  his  evidence  as  first  delivered,  who  took 
the  earliest  and  readiest  means  of  disclosing 
all  he  knew  to  the  individual  intended  to  be 
sacrificed  by  it,  namely,  to  lord  Castlereagh, 
but  failing  him  lord  Harrowby. 

Gentlemen,  does  he  not  appear  under  con- 
siderable suspicion  of  being  one  of  those  who 
would  wait  till  he  had  got  something  which  he 
could  carry  to  an  effectual  market  ?    Does  he 
support  any  plot  or  plan  except  by  the  con- 
versation with  Wilson,  arranged  so  as  to  bear 
upon  that  part  of  the  subject  ?    Does  he  telt 
you  of  any  thing  relating  to  a  plot  beyond  the 
scheme  of   the    assassination   of  ministers  f 
Let  us  examine  his  conversation  with  Wilson. 
I  hare  given  you  already  an  express  enumera- 
tion, not  to  be  departed  from,  of  the  houses  that 
he  pitched  upon ;  they  were  lord  Harrowby'^ 
lord  Castlereagh%  the  duke  of  Wellington's, 
the  bishop  of  London's,  and  one  other,  which 
he  did  not  recollect ;  now,  when  he  sees  Wil- 
son first,  he  reports  him  to  have  asked,  '*  would 
I  be  of  a  party  to  destroy  his  majesty's  ministers 
at  a  cabinet  dinner,  they  were  waiting  for  one, 
and  all  was  ready,  and  they  had  such  things  as 
I  never  saw,  they  called  them  hand-grenades  ; 
they  are,  I  believe,  such  things  as  nobody  ever 
saw ;  they  were  to  light  up  some  fires ;  they 
depended  upon  me  for  making  one;  and  I  told 
him  I  would ;  he  said,  those  things  were  to  be 
put  into  the  «room  where  the  gentlemen  were 
at  dinner,  and  they  who  escaped  the  explosion 
were  to  die  by  the  edge  of  the  sword,  or  some 
other  weapon ;  they  were  to  set  fire  to  some 
houses,  and  keep  the  town  in  a  state  of  con- 
fusion for  several  days,  then  it  would  become 
a  general  thing  ;'^  now  these  are  the  particular 
words  and  expressions  upon  which  this  trea- 
sonable conspiracy  is  attempted  to  be  fixed. 
Is  there  any  pretence  that  he  disclosed  to 
lord  Harrowby,  any  thing  like  this  ?    Is  there 
any  preten<4^  for  saying  that  the  matter  went 
further,  from  his  declaration  at  least,  than  that 
tiiere  was  a  plot  to  destroy  his  majesty's  min-* 
isten  }    And  here  let  me  set  myself  right  with 
respect  to  a  supposition  once  pat,  as  founded 
on  some  unconsidered  expression  of  mine^ 
certainly  not  arishig  from  a  desire  or  wish  to 
misrepreient,  which  I  consider  it  my  duty  t» 
deny  at  the  moment,  and  which  I  now  deny 
again ;'  I  never  did  sj^y,  nor  think,  nor  have  I 
any  intention  now  to  say,  that  lord  H&rrowby 
in  particular,  or  his  ms^esty's  ministers  in 
genera],  ever  had  the  least  thought,  by  the 
encouragement  of  reward,  or  the  hope  or  pro- 
miseof  SMvancement  of  any  kind,  to  induce  this 
man  by  any  endeavour  whatever,  to  strain  his 
conscience  to  swear  to  one  particttlar  more 
than  he  actually  knew,  or  mOre  espedally  to 
invent  any  plot  or  conspiracy  for  the  purpose 
of  ft]Ttherin|  their  views,  or  that  this  migfil 
haM  any  effect  on  the  king^is  subjects;    Per* 
4N 


13831 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ^Jakn  ThomOi  Bntni 


haps  I  may  be  going  further  tlian  my  fioimer 
atatement  might  neem  to  warrant,  hat  I  will 
make  this  qualificatioD ;  I  still  believe  that  the 
operating  motiTe  on  Hiden's  mind  when  he 
made  a  disclosure  to  lord  Harrowby,  was 
reward  from  lord  Uarrowby  or  some  one  else, 
and  that  therefore  that  motive  would  have  an 
influence  on  the  mind  of  the  witness,  although 
not  inspired  or  encouraged  either  directly  or 
indirectly  by  the  noble  indiridual  with  whom 
he  communicated ;  that  I  did  believe,  and  that 
I  do  believe ;  you  have  heard  he  is  a  roan  in 
beggarly  circumstances ;  that  he  is  a  prisoner 
for  a  very  small  debt  in  the  prison  of  the 
Marshalsea. — I  am  told  that  is  not  proved  in 
this  trial,  but  that  he  is  a  man  in  some  diffi- 
culties, and  I  believe  I  am  at  liberty  to  state, 
that  appearin|f  here  bv  virtue  of  a  habeas 
corpus,  ne  is  indisputaoly  a  prisoner  confined 
for  debt;  such  a  man,  under  such  circum- 
stances, woukl  therefore  indulge  hopes  whidi 
his  majesty's  ministers  may  not  feel  them- 
selves disposed  to  excite,  or  at  least  would 
not  excite  by  promises,  or  foster  by  any  de- 
claration of  theirs ;  but  the  influence  upon  his 
mind  is  the  same,  and  we  must  consider  what 
his  actual  expectations  were,  not  what  his 
reasonable  expectations  might  have  been ;  but 
I  go  further,  if  his  migesty's  ministers  were 
not  apprised  of  it,  and  be  was  the  first  person 
who  gave  them  that  information,  I  do  say,  as  a 
member  of  the  community,  this  man  has  a 
right  to  expect  the  remuneration  which  he 
ought  to  receive,  who  has  saved  their  lives ; 
mt  what  time,  or  under  what  circumstances  it 
is  to  be  made,  it  is  not  for  me  to  divine,  but  I 
have  no  hesitation  in  saying,  it  ought  to  be 
made ;  I  do  not  press  this  into  the  cause,  as 
having  an  influence  upon  ministers,  but  as 
having  a  possible  influence  upon  the  mind  of 
the  witness  himself,  and  therefore  as  being 
not  unworthy  of  your  best  attention. 

Kow,  gentlemen,  what  is  the  confirmation  of 
this  witness  ?  How  da  the  others  each  require 
confirmation  for  themselves,  namely,  Adams 
and  Monument,  and  a  third,  as  I  humbly  sug- 
gest, not  sufficiently  clear  from  inl^tations  of 
this  kind,  to  stand  as  an  unimpeachable  and  ir- 
itproacbable  witness?  Let  us  see  what  further 
aapport  they  receive,  principally  from  Monu« 
aent's  brother,  who  knows  nothing  of  the  con- 
▼ersation  with  Monument,  butonly  corroborates 
the  facts  of  his  being  called  out  of  the  zoom, 
and  of  their  entering  into  conversation,  such 
as  he  has  described,  but  not  going  into  the 
particulars.  He  says,  ''Brunt  called  vrith 
Tidd ;  when  Brunt  came  in,  my  brother  said, 
I  thought  I  bad  lost  you;  there  was  something 
passed  concerning  the  king's  death;  Brunt 
said,  that  the  king's  death  had  altered  their 
plans;  my  brother  asked  what  their  plans 
were;  Brunt  said,  they  embraced  many  ob- 
Jecte ;  Brunt  said  to  Tidd,  shall  we  give  them 
the  pass-word,  which  consi|ted  of  the  letters 
h,  u,  if  and  they  told  us  we  were  to  meet  at 
the  turnpike ;"  and  then  he  tejls  you  the  curi* 
pus  sign  and  countersign,  by  which  they  have 


leanad  to  spell  the  word  bktUtu  Ihttii  the 
confirmation  which  Monument  bss  recared 
firom  his  brother,  who  does  not  pretend  te 
know  what  the  plan  was,  but  that  the  khig^ 
death  had  altered  some  plan ;  to  wfaatdegiec 
or  extent  he  does  not  say,  except  tbtt  it  bid 
altered  their  plans  to  this  extent,  tint  tia 
cabinet  dinner  being  given  np,  they  coald  h( 
expect  to  meet  the  ministers  together  at  i 
cabinet  dinner ;  this  being  before  Mr.  Edwiidi 
bad  found  the  advertisement  ia  the  newmer, 
and  when  they  were  to  go  to  thiee  or  hn 
of  their  houses,  and  take  off  the  meet  ohaonw 
separately. 

With  respect  to  the  conspiracy  Moneacnt 
receives  no  support  from  hb  brother,  ens  if 
his  brother  were  disposed  to  support  bin  t» 
that  extent.  The  witness  relied  on  as  entinl]f 
innocent,  and  entitled  to  complete  credit,  ii 
Hale,  the  apprentice,  and  we  shall  tee  hot  fiv 
his  confirmation  goes.  It  is  beyond  dl  doiM 
and  dispute — I  mention  the  landlady  oelj"' 
the  purpose  of  saying  her  ooofirmalioe  IM 
it  proved— that  there  was  a  room  t>keD,iB 
which  certain  consultations  were  held;  m 
the  apprentice  does  not  tell  you  the  aibjecta 
those  consultations,  and  he  sapports  his  on 
credit  by  not  saying  that  le?ity  or  drunteawj 
on  the  part  of  his  master  had  emiodM" 
him  to  drop  a  single  word  u  to  the  object; 
but  he  says,  he  was  told  to  direct  any  peoMi 
who  called  on  the  fatal  night,  to  go  to  » 
White  Hart,  and  that  he  seat  one  nan,  of  ^a 
name  of  Potter,  to  the  White  Hart,  «odtt« 
is  supposed  to  be  a  confirmation  of  their  pai>> 
That  is  no  confirmation  of  their  plaos,  beoiie 
it  appears  that  there  were  twenty  or  »*• 
abouts,  at  Cato-etreet,  of  whom  tweg 
thirteen  only  have  been  named,  sod  ttitfw)" 
there  is  still  room  for  Potter  and  hit  fne^a 
have  been  there,  and  they  may  hare  reeane 
an  intimation  at  the  bar  of  the  Wbte^ 
where  they  were  to  go,  a  secret  «^^»**? 
not  thought  fit  .to  entrust  this  appiennce^ 
It  is  said,  that  when  Brunt  came  h«»«"^ 
tattered,  dirty,  and  miserable  conditioo,.*«2 
pressed  himself  in  these  terms,  "^J^^ 
over  yet."  to  one  person  with  whom  f  Jj 


conversing,  and  tlutt  he  went  oat  ^^ 
man.  Gentlemen,  all  wu  not  over;  he  n^ 
seek  to  promote  the  escape  of  •^V?S 
whom  he  knew  well  where  to  meet,  wj» 
intent  to  bring  them  together  agaiD;.""'!". 
re-tiniting  the  scattered  parts  of  »«/J*5 
racy,  every  bo4y  must  know  th^  n*^^ 
utteriy  and  clearly  impossible  ;Jortt^ 
evidence  such  a^H  is,  if  one  party  MoB^ 

suocess,  they  were  to  send  an  «"•"/ ^ 
Sepulchre's  diurch  door,  who  ''"^  '"y,^, 
another  orderly  from  the  o^^V^^'^^i^ 
hear  from  Mr.  Adams;  and  so  a  co«»^ 
tion  was  to  be  made.  Was  th«w  MTj; 
importing  that  those  persons  weieen^jj^ 
that  time  in  any  operation  I  Nothu*  ■J'jj 
Brunt's  dedaration,  therefore,  *f^  fog- 
more  than  this;  there  is  a  wreck,  ^^g^ 
meats  of  which  we  most  sMk  to  i«v«) 


1385] 


Jot  High  Trea$on. 


A.  D.  182a 


[1S86 


are  anse^  wbicb  Mr.  Edwards,  or  tome  worthy 
person,  has  hrought,  which  we  must  remofe  ;- 
and  part  of  these  wer^  carried  back  on  the 
morning  after  this  attack,  to  the  place  whither 
most  especially  they  ought  not  to  have  been 
taken,  to  Fox-court ;  Edwards  takes  the  gre- 
nades, and  they  were  (in  a  manner  that  would 
Bot  be  believed,  while  there  was  the  Thames 
flowing  near  London,  or  any  place  to  conceal 
them)  brought  back  to  the  very  place  where 
they  had  b^n  previously  deposited,  they  were 
there  again  deposited,  and  information  given 
lor  them  to  be  found,  to  weigh  down  the  case 
against  this  unfortunate  prisoner. 

These  are  the  prinapal  circumstances  of 
oonfirmatioD  which  the  evidence  of  this  man 
receives.  As  to  the  circumstance  of  the  watch- 
man seeing  Davidson  watch;  as  to  the  cir- 
cumstance of  the  spelling  of  the  word  btUton^ 
and  the  game  of  dominos,  and  so  on,  which 
liave  been  given  in  evidence,  they  are  so  light 
and  unimportant,  that  confirmation  of  that 
Bature  will  not  attach  crime  either  to  the  most 
innocent  man,  or  to  men  whose  guilt  up  to  a 
certain  point  was  admitted. 

Crentiemen,  I  may  have  failed ;  and  I  know 
I  have  foiled :  it  is  impossible  I  should  view 
-what  has  been  transacting  on  former  trials, 
without  knowing  that  I  have  failed  in  directing 

r>ur  attention  to  many  parts  of  this  evidence. 
know  you  will  be  told,  that  for  the  purposes 
of  murder,  fire-bails  were  not  necessary,  and 
poles  ol^this  kind  :  gentlemen,  how  mudi  viU 
rainy  may  have  added  to  that  project  which 
I  conceive  to  have  been  originally  entertained, 
it  is  not  for  me  to  define ;  but  it  is  quite  as  pro- 
bable that  twenty  pikes  should  be  used  in  kill- 
ing fourteen  ministers,  or  in  guarding  the  spot 
where  that  crime  was  to  be  perpetrated,  as  in 
overawing  the  whole  of  this  vast  metropolis, 
and  overpowering  the  military  to  be  brought 
against  them.  If  the  probability  is  to  be 
weighed  in  the  one  scale  or  the  other,  I  say  it 
is  quite  as  probable  that  they  should  mean  to 
arm  the  men  attending  them  on  this  one  ob- 
ject, as  that  they  should  by  means  of  such 
weapons  dig  a  trench  to  take  the  metropolis. 

I  have  no  doubt  that  I  have  omitted  many 
aabiects ;  but  I  trust  to  your  excellent  memory, 
and  to  the  summing-up  of  the  court,  to  inform 
your  minds  and  direct  your  attention ;  still  I 
dio  again  implore  you  to  consider  how  tliis  case 
]«  made  out,  and  how  it  is  supported ;  to  give 
tbe  best  attention  you  can  to  all  the  evidence, 
but  without  too  much  disposition  to  believe 
liiese  informers ;  who,  if  believed,  will  form  a 
precedent  by  which  prosecutions  may  be  ex- 
tended to  the  most  alarming  degree :  yoo  have  it 
already  in  evidence  ftat  there  are  other  branches 
in  this  conspiracy  to  which,  perhaps,  the  same 
elTorts  may  be  directed,  and  other  persons 
jbrought  to  trial,  on  the  very  same  testimony 
of  tfa«se  very  same  men.  Von  have  it  as  a 
declaration,  that  a  gentleman's  servant  had 
•applied  money  and  means  to  this  conspiracy ; 
if  you  believe  inforaiersof  this  kind,  some 
g^antleiDaD  ^|^  in  public  eitinMrtiro,  or  sonie 


nobleman  high  in  rank  and  illustrious  in  con- 
nection, may  be  the  next  victim  at  whom  this 
sort  of  surreptitious  credibility  will  be  aimed. 
If  they  can,  by  such  swearing,  take  the  lives  of 
the  humblest  class  of  victims,  it  wants  but  the 
vigour  which  will  be  derived  from  repeated 
success,  to  bring  home  the  same  conviction  to 
any  individual  in  the  community,  who  happens 
to  stand  high  in  rank,  reputation,  or  fortune, 
whom  it  may  be  thought  desirable  to  destroy, 
or  convenient  to  remove. 

Juries  cannot  exercise  too  much  prudence : 
we  are  often  told  that  the  policy  of  verdicts 
ought  to  be  remote  from  the  minds  of  juries ; 
and  so  it  ought,  when  the  consequence  ends 
with  the  subject  before  them;  but  in  a  case 
like  this,  where  the  parties  present  may  not  be 
alone  implicated,  but  where  hundreds  of  whom 
we  think  not,  may  come  to  trial  on  the  same 
testimony,  eked  out  as  this  is,  not  knowing 
where  such  things  may  stop,  it  is  not  too  much 
to  ask  of  juries  to  exercise  a  very  vigilant 
caution  and*  consideration.  Besides,  as  this 
trial  is  not  an  affair  of  individual  felony,  but 
an  affair  of  state — an  affair  on  which,  when 
judgment  is  exercised,  opinion  is  not  to  be 
suspended  —  which  enters  into  history,  and 
forms  one  of  the  land-marks  of  the  times — 
which  is  to  be  a  precedent  for  the  present  and 
future  days— it  is  not  too  much  for  me  to  say 
to  you  (and  I  know,  too,  you  would  do  it  if  I 
did  not  say  it)  watch  cautiously,  examine  at- 
tentively, be  not  too  prone  to  listen  to  spies, 
but  give  every  circumstance  your  utmost  con- 
sideration; and  particulariy  do  not,  because 
you  think  these  men  to  be  bad  men— because 
yon  think  them  atrociously  wicked,  proceed  on 
slight  evidence  to  find  them  guilty  of  high 
treason;  but  weigh  well,  deliberate,  and  if 
your  consciences  point  out  a  verdict  of  guilty, 
I  know  you  will  acquit  your  consciences ;  but 
unless  you  can  do  so,  fur  God's  sake,  for  the 
sake  Of  yourselves  and  posterity,  reject  and 
totally  discredit  a  spy,  exercise  caution,  in 
thinking  how  he  might  have  been  supported, 
how  he  has  been  and  how  he  has  not  been 
supported ;  -and  then  determine  whether  you 
are  so  free  from  doubt  as  to  be  under  the  ne* 
cessity  of  pronouncing  that  verdict  to  which  I 
have  adverted,  or  whether  you  will  not  feel 
yourselves  called  upon  to  say  that  the  prisoner 
is  not  guilty. 

A  Juryman  (Mr.  Goodchild.)'—'^y  lord,  there 
is  one  circumstance  impressed  on  our  attention 
by  the  learned  counsel,  which  (if  my  memory 
does  not  fail  me)  I  think  is  not  borne  out ; 
for  we  have  it  not  proved  on  this  trial,  that 
the  ammunition  was  returned  to  the  d^pdt, 
as  it  is  termed,  on  the  24th ;  I  submit  myself 
to  your  lordship  to  ^rrect  me,  if  I  am  in  error; 
my  memory  may  fail  me. 

lard  Owtf  Baron, — It  was  not  proved  on 
this  trial,  certainly. 

Mr,  Ado^l>kui, — ^I  am  sorry  I  should  hav^ 
fallen  into  the  mistake ;  I  thought  it  hid  been 
otherwise. 


1287}       1  GEOB6E  IV. 


Trial  ^JAn  IJiamaM  Bnmi 


(1988 


Xord  Chirf  BamLr^Ajkd  then  are  some 
other  things  which  have  not  been  proved  on 
this  trial ;  I  aliall  eDdeavoor  to  set  iheie  mat- 
ters right  in  reading  iny  notes. 

Mr.  AdcHphaa, — I  am  sure  fhe  gentlemen  of 
the  jary  will  believe  I  did  not  mean  to  mislead 
them. 

Mr.  Goodchild, — ^I  am  satisfied  of  that. 

Lord  Chief  Baron.'-li  is  impossible  that  any 
body  who  knows  Mr.  Adolphns,  should  ima- 
gine that  to  have  been  his  intention. 

Mr,  GoodcAtZi.— It'  is  impossible,  my  lord, 
to  suppose  that  Mr.  Adolpnus  had  any  such 
idea. 

Lord  Chief  Baron. — ^John  TTiomas  Brunt, 
your  learned  counsel  have  concluded  their  very 
able  addresses  to  the  gentlemen  of  the  jury ;  if 
you  wish  to  add  any  thing  to  what  they  have 
•aid,  this  is  the  opportunity  for  doing  so,  and 
the  jury  will  be  very  happy  to  hear  you. 

fining. — My  lord,I  have  had  adefence  put  into 
my  hands  but  a  few  minutes  ago ;  I  have  not 
had  time  to  peruse  it  over  yet ;  but  I  shall 
make  two  or  three  observations  respecting  the 
evidences  who  have  appeared  against  me,  par* 
ticularly  respecting  the  evidence  of  Monument. 
It  is  quite  useless  for  me  to  attempt  to  deny  being 
in  the  room  in  Cato-street,  I  do  not  intend  to 
deny  any  thing  of  the  kind ;  but  immediately  on 
the  arrival  of  Monument  at  the  room  in  Cato* 
street,  he  approached  me  ;  he  asked  me  what 
was  going  to  be  done,  when  he  saw  the  arms  on 
the  bench  which  has  beeii  described;  to  which, 
my  lord,  I  replied,  that  I  was  not  aware  that 
any  thing  was  going  to  be  done,  for  that 
£dwards  had  not  brought  so  many  men  by 
thirty  as  he  had  stated  he  could  bring  there ; 
and  it  was  much  against  my  intention  en- 
deavouring to  do  any  thing  with  so  few  men, 
for  I  would  not  be  led  by  any  individual. 
Accordingly,  perceiving,  my  lord,  that  Menu* 
ment  betrayed  a  great  deal  of  fear,  I  persuaded 
him  to  go  away. 

My  lord,  there  has  been  a  considerable  stress 
laid  upon  a  number  of  men  volunteering  to  go 
to  my  Lord  Harrowby's  house ;  this,  my  lord,  I 
totally  deny.  I  will  admit,  my  lord,  that  when 
Thistlewood,  as  it  has  been  stated,  addressed 
himself  to  the  few  men  in  number  Tfor  he  saw  the 
men  would  not  act  when  he  addressed  them) 
urging  the  necessity  of  going  to  act,  as  one  of 
the  witnesses  stated,  or  it  would  be  a  Despard's 
job,  some  few  men  went  into  the  small  room, 
but  they  never  had  come  to  any  agreement  or 
determination  (this  I  solemnly  protest)  to  go 
to  the  house ;  they  were  endeavouring  to  see 
whether  they  were  able  to  find  fourteen  or 
fifteen  men  desperate  enough  to  go  to  the 
square,  which  they  never  could  have  done.  I 
Bever  was  so  deprived  of  my  reason  as  to  go 
to  meet  instant  death. 

I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  the  jury  to 
two  circumstances  that  contradict  them- 
selves.   My  lord,  in  the  first  plac^,  Adama 


statei  to  iiopUcate  me  mora  deephr  than  an 
other  man  except  ThistLowqpd,  that  I  deciaie^ 
were  there  six  men  in  the  room,  I  mwM,  go  l» 
the  house  and  blow  the  house  about  tbeir  eaa; 
this,  my  lord,  is  £Mm*    Very  soon  alter  conae 
forward  Monument,  my  loid,  and  be  makes  a 
declaration  to  you,  my  lord,  and  the  gentleBMn 
here,  that  I  declai«d,  I  would  go  Xnf  mya^aod 
buiy  myself  in  the  ruins.    Is  thi8»  my  toid, 
consistent  evidence ;  }s  this  sufficient  em^we 
for  my  life  to  rest  on,  or  to  deprive  m?  of  lifii, 
my  son  of  a  father,  and  my  wile  of  a  hnsband? 
My  lord,  I  should  wish  to  adwt  to  another 
circumstance :  while  a  prisoner  in  Cold-bad^ 
fields  (I  was  there,  I  believe,  my  lotd,  for 
nearly  three  days,  and  scarcely  out  of  the  n 
even  to  wash  myself)  when  I  ceme  doiwa 
of  my  room  to  the  fire,  I  WW  Monument,  I  ( 
Strange,  I  saw  Cooper  and  Bradbom.  Mom^ 
meet,  my  lord,  came  to  me  dosely,  sat  himsstf 
down  by  me,  and  whispered  in  niy  ears  them 
words:   ^  What  did  you  my  when  yo«  came 
before  the  privy  council  V*  mys  I»  '^  I  mid  I 
knew  nothmg  of  the  matter.'^    Thia,  my  lesd, 
induced  me  to  ask  Monument  what  be  had  smd^ 
says  I,  "*  What  did  you  say  ?"--<<  I  could  my 
nothing,''  says  he,  ^  you  told  me  ^tbing  ;  why 
did  not  you  teU  me  more?  yo«i  t«3d  mt 
nothing.''    Says  I,  "  Were  it  possible  for  me 
to  tell  you  what  I  did  not  know  myself?    yoa 
knew  very  well,  when  you  mw  the  men  caBsd 
on,  it  was  declared  every  one  should  votnateer 
into  the  small  room  that  would  go  on  eneh  a 
desperate  affur*"    Though,  gentlemen  of  Iha 
jury,  you  observed,  no  doubt,  that  Adaom  has 
declared,  I  was  the  man  that  nominaied  the 
men  to  go  to  the  house,  and  him  amoBg  the 
rest;  a  man  whom  J  knew  to  be  a  villain,  and 
who  has  constantly  oome  to  my  place  twice  a 
day,  in  company  with  Sdwards,  to  deprive  me 
of  my  life.    But  I  am  no  traitor;  I  was  deter- 
mine, though  I  had  engaged  in  tjhis  baaeplo^ 
that  my  life  I  would  fofint  sooner  than  betisf 
an  individual ;  I  would  be  racked  on  tbe  wheel 
sooner  than  betray  a  feUow-.creatnre.    TIM  is 
my  principle,  my  lord,  and  this  shows  an  isH 
tention,  my  lord,  of  Monument  to  betray  m^ 

Now,  my  lord,  I  should  wish  to  advert  to  a 
circumstance  which  occurred  to  me  at  Cam* 
bray,  in  France,  Certainly,  my  lord,  as  Jam 
placed  here,  and  my  life  is  placed  in  the  heads 
of  those  twelve  honest  men*  it  beoomee  am  te 
state  any  thing  that  will  be  of  the  teaai 
to  me  or  beneficial  to  my  {felloir-pi 
While  I  was  in  France,  my  len),  I 

Adams,  on  the  first  Sunday  whea  I  ct. 

Paris,  me  and  my  son»  I  bad  wmked  in  dm 
capacity  of  a  bootHiloser.  Adams  was  e  amn 
possessed  of  no  judgment  in  the  tmde^  though 
ae  worked  for  a  number  of  officen;  l£ia  asa^ 
my  lord,  I  assisted  in  ontting  out  boots  fof  te 
officers,  and  learning  him  what  I  bad  mttaiait 
by  art  in  my  busipemf  The  man  betaum 
jedpns  of  me,  and  threatened  to  take  mf  Wk  i 
and  dedared  to  bis  wifo,  if  she  did  not  amk^ 
an  op^n  declaration  to  m«^  thaA  if  cver^n 
spoke  to  me  her  life  m  notesl^  koMaML  W 


isse] 


fat  HH  Dmsoih 


A.  D.  iiao. 


[ifiOO 


the  doitth  oi  her;  sccordiiigljy  I  wm  oliligid 
to  leave  the  bouse,  which  I  did  immedialely^ 
and  never  worked  for  him  again.  I  went  there, 
my  lord,  to  work  in  the  cavalry  barracks  with 
the  Coldstream  giiards;  and  I  believe,  that  if 
trouble  is  taken  to  inquire,  they  will  find 
nothing  treasonable  or  any  thing  disloyal  about 
me  during  that  time.  I  could  bring,  if  I  had 
aa  opportunity,  a  number  of  men  In  the  Cold- 
etream  guards  who  worked  in  the  barracks 
with  me,  particularly  one  Mr.  Marsden  who  is 
in  Westminster  now;  I  worked  for  him  a 
length  of  time.  After  this,  my  lord,  I  went 
Irom  Cambray  to  lisle,  where  i  worked  lor  a 
epace,  I  suppose,  of  about  eighteen  months ;  I 
woiked  for  an  English  master  who  then  worked 
there,  a  man  of  the  name  of  Pulsferd,  two  or 
three  months,  till  I  obtained  a  little  moae^,  and 
then  came  to  England.  I  knew  nothing  o£ 
Adams*  I  settled  myself  when  I  came  home. 
My  vrife  heard  that  me  and  my  son  were  a^ 
sassinated  in  France,  and  she  had  lost  her 
eenses,  and  I  found  her  in  St  Luke's  when  I 
<wme  home ;  but,  however,  as  that  is  not  to  the 
purpose,  I  shall  not  proceed  with  it.  My  wife, 
tbortly  after  that,  came  out ;  I  obtained  a  seat 
of  work  from  a  master  whom  I  had  worked 
§a€  be£^r^  and  who,  unfortunately  for  me, 
tamed  out  to  be  a  relation  of  thii  very  appren- 
tice who  has  come  here  to  take  my  lifo*  Trade 
was  very  bad,  extremely  bad  indeed.  This 
Mr.  Hale,  who  lives  in  Castle<etreet,  Holbom, 
voriLcd  chiefly  for  fomilies  in  the  West  Indies ; 
and,  my  lord,  as  it  has  been  held  op  to  this 
court,  that  he  is  such  an  undeniable  and  t^ 
apeetable  witness,  and  that  his  relations  are 
master  tradesmen,  I  will  advert  to  some  fow 
drcnmstances  which  oome  widiin  my  recollect 
tion  concerning  his  fomily.  It  must  be  well 
recoHected  by  several  gentlemen  in  this  court, 
that  John  Hale  (the  brother  of  this  very  man, 
who  put  this  boy  an  apprentice  to  me),  some 
yean  ago,  under  a  false  name,  took  a  large 
trareJioose  in  Ironmooger4ane,  and  after  tluit 
decamped  with  a  ship  loed  of  goods,  and 
ewindled  the  merchants  of  London  out  of 
tO0,000^ 

Xonf  Chief  Baron.-^You  should  not  go  into 
tlie  character  of  persons  who  are  not  before 
the  court ;  there  is  no  evidence  of  this. 

Ffuomr, — I  beg  pardon,  my  lord,  for  in- 
truding on  your  inaulgenoe,  or  that  of  the 
gentlemen  of  the  jury;  it  is  only  to  prove  to 
MU  of  what  descendants  this  boy  is;  he  has 
heen  a  villain  to  me,  which  I  can  bring  evi» 
deuce  in  the  court  to  prove,  but  I  will  pass 
ever  that.  This  relation  of  bos  that  I  vrarked 
{or,  I  would  wish  to  impress  upon  your  mind, 
wished  me  to  take  the  boy  apprentice ;  I  had  the 
boy  on  liking;  I  wished  to  avoid  taking  him,  but 
X  oouhl  not  without  losing  my  bread,  and  even 
if  I  should  be  disd^urged  from  this  place,  I  do 
BOt  know  where  I  sImII  pet  vrork,  that  is  therea- 
SOD  I  took  this  boy,  with  a  promise  of  seven 
]fears  work  with  him,  as  he  had  numbers  of 
xelaiMiie  laasteif ;  but  shortly  after  Ihad  taken 


him,  aAeir  he  tad  beeii  boiilid  a  short  lime 
to  me,  I  was  throvm  out  of  work ;  this  relation 
curtailed  my  v^ages ;  I  put  up  with  it  once ;  he 
wished  to  curtail  me  again,  which  I  could  not 
put  up  With  any  longer.  I  was  obliged,  my 
lord,  to  leave  my  work,  and  go  into  another 
neighbourhood  to  live;  this  landlord  vrillcome 
forward  if  it  is  necessary,  but  I  have  not  an 
opportunity  of  bringina  any  one  forward,  or  I 
would  bring  numbers  mrward.  I*  went  to  live 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Foz-couit;  before  I 
lived  in  Shoe>laoe ;  however  I  was  fortunate 
enough  to  obtain  pretty  well  of  work,  but  the 
worst  of  it  is,  that  this  boy  has  lost  it  for  me;  he 
spoileditforme;  positively  I  can  biingmeninto 
this  court,  mastery  particularly  Mr.  Smith  of 
Southampton*buildingB,  who  works  for  Mr. 
Bimie,  and  who  has  been  had  up  I  know,  for  my 
wife  told  me  he  hasbeen  had  up,  and  he  will  give 
me  a  good  character  for  work,  and  every  thing 
he  knows  of  me*  This  has  caused  my  apprentice 
and  me  to  have  frequent  dispmes,  his  spoiling 
myworic. 

My  lord,  about  eighteen  months  ago  my  vrifo 
was  not  very  well,  and  she  had  a  separate 
lodging  out  of  town,  and  this  boy  went  sod 
robbed  her  of  a  book,  which  I  deteeted  in  Uff 
pocket.  I  did  not  poiiish  him^  bnt  dnly  gave 
him  an  admonition ;  since  that  he  has  been 
in  the  habit  of  notng  abont  to  take  the  lives  of 
such  individuals  as  me;  he  has  been  in  Ae 
habit  of  going  about  and  thieving,  which  I  oan 

Kve  to  your  satisfoction,  I  com  bring  two 
« into  the  court  now,  who  lived  upon  ^e  same 
spot  with  me,  but  they  are  afhud  of  implica« 
ting  themselves ;  and  my  vrife,  poor  creature, 
has  never  been  well  since  she  vras  out  of  her 
mind,  and  is  quite  out  of  ability  to  come  here. 
He  went  to  a  butcher's  shop  and  stole  a  steel, 
and  sold  it  to  a  master  for  whom  I  woiked, 
(and  who  will  appear  with  the  steel),  to  a  Mr* 
Bacon,  in  Kirby-<street,  Uattoo-gaiden ;  this 
can  be  proved,  my  lord,  beyond  doubt.  Not 
content  with  this,  my  lord,  he  was  at  other 
kinds  of  robbery ;  he  vras  charged  in  Gray^s^ 
in»-lane  with  robbing  a  gentleman  of  his  watch, 
and  he  was  taken  into  die  Gt^  earl  of  War- 
wick publiohoase ;  the  landlord  knew  me  very 
well ;  he  directed  tiie  gentleman  to  take  him 
there,  being  an  artful  Iwy,  and  I  knovnng  the 
landlord,  the  landlord  persuaded  the  gentleman 
that  he  must  be  mistaken  for  that  he  knew  hie 
master  well,  and  he  got  liberated  by  that 
means.  My  lord,  I  do  not  know  that  it  is 
altogether  to  the  present  question  for  me  to 
name  it,  but  two  years  and  a  half  ago  he  had  a 
brother  died  under  sentence  of  death  here^ 
in  this  very  prison;  this  is  nothing  to  hie 
credit,  but  what  I  have  ststed  to  your  lordship* 
before,  i  can  prove ;  I  can  bring  the  people 
forward  ^  prove  it  Mv  wifo  went  to  the 
btttdier's,  bat  he  hesitated,  and  would  not  ac- 
knowledge to  anv  thing  of  the  sort,  but  the 
steel  oan  be  produced,  and  could  the  bcrys  be 
promised  that  they  vfould  not  be  punished, 
diey  would  come  forward ;  aad  not  only  tlns^ 
hatha  if  a  vittaia  to  hi»  asioci^tes,  ier  he  sold 


1S91]       1  GEOSGE  IV. 

te  steel  for  3«.  6if.  and  he  told  tiie  boys  lint 
he  sold  it  for  half  a  crowoy  and  robbed  them  of 
a  shilling ;  this  I  hope,  my  lord,  the  gentlemen 
of  the  jury  will  weigh. 

Then,  gentlemen,  .as  to  Hiden,  I  know 
nothing  of  him;  I  never  saw  him  in  my  life  to 
my  knowledge ;  that,  my  lord,  is  all  I  wish  to 
say«  except  reading  a  part  of  this  defence  which 
I  have  not  looked  over  at  present  [refen  to 
4ke  wriUten  defence],  I  beg  yonr  paidon  my 
lord,  I  wish  to  advert  to  a  person  af  the  name 
of  Bdwardsy  who  is  the  first  individual  who 
«verdrew  me  into  this  snare;  this  Mr.  Ed- 
wards, my  lord,  I  first  saw  in  company  with 
Thisdewood  at  the  White  lion  in  Wych-street, 
Clare-markety  or  Dniry-lane;  it  runs  into 
Dmry4aDe ;  this  Edwards  shortly  after  called 
upon  me  at  my  lodgings  in  Fox-court;  I  was 
▼ery  short  of  work,  and  he  used  frequently  to 
call  npon  me,  twice  or  three  times  a  day,  k>ng 
before  this  room  was  taken  which  has  been  so 
much  the  subject  of  the  present  trial;  this 
voom  which  was  unfortunately  a  back  room  on 
the  same  floor  as  I  lived ;  this  Edwards,  even  if 
I  was  not  at  home,  would  call  again ;  if  I  went 
to  a  shop  after  work,  he  would  even  come  and 
wait.for  me  till  I  came  out,  which  I  can  prove  by 
Mr.  Smith,  who  sfid  ^  I»  that  a  person  wait- 
ing for  yon,  why  do  not  yon  call  him  inf*' 
This  man,  my  lord,  harassed  me,  and  even  at 
times  supplied  me  with  money;  he  told  me, 
which  I  can  bring  other  people  to  prove,  could 
they  be  called  in  evidence  before  you,  who 
have  been  had  up  at  Bow-street  by  his  sug- 
gestion, whom  he  endeavoured  to  implicate, 
but  could  not ;  he  told  them,  that  if  he  could 
get  a  thousand  such  persons  as  me,  he  knew  I 
was  not  a  man  of  disloyalty,  and  he  know- 
ing me  to  be  a  staunch  man,  thought  me  fit  to 
be  made  a  prey  of;  he  has  taken  persons  with 
me  to  treat  them  with  eatables  and  drink; 
this  was  his  constant  practice,  my  lord,  day 
after  day  continually,  so  I  may  say,  for  two 
months,  if  not  more,  before  I  was  arrested; 
this  I  solemnly  declare  before  God,  that  he  is 
the  individual  who  has  seduced  n&e,  and  not 
Thistlewood ;  I  shall  advert,  my  lord,  as  I  stated 
before,  to  what  passed  when  I  was  in  Cato- 
street;  I  called  that  evening  and  before,  I 
wiU  state  nothing  but  the  truth ;  my  lord,  from 
the  different  favours  which  I  had  received 
from  Edwards  at  different  periods,  I  certainly 
had  a  good  opinion  of  the  man ;  I  will  candidly 
acknowledge,  when  the  officers  came  up  into 
the  room  in  Cato-streel,  I  made  my  escape  in 
the  best  manner  I  could,  though,  my  lord,  I 
do  not  say  I  made  my  escape  as  a  coward, 
tiiat  I  ran  off  and  went  to  bed,  nor  as  a  traitor 
deceived  my  fellow  comrades ;  I  went  imme- 
diately down  to  Grosvenoi^square,  where  I 
knew  this  villain  was  who  probably  will  be 
the  means  of  my  being  sent  into  another  world 
very  shortly;  I  went  to  that  villain,  and  told 
him  what  had  happened,  at  which  he  seemed 
very  much  surprised,  but  left  the  square  with 
me ;  shortly  after,  i|p  ci^ne.  Thistlewood  and 
another  pecson,  who  was  in  the  room,  but 


of  Join  tkmmu  Bruid 


[itmi 


who  has  not  been  tdcen,  nor  he  |Mver  wiO,  I 
dare  say,  my  lord;  however,  we  proceeded 
from  Grosvenor-eqnare ;  he  took  us  into  several 
wine-vaults  to  drink,  merely,  I  believe,  ay 
lord,  for  some  persons  to  identiiy  ns,  aa  I 
have  thought  since ;  we  went  into  a  boose  in 
Fritb^treet,  and  from  there  we  proceeded  to 
Holbom,  ¥^en  I  proceeded  home ;  I  had  not 
been  long  home,  before  a  man  came  id,  as 
the  apprentice  has  asserted,  and  said  he  had 
received  a  violent  blow  in  the  side,  but  the 
apprentice  forgot  to  tell  you  that  Mr.  Edwards 
was  the  man  who  .came  on  the  stairs  and  told 
us  to  come  out,  and  we  went  out  to  Hoibon, 
and  there  we  met  with  Palin  by  chance  in 
Holbom,  and  three  other  individuals,  and 
with  them  I  went  into  Thompeon's  wine 
vaults,  opposite  St.  Andrew's  church ;  I  drank 
a  small  glass  of  liquor  ^  Edwards  came  in  last, 
and  I  believe  if  I  recollect  right,  that  I  paid 
for  three  glasses  of  liquor,  one  for  Pa^iii,  one 
for  myself,  and  one  for  another  individaal, 
who  was  with  him ;  I  came  out  of  the  shop, 
and  was  followed  very  quickly  by  Edwards, 
who  called  -me  on  one  side  and  told  me  he 
wished  to  speak  to  me ;  on  hearing  what  he 
had  to  say,  he  beean  to  find  fault  with  me 
very  mnch  for  drinking  with  Palin,  declared 
that  he  was  the  man  that  had  bettayed  na 
all,  and  that  he  was  unworthy  to  live;  dedared 
that  he  had  prevented  ten  or  twelve  m^  whom 
he  dependeaon  finom  coming  to  Edgware* 
road  ;  that  be  had  sent  Potter  to  GrosTeaor- 
square  to  watch  his  movements,  and  that  he 
was  a  villain.  On  that,  my  lord,  we  walked, 
I  believe,  as  for  as  Little  Britain^  I  tiiink  aome- 
where  thereabouts,  I  am^'not  mudi  aoqiiaiated 
with  that  part  of  the  town,  but  when  we  caaw 
into  a  dark  place,  near  where  as  he  said  Cook 
lived,  (but  I  never  was  at  Cook's  j^aoe^  be 
urged  me  again  respecting  Palin,  as  PidiB  was 
very  much  intoxicated,  he  said  to  me  that  die 
safest  wav  will  be  for  us  to  put  Palin  oat  of 
the  worid;  he  urged  me,  my  lord,  aeveral 
times  to  assassinate  Palin;  he  told  me,  says 
he,  '^you  have  got  nothing  I  dare  say  aboet 
you,"  but  he  put  his  hand  to  his  pocket,  and 
pulled  out  a  brass-barrelled  loaded  pistol,  and 
offered  it  to  me  to  assassinate  Palin,  and  he 
likewise  offered  me  the  swoid  stick  in  his  hand, 
saying ''  if  you  put  him  out  of  the  worid,  every 
thing  will  be  safe;*'  he  likewise  shewed  me  a 
constable's  staff;  says  he,  ''I  will  act  in  te 
same  capacity  I  have  been  actins  in  aU  the 
evening,  in  Grosvenor-eqnare,  and  all  will  be 
safe;  should  there  be  any  alaim  given,  I  will 
officiate  as  an  officer,  and  you  may  depcmd 
upon  it  there  will  be  no  discovery.''  .  Finding 
him  urge  me  to  commit  murder,  I  made  him 
this  reply,  ^  If  you  are  convinced  th«i  Pidia  is 
a  villain,  the  weapons  are  in  good  hamda.* 
Finding,  my  lord,  that  lie  could  not  prevul  os 
me  to  ao  the  murder,  he  says  to  me,  ^  I  aaest 
bid  you  good  night,  for  I  am  going  to  condact 
Mr.  Thistlewood  to  some  secret  place.**  At 
he  had  always  been,  my  lord,  as  it  were,  pnmed 
to  the  coat  tail  of  ^.  ThistlewoM^  I  ihoagb^ 


10931 


f»  H^h  rriMOR. ' 


A.  D.  IMD. 


C1394 


htm  a  most  proper  penon  certtdDly,  and  know« 
ing  I  had  no  evil  intentions  myself  against 
any  individual,  I  was  detennined  not  to  know 
where  they  went,  and  consented  to  bid  him  good 
nighty  but  not  first  without  an  admonition 
from  him ;  he  came  on  one  side  again,  my  lord, 
and  whispered  to  me,  and  told  me  that  those 
things  which  had  been  entmsted  to  Palin  and 
Potter,  and  some  of  the  individuals,  they  had 
done  nothing  with,  and  they  were  taken  into  the 
back  room  my  lord,  in  the  house  where  I 
lodged.  This  vras  a  plot  to  take  my  life,  I 
have  no  doubt ;  he  asked  me  if  I  would  be  so 
good  as  to  tie  diose  things  up  in  the  morning, 
and  send  either  my  apprentice  or  my  own 
boy  with  a  part  of  them  to  Palin's,  and  a 
part  to  Potter^s  in  the  Borough,  with  an 
intent,  my  lord,  as  I  have  conceived  since  to 
take  their  lives,  I  have  not  the  smallest  doubt  of 
it ;  according^,  my  lord,  I  got  up  in  the 
morning,  and  those  things  which  have  been 
produced  here  I  put  in  Uiose  baskets,  as  has 
Men  given  in  evidence  here  by  mv  own  ap- 
prentice, and  tied  them  up,  my  lord,  but  altered 
my  mind  respecting  sending  them,  thinking 
that  if  they  wanted  them  they  might  fetch 
them.  This,  my  lord,  is  all  that  I  wish  to  say 
respecting  what  I  know  of  the  plot ;  this  is 
all  I  know ;  I  know  that  Edwards  is  the  man 
that  always  found  money ;  he  is  the  man  that 
went  about  at  the  old  iron  shops  and  different 
places,  buying  pistols,  swords,  and  other 
things  for  individuals  who  could  not  get  money 
or  aibrd  money  to  buy  them ;  this  I  declare 
before  that  God  whose  awful  tribunal  I  shall 
probably  be  called  to  attend ;  and  should  I 
die  in  Ihis  cause  for  having  been  seduced  by 
the  villain  who  has  been  employed  by  sovem- 
ment,  or  he  could  not  get  the  money,  it  I  die, 
I  will  die  not^'unworthy  of  a  descendant  of  the 
ancient  Britons ;  soMier  than  I  would  betray 
my  fellow  men,  I  wbuld  suffer  a  thousand 
deaths;  this,  my  lord,  is  all  I  have  to  say. 

BEPLr. 

Mr.  SolkUar  OeneraL — Gentlemen  of  the 
Jury ;  I  rise  for  the  purpose  of  making  some 
observations,  not  in  reply  to  the  case  which 
has  been  set  up  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner, 
because  no  evidence  on  his  behalf  has  been 
presented  to  your  attention,  but  in  reply  to 
die  observations  and  arguments  which  have 
been  so  ably  and  forcibly  urged  by  the  counsel 
assigned  for  his  defence.  Jaded  as  my  mind 
must  necessarily  be  by  a  continued  repetition 
of  the  same  &cts,  and  a  recurrence  to  the  same 
topics  and  the  same  arguments,  you  will  feel 
that  I  have  upon  this  occasion  a  most  iiksome 
duty  to  perform.  But  we  are  not  assembled 
here  for  the  purpose  of  amusement ;  we  are 
net  to  discharge  one  of  the  most  grave  and 
aolemn  duties  that  can  be  cast  upon  any  mem- 
bers of  civilised  society,  and  I  trust  therefore, 
however  tedious  this  inquiry  may  prove,  if  I 
•bould  be  compelled  to  recur  to  the  same  ar« 
guments  already  so  frequently  urged,  you  will 
—for  the  sake  of  the  public^dr  your  own 


satisfaction  and  peace  of  mind,  when  you  may 
look  back  at  some  future  period  to  the  events 
of  this  day — and  above  all,  for  the  sake  of  die 
prisoner  at  the  bar,  give  me  a  patient  and  at-' 
tentive  hearing. 

It  is  in  consequence  of  the  privilege  which 
tfie  law  has  given  to  the  prisoners  of  severing 
their  challenges,  and  of  Course  sepanting  their 
defences,  that  it  has  become  necessary  to  recur 
thus  frequently  to  the  facts  of  this  case.  I  am 
not  complaining  of  this ;  it  is  a  right  that  the 
prisoners  have  by  the  law  of  the  countiy,  and' 
if  they  conceive  that  the  exercise  of  it  can  be 
of  any  benefit  to  them,  I  should  be  one  of  the 
last  men  to  wish  to  deprive  them  of  such  a 
privilege.  In  a  case  of  this  description,  to 
think  of  our  own  personal  convenience  or  in- 
convenience, would  be  in  the  highest  degree 
selfish  and  contemptible,  and  however  painful 
and  distressing  may  be  the  sacrifice  which  we 
are  called  upon  to  make,  I  am  sure  it  will  be 
made  with  cheerfulness  and  alacrity. 

My  learned  friend  who  has  just  spoken  said 
nothing  on  the  law  of  the  question,  but  my  learn- 
ed fnend  who  preceded  him  made  many  remarks 
^-remarks  with  which  I  have  no  disposition  to 
quarrel— on  what  he  called  constructive  treason. 
But  we  are  not  here  engage  in  considering  a 
case  of  constructive  treason.  The  charge  pre- 
ferred against  the  prisoner  is  of  a  very  different 
character.  He  is  charged,  not  with  constructive, 
but  with  plain  and  direct  treason.  Disrobing 
the  accusation  of  all  technical  terms,  it  is  shortly 
and  plainly  this,  that  the  prisoner  conspired 
with  other  persons  to  move  an  insurrection, 
and  stir  up  rebellion  in  the  country ;  that  he 
endeavoured  to  effect  his  object  by  means  of  a 
most  extensive  plan  of  assassination  which  is 
not  now  disputeo  by  his  counsel,  which  is  ad« 
mitted  by  the  prisoner  himself  in  the  most  dis« 
tinct  terms,  and  which  ^with  their  ultimate 
object)  was  to  be  accomplished  by  those  other 
means  which  have  been  stated  in  evidence  in 
the  progress  of  this  trial. 

Now,  gentlemen,  with  respect  to  the  manner 
in  which  this  case  is  made  out  against  the 
prisoner.  Mr.  Curwood  has  stated,  that  before 
a  charge  of  this  kind  can  be  brought  home 
against  the  accused,  he  must,  according  to  the 
language  of  the  statute  of  Edward,  be  proveably 
attainted.  I  beg  leave  to  subscribe  to  that 
opinion,  to  the  fofi  extent  to  which  the  learned 
gentleman  would  press  it.  I  say,  unless  you 
aroi  hy  the  evidence  which  is  laid  before  you, 
cleariy  convinced  that  the  case  is  brought  home 
to  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  it  is  your  bounden 
duty  to  acquit  him ;  he  must,  according  to  the 
lanffuage  of  the  statute  and  the  commentary  of 
lord  Ck>ke,  be  proveably  convicted.  It  win 
be  for  you,  then,  considering  the  evidence  laid 
before  you  unopposed  as  it  has  been  by  any 
testimony  on  the  other  side,  to  say  whether  in 
the  proper  and  fair-  construction  of  the  terms, 
the  prisoner  is  proveably  convicted  of  the  of- 
fence with  which  he  is  accused. 

A  most  ettraordinary  course  of  argument 
hu  beenporsQied  oil  theotherstde^  and  amosi* 


19051       1  GEOBGiB  IV. 


TrUl  <^Jtlk»  Thomaa  Bnmt 


[IW 


•xtnofdinaiy  assomptioa  adopted.  The  wit*, 
Muee  lar  thle  praeeeatioD,  have  proved  to  you 
that  e  plan  of  assaBsination  was  tormed,  whidi 
constituted  one  step  towards  the  aooonplish- 
ment  of  a  treasonable  project.  My  learned 
friends  say  we  believe  your  witnesses;  we 
believe  your  evidence  up  to  a  certain  point; 
we  admit  that  such  a  plan  of  assassiaatioo, 
wicked  and  monstrous  as  it  is,  was  really 
formed ;  but  we  disbelieve  all  your  evidence 
beyond  that  point.  This  is,  indeed,  a  most 
extraordinary  goufm  of  argument^  pressed  for 
the  first  time,  I  believe,  to  grave  and  reasonable 
men,  in  a  court  of  justice  that  up  to  a  certain 
point  (establishing  that  which  is  almost  incre- 
dible in  itself,  namely,  that  these  persons  had 
combined  together  to  assassinate  so  many 
eminent  and  dignified  characters,,  with  whom 
t|iey  had  had  no  personal  intereouxse,  and  of 
whom  they  had  no  personal  knowledge)  you 
will  believe  the  witnesses  ;  you  will  give  eredii 
to  their  testimony  as  far  as  this  point,  and  aU 
the  rest  you  will  rctject  as  fiction  and  faUe. 
But  in  pursuing  this  inquiry  we  shall  see  whe- 
t^  my  learned  friends  are  entitled  to  reject 
the  evidence,  so  &r  as  it  relates  to  the  ulti* 
mate  object  which  these  parties  had  in  view. 
And  when  we  speak  of  this  being  an  improba* 
ble  fiction,  to  which  no  reasooable  man  can 
give  credit,  allow  me  to  ask,  vrhetber  that  which 
my  learned  friends  have  admitted,  and  which 
llie  prisoner  at  thtf  bar  has  not  disputed,  is  not 
infinitely  more  improbable,  standing  by  itself 
i|S  the  ultimate  olycot  at  which  they  are  sup- 
poesd  to  have  ainled,  than  as  forming  a  step 
towards  the  aeconmjishment  of  that  treason 
which  they  meditated.  For,  I  do  declare,  in 
4ie  laojguage  (or  rather  in  the  spirit,  for  I  can* 
Qot  imitate  the  language)  of  the  learned  judge 
ta  whom  I  allude,  that  it  is  infinite^  more 
incredible  thai  the  prisoner  should  have  en« 
gaged  in  a  conspiracy  for  the  mere  assaarination 
<^f  his  m^ieaty's  ministers,  than  that  they  should 
have  united  m  a  treasonable  design,  using  the 
assassination  of  his  miyesty's  ministers  as  a 
atep  to  promotoi  an  insunection  and  rebellion 
in  the  oounti^*  I  think  the  assumptipn  on  the 
other  side  is  mfinile)jf  more  void  or  probability 
than  that  which  we  state,  and  which  at  Uie 
same  time  is  proved  by  the  evidence  in  the 
cause,  whereas  the  oth^  rests  upon. mere  as- 
aertion ;  vou  are  requested  to  reiect  the  evi- 
dence and  to  consider  all  this  as  nction  merely 
on  the  gratuitous  statement  of  the  counsel  for 
l^e  prisoner. 

Lot  us^  then,  look  at  the  evidence  as  it  ap- 
plies to  the  case,  and  see  whether,  as  sober 
men,  judging  upon  the  testimony  given  upon 
oath  before  you,  and  upon  those  striking  facts 
which  cannot  be  distorted  or  denied,  this  case 
is  or  is  not  broeght  home  effectually  to  ihe 
prisoner  at  the  bar*  We  have  called  before 
you  an  accomplice ; — Mot  but  that  the  case  is 
made  oujL  in  its  general  ^haraoter  and  plan, 
vrithout  his  evidence*  X  have  already;  to  some, 
of  the  f  SNi^^emen  I  heve  now  the  hoaour  of 
addre^pipig^  sMued  wfaatl  ti«kfi  to  be  the  jesi 


principle  by  edudi  ih»  evidenee  of  tBsecflie> 
plice  is  to  be  examined.  First,  I  eomider  ihi 
previous  character  of  the  individiiaL  Thiiini 
has  been  known  to  the  prisoner  ibr  a  keg 
period  of  time.  The  prisoner  is  new,  ishi 
defence,  casting  imputatioas  on  his  cosdad: 
but  is  there  any  evidence  to  impeach  llieck» 
ricter  of  Adams  f  The  name  of  Adnsi  m 
in  the  list  of  vritnesses  delivoed  te  the  primer 
upwards  of  four  weeks  firom  this  tiiae;  «i^ 
nesses  might  have  been  called  fw  the  ]iaipott 
of  discrediting  him,  and  of  saying  thitkefW 
not  a  man  to  be  believed  upon  bu  oath.  N^ 
thing  of  that  kind,  however,  has  bees  attenj^ 
ed;  but  it  is  said  that  he  has  been  a  disbe* 
liever  in  the  Christian  religion,  tad  his  knag 
renoenoed  thoee  errors  at  a  late  period  is  up* 
posed  to  throw  a  doubt  upon  his  eridssct 
That  observation,  if  my  letmed  fnced  viD 
give  me  leave  to  say  so,  shews  a  dephnUe 
ignorance  of  human  nature  and  of  Ifae  disneier 
of  the  human  mind.  That  this  msneaiM 
astray  from  hb  foitb  by  the  pemidosswrilogf 
of  Paine  he  admitted,  the  moment  the  qne^ 
was  put  to  him.  But  we  all  know  tfastvtei 
principles  of  religion  are  earljmlifeiaphild 
m  the  mind  they  never  can  be  enliraly  cadi* 
cated.  In  moments  of  distress  ^-viNBtki 
illusions  of  life  are  vrithdrawn— iHiea  mAm 
calamity,  and  particolariy  when  the  dssftfe 
death  stares  men  in  the  fiMc^— theait  i*  ^ 
they  fall  back  agam  to  the  eoesoktidMof 
religion  ;—4hea  it  is  that  they  see  the  wf 
of  the  errors  which  they  have  mmMr 
then  it  is  that  they  ding  again  to  m 
faith  vfhich  is  man's  best  hope  ssd*><"|7 
in  the  season  of  diMreis  and  soirov.  h  s 
unnatural,  therefore,  that  Adsiiis,-^v  * 
new  designated  by  my  learned  ftia^  ^  * 
first  time  as  a  spy  (but  of  wfaieb  tbert^"^ 
the  slightest  evidence  in  4he  tnm\  «h»  s 
suppceed  to  have  been  emplo^  hygow^ 
ment,  for  the^purpose  of  ettendiag  t^^*^"^ 
ings  (but  of  which  there  is  not  sir^  proo^  ^ 
the  slightest  foundation  in  fiKSt;  n>r  be  «ni 
not  a|x>rebeBided  tiU  the  Friday,  sor  ^» 
name  known  to  the  goveraaseDt  ti&hevs* 

apprehended)— Is  it  at  all  ■"^pii'i^^J!^ 
a  man,  when  he  was  apprehended,  «S*°!^ 
he  Imsaw  the  eoaseqaences  of  the  ^'^^''T^ 
in  which  he  was  involved,  shoeld  1>***JT 
ceived  the  error  of  his  wsys,  tw^  *■*  Sc! 
and  repenUnee  should  have  foU^ved^.  ^J^ 
my  learned  fnend,  thercfiiw,  "^*^  ^ 
diange  as  inconsistent  and  Jsip*****;^ 
ridicules  that  which  a  moment^HJtoyjjJ; 
have  suggested  as  the  nataial  «^**^^ig 
the  prisoner's  sitnation ;  aadhedieiMm^ 
this  respect  at  leest,  he  is  wmpMi^^ 
the  wcAuni  of  the  human  mind.  ,^^.^ 
Again,  as  to  Adams,  whst  is  1«  ui^ 
the  cause)    Amandoesnotcomews^^ 

of  justice  le  commit  v^tjvtft  "^  !^ 
some  melive  of  anierest  wsm^^^^ 
his  mind.  Bed  and  degraded  ss  a  0»"^^ 
will  not  coounit  pcrpuylor  the  ^^^^ 
ensue ;  and  stitt  less  villhs  deM  «>^ 


^ 


1397] 


for  H^k  Treaion* 


A.  D.  18Sa 


[1398 


lead  to  oonsequencec  of  such  a  nature  as  would 
follow  upon  the  present  occasion.  He  is  ap* 
prehended,  he  is  conscious  of  his  guilt ;  he  is 
told  he  may  be  a  witness  for  the  Crown ;  terms 
are  not  made  with  him,  because  that  is  never 
done ;  he  is  merely  informed,  that  he  may  be 
a  witness  for  the  Crown.  Of  course  he  ex- 
pects his  pardon ;  but  it  is  upon  one  condition 
only :  That  he  falsifies  the  fact?  that  he  states 
that  which  is  untrue  ?  that  he  aggravates  the 
charffe  asainst  his  associates  and  himself?  no : 
but  Uiat  he  states  with  truth  all  that  he  knows. 
What  motive  then  has  he  to  come  forward  for 
the  purpose  of  stating  that  which  is  untrue  ? 
He  blackens  his  own  character  in  the  same 
proportion  in  which  he  criminates  his  asso- 
ciates. He  was  one  of  the  willing  partners  of 
their  crime ;  why  then  should  he  state  the  of- 
fence to  be  of  a  different  nature  from  that 
which  was  really  committed  ?  I  can  under- 
•tand  that  he  may  have  a  motive  in  lessening 
the  atrocity  of  the  crime ;  but  I  cannot  under- 
stand any  motive  operating  on  his  mind  which 
would  induce  him  to  represent  it  as  of  a  blacker 
and  more  infamous  cnaracter,  than  it  really 
deserved. 

Again,  when  you  are  considering  the  evi- 
dence of  a  man  in  the  situation  of  Adams,  you 
will  inquire,  could  he,  if  he  has  spoken  false, 
be  contradicted?  Over  and  over  again  that 
challenge  has  been  thrown  out  to  my  learned 
friends ;  they  might  have  called  witness  after 
witness  for  the  purpose  of  contradicting  him  if 
the  stoiy  he  has  told  were  untrue.  There  is  a 
witness  of  the  name  of  Hall  now  within  their 
reach  who  attended  all  these  meetings ;  there 
are  other  witnesses  who  have  been  named, 
whom  he  has  stated  to  have  been  present  at 
many  of  those  meetings,  and  who  might  have 
been  called  either  for  the  purpose  of  dis- 

S roving  this  fact,  or  of  proving,  if  they  really 
Id  attend  the  meetings,  that  the  object  of  the 
meetings,  and  that  what  took  placie  at  them, 
were  different  from  what  Adams  has  represent- 
ed. Why,  then,  are  not  those  witnesses  put  into 
the  box  ?.  If  the  story  told  by  Adams  is  false, 
why  does  not  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  call  his 
own  associates  for  the  purpose  of  showing, 
that  he  is  not  guilty  of  the  charge  imputed  to 
him,  and  that  the  account  given  by  Adams,  of 
what  passed  at  the  meetings,  is  false  ? 

But  let  us  look  to  another  part  of  the  case, 
to  the  confirmation  of  the  stoiy  which  he  has 
told.  When  you  are  desirous  of  knowing, 
whether  an  accomplice  is  speaking  the  lan- 
guage of  truth,  you  examine  his  evidence  by 
this  test;  you  sav,  ''if  the  account  be  true,  it 
may  be  confirmed  in  such  and  such  particulars. 
It  cannot  be  confirmed  in  all,  because  there 
are  circumstances  to  which  the  witness  and  the 
pfisoner,  could  alone  be  parties."  Let  us  then 
see,  whether  he  is  confirmed  in  those  things 
in  which  his  evidence  admits  of  confirmation. 
Tr^  his  evidence  by  that  test,  and  you  will  see 
it  IS  confirmed,  not  in  trivial  particulars,  but  in 
those  which  constitute  the  Tery  essence  of  the 
crime  imputed  to  the  prisoner  at  the  bar, 
VOL.  XXXIIL 


Gentlemen,  I  am  desirous  of  sparing  you— I 
am  desirous  also  of  sparing  myself — the  fati^e 
of  going  through  this  detail.  We  have  ad« 
verted  again  and  again  to  these  facts,  and  I 
shall  touch  as  lightly  upon  them  as  possible, 
knowing  that  the  eridence  will  be  summed  up, 
and  that  you,  from  the  attention  you  have 
given  to  it,  will  apply  the  general  observations 
to  the  facts  as  they  arise,  and  see  how  they  are 
borne  out  by  the  evidence  in  the  cause. 

A  witness  has  been  called  of  the  name  of 
Hale  who  was  unassailed  until  you  heard  what 
fell  from  the  prisoner  at  the  bar ;  to  whom  not 
a  question  was  put  on  cross-examination,  and 
who  told  his  story  in  a  manner  calculated  to 
raise  no  suspicion  as  to  his  veracity.  But 
when  the  examination  is  over,  and  the  witness 
has  left  the  court,  the  prisoner  at  the  bar, 
relying  upon  his  own  assertion  only,  states 
that  the  witness  upon  some  former  occasion 
had  disgraced  himself,  and  that  he  is  not 
worthy  of  credit,  nay,  more  with  an  injustice  ' 
peculiar  to  this  case,  endeavoured  to  load  him 
with  the  supposed  guilt  of  his  relations  and 
his  friends.  But  if  the  imputations  attempted 
to  be  cast  upon  him  were  well  founded,  why 
were  not  those  imputations  communicated  to 
my  learned  friends,  that  the  questions  might 
have  been  fairly  propounded  to  him,  and 
that  he  might  have  had  an  opportunity  of 
denying  or  admitting  the  correctness  of  the 
charges  made  against  him  ?  I  am  sure  that 
the  assertions  of  the  prisoner,  made  at  this 
late  moment,  will  not  in  the  slightest  degree 
detract  from  that  attention  which  I  am  sure 
you  will  be  disposed  to  pay  to  the  evidence  of 
Hale.  You  observed  the  mode  in  which  he 
gave  his  evidence ;  was  there  any  thing  in  it 
to  lead  you  to  suppose  that  he  was  influenced 
by  any  malicious  feeling  towards  his  master? 
Did  he  not  give  it  in  the  most  becoming  and 
proper  manner  ?  And  may  I  not  repeat  again, 
that  no  man,  attending  to  that  evidence,  could 
entertain  a  particle  of  doubt  as  to  its  truth? 

Then,  how  does  that  evidence  confirm  the 
testimony  of  Adams?  It  appears,  that  the 
room  was  taken — that  the  parties  assembled 
there  for  a  period  of  five  weeks — that  the  per^ 
sons  so  assembling  were  correctly  described 
by  Adams.  Adams  states,  that  it  was  pro- 
posed that  a  more  numerous  meeting  than 
usual  should  beheld  on  the  Sunday, 'to  ar- 
range some  plan,  in  consequence  of  the  sus- 
pension of  the  cabinet  dinners.  Hale  con- 
firms this.  He  says,  that  a  meeting,  more 
numerously  attended  than  usual,  did  take 
place  on  the  Sunday,  and  though  he  was  not 
admitted  into  the  room  to  be  able  to  explain 
what  passed  at  this  meeting,  is  it  p  ossible  yo 
should  not  consider  this  as  confirming  in  tne 
strongest  manner  the  testimony  of  Adams? 
How  could  Adams,  when  he  told  his  story, 
know  that  the  facts  stated 'by  Hale  would 
afterwards  come  out  in  corroboration  of  the 
trutli  of  it?  He  has  had  no  communication 
with  the  witness  Hale — ^he  has  been  in  custody. 
Uale  of  course  has  been  at  large.    Adams 

40 


129&]         1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  John  Thmat  Bnpii 


[law 


therefore  could  not  have  invented  the  facts 
which  he  has  stated^  with  a  view  to  create  a 
correspondence  with  the  evidence  of  Hale, 
sinco  he  could  have  no  knowledge  of  what  that 
evidence  was  to  be. 

There  is  another  circumstance  to  which  I 
beg  vour  attention.  Adams  states,  that  on 
^  the  afternoon  of  the  day  when  the  blow  was  to 
be  struck,  some  persons  came  into  the  room 
of  the  prisoner,  in  order  to  prepare  their  arms. 
Hale  states  that  he  was  in  the  room  at  the  time, 
and  he  describes  all  the  particulais,  exactly  in 
the  same  manner  in  which  the^  had  been  pre- 
viously stated  to  you  by  the  prisoner,  Adams. 

Now,  gentlemen,  give  me  leave  to  direct 
your  attention    to    that    remarkable  fiact  to 
which  my  learned  friend,  Mr.  Curwood,  has 
adverted,  namely,  the  proclamation;  and  I 
.direct  your  attention  particularly  to  this,  be- 
cause It  is  of  such  infinite  importance  in  the 
.  cause.    There  were  no  materials  prepared  for 
writing  the  proclamation.    Application  was 
made  by  Thistlewood  to  Brunt,  and  Brunt  was 
desired  to  procure  cartridge  paper  for  the 
purpose.    Adams  says.  Brunt  went  out  of  the 
room,  and  in  a  short  time  the  paper  was brouii^ht 
in,  and  the  proclamations  were  written.    The 
apprentice  tells  you  precisely  the  same  story ; 
it  is  true  he  was  not  in  the  room  to  know 
how  the  paper  was  to  be  applied^  but  he  got 
the  paper  at  tlie  desire  of  his  master,  and  it 
was  carried  into  the  room.    Thistle  wood  wrote 
the  proclamations.    They  are  in  these  terms : 
"  Your  tyrants  are  destroyed.    The  friends  of 
liberty  are  called  upon  to  come  forward.    The 
provisional  government  is  now  sitting.^    The 
prisoners  were  not  taken  by  surprise  as  to  this 
proof.    Notice  was  given  to  them  to  produce 
the  proclamations,  but  they  in  answer  suggest 
that  no  such  proclamations  ever  existed.    Let 
me  recall  to  your  attention  the  particular  facts, 
and  see  how  decisive  they  are  with  respect  to 
this  part  of  the  case.    First  of  all,  observe  the 
manner  of  Thistle  wood.  Wliile  he  is  in  motion, 
and  in  a  state  of  excitement,  he  betrays  no 
want  of  firmness.    He  fixes  his  attention  to 
write  the  proclamations,  and  after,  he  finishes 
three  of  them  his  spirits  subside,  from  the 
nature  of  the  employment  in  which  he  was 
engaged.   Now  mark  the  effect.    Adams  never 
could  have  invented  it;  it  was  the  natural 
result  of  the  situation  in  which  this  unhappy 
man  was   placed.    He   became  all  at  once 
extremely  agitated,  so  much  so  that  he  could 
not  complete  what  he  had  undertaken.    No 
nan  could  have  invented  a  circumstance  of 
this  nature,  tliough,  when  it  is  stated  by  the 
witness,  it  appears  so  natural  and  obvious, 
that  it  at  once  carries  conviction  to  the  mind 
as    to   the  reality  of  the  story.    It  speaks 
volumes  upon  the  subject.    In  consequence  of 
this  uneasiness,    what  did  Thistlewood  do? 
Hall  stood  by ;  he  desired  Hall  to  take  the 
pen,  and  Hall  refused.    Is  this  story  true^  or  a 
fabrication  by  Adams?    If  it  be  false.  Hall 
might  have  been  called  for  the  purpose  of  con- 
tradicting it.    I  ask  you,  Hall  not  being  called 


by  the  prisoner  at  the  bar,  wheflier  pi  en 
entertain  a  doubt  that  the  stioiy  told  by  Mm 
is  in  this  particular  true.  My  leaned  fiind 
says,  Hall  would  be  in  jeopardy  if  he  nm 
called.  That  is  incorrect ;  he  would  be  opesri 
to  no  risk.  If  he  was  not  at  the  meeting,  k 
would  contradict  Adams ;  if  he  was  presest, 
the  question  being  asked  him,  whether  soehi 
proclamation  was  written,  he  would  ufwcr 
no,  if  in  point  of  fact  it  was  not  wnttea.  If 
any  question  were  asked  tending  to  crinittle 
himself,  he  might  refuse  to  answer  it ;  b«  if  ii 
reality  such  a  proclamation  wss  not  vrittts, 
he  might  have  so  stated,  and  in  so  dflia| 
could  run  no  possible  risk,  by  qaestiouftoo 
the  counsel  either  for  the  Crown,  or  theprijoner, 
Is  this  or  is  it  not  then  confinnatioaofllR 
most  convincing  nature,  with  respect  to  iftd 
decisive  of  the  case  spoken  to  by  Adim, 
confirmed  by  the  apprentice,  and  notdispiwed 
by  Hall,  as  it  might  have  been  if  it  ^«« 
untrue. 

Let  us  go  further.  The  parties  proceed  fc 
the  meeting  in  Cato-street ;  Brunt  eftcts  te 
escape,  Adams  is  not  taken  by  the  officers.  T« 
prisoner  at  the  bar  confirms  this  by  to  oti 
statement  in  the  course  of  bis  defence,  ntj, 
he  does  more,  he  confirms  also  the  aceort 
given  by  Hale.  He  tells  you  that  he  lert 
out,  and  returned  at  nine  o'clock  in Jj* 
manner  Hale  has  d escribed, covered  wifliB", 
and  that  another  person  came  to  him.  W 
gentlemen,  as  to  the  preparations  in  Bnsn 
lodging.  On  that  very  evening  and  on  » 
following  morning  are  found  materials,  «* 
for  the  execution  of  the  plot  in  Grosrwof- 
square,  for  every  thing  to  be  made  ««  *■ 
Grosvenor-square  had  been  removed  to  W^ 
street ;  but  in  Brunt's  lodgings  are  foood  *•■ 
balls— in  Brunes  lodgings  are  found  caftndg 
for  the  cannon^in  Brunt's  lodgings  aitWM 
grenades,  none  of  which  were  to  be  used  « 
Grosvenor-square,  but  all  of  which  «« 
evidently  intended  for  some  other  opetiMJ. 


The  officer  who  finds  these  proceeds  imiBifflj 
ately  afterwards  to  the  d^p6t  atTidd'^»» 
there  he  sees  what  puts  an  end,  as  ft  »PI*2 
to  me,  to  every  doubt  as  to  the  wtwe  fl» 
extent  of  the  design.  You  may  duheW« 
Adams,  you  may  disbelieve  Monoment,  w« 
youcannot  escape  the  inference  to  ^y^ 
from  these  preparations.  ^P'^'^  ^ 
rounds  of  ball-cartridges  are  prodoccd  tojw- 
It  is  said  that  there  was  a  cwj»P"*SL  " 
assassinate    his   majesty's   mimstersr 

speaks  so  strongly,  that  it  is  impossible  wj 


these  1,200  rounds  of  baU-cartridges  pi«P^ 
for  that  purpose  f  res  ipsa  loquitur,  the  "^ 
speaks  so  strongly,  that  it  is  »J»P?*™*j^. 
man  can  entertain  a  doubt  upon  the  saPP* 
But  it  is  said  this  is  so  extravagant  a  proj*^ 
th^t  it  is  utterly  incredible.  B^^  "]^ 
prisoner  consider  it  to  be  a  ▼J^^^^^Tf^ 
I  am  sure  you  have  not  foigotten  w» 
passing  in  the  mind  of  TWstlewoodJ^ 
told  Monument  that  the  people  were  ejg^ 
where  desirous  of  a  change..  ^^JJ^.  ,w 
wards  said  by  Tidd  to  the  piisooer  Bm"^ 


mi] 


Jitr  HtjgA  TVeonm. 


A.D.  1820. 


[1301%  . 


i{  they  could  but  throw  things  mto  confusion 
for  ^  day  or  two  the  measure  would  become 
general.    The  precise  expression  I  do  not  at 
this  moment  recollect,  but  he  said  it  would 
become  general.    Xliey  did  not  rely,  therefore, 
upon  their  own  strength,   upon  their    own 
resources,  upon  their  own  numbers  for  the 
purpose  of  accomplishing  the  ultimate  object 
they  bad  in   view;  but  they  looked  to  that 
feeling  and  disposition  which  they  believed  to 
exist  among   the  labouring   classes  in  this 
metropolis.    In  this  I  believe  in  my  conscience 
they  were  mistaken ;  but  they  imagined  that  if 
they  struck  this  great  blow,  that  if  they  ex- 
cited a  momentary  confusion,  and  suspended 
for  a  short  time  the  functions  of  government, 
a  general  rising  would  be  the  result,    and 
disorder  would  be  everywhere  prevalent ;  and 
the^  hoped  that    they  might  ^ride  on   the 
-whirlwind,  and  direct  the  storm.''.   I  have  no 
doubt  that  was  the  object  which  these  parties 
had  in  view;;  and  we  are  ourselves  feeble 
reasoners,   we    are    visionary    men,   if    we 
estimate  the  nature  and  character  of  their  plan 
solely  by  the  extent  of  their  own  numbers,  and 
the  immediate  means  they  had  prepared  for 
the  accomplishment  of  their  object. 

When  we  are  raising  an  argument  founded 
i;pon  the  visionary  character  of  this  project. 
Hire  cannot  look  to  what  has  been  passing, 
-within  these  few  weeks  in  our  own  country, 
-without  perceiving  how  utterly  unsound  such 
reasoning  must  appear.  If  we  look  to  the 
xiorth  of  this  islana,  and  to  the  events  which 
have  recently  occurred  there,  or  if  we  only 
call  back  to  our  minds  what  took  place  in  the 
county  of  Derby,  in  the  year  1817.  where  a  plan 
-was  fornied  infinitely  more  wild  than  the 
present,  but  the  reality  of  which  was  distinctly 
proved  by  the  most  unequivocal  and  satis- 
factory evidence,  we  cannot  say  that  it 
lumishes  any  argument  against  the  truth  of 
the  evidence,  that  to  prudent  calm  and 
reflecting  minds  the  ultimate  purpose  of  this 
scheme  must  appear  wild  and  visionaiy. 

If  in  the  course  I  am  pursuing,  I  should 

fiitigue  your  attention,  you  will  consider  the 

infinite  importance  of  the  question  to  every 

one  of  us,  and  in  particular  to  the  prisoner  at 

the  ^ar.    I  beg  tnen  to  iadveit  agai^  to  the 

evidence  pf  Monument;  I  do  it  for.  Uie  sake 

€kt  Moniuxient   himself.     Admirable    is   the 

mtitiition  of  trial  by  jury  ;  the  witnesses  are 

T^on  exaipQined  in  a  corner ;  they  give  evidence 

IP  the  presence  of  the  prisoner,  and  in  the  face 

of  tnose  who  are  to  decide  upon  the  credit  due 

to    their   testimony.    I    asK   you,   Uien,  to 

recpilect  tlie  manner  in  which  that  witness 

gaye  his  testimony ;  I  ask  you,  whether  you 

can  doubt  for  a  moment  from  the  manner  in 

ifv^ioh  he  gave  his  evidence,  the  truth  of  the 

stpzy  which  he  told :  he  told  you  that  when 

HusU^wood  called,  he  mentioned  to  him  that 

IpreAt  events  were  at  Hajid,  that  the  people 

-wece  dissatisfied  with  the   existing  order  of 

thio^^s^  and  that  every  thing  portended  change. 

Wheiiy  therefore,  my  learaed  friends  say  that 


all  that  these  parties  had  in  view  was  the 
assassination  of  his  majesty's  ministers,  or  that 
the  further  object  was  merely  plunder,  is  not 
this  directly  negatived  by  the  evidence?  That 
every  body  was  desirous  for  a  change  1  a  change 
in  what  \  evidently  a  change  in  the  constitu- 
tion and  laws  of  the  country.  Gentlemen,  he 
tells  you,  that  he  vras  induced  to  attend  this 
meeting  in  Cato-street;  he  tells  you  what 
passed  at  that  meeting,  and  in  so  doing,  he 
confirms  in  every  respect,  as  far  as  he  had  an 
opportunity  of  observing,  the  testimony  of 
Adams. 

There  is  another  fact  which  my  learned 
friends  have  treated  as  a  very  light  circum-' 
stance,  but  on  which  I  would  say  a  few  words; 
for  it  is  from  circumstances  which  arise 
accidentally  in  the  progress  of  a  case  of  this 
kind,  and  which  are  accidentally  confirmed, 
that  the  firmest  support  is  given  to  the 
evidence  they  are  intended  to  maintain.  You 
recollect  it  was  a  mere  accidental  circumstance 
occasioned  by  something  which  Adams  had 
stated  at  the  meeting,  that  the  watch  veas 
appointed  at  lord  Harrowby's.  It  was  no 
part  of  the  original  plan.  He  stated  who  the 
parties  were  that  first  composed  that  watch, 
and  by  whom  they  were  afterwards  relieved, 
and  you  find  this  confirmed  by  the  watchman, 
and  by  what  took  place  at  the  public-house, 
where  the  lad  played  at  dominos  with  the 
prisoner.  Every  step  that  we  take  in  this  case 
tends  to  confirm  the  story  told  by  Adams. 
Did  he  invent  this  tale  ?  If  so,  we  should  have 
found  him  contradicted  throughout;  but  the 
more  we  sift  and  search  and  examine,  the 
more  completely  and  fully  we  find  him  sup- 
ported  and  confirmed. 

I  pass  over  a  great  deal,  because  I  will  not 
fatigue  your  attention.  My  learned  friend 
reminds  me  of  Monument*s  brother.  He 
confirms  Adams,  and  he  also  confirms  the 
testimony  of  his  brother.  He  tells  you  that 
Brunt  called  at  his  lodgings.  Now  mark  the 
conversation,  for  this  is  a  most  material  cir- 
cumstance. ''  Our  plans,''  the  prisoner  said, 
"  have  been  suspended,  in  consequence  of  the 
death  of  the  king ;''  have  they  had  any  com- 
munication vrith  Adams  ?  none  whatever.  But 
Adams  tells  you  the  same  fact,  that  the  plan 
of  general  assassination  had  been  interrupted 
by  the  circumstance  of  the  death  of  the  king, 
which  had  suspended  the  cabinet  dinners. 
Thus,  every  tlihig  as  it  happens  accidentally 
to  occur  tends  to  confirm  the  testimony  of 
Adams. 

Then,  we  come  to  the  evidence  of  Hid  en. 
My  learned  friend  would  persuade  you  that 
Hiden  was  an  accomplice;  one  of  the  most 
extraordinary  and  unfounded  assertions  t  ever 
heard  made.  On  what  ground  does  he  assert 
that  Hiden  is  an  accomplice?  Because  he 
attended  two  meetings  of  a  shoe-makers'  club 
in  Round-court.  I  will  admit,  that  those 
meetings  were  held  for  the  purpose  of  reform. 
He  went  with  a  man  of  tlie  name  of  Clarke, 
and  invited  a  man  of  the  name  of  Bencett, 


1303]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ^John  Thouat  Brunt 


[1004 


and  if  my  friend  pleases,  I  will  admit  tiiat  he 
told  Bennett  something  was  to  be  done  for 
the  good  of  the  country.  Hiden  might  be  a 
friend  to  reform.  Is  that  to  be  a  subject  of 
reproach  ?  Through  what  means  was  it  to  be 
accomplished  f  Does  it  appear  that  there  was 
any  thing  criminal  to  be  transacted  at  the 
club  ?  There  is  not  the  slightest  proof  to  that 
effect,  and  yet  if  any  thing  had  been  done  or 
intended  in  which  Hiden  was  implicated,  my 
learned  friends  were  in  possession  of  abundant 
evidence  to  establish  it.  God  forbid  that  a 
man  should  be  considered  as  an  enemy  to  his 
country  because  he  is  a  friend  to  reform — ^to 
reform  to  be  effected  by  lawful  means.  But  a 
communication  was  made  to  Hiden,  and  why 
was  that  communication  made  ?  because  Wil- 
ton had  known  him  for  some  time*  He  had 
intelligence  no  doubt  that  Hiden  had  attended 
those  meetings,  and  conceiving  he  was  a  friend 
to  reform,  conceiving  there  was  some  dis- 
position lurkine  in  his  mind  adverse  to  the 
institutions  of  his  countiy,  when  the  plan  is 
just  ripe  for  execution,  and  when  he  conceives 
there  can  be  but  little  danger  in  the  commu- 
nication, he  acquaints  him  with  the  scheme. 
How  does  Hiden  conduct  himself?  Does  he 
bury  the  secret  in  his  own  bosom  ?  does  he 
adopt  it  ?  he  tells  Wilson  indeed,  that  he  will 
be  one  of  them.  But  why  ?  because,  knowing 
the  desperate  character  of  the  individuals  con- 
cerned m  the  enterprise,  he  knew  he  should 
have  been  exposed  to  personal  risk  and  dan- 
ger if  he  had  refused.  He  therefore  assented 
to  it;  but  to  shew  by  what  spirit  he  was 
actuated,  he  immediately  wrote  the  letter  to 
lord  Castlereagh,  and  made  that  communi- 
cation to  lord  Harrowby,  to  which  his  lordship 
has  spoken,  and  yet  aner  all  this  he  is  to  b« 
stigmatized  as  an  accomplice,  and  as  such 
undeserving  of  credit.  He  is  desired  by 
lord  Harrowby  to  meet  him  on  the  follow* 
jng  day.  Such  was  the  alarm  and  terror 
created  in  his  mind,  that  he  was  afraid  of 
meeting  him.  It  was  proposed  therefore  that 
he  should  attend  in  a  retired  and  sequestered 
part  of  the  park,  and  there  he  renews  the  com- 
munication, and  details  the  particulars  of  the 
plan.  He  afterwards  sees  Wilson  at  about 
four  or  five  o'clock,  and  Wilson  then  lets  him 
further  into  the  project.  He  enumerates  some 
of  the  circumstances  to  you.  He  telU  you 
there  were  to  be  four  divisions ;  that  the  can- 
non in  the  Artillery-ground  were  to  be  seized ; 
that  the  cannon  in  Gray's-inn-lane  were  to  be 
taken ;  that  the  parties  were  to  proceed  to  the 
Hansion-house ;  and  he  relates  all  the  leading 
particulars  of  the  plot.  If  this  be  a  fisible,  it  is 
one  of  the  most  extraordinary  coincidencies 
that  ever  existed.  Had  Hiden  ever  seen 
Adams  ?  had  he  ever  had  any  communication 
with  him  ?  Adams  tells  you  the  story  which, 
as  it  turns  out,  corresponds  precisely  with  the 
story  communicated  by  Wilson. 

Now,  gentlemen,  reflect  upon  this  strong 
body  of  confirmatory  evidence.  Do  you  or 
do  you  not  believe  the  truth  of  the  story?  do 


you  or  do  yon  not  believe  the  erideDce  of 
these  witnesses  ?  Look  to  wliat  took  place  is 
Cato-street;  look  to  the  prepantioas  at  tint 
place ;  they  were  directed  to  the  acoompliA- 
ment  of  a  part  of  the  object;  look  to  the  pre- 
parations in  other  ooarters;  they  were  directed 
to  the  execution  of  the  further  objects  of  tiie 
conspiracy.  Look  to  the  conduct  of  the  par- 
ties in  Cato-street,  and  to  the  resistance  they 
made.  Do  you  or  do  you  not  hdieve  tke 
story  ?  •*  Yes,  sav  my  learned  fneods,  « 
believe  the  story,  out  we  believe  it  ooljatto 
the  plot  of  aissassination.  The  prisoaer  at  tke 
bar,  and  about  twenty  of  his  associates,  eop* 
bined  together  for  the  pur{)ose  of  moidering 
his  majesty's  ministers,  withoat  any  finto 
object,  without  any  assignable  motire,  ait 
knowing  the  greater  proportion  of  the  iadt* 
viduals  who  were  to  be  the  victims  of  their 
treachery  and  cruelty."  Can  you  belie?e  oA 
a  thing?  I  can  easily  believe,  whea  isGnaie 
pursuing  criminal  purposes  in  the  way  of  re- 
solution, that  human  life  becomes  conpin' 
ti?ely  unimportant ;  that  they  do  not  aito» 
such  sacrifices  to  be  any  impediment  to  Ae 
execution  of  their  designs;  the  eiui  atvbn 
they  are  aiming,  in  their  view,  sanclite^ 
means  by  which  it  is  to  be  accompli^ 
But  I  cannot  bring  myself  to  believe,  tbit  & 
number  of  men  could  unite  together,  toatf- 
der  in  cold  blood,  for  no  object  that  can  eva 
be  suggested,  but  f^om  malignapt  fe^ 
alone,  such  a  body  of  distinguished  indindnv- 
As  a  means  to  accomplish  refolutiooaiyM* 
signs,  lean  understand  it ;  ^^^^^J*?* 
mind  capable  of  understanding  how  son> 
conspiracy  for  the  purpose  of  mmder  awe, 
could  possibly  have  been  fonned.  Wejsf< 
been  told  of  their  feelings  of  ^i^^^ 
venge,  against  whom?  asainst  the  BoUeatt 
whom  you  saw  giving  evidence  yesterday. 
what  way  had  he  given  offence  to  the  pnso* 
at  the  bar  and  his  associates?  ^7^^^?^? 
only  by  name.  If  they  had  inquired  faw 
they  would  have  heard  only  of  the  wtB»"J 
talents  by  which  he  is  adorned.  My  i^ 
friend,  the  Attomey-geneial,  mentiooed  » 
name  of  the  distinguished  indiTidoal  at  v 
head  of  his  majesty's  govenunent,  ^J^ 
by  common  consent,  has  been  J"*J"J 
spared  amidst  ail  the  bitterness  and  raa^ 
of  party  and  faction.  Again,  f!^^^^ 
illustrious  commander,  who  had  so  «*l^ 
led  our  armies  to  victory— he  ^  be  in  oig» 
of  enmity  and  revenge  to  Englishmen,  he  ^ 
had  so  raised  and  exalted  the  name  m^ 
racter  of  our  countty,  who  bad  throwiuw° 
shade  the  glorious  deeds  of  P"?  *^JJr 
realized  whatever  of  gloiy  our  ^"[^^JJiod 
fancies  had  conceived ;  that  P"^**  °^  rf 
revenge  should  have  influenced  the  m«^ 
the  prisoners  to  such  a  deed,  I  shoaic  ^ 
supposed  it  impossible  even  ^^J^^^ 
presence  of  men  of  sense  and  '*'*5I;  «f- 
less  could  I  have  supposed  that  w^L  "JSi 
gestion  could  have  been  made  witaow 
the  semMaace  of  pioof,  to  support  it. 


1305] 


Jor  High  IVmiom. 


A.  D.  18S0. 


[1606 


But  again  it  is  iiKed  (and  that  is  a  new 
supposition)  that  all  Uiis  was  for  purposes  of 

J  blunder:  were  such  preparations  ever  made 
or  such  an  object?  But  let  me  ask,  what  is 
there  in  the  character  of  the  men  engaged  in 
this  afiair,  that  should  lead  you  to  suppose 
plunder  was  the  object.  Let  me  recall  your 
recollection  for  a  moment,  to  that  unhappy 
man  the  leader  of  the  whole  desi^,  Arthur 
Thistlewood.  Is  there  any  thing  in  his  cha- 
racter to  induce  you  to  suppose,  that  he  in- 
tended merely  a  scheme  of  plunder?  Is  he 
not  only  to  be  couTicted  as  a  traitor,  but  is  he 
to  be  stiffmatized  as  a  felon  and  a  thief? 
Fallen  as  be  is,  let  us  not  sink  him  still  lower; 
we  know  the  feelings  by  which  he  was  influ- 
enced, that  he  was  inflamed  by  strong  political 
passions,  and  we  know  therefore,  that  he 
might  have  headed  a  band  of  menwith  a  view  to 
revolutionary  objects ;  but  there  is  nothing  in 
his  dmracter  or  conduct,  to  lead  you  to  sup- 

Kse  that  he  would  have  become  a  leader  of 
nditti  for  the   mere  purposes  of  general 
plunder. 

Gentlemen,  I  beg  your  pardon,  for  having 
detained  you  so  long  by  my  remarks  upon  the 
evidence  in  this  case ;  but  it  is  a  case  of  in- 
finite importance,  for  though  the  inquiry  into 
this  conspiracy  has  been  pursued  t¥nce  before, 
yet  the  prisoner  at  the  Mr  is  not  to  be  pre- 
judiced or  affected  by  the  result  of  former 
rerdicts.  He  must  be  tried  bv  the  evidence 
which  you  have  yourselves  heard  in  this  cause, 
Hnd  i»  entitled  to  the  benefit  of  those  observa- 
lions  which  you  have  heard  so  eloquently 
urged  by  my  learned  friend.  His  fate  must 
depend  upon  the  impression  made  upon  your 
minds  by  that  evidence,  without  reference  to 
what  you  before  knew  or  may  have  heard  upon 
the  subject ;  and  it  is  for  this  reason  that  I 
have  gone  through  this  case  at  some  length ; 
it  was  my  duty  so  to  do ;  I  have  been  heard 
with  patient  attention ;  and  as  far  as  we  are 
concerned,  our  duty  is  at  an  end.  A  part,  an 
important  p&rt  of  yours  is  still  to  be  peitormed. 
You  stand  between  the  prisoner  on  the  one 
side/  and  the  Crown,  the  prosecutor,  on  the 
other.  Sworn  to  administer  justice  impar- 
tially between  them,  sworn  to  do  justice  to 
the  prisoner,  sworn  to  do  justice  on  the  other 
hand  to  the  public,  I  have  no  doubt  whatever 
tiiat,you  will  do  so,  and  whatever  may  be  the 
issue  of  your  verdict,  I  for  one  shall  be 
content. 

SUHHING-UP. 

Lard  CAwf  Airoii.*-Gentlemen  of  the  Jury; 
—It  now  becomes  my  duty  to  request  vour 
patient  attention ;  and  I  proceed  to  address 
you  in  the  perfect  confidence  that  you  will 
discard  from  your  minds  every  impression  that 
has  not  been  made  in  the  course  of  the  present 
triaL  By  the  indictment  the  prisoner  is 
charged  with  the  crime  of  high  treason.  Gen- 
tlemen, you  find  four  counts ;  I  shall  take  the 
liberty  of  drawing  your  attention  to  only  two 
mi  them.    The  first  is  that  the  prisoner,  with 


others,  eompassed,  imagined,  invented,  devised 
and  intended  to  deprive  and  depose  our  lord 
the  king  of  and  from  the  style,  honour,  and 
kingly  name  of  the  imperial  crown  of  this 
realm.  The  other  to  which  I  shall  beg  leave 
to  call  your  attention  is  the  third  count,  that 
tlie  prisoner,  with  others,  compassed,  imagined, 
invented,  devised  and  intended  to  levy  war 
against  our  lord  the  king  in  his  realm,  in  order, 
by  force  and  constraint,  to  compel  him  to 
change  his  measures  and  counsels. 

The  crime  of  high  treason  imputed  by  these 
counts,  consists  in  the  imagination  and  inten- 
tion, and  that  intention  is  to  be  proved  by 
what  are  called  overt  acts,  which  are  stated  in 
the  indictment ;  and  if  those  overt  acts  or  any 
material  parts  of  them  are  proved  to  your 
satisfaction,  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  they 
support  the  charge  of  high  treason  in  each  of 
those  counts. 

I  am  happy  to  relieve  you  from  the  notion 
that  was  attempted  to  be  thrown  in  your  way, 
that  there  is  in  this  case  any  question  of  con- 
structive treason ;— there  certainly  is  none-^ 
the  question  here  is  merely  whether  these  ima« 
ginations  and  intentions,  which  are  in  them* 
selves  treason,  are  proved  by  the  evidence; 
and  I  think  I  may  go  further  and  say  now,  that 
the  question  before  you  is  entirely  free  from 
any  legal  perplexity,  and  that  it  depends 
entirely  upon  whether  you  believe  the  evidence 
or  not. 

Tliat  there  has  been  a  conspiracy  Is  not  only 
indisputably^  clear  from  the  evidence,  but  it  is 
admitted  distinctly  by  the  learned  counsel  for 
the  prisoner,  and  by  the  prisoner  himself— it  is 
admitted,  and  it  is  also  proved,  to  have  been  a 
conspiracy  formed  for  a  most  nefarious  purpose 
— it  is  admitted  that  it  was  a  conspiracy  rounded 
in  the  diaboUcal  intention  to  destroy  his  majesty's 
cabinet  council ; — fifteen  of  those  persons  who 
transacted  the  principal  affairs  of  government, 
and  who,  in  their  individual  characters,  are 
perhaps  some  of  the  most  honourable  and 
most  amiable  of  his  majesty's  subjects,  against 
whom  there  had  been  no  personal  indignation 
on  the  part  of  any  body.  If,  however,  this 
terrible  purpose  was  the  onl^  purpose  which 
this  conspiracy  embraced,  there  is  no  high 
treason  in  it,  because  the  otiject  is  confined  to 
the  destruction  only  of  those  fifteen  noble 
lords  and  gentlemen ;  but  it  is  contended  that 
this  particular  purpose  formed  one  of  the  steps 
to  the  general  scheme  of  subverting  the  con* 
stitution ;  and,  gentlemen,  in  the  consideration 
of  the  evidence,  you  will  have  to  decide  to 
which  side  that  evidence  is  to  be  applied. 

I  will  now  proceed  as  carefully  as  I  can 
to  read  to  you  all  the  material  parts  of  the  evi- 
dence. I  shall  begin,  of  course,  with  Robert 
Adams,  and  proceed  with  the  witoesses  in  the 
order  in  which  they  were  presented  to  you. 
But  before  I  read  -  the  evidence  of  Robert 
Adams,  I  will  detain  nyou  for  a  few  moments 
upon  tiie  subject  of  lus  particular  character, 
lie  is,  beyond  all  doubt,  an  accomplice  con- 
taminated by  the  crime,  whatever  it  may  b^ 


1307]       1  GEOAGE  IV. 


Trial  cfjolm  Thomt  BruiU 


[lao^ 


of  which  th«  prisoner  at  the  bar  was  guiUy; 
for  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  admits  that  he  was 
guilty  of  a  crime,  but  not  of  high  treason ;  the 
accomplice  being  a  partaker  of  that  guilt, 
whatever  it  may  be,  ought  to  be  looked  at  with 
that  care  and  jealousv,  which  are  necessarily 
excited  by  a  person  of  that  description ;  but, 
in  point  of  law,  he  is  so  adraissiole  witness. 
Whether  he  is  to  be  believed  is  another  ques- 
tion, and  will  depend  upon  other  circumstances. 
I  shall  first  state  the  testimony  which  he  has 
given.  Slid  then  in  proceeding  with  the  other 
witnesses,  you  will  see  how  far  you  will  ba 
of  opinion  that  credit  is  due  to  him.  At  pre- 
sent, however,  we  must  consider  his  evidence 
with  great  attention ;  because,  if  it  be  believed, 
it  is  of  very  great  importance  indeed  in  this 
very  important  case. 

Robert  Adams  says,  he  is  a  shoemaker,  that 
he  is  at  this  time  a  prisoner  in  custody,  that 
he  lived  before  he  was  taken  prisoner,  at  No. 
4,  Hol&-in-die-wall  passage,  next  house  to 
Tidd's ;  that  he  was  in  the  army  eighteen  yean 
ago,  in  a  regiment  of  horse-guards;  that  he 
knows  the  prisoner  Brunts  he  is  a  boot-closer, 
he  became  first  acquainted  with  him  at  Cam- 
bcay  in  France,  in  the  year  1816,  at  that  time 
Brant  went  by  the  name  of  Thomas  Morton ; 
they  wove  both  at  the  head  quarters  of  the 
British  army,  and  there  the  witness  followed 
his  business  of  a  shoemaker,  serving  our  army ; 
that  early  in  the  present  year,  he  called  at 
Brunt's  lodgings  in  f'oz-court^  Gray's-ina-lane ; 
Brunt  and  logs  on  the  13th  of  January,  in- 
troduced the  witness  to  Thistlewood.  Thistle- 
wood  lived  in  Stanhopeatreet,  Clare-market ; 
on  entering  the  room  when  Brunt  and  lags  in- 
troduced him,  ''Brunt'  said  to  Thistlewood, 
here  is  the  man  I  spoke  to  you  about;  then 
Thistlewood  said  to  me,  you  belonged  formerly 
to  the  Life-guards,  did  you  not  ?.  I  said,  no,  to 
the  Oxford-blues ;  he  said,  no  doubt  you  are  a 
good  soldier  ?  I  said,  I  was  once ;  he  said,  you 
can  use  your  sword  well  7  I  said,  I  knew  how 
to  use  a  sword  formerlv,  but  for  want  of  practice 
I  cannot  use  it  so  well  now,  but  I  can  use  a 
fiiord  sufficiently  to  defend  myself.  Thistle- 
wood then  turned  his  discourse  upon  the  shop- 
keepers of  London ;  he  observed,  they  weie 
a  set  of  aristocrats  altogether,  they  worked 
under  one  ^stem  of  government,  and  he  should 

gory  to  see  the  day  when  they  should  have  all 
eir  shops  shut  up  and  well  plundered ;  then 
)ie  turneo  his  discoune  towards  Mr. Hunt;  he 
aaid  he  was  not  a  friend  to  the  people,  aad  he 
Md  BO  doub^  that  oould  he  enter  Whitehall 
and  (werlook  the  government  books,  he  should 
£nd  Hunt* s  name  as  a  spy  of  goyi^romeni ;  find 
.then  he  spoke  of  Cobbett,  that  he  with  all  bis 
writii^  was  no  friend  of  the  people ;  and  he 
jMid,  I  have  no  doubt,  if  I  could  see  the  same 
book^  I  should  find  he  was  a  ^ py  as  well  as 
Hunt;  then  Brunt  said,  he  had  .a  coup^  of 
other  men  to  call  upon^  tovmrds  CarnaJby'- 
narket,  aad  asked  Mr.  Thistlewood  whether 
.he  would  walk  mih  him  to  aee  the  men; 
Tbiytlawoodyhowfiverf  ^id^npt.go;  .ther^  WiM 


a  word  or  two  between  Bniat  and  ThiiUewoodi 
about  attending  a  rajffle  for  a  bluaderbms  vitk 
a  brass  barrel.  I  do  not  recollect  that  Mr. 
Thistlewood  said  he  should  go,  but  I  and 
Brunt  and  Ings  leCt  the  roo■^  leatisg  Tbinle- 
wood  behind,  I  was  soon  aflerwards  Uken 
to  prison  for  debt^  I  staid  in  piison  until  the 
30tn  of  January,  which  was  the  Sund^,  the 
day  afier  the  latekiog^  dealh;  the  sezt  daj, 
Monday,  I  saw  Brunt  at  the  White  Uvi, 
which  is  kept  by  a  man  of  the  name  of  HobU ; 
in  the  evemng  I  saw  him  again,  ia  the  house  ia 
which  he  lodsedyin  the  badi  roonuptwo-piic 
of  stairs  on  the  same  floor  with  hisowurooiDip 
he  occupies  twoj  one  of  which  he  works  iuiod 
another  he  lives  in ;  I  had  heard  him  nj,  tbt 
he  had  taken  that  back  room  for  lugs;  I  air 
tended  several  meetings  in  that  rooo),  down  to 
the  3ard  of  February,  from  the  time  1  lefttlie 
prison ;  the  meetings  were  held  there  geoerally 
twice  a  day ;  those  who  usually  attended  ika 
were  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings,  Hall,  Harris 
who  had  been  in  the  life-guards,  aod  Davidsoa 
a  man  of  colour,  and  also  Wilson,  Edwaris 
and  Tidd,  who  lived  in  the  next  house  to  mi. 
Tidd  was  also  a  shoemaker;  Palin  alteaded 
sometimesy  but  not  regularly ;  I  bare  aees 
Potter  there  also ;  Hall  was  a  tailor  Iw  ttade. 
When  I  came  out  of  prison,  I  attended  tje 
first  meeting  on  the  evening  of  Monday,  IM 
31st  of  January,  that  was  in  this  hack  ropB. 
"  On  the  Wednesday  night  following,  I  wal 
again  to  a  meeting  in  thi»  back-room  ;Tbisue* 
wood,  Brunt,  Wilson,  Davidsoo,  HamsBB, 
Edwards,  and  Bradbum  attended;  I  nwwn 
in  the  room  a  number  of  pike-staves;  there 
was  no  furniture  in  the  room  of  any  ^^jj*?' 
except  a  fixed  stove;  when  we  wanted  chtfs 
they  were  brought  from  Brunt's  room, «» " 
same  floor;  the  staves  I  saw  there  were  W 
and  green,  as  if  they  had  just  been  cut,  mJ 
just  come  from  the  oountiy ;  Bradbum  w 
cutting  the  ends  of  the  sUves  off,  and j>ulM| 
on  ferrules ;  after  they. were  aH ^o®^f^?^ 
was  considered  that  the  end  of  the  pi''®'^*? 
would  not  be  strong  enough  to  wpportwj 
pike  heads ;  then  they  cut  the  endsoffasecoaj 
time,  and  Brant  got  some  larger  ferruH  »J 
they  were  put  on ;  I  saw  them  afterwaiw  P» 
on.  A  *hort  time  before  the  king's  funenM 
was  there,  and  I  saw  TWstlewood,  Hw™^ 
Davidson,  and  Wilson  there  ;  HarmonW* 
ThisUewood  that  he  had  seen  a  Ufe-g«»f7j 
and  heard  from  him  ttat  aU  the  &^J^ 
could  be  mounted  would  be  at  wwdfjr » 
the  king's  funeral,  and  that  as  many  ^  ^ 
fool-guwds  and  police-ofl&cew  W  »«*»  JJ 
spared)  would  be  tnei^  also ;  and  Hsrwon 
he  thought  it  would  be  as  favourable  w  T 
portunity  as  could  be  to  kick  up  »  ^^ 
Udon,  as  he  th(mgjit  the  •oldies  an^ 
would  be  out  of  London,  and  there  wow»^ 

scarcely  any  body  in  London  ^^'.P'^j^i- 
This  he  mentioned  to  XhisUewood,  wft». 
came  into  the  room.  Thistlcwoc^  jmTJ 
upon  it  in  this  way ;  he  prop?*^  ^iistt 
{MAoe9  of  gai>fio%  wjii*  wew  ia  wj^^ 


1^091 


fiir  High  Trettion. 


A.  D.  isaa 


ri9u> 


tone,  and  six  other  oaniion  in  the  Artiilery- 
ground  should  be  taken  on  the  same  night." 
Gentlemen,  you  know  tiie  question  is,  whether 
this  was  a  particular  purpose  of  destroying  the 
ministers,  or  a  more  general  pnrpose.    The 
cannon  could  hardly  be  wanted  %o  destroy 
gentlemen  in  the  house  at  dinner ;  if,  indeed, 
you  believe  the  evidence  conoeming  the  can- 
non.    The  witness  prdceeds  to  atata  that 
^Thistlewood  said,  ttiat 'after  this  siionld  be 
done,  he  thought  it  would  be  necessaiy  to 
-send  to  Hyde-park-comer,  to  nierrent  any  u^ 
telligenoe  being  sent  by  an  orderly  from  Lon- 
don to  Windsor,  to  connnunioaite  what  was 
•going  on  in  London.    At  the  aame  time  he 
proposed  that  the  telegraph  on  the  other  side 
of  the  water  should  be  taken  to  prevent  a 
communication  to  Woolwich  of  what  was  pass- 
ing in  London;   and  Thistlewood  said,   he 
thought  it  would  be  necessary,  at  the  same 
4ime,  to  cut  trenches  across  the  road  to  pre- 
vent cannon  being  brought  from  Woolwich, 
and  he  said  that  the  soldiers  at  Windsor  would 
be  so  knocked  up  and  fatigued  that  they  would 
not  be  able  to  come  from  Windsor  to  London ; 
or  if  they  did  come  they  would  be  unable 
to  do  any  thing.    Thistlewood  proposed  that 
an  offer  should  be  made  to  the  soldiers  in 
-order  to  bring  them  over  to  us ;  or  if  they  were 
determined  to  act  i^^nst  us,  Harrison,  who 
was  an  old  soldier,  should  employ  the  hand- 
grenades  to  destroy  the  soldiers.    Thistlewood 
then  proposed  to  send  to  the  difibrent  sea-ports, 
Dover,  Margate,  Brighton,  and  I  think  other 
ports,  with  an  express  order,  that  if  any  person 
was  permitted  to  leave  the  country,  without  an 
order  from  the  provisional  govemmeot,  those 
towns  should  be  blown  down  over  their  heads; 
that  as  soon  as  they  could  collect  force  enough, 
which  he  had  no  doubt  they  should,  they  should 
vend  a  very  strong  force  down  to  Brighton,  in 
•case  the  new  king  should  be  there  after  the 
riot  was  kicked  up)  which  he  did  not  suppose 
he  would,  in  consequence  of  his  indisposition ; 
that  they  should  send  this  force  down  in  order 
to  plunder  Brighton,  and  as  to  the  new  king 
being  crowned  as  king,  Thistlewood  said  it 
was  all  nonsense,  for  he  did  not  intend  that 
that  should  ever  be.    After  this  Ings  and  Brunt 
came  into  the  room,  and  Thistlewood  coramu- 
•nicated  to  them  all  that  had  passed,  and  Ings 
and  Brunt  both  expressed  themselves,  that 
nothing  short  of  the  assassination  of  the  king*s 
ministers  would  satisfy  them."    The  witness 
then  said,  ^'On  the  2nd  of  January,  before  I 
was  introduced  to  Thistlewood,  as  we  were 
walking  down  the  street.  Brunt  spoke  to  me 
about  assassinating  the  ministers. '    Then  he 
says,  *f  When  we  began  to  talk  of  the  assassi- 
nation of  ministers,  Ings  said,  he  had  been  in 
the  park  to  assassinate  ue  prince  regent  before 
his  majesty's  death ;  he  pulled  a  pistol  from 
his  pocket,  and  saud,  that  was  the  pistol  that 
he  had  taken ;  he  pulled  the  pistol  from  his 
left  pocket,  and  held  it  out,  saving,  damn  my 
mortal  eyes  this  is  the  pistol ;  ne  said  it  was 
the  time  when  the  prince  regent  went  to  open 


the  paiMameiit.  When  BnM  jpeke  to  ue 
about  the  asssfssinatioo,  he  said,  that  it  was  40 
be  dose  the  first  time  that  the  ministers  assem- 
bled at  a  cabinet  dinner. 

<<  On  the  19th  February,  the  Saturday,  thei« 
was  another  meeting,  at  which  were  preseal» 
Thistlewood,  Bnmt,  Hanison,  Wilson  and 
ings;  this  was  between  dearen  and  twelve 
joV^lock  in  tlie  morning.  I  oaonot  be  sure 
whether  Davidson  was  there  or  not;  on  any 
^iag  iiAo  the  room,  I  found  those  persons  £ 
ha^  named,  except  Davidson,  as  to  mkfim  I 
do  not  taiow  whetner  he  was  diere  or  not ;  I 
fovad  tbem  ntting  witli. their  heads  together  in 
oonsaHation.  1  soon  &nnd  what  they  mmat 
coasultiog  about,  iot  ibey  got  up  akogethec^ 
and  ThisUewood  said,  it  ie  agreed ;  if  nothing 
transpiros  betwnen  this  and  Wednesday  night, 
we  will  ^o  to  ^mk,  as  we  are  aH  so  poor  we 
cannot  wait  any  longer ;  and  then  Thistlewood 
proposed  that  a  committee  should  sit  on  Son« 
day  morning  to  diomr  up  a  plan  to  act  upon ; 
this  was  also  agreed  to.  Then  Thistlewood 
told  Brunt  to  tell  the  men  that  were  to  come 
nnder  his  ease  to  come  armed ;  here  firunt  said, 
it  is  a  parcel  of  nonsense,  that  if  any  ofiieer 
x»me  there,  he  would  execute  him  iathesoom, 
or  nsurder  him ;  he  expressed  ihimself  in  a  sort 
of  language  not  proper  to  be  used,  battfw 
purport  of  it  was,  that  they  should  be  muidered 
if  theydidoome ;, Brunt  adding,  I  will  take  care 
that  it  never -shall  be  found  out,  ^r  to^hat 
effect."  Then  jdie  witness  says,  that  he  Uth 
them  all  in  the  room  and  went  iwwf,  ^Dben 
he  says,  ^'before the  Saturday, I  had  seen  in 
the  room  a  sword  and  Aome.hand«gvea!Rles, 
some  of  which  had^been  made  up  in. the  room.; 
and  I  had  seen  pistols  pulled  fern  thei^  differ- 
ent pockets  ;  the  things  were  removed  to  Tidd's 
lodgings  f'm  Hole-4ii-the-waU  msage,  iwbich 
they  called  t^e  d^t.  Thisdenro^  wished 
them  to  be  femo^d  to  that  d6p6t  to  eonoeal 
them  from  any  person  who  might  come  into 
the  room,  and  Brunt  carried  the  principal  part 
of  the  hand-grenades  to  Tidd's;  I  followed 
him  into  the  room  at  Tidd's ;  I  saw  him  place 
them  upon  the  floor,  and  Tidd's  daughter  put 
them  into  a  box  under  the  ^ndow. 

'*  On  Sunday  morning  the  20th,  Thistle- 
wood, Ings,  ilall,  Brunt,  Harrison,  Davidson, 
Bradbum,  Edwards,  Cook,  and  three  other 
persons,  strangers  to  me,  came  to  thi»baok 
room ;  there  were  twelve  of  them  in  all.  Be- 
tween eleven  and  twelve  on  that  day,  Thistle- 
wood looking  about  and  seeing  there  were 
twelve  men  of  us,  said,  there  are  twelve  of  us, 
that  is  enough  to  make  a  committee,  and  Tidd, 
was  desired  to  take  the  chair ;  he  took  thechair  ac- 
cordingly, with  apike in  his  hand .  Thistlewood , 
vrho  stood  on  Tidd's  right  hand,  said,  gentle- 
men as  we  have  all  met  here,  we  have  no  occa- 
sion (turning  his  head  to  the  door)  to  mention 
any  names ;  I  suppose  you  all  know  what  you  are 
met  for,  and  as  we  have  all  waited  so  long  with 
an  expectation  of  the  ministers  dining  together, 
finding  there  is  no  likelihood  of  their  coming 
together ;  we  tire  resolved;  i(  they  do  not  meet 


131 1  j       1  GEORGE  I\r. 


Trial  ^John  TImHU  Brunt 


cms 


before  Wedaesday-night  to  take  them  sepa- 
rately. He  then  proposed  this  plan ;  he  called 
Ahe  project  to  assassinate^  the  Wai-emd  job. 
He  saidy  that  the  two  pieces  of  cannon  in' 
€rrayVinn-lane,  and  the  six  pieces  of  cannon 
at  the  Ardlleiy-gTOund,  should  be  taken  ;  and 
that  Palin  should  take  the  command  of  another 
party  to  set  fire  to  different  buildings  of  the 
town ;  Cook  was  to  take  the  lead  in  taking 
the  cannon  in  the  Artillery-ground ;  as  to  the 
timey  Thistlewood  said  he  could  not  then  ion 
the  precise  time,  but  there  would  be  oppor« 
tunity  enough  to  fix  before  Wednesday-night; 
that  he  thought  forty  men  would  be  (|uite 
enough  for  the  West-end  job,"  that  was  the 
•assassination  of  miniiterSy  *^  if  we*  can  get  so 
many ;  and  as  to  further  prooeedings  on  the 

Slan,  it  should  be  settled  another  time,  for  that 
(runt  was  to  come  forward  irith  a  project 
about  the  assassination^  and  to  state  now  it 
could  be  done.  Brunt  then  stepped  forward." 
This,  gentlemen,  is  given  to  you  m  the  way  in 
which  the  man  states  it ;  he  stated  it  with  great 
particularity^  but  it  is  material  only  as  shewing 
how  the  business  was  carried  on,  and  how  they 
conducted  th«nseWes  in  the  room.  The 
witness  says,  ''Brunt  then  stepjped  forward; 
but  Thistlewood  stopped  him  before  he  spoke, 
and  said  his  own  motion  should  be  put  first 
from  the  chair;  that  if  any  body  wished  to  speak 
to  it  he  wished  them  to  speak ;  the  question  was 

Sit,  and  Thistle  wood's  motion  carried.  Then 
runt  came  forward,  and  proposed  his  plan, 
which  was  this — ^As  no  signs  of  getting  the 
ministers  all  together  appear  to  us,  we  must 
take  them  separately,  ana  it  shall  be  done  in 
this  way;  our  men  must  be  divided  into 
parties,  according  to  the  number  of  ministers 
to  be  murdered.  The  men  were  to  be  lotted, 
and  he  proposed,  that  a  man  from  each  lot 
should  be  drawn  out  for  the  purpose  of  assas- 
sinating the  particular  minister,  and  if  the  man 
to  be  drawn  out  did  not  execute  his  duty  from 
any  signs  of  cowardice,  he  should  be  run 
through  the  body  on  the  spot."  On  this,  the 
witness  Adams  says,  he  got  up  and  asked 
whether  a  man  might  not  fail  in  the  attempt, 
and  if  so,  whether  he  was  to  be  run  through 
on  the  spot }  **  Brunt  said,  certainly  not, 
unless  there  is  proof  of  the  man's  Ming  a 
coward  ;"  then  Adams  says,  he  himself  sat 
down.  ''The  question  upon  Brunt's  propo* 
sition  was  put  from  the  chair,  and  agreed  to, 
in  the  same  manner  as  Thistlewood 's  motion 
was.  Directly  after  this,  three  other  men 
came  in,  namely,  Palin,  Potter,  and  Strange ; 
what  had  passed  before  they  came  in,  was 
communicated  to  them;  then  Palin  got  up, 
and  asked  bow  the  things  were  to  be  done,  as 
they  had  so  many  objects  talked  of  at  the  same 
time ;  sayinff,  I  belieye,  provided  they  could 
be  all  carried,  they  would  be  a  great  acquisi- 
tion to  what  we  have  in  view ;  but  this  is  what 
I  want  to  know,  you  talk,  of  taking  forty  men 
for  the  West-end  job ;  you  talk  of  taking  the 
two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gra/s-inn-lane,  and 
six  at  the  Artillery-gtound ;  and  you  propose  | 


me  with  a  few  men  to  set  file  tpthedilfoeit 
buildings ;  but  you  ought  to  know  better  thu 
myself  what  men  you  can  commaDd;  I,  Ibr 
my  own  part,  cannot  aatisfy  you  what  nifi  I 
can  bring  forward,  unless  I  am  intnisted  by  tUs 
committee  to  state  to  them  what  has  passed 
in  this  room  this  morning;  if  I  can  have  tk 
power  to  tell  my  men  what  they  are  goioe 
about,  and  when  they  will  be  wanted,  I  doB 
better  know  how  to  act  with  them.  Ita 
Thistlewood,  BruntandTidd  said,  they  thoogk 
no  harm  would  arise  in  giviog  Palin  that  ifr 
thority  which  he  proposed,  if  he  had  iimq  is 
whom  he  could  place  confidence ;  on  this  Palii 
sat  down,  and  nothing  particular  paned  afteN 
wards  whilst  Tidd  was  in  the  chair.  Wlien 
Tidd  left  the  chair,  Thistlewood  tuned  nod 
on  asudden,  and  said,  Brunt,  as  Palin  is  ho^ 
you  can  take  him  to  the  place  close  by,aDl 
let  Palin  see  whether  that  place  is  practicable 
to  do  or  not ;  Brunt  and  Palin  then  went  cot 
together,  and  returned  in  about  ten  Dintn. 
Palin  said  it  was  a  very  easy  job,  and  w»m 
make  a  ff ood  fire.  This, "  Adams  sa]fs,  '^ 
FumivalVinn-buildings;  Brunt  had  Bieotioae| 
this  at  a  previous  meeting,  as  a  buiidiag  to  m 
set  fire  to ;  the  building  was  at  that  tine  o^ 
finished ;  Fox-court  is  very  near;  the  peo* 
began  to  separate,  saying  th^  bad  nea  to  w 
upon.  After  this  ThisUewood  still  remasf, 
he  said  to  Brunt,  I  think  that  betweejiiM 
and  the  time  we  go  to  work,  we  had  bet» 
collect  the  men  together  and  give  tbemaM 
but  I  do  not  know  how  this  is  to  be  wj^ 
we  are  all  of  us  so  verr  poor.  Bn» 
turned  round  and  .said,  Damn  ay^ 
though  I  have  done  little  or  no  woit  mh^ 
have  got  a  one  pound  note,  which  I  »^ 


reserved  for  the  purpose  of  treating  ay  ?«J 
and  I  wiU  do  it.  ThisUewood  said, be didM^ 
know  where  we  could  take  them  to;  *'?f?T 
we  can  have  the  room  up  stairs  at  nw»> 
Brunt  said,  he  did  not  like  to  go  ^^^ 
sequence  of  what  had  been  ^«^PP^^ 
my  mouth,  of  what  had  been  said  l^  ^^' 
then  Brunt  said,  never  mind,  as  time  g*  » 
near,  I  do  not  see  what  we  hare  to  »«*!' ^ 
any  officers  come  into  the  room,  ^^^"^ 
care  of  them;  shortly  afterwards  J^JK 
rated."  Gentlemen,  you  know  what  HobKi* 

told  Adams   and  Adams  had  told  tbeja^ 
that  officers  had  been  to  his  house  saspec<^ 
a  radical  meeting  to  be  there ;  this  was  ob 
Sunday.  ^  j^ 

The  witness  proceeds  to  stote  that  vi^ 
was  another  meeting  held  on  theMondj» 
another  on  the  Tuesday  morning  ^^^^ 
o'clock.  Brunt  was  at  this  meeting,  »^ 
Thistlewood,  Tidd,  Ings,  Hall,  the  ij*»^ 
Adams,  Wilson,  Harrison,  Edwards,  Bradji«J 


venor-square,    for    he  had   ^^^.^\f?.  he 
news-paper.    Thistlewood  doubted  tj^ 
said,  he  bad  not  seen  it  in  ihesOT^ 


Id  191 


Jbr  High  Tmuon. 


A.D.  1820. 


[13U 


he  rea^ » he  proposed  to  send  for  a  newspaper. 
Hall  fetched  it;  U  was  the  New  Times;  it 
turned  out  that  Edwards  had  given  them  true 
information  ;  Thistle  wood  read  the  paragraph 
alond ;  then  it  was  proposed  by  Thistlewood 
to  have  another  committee  to  alter  the  plan ; 
Harrison  and  Davidson  came  into  the  room  in 
the  interval  of  the  paper  being  fetched. 
When  Harrison  and  Davidson  came  in, 
Davidson  brought  a  bag  of  balls,  and  Harrison 
some  powder ;  before  the  newspaper  came  in, 
Ings  pulled  out  three  daggers ;  these  daggers 
he  said  he  had  prepared  with  the  sole  inten- 
tion of  a  separate  assassination,  and  he  shewed 
by  his  action  how  he  intended  to  cut  the  heads 
of  the  ministers  off,  using  some  very  coarse 
expression*  After  the  paper  was  brought  and 
read,  from  which  it  appeared  that  the  ministers 
were  to  meetontbeWednesday,Brunt  exclaimed, 
Damn  my  eyes,  now  I  believe  there  is  a  God, 
in  calling  those  thieves  together ;  it  has  often 
been  my  prayer  that  they  would  all  meet 
together,  now  God  has  answered  my  prayer ; 
Thistlewood  then  proposed  there  should  be  a 
committee^  9^4  that  I  should  take  the  chair; 
I  did  so;  upon  Thistlewood  coming  forward 
to  explain  his  plan,  I  called  him'  to  order,  and 
said,  before  you  begin,  I  hope  you  have  given 
due  considen^tion  to  what  I  communicated  to 
vou  yesterday  momipg ;"  that  was  what  Hobbs 
had  said  to  him,  namely,  that  there  had  been 
two  officers  there,  saying  there  was  something 
wrong  going  on  in  liis  house.  ''On  my  saving 
this,  Palin  took  it  up,  and  said  he  wished  for 
some  explanation,  and  that  before  the  business 
proceeded  any  further.  Upon  this,  Brunt  got 
up,  saying  you  shall  have  an  explanation, 
and  then  he  stated  what  had  been  said  before 
about  Hobbs's  information;  then  Brunt,  to 
obviate  any  risk,  proposed  that  a  watch 
sbonld  be  set  to  ooserve  lord  Harrowby's 
hoas0,  the  watch  to  begip  at  six  o'clock  that 
$9 me  night;  two  to  go  at  six  and  stay 
till  nine,  then  to  be  relieved  by  two  others 
U>  4tay  til^  twelve,  and  to  commence  again 
the  next  morning  at  four,  and  the  watch  to 
continue  until  the  pext  evening,  when  it  was 
proposed  we  should  go  to  work;  those  men 
were  to  watch  whether  soldiers  or  police 
C»fficefs  went  into  the  house  at  any  time,  and 
if  $0%  they  were  to  give  notice  to  the  rest ;  if 
■ot,  Bnmt  said  the  work  ^ould  be  done  the 
following  night  (Wednesday  night).  Brunt 
^eked  out  the  men  to  watch,  Davidson  was 
ime  of  the  first;  he  was  to  watch  from  six  to. 
Dioe,  and  Brunt  and  Tidd  to  watch  from  nine  to 
^W^lve.    On  this,  Thistlewood  came  forwards 

15  to  what  fell  from  Brunt's  mouth,  and  said, 
f  ao  soldiers  or  police  officers  enter  the  house^ 
[  shall  propose  a  plan  to  take  them  all  together ; 
i&  proved  to  go  himself  to  lord  Harrowby's 
loor  with  a  note^  to  deliver  to  a  servant,  say- 
M$g  \ie  vmst  have  aii  answer,  and  on  his  being 
idmitlAd  into  the  nouse  to  wait  for  an  answer, 

16  was  to  be  followed  by  the  odieis,  who  were 
^  rush  in  dlreetly  afterw^^rds ;  Ibey  w^re  to 
leize   upon  the  sextants,  to  present  pistols 

vol..  XXXIII. 


to  tliem,  and  threaten  them  with  instant  death 
if  they  made  any  resistance ;  at  the  same  time, 
four  were  to  take  the  command  of  the  stairs  ; 
two  men  to  take  care  of  the  stairs  that  went 
to  the  upper  rooms,  and  two  to  take  care 
of  the  stairs  that  went  to  the  lower  rooms^ 
and  each  of  those  four  men  was  to  have  a 
hand-gprenade  in  bis  hand,  and  a  pistol  and 
cutlass ;  if  any  attempt  was  made  from  the 
upper  part  of  the  house,  a  hand-grenade  was.- 
to  be  thrown  amongst  them,  and  in  the  lowec 
part  of  the  house  also,  if  any  resistance  was 
made  ;  two  men  were  to  be  placed  in  the  area,.- 
one  with  a  blunderbuss,  and  the  other  with 
a  hand-grenade;  after  this  was  done,  the 
others  were  to  rush  into  the  dining  room ;  Ings 

J>ropo8ed  to  enter  the  room  first ;  he  was  to  be 
ollowed  by  two  swordsmen,  who  were  to  be 
Harrison,  and  Adams  ;  then  Ings  said  he 
would  say  this.  Now,  my  lords,  I  have  as 
good  men  here  as  the  Manchester  yeomanry, 
enter  citizens  and  do  your  duty.  On  this  word 
of  command,  they  were  to  rush  into  the  room 
to  be  followed  by  Ings  with  his  broad  knife, 
and  he  swore  that  he  would  cut  off  their  heads 
as  fast  as  he  could  get  at  them.  The  heads 
<^  lord  Castlereagh  and  lord  Sidmouth  he 
was  determined  to  bring  away  with  him.  in 
his  bags  and  he  also  was  determined  to  have 
one  of  lord  Castlereagh's  hands  which  he  in- 
tended to  pickle ;  this  hand,  he  said,  would  be 
thought  much  of  on  a  future  day.  Ings  had 
said  before  this,  he  would  exhibit  the  heads 
of  lord  Castlereagh  and  lord  Sidmouth  upon  a 
pole  in  the  streets.  Thistlewood  improved 
upon  this  plan,  and  said,  bethought  it  would  be 
better  to  put  them  on  a  pike,  place  them  behind 
the  cannon,  and  carry  them  along  the  streetsy 
and  that  they  would  more  terrify  the  people; 
On  this  Bradbum  said,  that  after  they  were 
exhibited  in  this  town  sufficiently,  he  would 
enclose  their  heads  in  a  box  and  send  them  to 
Ireland*  After  the  business  was  done  at  lord 
Harrowby's,  they  were  to  go  to  the  Horse* 
barracks  in  King-street,  and  set  fire  to  the  shed 
with  a  ball  or  balls  prepared  for  that  purpose. 
Wilson  was  to  go  and  support  Harrison  in  that 
project;  from  thence  they  were  to  proceed  to 
Gray's-inn-lane  to  the  City  Light-horse-bar- 
racks,  to  talce  two  cannon  from  thence ;  and 
there  was  to  be  somebody  there  waiting  to 
assist  the^;  they  were  then  to  proceed^to  the 
Artillery-ground,  imless  something  oceurred 
to  the  contrary,  and  to  meet  Cook  at  the 
Artillery-ground;  they  were  to  take  the  six 
cannon  from  thence,  and  after  they  hadgot  them « 
they  were  to  load  them  and  bring  them  into 
the  street  loaded ;  and  if  Cook  found  himself 
sufficiently  strong  by  the  accession  of  people, 
or  otherwise,  he  was  to  advance  to  the  Man- 
siourhouse,  which  was  to  be  taken  and  to  bef  • 
made  the  seat  of  the  provisional  government. 
The  cannon  were  to  be  placed,  ^ree  on  one 
side  and  tiiree  on  the  otner  side  of  the  Man- 
sion-house ;  and  if  the  inhabitants  of  the  house 
refused  to  give  up  the  Mansion-house,  they 
were  to  force  their  way  in,  aiid  to  make  it  tb< 
4P 


13151       I  GEORGE  IV, 


Trial  (fj^n  fhmat  Bnad 


[1316 


teat  of  the  provisional  goverament.    Then  they 
agreed  that  the  Bank  of  £ngland  was  to  he 
taken  and  plundered,  but  Thistlewood  said,  he 
meant  not  to  destroy  the  books  but  secure  the 
books,  in  order  that  we  may  be  able  to  see 
some  of  the  proceedings  of  goTemment  that 
we  are  not  now  in  possession  of.    Thistlewood 
and  Cook  agreed  between  themselves,  that  if 
he,  Cook,  found  himself  so  situated  as  to  be 
able  to  go  to  the  Mansion-house,  he  was  to 
send  an  orderly  man  forward  to  stand  against 
the  door  of  St.  Sepulchre's  church,  to  wait  the 
arrival  of  an  orderly  to  be  sent  by  him  (This- 
tlewood), and  these  two  men  were  to  return  to 
their  respective  parties  with  the  information 
they  were  to  give  the  one  to  the  other ;  then 
Harrison  said,  there  should  be  a  counter-sign ; 
the  woid  should  be  hutUm;  one  man  should 
say  6, 11,  ty  and  if  he  addressed  his  friend,  that 
friend  should  say  <,  o,  n, ;  there  was  to  be  a 
man  fixed  at  the  end  of  Oxford-street;  one 
man  should  say  6,  u,  f,  another  <,  o,  n,  and  then 
they  would  each  shew  themselves  to  be  of  the 
same  party.    Harrison  said,  he  would  secure 
a  place  for  the  men  to  go  somewhere  about 
the  end  of  Oxford-street.    In  the  afternoon  I 
went  to  Fox-court  again ;  as  I  was  going  up,  I 
perceived  a  strange  smell ;  on  going  into  the 
room  I  saw  Ings,  Hall,  and  Edwards ;  Edwards 
was  making  fuses  for  the  hand-grenades ;  Ings 
was  putting  the  ingredients  for  the  fire-balls 
into  an  iroapot,  and  Hall  vras  laying  paper  on 
the  floor  in  order  to  receive  those  balls,  after 
they  had  been  dipped  in  the  pot,  to  prevent 
their  dirtying  the  floor.    I  called  again  in  the 
evening,  and  found  Thistlewood  and  two  per- 
sons who  were  strangers  to  me  there.    In  the 
course  of  the  evening  the  party  were  pretty 
well  all  there ;  Davidson  went  to  watch  at  six, 
and  Brunt  and  Tidd  started  about  nine  o'clock 
to  relieve  him ;  as  they  were  going,  I  under- 
stood Tidd  was  detained  by  some  other  cir- 
cumstance, and  Brunt  returned ;  and  as  Tidd 
could  not  go  to  lord  Harrowby's  house,  he 
took  me  with  him  in  Tidd's  stead ;  we  found 
Davidson  on  the  watch,  and  relieved  him.    I 
went  about  nine  o'clock ;  whilst  we  were  upon 
the  watch.  Brunt  and  I  went  to  a  public-house 
to  take  some  refreshment  at  the  comer  of  the 
Mews,  directly  at  the  back  of  lord  Harrowby's 
house.    I  do  not  know  the  name  of  the  sign ; 
Brunt  and  I  went  about  twenty  minutes  past 
nine,  and  staid  there  about  an  hour  and  a  half. 
Brunt  played  at  dominos  with  a  young  man 
there."    You  will  see,  gentlemen,  the  materi- 
ality of  this   evidence   presently.      ^  About 
eleven  we  returned  to  our  watch,  and  left  the 
place  on  the  turn  of  twelve ;  I  went  out  of  the 
public-house  once  or  twice  occasionally.    On 
Wednesday  I  went  again  to  Fox-court  about 
two  o'clock  in  the  afternoon ;  I  first  went  into 
prunt's  own  room.    Strange  one  of  the  pri-' 
soners  came  in  first,  then  two  or  three  whom 
I  did  not  know>    I  then  saw  pistols  in  Brunt's 
private  room ;  they  began  to  try  to  put  flints 
into  them;  when' the  strangers  came.  Brunt 
proposed  we  should  go  into  the  other  room^ 


and  he  and  I  went  there  with  Strange  and  the 
strangers ;  I  saw  pistols,  cutlasses  and  Uob- 
derbusses  there ;  just  after  we  came  in  Tliii. 
tl^wood  came,  and  after  him  logs  andM; 
when  Thistlewood  came  in,  he  looked  rooiid 
and  said,  now  my  lads  this  looks  somelfaios 
like ;  it  looks  as  if  we  were  going  to  do  solB^ 
thing ;  he  clapped  his  hand  upon  my  shoolk, 
and  said,  how  do  you  do  Mr.  Adams;  laid, 
I  am  not  well,  I  am  low  spirited ;  not  on  k- 
count  of  what  we  are  going  about,  stjsTbis- 
tlewood.  [  said,  I  wanted  some  refreshment; 
and  Brunt,  by  Thistlewood's  ordeis,  sentfcr 
some  gin  and  beer ;  and  Thistlewood  said,  W 
wanted  some  paper  to  draw  out  some  Uils, 
large  posting  bills,  sudi  as  the  paper  on  vhicb 
newspapers  were  printed,  but  he  did  not  knot 
the  name.  I  proposed  cartridge  paper;  I  toU 
him  that  would  answer  the  purpose;  vpoDtlu^ 
Thistlewood  gave  Brunt  some  monev  to  fetdi 
this  paper ;  Brunt  sent  for  it,  and  itni 
brought  ;  then  a  cha\r  and  table  werebnafK 
in  from  Brunt's  room,  and  ThisUewood  fA 
down  to  write  on  this  paper  so  brought;  he 
wrote  three  bills ;  he  read  what  be  had  wriiia» 
and  the  words  were  these :  Your  tyranto^ 
destroyed.  The  friends  of  liberty  are  oW 
upon  to  come  forward,  as  the  provisional  Jo- 
vemment  is  now  sitting.  Signed,  James  ingr 
secretary,  February  23,  1820.  TTustkwMjr 
after  writing  these,  expressed  himself  liw» 
and  seemed  to  be  rather  agiuUed;  the  bulvis 
written  in  largish  letters;  they  were  »» 
placed  and  posted  up  against  the  diBaert 
buildings  which  should  be  on  fire,  or  ajj 
them,  in  order  to  inform  the  pnblic  "^^^ 
come  to  the  fires  what  had  been  done ;  hetua 
asked  Hall  to  take  the  pen  and  wrHe  m 
bills,  which  he  refused;  a  stranger  i«  »» 
asked  ;  he  refbsed  at  first,  but  afte^^'rj 
it ;  afterwards  Ings  accoutred  himself,  he  w 
put  a  black  belt  round  his  loios ;  aftff  t»| 
he  hung  another  over  his  ^^'^^^^'"JS 
round  his  loins  was  to  contain  a  ^5?  £ 
tola ;  the  one  over  his  shoulder  was  w  "r* 
lass;  he  put  a  couple  of  bags  over  his  shoow^ 
in  the  shape  of  soldiers,  haversadcs ;  on  vm 
himself,  after  he  had  thus  dressed  ^^^ 
said  he  thought  himself  not  complete  «it«» 
his  steel ;  he  then  produced  a  "i^W^ 
with  a  very  broad  blade,  and  ^w^-^^ST^ 
round  the  handle ;  he  said  the  wax-esj  ^^ 
keep  his  hand  firom  slipping;  this  kJ«JJ 
said,  is  to  cut  off  the  heads  of  lords  CasUW 
and  Sidmouth ;  all  the  rest  took  sa  «*J  r 
in  preparing  themselves  with  pistols  anfl  «j; 
lasses,  and  other  things.  Then  P*lmca»«  >»' 
Thistlewood  and  Brunt  left  the  room  •  "^ 
before  five ;  Palin  said,  he  hoped  ^^ 
sons  knew  what  they  had  met  there  op««^ 
hoped  if  they  did,  that  they  had  V^^r^ 
deration  to  what  they  were  going  to  w, 
wished  diem  to  inform  *emselTe8,^|J|^ 
the  assassination  of  minivers  wM  IW^ 
of  service. to  their  country,  and  "*r*i^ 
wbuid  oome  over  to  them;  ^"^.JTIjbe 
you  ought  to  determine  with  yoBne»'» 


1317] 


Jbr  High  IVeatoN. 


A.D.  1820. 


11318 


irue  to  one  another ;  if  it  should  be  prored 
that  any  one  of  you  is  in  danger  from  the  op« 
posite  party,  others  of  us  should  immediately 
go  to  his  assistance,  and  if  any  man  flinches, 
he  ought  to  be  run  through;  he  was  here 
interrupted  by  a  tall  man  whom  I  do  not  know, 
nrho  said,  you  speak  as  if  all  the  men  in  the 
room  knew  what  they  were  going  to  do,  but 
that  is  what  I  wish  to  know  myself,  and  some 
others ;  I  myself  am  not  afraid  of  my  life,  and 
no  man  who  turns  out  on  such  a  thing  ought 
to  be  afraid  of  his  life.  Palin  was  going  to 
speak,  but  Brunt  came  io,  and  seeing,  as  I 
thought,  some  alteration  in  the  countenances, 
in  consequence  of  what  this  tall  man  and 
Palin  had  said,  he  told  him,  that  he  and  the 
others  wanted  to  know  what  they  were  going 
to  do.  Brunt  said,  this  is  not  the  proper  place 
where  you  ought  to  know  it ;  but  if  you  go  to 
a  room  in  the  Edgware  road,  there  you  shall 
know  all ;  Brunt  added,  all  those  who  went 
with  him  should  have  something  to  drink  to 
put  them  in  spirits;  the  tall  man  said,  he 
Doped  that  no  man  going  on  such  a  piece  of 
business  as  this,  would  get  drunk ;  the  man 
who  does  so  puts  himself  in  the  hands  of  his 
enemy,  and  is  of  no  use  to  any  body.''  Then 
Adams  proceeds,  and  says,  **  there  was  a  cup- 
board in  the  room,  in  which  I  have  seen  a 
vword,  and  tar  and  pitch,  and  oakum,  which 
ire  materials  for  fire-balls,  and  hand-grenades 
were  kept  there  till  they  were  removed ;  I  went 
iown  stairs  alone^  and  was  followed  by  a 
stranger;  I  went  to  Cato-street  that  evening; 
I  took  a  blunderbuss,  and  a  broomstick  pre- 
pared to  receive  a  bayonet ;  I  met  Thlstlewood 
and  Brunt  in  £dgware-road,  they  took  me  to 
the  stable  in  Cato-street ;  in  going  through  the 
stable,  I  saw  Davidson  and  Wilson ;  Davidson 
sitting  down,  and  Wilson  standing  up." 

Brunts — ^My  lord,  I  beg  pardon,  but  as 
Ihere  are  several  evidences  in  the  court,  and 
it  may  operate  to  the  prejudice  of  my  fellow 
prisoners,  I  tnsh  to  know  whether  they  may 
not  .withdraw? 

Lord  Chief  Boron.— Oh,  yes,  certainly. 

Mr,  Crumey, — My  lord,  they  are  the 
persons  who  the  counsel  for  the  prisoners 
consented  should  remain ;  they  are  the  officers 
in  custody  of  the  arms. 

Lord  Chief  Bortm.— Your  counsel  know  the 
persons  very  well. 

Mr,  Baron  Garrow. — It  has  been  made 
matter  of  express  consent,  or  they  would  have 
retired  as^the  other  witnesses  have  done. 

Lord  Chief  Baron, — Adams  then  says ;  "1 
went  up  into  the  loft,  I  found  several  men 
there ;  the  stable  is  the  first  building  in  Cato- 
street  ;  Cato-street  is  a  little  street  running  out 
of  John-street;  you  enter  it  under  an  archway, 
and  when  you  get  through  that  archway  you 
turn  to  your  right,  and  directly  into  the 
stable.  At  the  further  end  of  the  stiible  there 
was  a  ladder,  by  which  I  got  up  into  the  loft ; 


in  the  loft  there  was  a  carpenter's  bench,  and 
upon  it  I  saw  pistols  and  cutlasses,  and  there 
was  also  a  candle  on  the  bench.    When  I 
went  first,  Thistlewood,    on    looking    about, 
said,  there  were  eighteen  in  the  room,  and  two 
below  stairs.    I  laid  my  blunderbuss  on  the 
bench ;  there  were  present  then,  Thistlewood, 
Brunt,  Ings,HaU,  Bradburn,  Davidson,  Wilson, 
Harrison,  Strange,  Cooper  and  Tidd.    They 
were  all  the  persons  whom  I  knew  by  name ; 
there  were  otner  persons  there ;  they  were  all 
preparing  themselves  with  their  different  arms. 
After  I  came,  Ibistlewood  went  down  stairs, 
and  I  afterwards  went  down  stairs  myself,  and 
found  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Davidson,  Harrison 
and  Wilson  in  the  stable.    When  I  went  down, 
they  turned  themselves  round  and  expressed 
themselves  all  on  a  sudden,  what  good  news 
we  have;   there    are  six  or  seven   carriages 
already  come  to  lord  Harrowby's  house ;  and 
Brunt  said,  what  a  rare  haul  we  shall  have  to 
night.    Tidd  had  not  arrived  at  that  time.  We 
went  up  into  the  loft  again ;  but  Brunt  pro- 
posed before  we  went  up  again,  that  tnere 
should  be  a  double  sentiy  at  the  stable-door, 
and  that  no  one  should  be  admitted  unless  he 
would  give  the  counter-sign.    When  we  went 
to  the  loft,  somebody  expressed  a  fear  that 
Tidd  would  not  come ;  Brunt  said,  there  is  no 
occasion  at  all  for  any  fear  upon  that  subject ; 
I  will  pledge  my  life  that  he  will  come.    Ings 
behaved  like  a  madman,  and  said  he  would 
either  hang  himself,  or  cut  his  own  throat,  if  we 
did  not  go  through  with  the  plan.    Thistle- 
wood said  he  hoped  they  would  not  drop  the 
concern;  if  they  did,  it  would  be  another 
Despard's  job.    Just  after  that,  Tidd  came  in. 
After  some  little  conversation  with  Tidd,  This- 
tlewood came  to  the  table,  and  said,  suppose 
lord  Harrowby  to  have  sixteen  servants  in  the 
house,  they  will  not  be  prepared,  and  we  shall 
be ;  and  Thistlewood  proposed  fourteen  i6  be 
picked  out  of  the  twenty  men  to  go  into  the 
room.    Thistlewood  and  Brunt  then  began  to 
pick  them  out.    On  this  being  done.  Brunt 
introduced  a  gin  bottle ;  he  offered  me  a  glass, 
and  he  called  me  out  among  the  fourteen. 
Some  time  before  this,  on  Brunt  finding  the 
men  rather  apprehensive  that  they  had  not 
sufficient  strength,  Brunt  came  up  to  the  table, 
and  addressed  them  in  a  few  words ;  he  al- 
luded to  those  who  were  in  the  room,  that 
they  did  not  know  exactly  the  preparations 
they  had  got.    He  said,  we  have  got  things 
here  that  will  blow  the  house  down  over  their 
heads ;  so  bent  am  I  on  doing  the  job,  that  if 
there  were  only  eight  or  nine,  I  am  determined 
on  going  in  and  doing  it ;  then,  he  added,  if 
there  were  only  five  or  six  that  will  go,  I  will 
be  one  that  will  do  it,  and  if  we  find  any 
danger,  we  will  take  those  things  with  us,  and 
destroy  the  house,  and  perish  all  together  with 
it.    Just  at  that  time,  as  the  gin  was  going 
round,  after  the  men  were  picked  out,  I  beard 
some  noise  below;  some  body  came  to  the 
bottom  of  the  ladder,  and  cried,  holloa,  show 
a  light !    Upon  tliis^  Thistlewood  took  a  can- 


13191        1  GfiORGEIV. 


Trial  ^Jckm  lUmat  Brunt 


[im 


die  from  the  bench,  and  looked  down  the 
stairs,  turned  round,  and  put  down  the  candle 
on  the  bench  again,  and  seemed  rather  con- 
fused. Then  some  officer  ascended  the  ladder, 
and  came  into  the  room ;  the  first  word  he 
spoke,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  was,  here 
is  a  pretty  nest  of  Jrou  gentlemen ;  we  hare  got 
a  warrant  to  apprehend  you  all,  and  as  such  I 
hope  you  will  go  peaceably.  At  this  time  two 
officers  had  entered,  and  another  officer  was 
behind  them  on  the  ladder ;  he  cried,  let  me 
come  up ;  he  came  up,  and  came  forward  on 
one  side  of  the  room.  Those  that  were  on 
that  side  of  the  room  sidled  off  into  a  little 
room  that  there  was  on  the  left.  I  did  not 
observe  the  officer  advance  into  the  room ;  I 
went  into  this  little  room,  and  I  saw  Thistle- 
*wood  among  the  men  in  the  little  room.  On 
this  officer  coming  into  the  room,  the  other 
rushed  towards  the  door-way.  At  that  mo- 
taient  I  saw  an  arm  in  the  act  of  rushing  for- 
ward, and  a  pistol  was  fired  off  directly.  I 
tannot  sav  that  I  saw  the  officer  fall;  the 
moment  the  pistol  was  fired,  the  candle  was 
out;  a  great  deal  of  confusion  followed;  I  got 
down  the  ladder  into  the  stable,  and  got  away ; 
I  went  off  to  my  lodging  directly ;  I  was  taken 
up  on  Friday,  the  day  but  one  after  this 
happened.  Af^er  I  left  Cato-street  I  went 
home,  and  never  went  out  afterwards  till  I  was 
taken ;  I  have  been  in  custody  ever  since." 

He  is  cross-examined ;  he  says,  ''  the  first 
lime  I  was  here,  I  said  when  I  got  home  I 
repented  of  my  iniquities,  it  was  so,  I  did 
repent  of  my  iniquities,  and  before  that,  I  was 
convinced  1  was  wrong ;  when  I  saw  the  error 
of  my  ways,  I  embraced  Christianity  again ;  I 
had  been  a  Christian  down  to  the  time  when  I 
read  tlie  infernal  work  of  Thomas  Paine,  which 
was  given  to  me  by  Tidd ;  he  was  examined 
further,  and  at  last  he  got  a  little  warm,  and  he 
said  *  Brunt  contributed  to  destroy  my  belief 
as  a  Christian ;  his  plan  was  to  destroy  the 
pillars  of  religion.' "  Then  he  adds  "  I  found  a 
satisfaction  in  making  an  atonement  to  my 
Maker,  for  my  errors ;"  then  he  goes  on,  and 
states,  "  I  never  intended  to  commit  murder; 
I  thank  my  Maker  I  did  not  commit  any ;  I 
never  thought  it  morally  right  to  murder  any 
man.  On  the  2nd  of  February  I  heard  of  a 
conspiracy  to  murder  the  ministers,  and  on 
the  12th  of  February  I  was  introduced  to 
Thistlewood,  and  joined  him  to  aid  in  the  plot 
\vhich  was  communicated  to  me  on  the  2nd ; 
it  was  done  through  the  insinuation  of  Brunt ; 
but  on  Tuesday  morning  before  the  Wednes- 
day, I  went  to  the  meeting,  with  three  others 
to  stop  the  business,  but  as  soon  as  I  mention- 
ed it  by  way  of  throwing  any  objection  in  the 
way,  they  were  all  like  a  set  of  mad  men 
against  me,  except  those  three  I  had  got  with 
)ne,  and  though  1  disapproved  of  their  plan,  I 
did  not  wish  to  bring  any  of  them  to  punish- 
mem** 

He  is  re-examiaed,  and  says,  "Paine's  Age 
of  Reason  and  Carlile's  publications  perverted 
iny  mind;*'  thai,  gentlemen,  is  a  disclosure  in 


such  a  transaction  as  this,  whidi  ought  to  uke 
very  great  impression. 

Such  is  the  evidence  of  this  man ;  the  qae* 
tSon  will  be,  whether  you  can  give  him  credit; 
he  is,  as  I  said  before,  an  accomplice;  be  is t» 
be  listened  to  with  great  jealouvjr;  hot  asm 
is  not  supposed  always  to  tell  an  untrath  opoB 
his  oath  because  he  happens  to  have  been  n  a^ 
complice  in  a  most  nemrioiis  transaction;  ht 
you  will  expect  to  find  a  good  reason  forsettii{ 
up  Ihs  credit,  standing  as  he  does  in  the  onidi* 
Stances  of  a  participator  of  that  guilt  wUebii 
imputed  to  the  prisoner.  We  wul  wm^  gei* 
tlemen,  proeeed  to  see  what  the  other  evideiiee 
is;  I  believe  there  is  no  great  difficdtjio 
saying,  that  if  this  evidence  be  tnie,  it  pram, 
as  far  as  one  witness  can  prove,  the  Gkai|0 
made  against  the  prisoner  by  the  indicODat 
now  under  your  consideration. 

The  next  witnes  is  Eleanor  Walker;  she  b 
the  niece  and  servant  of  Mrs.  Rogers,  in  Fa- 
court,  at  the  house  where  Biunt  lodged  ^ 
his  wife  and  child  and  apprentice,  and  iavindl 
the  back  two-pair  Of  stairs  room  we  ban  bnm 
of  was;  "Brunt,"  she  says,  ** lodged iwrij* 
twelvemonth  in  our  house;  he  occupied  tht 
two  front  rooms  in  the  two-pair  of  stain  tloor; 
he  lived  in  one,  and  woikea  m  the  otber;  tie 
back  room  two-pair  of  stairs  was  takea  bf 
Ings  f  I  did  not  know  the  man's  name  at  tbe  tiai 
Brunt  introduced  him ;  the  room  ir»  ^ 
unfurnished."  This  is  what  the  otfier  wittj 
Adams,  told  us;  ^*  he  said,  perhaps  be  nip 
bring  his  eoods  in  a  week  or  better,  bet  be 
never  did  bring  any  goods  there;  myBS*' 
keeps  a  shop;  the  other  lodgers  enter  ia«J 
the  side  door,  and  they  go  up  and  downW 
stairs  without  our  knowing  any  thiog  of  tw' 
motions.'' 

Mary  Rogers  is  the  landlady,  and  ft*  «J* 
and  mistress  of  Eleanor  Walker ;  sbe  sapi  * 
did  not  know  Ings's  name  when  be  tookoj' 
lodgings ;  he  paid  roe  for  four  or  fin|^ 
I  do  not  exactly  know  which,  at  3j.  per  ••*{ 
but  observe,  Ings  took  the  room  at  3i.«**j 
certainlv  not  to  live  in.  "  One  cveniug,  »*• 
I  was  about  putting  my  children  to  bed,lft^ 
three  men  go  up  stairs,  the  middle  one  I P^' 
ceived  was  a  black  man ;"  who  that  maa  «J 
she  was  left  to  conjecture;  **I  ^^^frl 
Brunt  what  Ings  was ;  Brunt  told  tsa,  w**' 
nothing  of  him,  except  that  he  saw  hw  » 
a  public-house,  and  heard  him  i"^^^J*^j 
lodging ;  he  said  that  he  ^^ndcntooa  be^ 

butcher  by  trade;"  these  lodging»»  ""^  "J 
were  taken,  were  never  slept  in  by  I°P» 
he  never  had  an  article  of  furniture  »  ti*J 
except  that  there  was  a  stove,  whicb  •» 
property  of  the  landlord ;  so  far,  yw  JJ^ 
IS  an  agreement  between  Adams  aw_ 
two  persons  with  respect  to  these  lodgmP-^  j 
Joseph  Hale  is  next  called;  ^^^^ 
was  an  apprentice  to  Brunt,  and  "^*w 
him  in  Fox-^urt;  he  had  two  ^^^^ 
one  was  his  work-shop,  the  ^^.    JJtwo- 
I  remember  Ings  coming  and  **^*'?\!iqj| 
pair  back  room.  Brunt  went  with  b*'" 


13211 


Jbr  High  Treoion. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1332 


M  it,  and  when  he  hail  teen  it.  Brunt  told  Ings 
it  would  do,  and  said^  go  down  and  ^ve  them 
tt  shilling/'  that  was  to  hind  the  hargain,  I  sup- 
pose.  **  I  had  known  Ings  ahout  a  fortni^t 
before  that  day,  I  bad  seen  him  withThistlewood 
in  Brunt's  room  f  so  that  it  appears  here,  that 
Bnint  and  Ings  were  acquainted  ihoot  a  fort- 
night before  Brunt  told  Mrs.  Rogers  that  he 
Icnew  noUiing  of  him,  except  seeing  him  at 
the  ale-house  on  the  morning  of  the  day  when 
he  took  the  room.  **  Ings  came,  and  asked 
Mrs.  Brunt  for  the  key ;  she  gave  him  the  key. 
Hall  was  with  him  in  Uie  course  of  the  evening; 
I  heard  other  persons  go  into  that  room.  From 
that  time,  until  my  master  was  apprehended, 
divers  meetings  were  held  in  that  room.  I 
have  seen  there  Thistlewood,  Ings,  Tidd,  Hall, 
Davidson,  Bradbum,  Strange,  Edwards,  Pot- 
ter, and  Adams  and  others ;  they  were  at  dif- 
ferent times  in  this  room,  and  coming  up  and 
down ;  my  master  was  generally  with  them. 
"When  I  hare  passed,  I  have  seen  the  room 
door  open,  ana,  by  that  means,  have  seen 
aome  long  poles,  like  th^  brandies  of  trees, 
vough  cut ;  I  saw  about  twenty  of  them ;  the 
meetings  were  mostly  in  the  evening.  I  have 
heard  hammering  and  sawing  in  the  room ;  I 
heard  it  more  than  once ;  they  went  by  their 
names ;  Thistlewood  was  called  sometimes  T., 
and  sometimes  Jrihtar;  then,  he  says;  on  the 
Sunday  evening  before  Brunt  was  tSkaa,  there 
Was  a  meeting  rather  larger  than  usual ;  all  Uie 
persons  I  have  named  were  there,  and  went 
away  one  or  two  at  a  time ;  Brunt  was  with 
them.  When  the  meeting  was  over  I  saw 
Strange  with  Brunt,  in  Brunt's  own  room. 
There  were  meetings  also  on  the  Monday,  and 
en  the  Tuesday,"  as  Adams  had  said ;  *^  on 
the  afternoon  of  Wednesday  several  people 
came ;  some  of  them  came  m  the  front  room. 
Thistlewood  came,  Ings  came,  and  Strange 
was  there  also  about  two  o'clock ;  thev  went 
first  into  Brunt's  room  where  he  lived,  and 
then  came  into  his  work-shop ;  their  employ- 
ment was  flinting  Uie  pistols.  I  did  not  know 
tome  of  them;  Uiey  were  strangers ;  they  had 
five  or  six  pistols,  which  they  were  flinting ; 
they  did  not  finish  th^m ;  one  of  the  men  said, 
the  people  were  overlooking  them  from  the 
opposite  house ;  Brunt  told  them  to  go  into 
the  back  room,  which  they  did.  In  the  course 
tif  the  afternoon  Thistlewood  came  out  of  the 
i>ack  room,  and  asked  me  if  I  could  get  him  a 
jriece  of  writing  paper  f  I  gave  him  some,  and 
fie  took  it  into  the  back  room ;  after  that  Brunt 
came  out,  and  told  me  to  get  six  sheets  of  car- 
tridge-paper,  and  gave  me  money.-  I  brought 
it  and  gave  it  to  him,  and  he  took  it  into 
the  back  room  ;**  this  idso  Adams  had  told  us 
before ;  **  about  six  o'clock  Brunt  left  the  back 
loom,  and  came  into  his  own  room  for  the  last 
time,  with  a  stranger,  and  then  they  went  out 
together.  I  heara  others  go  down  stairs. 
After  Brunt  went,  my  mistress  had  oocainon  to 
make  her  tea ;  her  table  was  in  the  back  room  ;** 
and  Adams  told  us  the  same ;  *'  she  told  me 
to  go  and  get  i^  I  went  to  the  door  and 


knocked ;  a  man  of  the  name  of  Potter  opened 
it,  and  gave  me  tlie  table ;  when  the  door  was 
opened,  I  observed  four  or  five  more  people  in 
the  room,  and  thev  had  a  fire ;  in  the  course 
of  the  evening  Tldd  called,  and  came  to  the 
front  room ;  Mrs.  Brunt  took  him  to  the  cup- 
board and  showed  him  a  pike-h^ul  and  a 
sword,  and  asked  him,  what  she  could  do  with 
them  P  And  he  said,  give  them  to  me,  I  will 
take  them  away ;  he  took  them  into  the  bade 
room.  After  tlds  I  heard  some  persons  go 
down  from  the  back  room;  this  was  after  seven, 
and  I  believe  near  eight ;  after  this  a  person 
came  and  told  Mrs.  Brunt,  if  any  person  comes 
here,  and  inquires  for  any  of  us,  send  them  to 
the  White  Hart  Shortly  after  some  persons 
came;  Uiey  did  not  know  their  vray  to  the 
White  Hart,  and  I  vrent  with  them  to  show 
them  the  house.  On  my  return  from  the  White 
Hart,  after  I  had  been  at  the  door  a  few  mi- 
nutes, some  other  persons  came,  and  they 
were  told  to  go  to  tne  White  Hart;  I  did  not 
go  with  them,  as  they  appeared  to  know  the 
way.  Brunt  came  home  about  nine  o'clock  in 
the  evening ;  his  dress  was  disordered,  and  his 
great  coat  and  his  boots  were  veiy  muddy ;  he 
seemed  rather  confused ;  he  told  his  wife  that, 
where  he  was,  a  lot  of  officers  had  been ;  he 
said  it  was  all  up,  or  words  to  that  effect.^ 
There  is  no  doubt  he  was^n  Cato-street,  thlt 
is  not  only  proved  by  the  witness,  but  admitted 
by  himself.  **  He  said,  that  he  had  saved  his 
life,  and  that  was  all.  Directly  after  this, 
another  man  came  in,  who  was  a  stranger  to 
me.  Brunt  shook  hands  with  him,  and  aoked 
if  he  knew  who  had  informed ;  this  man  an- 
swered, he  did  not  know.  The  stranger  said, 
that  he  had  had  a  dreadful  blow  on  the  side, 
and  had  been  knocked  down ;  and  from  the 
manner  of  speaking  to  each  other,  they  ap- 
peared to  have  been  in  the  same  place.  Brunt 
said,  there  is  something  to  be  done  yet,  upon 
this  the^  both  went  out  again  together;  then, 
after  this,  he  says,  Mrs.  Brunt  and  I  went  to- 
gether into  tne  back  room ;  we  found  in  the 
cupboard  several  rolls  of  brown  paper,  vrith 
tar  in  them,  which  I  have  since  understood 
were  hand-grenades;  also  an  iron  pot  that 
belonged  to  Brunt;"  this  is  also  stated  by 
Adams;  ^  there  were  some  bags  there  made  of 
flannel,  two  of  them  were  fou  of  something ; 
in  the  room  there  was  a  long  pole  also ;  Mrs. 
Brunt  and  I  left  them  there.  Brunt  came 
home  about  eleven  o'clock;  he  told  me  to  get 
up  early,  and  clean  his  boots,  which  I  did ;  he 
asked  me,  whether  I  knew  the  borough?  I 
told  him,  yes ;  he  then  asked  me  if  I  knew 
Snovr's-field's  ?  I  told  him.  no;  he  directed 
me  to  go  to  Kirby-street,  snoVs-fields,  to  k 
person  of  the  name  of  Potter ;  he  said  there 
were  some  things  in  the  back  room ;  we  went 
together  into  the  back  room ;  w«  took  each  a 
rush  basket ;  he  told  me  to  put  the  things  that 
were  in  the  cupboard  into  a  basket,  which  1 
did ;  one  of  the  baskets  was  tied  up  in  abln^ 
apron,  belonging  to  Mrs.  Brunt,  whicn  had  beeh 
made  use  of  as  a  curtain  to  the  window  of  (hat 


1323]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  ^Jakn  T%ma$  Brmd 


11334 


room;  the  other  was  not  tied  up^  we  went 
into  firaot'fl  own  room  to  look  for  somethiog 
to  tie  that  up,  and  two  officers  came  ia  and 
took  Brunt  7*^ 

Thomas  Smart  is  a  watchman  of  St.  George's, 
Hanover-square;  he  sajs,  in  taking  his  walk 
on  that  nighty  the  22nd  of  February,  he  saw  a 
person  of  colour,  and  three  other  persons,  in 
^rosvenor-square,  they  looked  suspicious  ;.this 
is  with  a  view  to  lead  to  the  opinion  that 
Davidson  was  there,  according  to  what  Adams 
had  said  of  the  direction  given  to  him  lo  go 
there. 

Charles  Bissix  is  also  a  watchman ;  he  says, 
lie  saw  two  men  taking  particular  notice  of  the 
houses  in  Grosvenor-square,  about  half-past 
eight  or  a  quarter  before  nine,  on  the  22na  of 
February  last ;  one  was  a  man  of  colour ;  they 
took  particular  notice  of  lord  Harrowby's  house. 

Henry  Gillan  is  a  young  man,  a  servant  of 
an  apothecary,  living  in  that  neighbourhood; 
he  says,  ^  I  know  the  Rising  Sun  public-house 
at  the  comer  of  Adams -mews,  in  Charles- 
•treet,  Grosvenor-square ;  I  was  there  on  the 
22nd  of  February  last;"  he  describes  it  as 
Adams  had  done;  he  says,  **  Brunt  and  Adams 
came  in,  they  had  porter  and  bread  and 
cheese;''  Adams  said  they  had  refreshment 
there.  **  Brunt  challenged  roe  to  play  at 
dominos;  I  stayed  there  and  played  two 
games,  and  left  them  both  there  at  ten  o'clock;" 
so  that  this  is  confirmation  of  the  hci  stated 
by  Adams. 

Edward  Simpson  is  a  corporal-major  of  the 
2nd  regiment  of  Life-guards ;  hie  speaks  of  the 
barracks  in  King-street;  he  says  that  Harrison 
knew  them  perfectly  well ;  that  he  had  been  a 
soldier  connected  with  them,  and  that  there 
were  some  windows,  which  have  been  since 
shut ;  that  the  barracks  would  have  been  very 
easily  burnt  by  any  fire-balls  thrown  in  at 
those  windows,  which  would  have  reached  the 
hay  and  straw  deposited  there.  That  is  to 
show  something  of  a  coincidence  between 
Adams's  account  of  the  proposed  burning  of 
the  barracks  with  the  evidence  that  tbey  might 
easily  have  been  burnt. 

John  Hector  Morison  is  a  journeyman  to 
Mr.  Underwood,  a  cutler  of  Drary-lane ;  he 
says,  ''  I  remember  the  prisoner  Ings  coming 
with  a  sword  to  be  ground,  about  last  Christ- 
mas ;"  here  it  is — a  small  one ;  "  he  directed 
me  to  grind  it  sharp  fro  m  the  heel  to  the  point, 
and  likewise  the  back  of  the  point  to  be  ground; 
the  prisoner  Tngs  called  for  it  about  three  days 
after  he  left  it,  he  approved  of  the  manner 
in  which  it  was  ground,  and  in  about  a  fort- 
night afterwards  he  brought  me  a  very  long 
one ;  he  said  the  first  one  was  ground  to  his 
likiug,  and  I  was  to  grind  that  in  the  same 
manner;  he  gave  me  his  name,  as  I  understood 
him,  Eames,  the  first  time.'*  Morison  has 
looked  at  it,  and  says,  that  was  the  sword 
which  he  so  ground  by  the  direction  of  Ings. 

James  Aldous  is  a  pawnbroker ;  he  says  **  I 
know  the  prisoner  Davidson ;  he  pawned  with  j 
me  a  brass-barrelled  blunderbuss  in  January, 


and  redeemed  it  on  the  23rd  of  Fehnnij;*'  lie 
says,  that  be  has  seen  it  since,  that  Mr.  Bvft- 
ven  showed  it  to  him,  and  that  he  believes  it  to 
be  the  same  that  was  pledged  and  redeemed. 
John  Monument  comes  next;  his  erideoee 
requires  great  attention ;  he  is  a  prisoner  is 
the  Tower  i^**  I  am  by  trade  a  sbcMemaker;  I 
lived,  before  I  was  a  prisoner,  at  No.  8,  Ge- 
den-street,  Baldwin's-gaidens,  which  is  oar 
Brook's-market ;  I  saw  Thi^ewood  at  the 
house  of  a  man  of  the  name  of  Foid,  three 
months  before  I  was  apprehended ;  afbtwirds 
Thistlewood  called  upoo  me  in  a^ot  a  fort- 
night, he  came  with  Brunt ;  my  mother  and 
brother  were  with  me ;  my  brother's  Dane  in 
Thomas;  after  Thistlewood  and  Brant  bd 
been,  in  the  room  some  time,  Thistlewood  nid 
he  wished  to  speak  to  me ;  1  went  with  bin, 
leaving  l^nt  with  my  brother.  Thisdewood 
said,  great  events  are  at  hand ;  peof^  were 
every  where  anxious  for  a  change;  I  havs 
been  promised  support  by  a  great  Domber  of 
men,  who  have  deceived  me,  but  now  I  hare 
got  men  who  will  stand  by  me.  He  tha 
asked  me  if  I  had  any  arms ;  I  said  no;  he 
said,  every  man  ought  to  have  arms ;  all  of  o 
have  got  arms,  some  a  pistol,  some  a  pike, 
and  some  a  sabre ;  you  can  huy  a  pistol  for 
about  four  or  five  shillings.  I  told  him  I  bad 
no  money  to  buy  pistols ;  he  then  said  I  viH 
see  vrhat  I  can  do.  We  returned  agaiointo 
the  room,  and  found  Brunt  there;  and  tha 
Thistlewood  and  he  went  away  together.  On 
Tuesday,  the  22nd  of  February,  Bmnt  caflrf 
upon  me  in  comoany  with  Tidd ;  my  biothff 
Thomas  was  with  me  at  that  time.  I  twd 
Brunt  I  thought  I  had  lost  him ;  he  said,  the 
king's  death  has  made  an  alteration  lo  m 
plans ;  I  asked,  what  plans ;  he  said  there  •« 
to  be  a  meeting  the  following  evening,  up » 
Tyburn-turnpike,  where  I  should  hear  afl  the 
particulars.  Be  then  turned  to  Tidd, «n<^^ 
whether  he  should  give  me  the  name;  ind 
said  yes,  he  supposed  there  was  no  dangff; 
he  then  told  me  that  if  I  came  to  thepUce, 
and  found  any  people  about,  I  was  to  ay 
6. «.  t,  and  that  if  they  were  fn«"^5  J^ 
would  answer  t  o,  n  ;  he  said  he  should  be » 
our  house  again  in  the  morning,  to  tell  oe 
more  about  it,  and  when  the  thing  was  torn 
place ;  he  did  not  call  the  next  day  tiU  aha« 
half-past  four ;  he  then  came  alone ;  my  ^ 
ther  was  vrith  me ;  he  called  me  down  ^'J 
and  told  me  I  must  go  with  him  in  »«» *° 
hour ;  I  told  him  I  could  not  go  so  8ooo« 
that;  he  asked  why ;  I  said  I  had  gotJojK 
work  to  do,  that  must  be  done;  he  «»f  r 
at  what  time  it  would  be  done,  and  I  toW  »» 
about  six  o'clock ;  he  said  he  could  not  jw^ 
so  long,  and  that  I  must  go  with  Tidd,  ww» 
he  had  brought  with  him  the  day  befort;  J^ 
he  told  me  where  Tidd  lived,  which  was  BOf 
in-the-wall-passage,  leading  to  Don"Y» 
street;  in  consequence  of  that,  I  ▼«"  , 
Tidd's  about  half-past  six  o'clock,  and  ftj" 
him  at  home ;  he  said  he  had  waited  for  ^ 
more  people;  that  he  should  not  wa» .  * 


1325] 


Jot  High  TreasM, 


A.  D.  182a 


[13219 


peTen  o'clock ;  and  that  if  no  one  else  came 
before  seven,  we  should  go  together ;  no  one 
else  came ;  and  at  seven  o'clock,  he  went  to 
the  comer  of  the  room,  and  took  out  a  pistol, 
which  he  put  in  a  belt  that  be  had  got  round 
his  body  under  his  great  coat ;  he  took  about 
six  or  seven  pike  heads  wrapped  up  in  brown 
paper,  and  a  staff  about  four  feet  long,  with  a 
hole  in  one  end  of  it  adapted  to  receive  a  pike 
head ;  then  we  went  down  into  BrookVstreet 
and  up  to  Oxford-street ;  when  we  came  to 
Holborn,  he  gave  me  the  pike-staff  to  carry ; 
as  we  were  going  along  Oxford-street,  I  think 
it  was,  I  asked  him  to  tell  me  where  we  were 
going,  he  said  I  should  know  when  I  got  to 
the  place ;  I  had  asked  him  before  we  came  out 
of  the  room,  what  place  it  was  up  at  Tybum- 
tumpike  we  were  going  to,  and  he  answered 
at  a  mews  up  by  Edgware-road ;  I  •  asked 
him,  whether  we  were  going  to  the  House  of 
Commons  ?  he  said  no,  there  were  too  many 
soldiers  there ;  I  asked  him  again  where  we 
were  going,  he  said,  to  Grosvenor-square ;  I 
asked  him  whether  any  one  in  particular  lived 
there ;  he  said  there  was  to  be  a  cabinet  din- 
ner there ;  no  other  conversation  passed  be- 
tween us  that  I  remember,  till  we  got  to  Cato- 
street ;  we  went  under  an  archway ;  there  were 
two  persons  under  the  archway ;  there  were 
some  few  virords.  passed  between  them  and 
Tidd,  which  I  could  not  understand ;  he  was 
before  me;  the  stable  is  directly  close  to  the 
archway,  you  turn  to  the  right  hand ;  we  went 
into  the  stable ;  I  saw  in  the  stable  three  or 
lour  men,  whether  they  were  armed  I  cannot 
say;  there  was  a  light  below;  I  went  up  a 
ladder  at  the  further  end,  on  the  left  hand  into 
the  loft,  and  found  the  people  up  stairs,  I 
suppose  about  twenty-two  or  twenty-three; 
somebody  asked  Thisdewood  how  many  there 
were,  and  he  said  there  was  no  occasion  to 
count  them  there  were  five-and-twenty ;  there' 
was  a  carpenter's  bench  there,  and  on  Uie 
bench  a  quantity  of  swords  and  pistols ;  there 
was  only  one  light  that  I  observed,  and  that 
was  on  the  bench  ;  there  was  one  man  in  a 
brown  great  coat,  who  spoke  of  the  impro- 
prie^  of  going  to  lord  Harrowby's,  with  so 
amall  a  number  as  five-and-twenty  men ;  that 
was  the  first  time  of  my  hearing  lord  Har- 
towby's  mentioned  as  thie  house  to  which  we 
were  to  go;  Thistlewood  said,  that  number 
was  quite  sufficient,  for  he  only  wanted  four- 
teen men  to  go  into  the  room,  and  supposing 
that  lord  Harrowby  had  sixteen  servants  that 
liumber  would  be  quite  sufficient ;  the  other 
man  said,  when  we  come  out,  there  will  of 
course  be  a  crowd  of  people  about  the  door,  how 
shall  we  make  our  escape  ?  Thistlewood  said, 
you  know  that  the  largest  party  were  already 
gone ;  Davidson  then  told  him  not  to  throw  cold 
water  upon  the  proceedings,  but  if  he  was 
afraid  ot  his  life,  he  might  go  away,  they  could 
do  without  him  ;  and  Srunt  said,  sooner  than 
they  should  go  from  the  business  the^  were 
about,  he  would  go  into  the  house  by  himself, 
and  blow  them  all  up,  «ven  if  he  ]aerished.with 


them ;  yon  know  we  have  got  that  says  Brunt, 
that  we  can  do  it  with ;  after  that,  the  man  in 
the  brown  great  coat  said,  though  I  do  not 
like  to  go  with  so  small  a  number^  yet  as  you 
are  all  for  it,  I  will  not  be  against  it;  he  then 
proposed  they  should  all  put  themselves  under 
the  orders  of  Mr.  Thistlewood.  Thistewood 
then  said,  every  one  who  engages  with  me 
will  have  equal  honour  with  myself;  and  he 
proposed  that  the  fourteen  men  who  wre  to 
go  into  the  room,  should  volunteer  from  the 
pers6ns  thatweretbereassembled;  about  twelve 
or  thirteen  men  immediately  afterwards  volun- 
teered, and  among  them  were  Tidd,  Brunt  the 
prisoner,  Davidson  and  Wilson.  About  this 
time,  Thistlewood  stepped  down  stairs,  and  he 
came  up  again,  and  said  he  had  received 
intelligence  that  the  dnke  of  Wellington  and 
also  lord  Sidmouth  had  just  arrived  at  lord 
Harrowby's ;  I  do  not  recollect  any  thing  more 
that  passed  till  the  officers  came  up;  they 
came  up  into  the  room,  and  told  them  to  siir« 
render ;  that  they  were  officers,  and  that  there 
was  a  guard  of  soldiers  below;  I  was  taken 
into  custody  up  stairs."  This,  gentlemen,  is 
the  evidence  of  an  accomplice;  but  if  it  is 
believed,  it  supports  the  case  proved  by 
Adams. 

Then  upon  his  cross-examination,  he  savs, 
''  T  have  read  Paine's  Age  of  Reason,  and  I 
have  also  read  the  bishop  of  Llandafi^s  answer 
to  it ;  Paine*8  certainly  affected  my  mind,  but 
the  bishop's  answer  prevented  its  whole  effect ; 
I  never  saw  Brunt  till  Thistlewood  brought 
him  to  me ;  I  went  there  first  without  knowing 
what  they  were  going  about ;  I  saw  Tidd  arm 
himself;  I  followed  him;  I  thought  they  were 

S}ing  to  attack  the  members  of  the  House  of 
ommons ;  still  I  went  with  him,  having  rea« 
son  to  believe  something  was  to  be  done,  biit 
not  knowing  what  was  to  be  done  till  I  got  to 
Cato*street ;  when  he  told  me  there  was  to  be 
a  cabinet  dinner,  I  was  convinced  that  their 
object  was,  to  destroy  the  persons  there ;  but 
though  I  was  a  Christian  as  I  profess  to  be,  I 
was  to6  much  afraid  to  retreat  after  I  had  been 
engaged  in  this  plan.^ 

Thomas  Monument  is  produced  to  shew, 
that  that  which  his  brother  swears  is  correct, 
so  far  as  it  is  within  his  knowledge ;  he  states, 
^  I  remember  Thistlewood  coming  to  my  bro* 
ther's  house  one  evening,  in  company  with 
Brunt  the  prisoner;  Thistlewood  asked  to 
speak  to  my  brother ;  in  consequence  of  that 
they  both  went  out;  Brunt  staid  behind  in^ 
the  room ;  they  were  out  about  two  or  three 
minutes,  and  after  they  tetnmed,  Brunt  and 
Thistlewood  went  away  together ;  and  again 
on  the  22nd  of  February^  the  Tuesday,  Brunt 
and  Tidd  called  on  my  brother ;  when  Brunt 
came  in,  my  brother  said,  I  thought  I  had  lost 
you ;  there  was  something  pa^ed  concerning 
the  king's  death ;  that  his  death  had  made  an 
alteration  in  the  plans ;  mv  brother  asked  him 
what  plans ;  he  said  they  had  different  objects 
in  view ;  I  recollect  Brunt  asking  Tidd  whether 
he  should  give  us  the  outlina  of  a  plan ;  whethev 


13S7]       1  GEORGE  f  V. 


Trial  qfJakn  Tkmas  Bnmt 


[I33» 


Tidd  made  my  answer  or  not,  I  do  not  know  ; 
bttt  Brunt  told  us  the  pass-word  ;*'  and  he  gives 
the  same  account  of  that  as  the  brother  had 
done  before.  ''On  the  Wednesday,  Brunt 
called  again  on  my  brother  between  four  and 
five  o'docfc ;  my  brother  could  not  go  just 
then ;  Brunt  asked  him  if  he  was  ready  to  go ; 
we  were  bosv  at  woik^  and  my  brother  told 
him  he  could  not  go  then ;  Brunt  told  him» 
when  he  was  ready  to  go,  he  was  to  call  in 
Hole-ii^th^wall  passage  on  Iidd,  and  he 
would  take  him ;  Brunt  then  went  away ;  my 
brother  went  out  about  seven  o'dock,  as  nearly 
as  I  can  recollect ;  I  did  not  go  myself;  I  had 
never  seen  my  brother  from  that  time  till  he 
was  in  custody.*'  Now,  gentlemen,  this  young 
man  swears  positively  to  every  thing  which  his 
brother  John  has  sworn  to,  except  the  parts 
whioh  his  brother  only  was  present  at;  the 
question  iS|  whether,  when  a  narrative  is  made 
in  several  parts  of  which  another  person  agrees, 
you  do  not  believe  the  accomplice  in  the  oUier 
parts ;  the  two  agreeing  in  the  principal  part, 
vou  will  ask  yourselves  whether  you  do  not 
believe  him  in  tbf  other  things  iJso. 

John  Monumept  is  called  again;  he  tayi, 
^  I  was  taken  in  custody  to  Whitehall;  I  can- 
not exactly  say  whether  I  was  handcuffed  to 
any  person ;  I  know  I  was  put  ipto  a  room  by 
myself,  but  on  the  last  day  pf  examination 
some  conversation  passed  between  me  aod 
Thistlewood;  Brunt  and  the  other  prisonen 
were  there ;  we  were  then  all  put  into  a  room 
together.  Thistlewood  told  me,  when  I  came 
to  be  examined  before  tbe  Privy  council,  to 
tell  them  that  Edwards  brought  me  into  tlu» 
meeting,^-that  it  wgs  through  Edwards  J  came 
there.  I  said,  how  can  I  tell  that  falsehood, 
when  I  have  never  seen  Edwards.  He  said, 
that  is  of  no  eonsequenoe  at  all ;  you  must 
describe  him  as  a  man  not  much  taller  then 
yourself  of  a  sallow  complexion,  and  that  be 
wore  a  brown  great  eoat.  We  were  sittiog 
found  the  Uble,  and  Thistlewoood  told  m« 
that  Edwards  had  betrayed  us ;  and  he  bade 
me  send  that  round  to  the  other  prisoners.  I 
did  not  like  to  do  it ;  I  told  him  X  should  be 
noticed ;  he  then  leaned  over,  and  desired 
somebody  else.*' 

Then,  gentlemen,  Thomas  Hiden  is  called ; 
I  shall  not  make  any  apology  for  reading  the 
whole  of  the  evidence.  I  feel  that  I  am  tre^ 
passing  very  much  on  your  time,  but  tlie  oc- 
easion  is  so  important,  that  I  am  sure  you  will 
n^t  feel  k  to  be  too  long.  Thomas  Hiden 
says;  ^ I  have  carried  on  business  as  acow^ 
keepev  and  daiiyman  in  Manchestowmews;  I 
have  now  the  misfortune  to  be  in  prison  for  debt ; 
I  was  taken  in  exeoutionlastSaturdav  se'nnight, 
I  know  Wilson  very  welU  A  few  days  belbre 
the  23fd  of  February  he  asked  me  to  be  of  a 
pwnr  to  destroy  all  his  owjeetv^s  miniaters  at 
»  cabinet  dinner;  that  he  and  the  party  had 
all  things  ready,  and  were  waiting  for  a  cabinet 
dinner,  and  that  they  had  each  things  as  I  had 
never  sefn---large  round  thingSi,  made  of  taiw 
fnnlia  and  eords,  and  filled  full  of  nails  and 


iron  and  other  things,  and  that  their  stiea^ 
was  very  ffreat ;  he  said  if  they  were  lifted, 
they  would  heave  up  one  of  the  mWi  of  tie 
houses  on  the  other  side  of  the  street;  he  aid 
they  were  waiting  for  a  cabinet  dinner,  nd 
then  thev  meant  to  set  some  houses  on  iin, 
and,  bv  keepifis  the  town  in  confusion  for  sone 
days,  U  would  become  general ;"  diet  is  tot 
the  particular  mischief  of  setting  fire  to  the 
houses,  Init  that  would  become  general ;  ^^tlme 
things  were  to  be  put  into  the  room  vben  the 
gentlemen  were  at  dinner;  that  they  mentis 
set  fire  to  lord  Harrowby's  house.  He  nil' 
that  all  who  escaped  the  explosion  wen  to  die 
by  the  edge  of  the  sword  or  some  othervn* 
pon.  The  houses  he  named  were  those  of  tke 
duke  of  Wellington,  lord  Hanowhy,  lord  Sid- 
mouth,  lord  Castlereagh,  the  bishop  of  Loodai, 
and  one  other  house  that  I  do  not  recollect; 
he  said  that  they  would  depend  upon  wj 
making  one;  I  told  him  I  would;  bdbietke 
23rd,"  he  does  not  remember  Uie  time,  ba 
that  time  is  made  up  by  another  mtom,  ''I 
wrote  a  letter  to  lord  CJasdereagh;  I  tried  to 
see  him,  but  I  could  not  get  access  to  Urn;  I 
went  to  watch  lord  Harrowby's  going  oot  d 
his  house  to  Hyde  park;  I  went  tvoortkiw 
times  to  lord  Harrowby's ;  at  last  I  saw  a  gn- 
tleman  by  his  house  mount  a  horM.  I  did  ifl| 
know  the  eail  of  Hanowby  then;  I  kXkm 
him  into  the  pari( ;  I  met  him,  anddeUmed 
to  him  the  letter  I  had  vrritten  to  lord  CMt)^ 
reagh."  He  looks  at  the  letUr,  and  nj>y 
<<  that  is  the  letter.'*  It  cannot  he  in  erid«KX> 
because  it  passed  between  two  penoo%  tke 
prisoner  not  being  there.  ^'The  neitdift 
between  four  and  five  o'clock,  Wilson  net  a^ 
and  said,  you  are  the  man  I  want  to  ne;  v 
said  there  was  to  be  a  cabinet  dinner  ttft 
night  at  lord  Harrowby's,  inGiosfenoHqaiA 
I  asked  him  where  they  were  going  tooNii; 
he  told  me  I  was  to  go  up  into  JobiKen^ 
and  to  the  public-house  at  the  comer  of  Cato- 
street,  the  sign  of  the  Horse  and  Groom ;  vA 
there  (  was  in  stop  in  the  public-honsef  <*  " 
stop  aft  the  oomer  of  the  pest  '»^^2| 
showed  into  a  stable  oleee  oy.  I  ''^^{^ 
wheq  they  were  to  meet;  he  said  ^Si^ 
before  ei  at  six  o'clock  ^  if  y  wi  do  not  •« 
hasle»  ha  said  the  grand  tlung  will  be  «w 
befose  yon  eoma«  I  asked  bim  bo^  *^ 
men  were  to  meet;  he  said  between  tw 
and  thirty;  J  asked  if  that  was  sU  ^f^ 
that  was  in  Cato^street,  and  be  mid  "^i*** 
miolh^  party  in  Gray's-inn^ane,  anotherfj^ 
in  the  Borough,  and  another  in  Gfe's^^ 
the  city,  I  do  not  know  which.  H^  toM^ 
had  no  occasion  to  be  alarmed,  *ll^T^ 
was  in  it  »*-they  are  most  of  Ibam  Iw» »■» 
court.  Wilson  told  me  the  Irish  were  tfJJJ 
but  that  tbey  would  not  begio  ^  the  Mim 

bmin  first;  the  English  had  behsvid  imn 
a^  disappointed  them  no  ofifo,  th^  th^^ 
deurmined  not  to  begin  tiU  tbe  ^^!^ 
begun;  be  said  one  P*«r  wf  «?  go  » «^ 
Hanowby*s,  and  do  the  grand  ^Jf!^ 
all  the  parties  were  to  letiw^  a»a»e«*^ 


la^l 


fw  High  Trmuan* 


vlierc  about  the  neighbonrliood  of'  the  Man- 
lioii-house.''  That  is  consistent  with  what 
kdams  said.  ^  He  said  there  were  two  pieces 
»f  cannon  in  Grav's-inn-lane,  which  would  be 
'ery  easily  taken  by  knocking  in  a  small  door; 
bur  pieces  more  at  some  Artillery-gronnd,  he 
loes  not  know  where,  whidi  were  to  be  got 
lasily  by  killing  the  sentry.  I  then  left  him, 
ind  went  to  John-street  that  evening,  between 
nxand  seven  o'clock.  I  beliete  it  to  have 
>^en  near  seven  when  T  got  there.  When  I 
^t  near  the  gate-way  I  met  Wilson  and  Da- 
ridson,  the  man  of  colour,  standing  near  the 
x»t.  Wilson  said,  you  are  come;  I  said, 
res,  I  am  come,  but  I  am  behind  my  time ;  I 
old  him  I  had  to  fetch  some  cream,  which  I 
vas  obligated  to  do.  Davidson  asked  me  if  T 
iras  going  in,  and  said,  Thistlewood  was  in ; 
L  asked  him  what  time  they  would  go  away 
torn  thence,  as  I  must  go  and  get  some  cream ; 
md  he  told  me  they  meant  to  leave  that  place 
tbout  eight  o'clock,  and  if  they  were  gone 
>efoTe  I  came  back,  I  must  follow  them  to 
^rosvenor-square,  and  I  should  find  them  at 
ord  Harrowby*s  house,"  describing  the  place 
irbere  it  was. 
He  is  cross-examined ;  and  he  says,  **  I  went 

0  a  club,  called  the  shoemakers*  club,  twice ;  I 
vent  first  on  a  Sunday  night;  I  was  induced 
>y  a  friend  of  mine  to  go ;  I  went  another  time 
m  a  Sunday,  but  I  never  went  once  to  a  pri- 
Rate  meeting;  I  know  Bennett;  I  asked  nim 
f  he  would  go  with  me  and  my  friend  Clarke, 
vho  was  the  person  who  invited  me  to  go.  I 
■ever  persuacled  him  to  go ;  I  asked  him  if  he 
vould  go  to  the  shoemakers'  club  ¥rith  Clarke 
ind  me ;  I  did  not  know  till  between  four  and 
Ive,  that  the  meeting  was  to  be  held  in  Cato* 
rtreet.    I  wrote  the  letter  myself." 

Then  the  earl  of  Harrowby  is  called ;  he  is 

1  privy  councillor,  and  one  of  his  majestv's 
ninislers ;  he  says,  **  it  was  usual  to  have  £abi« 
let  dinners,  but  the  dinners  were  ruspended 
n  consequence  of  the  king's  death.  I  deter- 
nined  to  have  a  cabinet  dinner  on  the  23rd  of 
February  last ;  on  the  Friday  or  Saturday  pre- 
ledittg,  cards  of  invitation  were  issued  for 
that  purpose.  I  saw  the  last  witness  Hiden  in 
lie  park,  near  Grosvenoi^-gate,  on  Tuesday  the 
12nd  of  February,"  His  lordship  is  not  quite 
positive,  but  thinks  it  was  between  two  and 
three  o'clock  he  saw  him ;  he  gave  his  lordship 
I;  letter,  aiid  upon  the  letter  being  shown  to 
trim,  he  said,  **  that  is  the  letter  "  his  lordship 
khen  says,  ^'I  had  some  conversation  with 
Hiden ;  I  asked  him  if  he  had  given  his  name 
ind' Address  in  the  letter ;  I  desired  to  have  his 
name  and  address,  and  he  gave  it  me ;  on  his 
sirpressing  a  wish  to  have  some  further  com- 
■luliftcation  with  me,  I  saw  him  again  by  ap- 

Siintment  the  next  morning  in  the  ring  m 
yde«nark  ;  I  appointed  to  meet  him,  as  he 
leemed  to  be  afraid  of  continuing  the  conver* 
lAion  with  me ;  I  went  to  Hyde-park,  and  met 
btm  at  Grosvenor-gate;  I  told  him  to  go  on  to 
^  ring,  and  I  went  on  among  the  plantations 
in  or^er  to  avoid  hit  being  seep.    Tbe  dinner 

VOL.  xxxni. 


A.  D.  !«2a  nigO 

did  not  take  place ;  but  I  had'  given  directions 
to  the  servants  to  provide  it  as  if  it  was  to  take 
place ;  a  little  before  eight  I  was  dining  at  the 
earl  of  Liverpool's,  and  I  sent  a  note  to  inform 
my  principal  servant  that  the  dinner  would  not 
take  place,  and  the  dinner  was  of  course  put 
aside." 

John  Baker,  his  lordship's  principal  servant, 
says,  at  a  little  after  eight  o'clock,  ne  received 
information,  that'  his  lordship  and  the  privy 
council  would  not  dine  there ;  he  says,  **  op  to 
that  period  every  preparation  for  the  dinner 
was  going  on ;  nobody  had  an  idea  to  the  con- 
trary ;  I  believe  there  was  a  party  that  night  at 
the  archbishop  of  York's,  whose  house  is  next 
door ;  as  I  saw  carriages  stopping  at  the  door, 
I  thought  there  was  to  be  a  ainner  there  diat 
day,  and  that  some  gentlemen  had  come  there ; 
it  was  rather  sooner  than  lord  Harrowby's 
dinner  hour;  it  was  between  sir  and  seven 
o'clock." 

Richard  Monday  says ,  he  lives  at  No.  8,  in 
Cato-streel.  He  says,  *^  I  know  the  stable  in 
Cato-street;  on  the  23rd  of  February  last  I  saw 
persons  go  into  that  stable ;  the  first  was  about 
three  o'clock  in  the  afternoon ;  I  saw  Harrison* 
in  the  stable.  I  came  home  from  work  about 
twenty  minutes  or  half  an  hour  after  four,  and 
I  saw  Davidson  walking  up  and  down  the 
archway  that  leads  to  the  stable ;  I  went,  into 
my  house,  and  I  saw  Davidson  again  about  six 
o'clock,  with  two  lighted  candles  in  his  hand." 
It  is  said  that  one  candle  was  in  the  stable 
and  another  up  stairs ;  it  is  very  probable  that 
tliev  had  but  two  candles;  however  that  is  of 
little  consequence.  **  I  saw  two  going  in  and' 
three  coming  out,  and  moving  backwards  and 
forwards ;"  that  does  not  appear  to  be  very 
material,  for  there  is  na  douot  that  they  were 
there,  and  he  saw  them  hovering  about  and 
going  in  and  out. 

Then  George  Cay  lock  says,  he  saw  Harrison 
go  into  the  stable ;  Harrison  told  him  that  he 
bad  taken  two  chambers  and  was  cleaningthem  ;- 
he  saw  five-and-twenty  people  go  into  the  stable 
that  evening. 

Then  George  Thomas  Joseph  Ruthven  is 
called ;  he  gives  you  a  description  of  what  pas- 
sed in  Cato-street.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is 
necessary  forme  to  trouble  you  with  an  account 
of  the  transactions  there ;  he  found  them  in 
the  place ;  he  and  Ellis  went  up  first ;  the  other 
poor  man,  Smithers,  full  of  courage,  pushed 
himself  forwards  and  was  killed  by  Thistlewood. 
With  respect  to  the  arms  and  ammunition,  I 
will  state  to  you  presently  of  what  they  consist. 
A  very  serious  remark,  no  doubt,  arises  on  the 
circumstance  of  their  being  all  found  there 
and  the  outrageous  resistance  which  was  made  ^ 
-^the  bloody  resistance  which  was  made,  and 
which  was  attempted  to  be  made  a  great  deal 
more  bloody  than  it  turned  out — ^wbether  that ' 
is  evidence  of  a  purpose  beyond  the  destruo* 
tipn  of  ministers  (the  mere  conception  of  which 
is  not  a  capital  crime,  though  a  very  great 
offence  in  a  moral  point  of  view)  you  will  coik 
aider.^ 

4Q 


1831]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qfJokn  Ttomoi  Bruid 


\m 


Then  James  Ellis  sajfs,  tliat  the  momem 
Ibat  he  saw  Smithers  stabbed,  he  fired  his 
pistol;  the  pistol  did  not  taJce  effect,  bat 
missed  the  man,  the  candles  were  then  ex- 
tiDguished ;  the  flash  of  his  pistol  was  the  last 
light  that  he  saw.  Ruthven  says  there  were 
several  candles.  Adams  says  there  were  only 
two ;  and  when  jrou  consider  that  the  only  fire 
be  saw  after  that,  was  the  flash  of  his  pistol,  it 
should  seem  that  there  were  Dot  many  candles 
in  the  room ;  however,  as  to  that  contradiction 
between  Ruthven  and  Adams,  it  is  of  little 
consequence.  Ruthven  said  there  were  four 
or  five  on  the  bench,  and  two  or  three  in  the 
Uttle  room.  It  appears  that  there  was  great 
confusion;  and,  perhaps,  that  may  account 
for  a  good  deal  of  inaccuracy.  Ellis  says 
tiiere  were  two  or  three ;  one  says  there  were 
certain  words  spoken  from  below ;  and  another 
says  there  were  other  words  to  the  same  pur- 
port. You  will  see,  whether  that  is  such  a 
contradiction  as  afi^ts,  in  your  minds,  the 
credit  to  which  the  other  parts  of  the  case  may 
entitle  Adams. 

Westcoatt,  Wright,  and  Champion,  who  are 
also  oflieers,  are  called  to  prove  fttcts  of  the 
same  nature. 

Then  Lieutenant  Fitxdarence  gave  his  evi- 
dence in  the  way  in  which  you  saw  and  heard ; 
his  conduct,  and  that  of  his  men,  was  most 
gallant;  he  states  what  they  found  on  these 
persons. 

Samuel  Hercules  Taunton  is  then  called ;  he 
states  that  be  went  to  Brunt's  lodgings  the 
following  morning,  and  found  those  things 
.which  he  produces* 

Then  Ruthven  is  called  again,  and  he  enume- 
rates the  thin^  and  states  where  thev  were 
found ;  if  it  is  necessary  that  I  should  read 
them  to  you,  I  will  do  it  with  great  oleasure ; 
but  the  great  object  is,  to  show  that  mere  was 
an  assembly  of  these  men  armed  with  a  great 
number  of  arms,  and  that  they  made  a  most 
Uoody  and  outrageous  resistance.  You  must, 
of  course,  draw  your  own  inferences  from  the 
nature  of  that  resistance,  as  it  can  be  applied 
10  the  case  of  high  treason. 

Tbe  quantity  of  things  found  seems  to  be  a 
considemble  ingredient  in  the  evidence.  You 
see  the  defence  is  this ;  we  intended  to  assassi- 
nate the  ministers,  and  to  commit  plunder 
afterwards.  With  respect  to  the  plunder,  there 
is  no  evidence  of  that ;  with  respect  to  the  kil- 
ling his  majesty's  ministers,  the  prisoner^  as 
well  as  his  counsel,  admits  the  intention,  and 
the  evidence  proves  it;  in  the  loft  they  found 
tbirty-eight  ball-cartridges,  a  fire-lock  and 
bayonet,  one  powder-flask,  three  pistols,  ooe 
sword,  six  bi^onet  spikes  and  doth  belt,  one 
blunderbuss,  one  pistol,  fourteen  bs^onet 
spikes,  and  three  pointCMi  files,  one  bayonet, 
another  bayonet  spike  and  one  swonl  scabbard, 
ojie  carbine  and  bayonet,  two  swocd^  one  bul- 
let, ten  hand-grenades,  two  fire-balls,  one  laige 
grenade  and  bayonet,  one  rope  li^der,  one 
sivord'Stick,  forty  ball-cartridges,  one  bayonet,' 
and  three  loose  balls.    They  found,  in  the 


sUUe,  ia  tbe  pocket  of  BradbniQ,  lix  brit 
cartridges,  three  balls,  and  vome  string  nt 
round  him  to  act  asabdt;  the fistd that  1U 
fifed,  the  pistol  that  Wilson  attempted  tofiR^ 
a  blunderbuss,  sword,  belt,  and  Ksbbuda 
the  stable,  a  pistol  in  the  stable,  SDOIhei  ft 
tol  in  the  staole,  a  sword  in  the  staUe,  ties 
large  sticks  with  ferrules;  in  the  pocket fl{ 
Tidd  they  found  twobaIl-caitiidge9,uidnaA 
him  a  leather  belt;  two  ball -cartridges  &di| 
the  stable,  and  ten  ditto  in  NswabiiflMtRet] 
one  muflket  cut  down,  and  ooe  iword  fi«s 
Davidson;  one  haversack,  cross-belts,  a| 
pricker,  baTonet,  scebbard,  cartouch-box,  v 
abelt  round  the  body  of  Daridsoo;  twohra* 
sacks,  one  belt,  and*  tin  powder^^iei  AM 
Ings;  four  pistol  balk^  one  pistol  key,  a^i 
knife-case  from  Ings ;  one  haversacki  coiliii' 
ing  seventeen  ball-caitridges,  thies  Ub,  ok 
pistol  flint,  one  pricker;  one  worm  {»dn«a| 
cartridges,  one  knife,  and  a  tom-scfes;  *| 
stick  cut  to  receive  a  banronet,  left  ia  m 
publio4)ouse ;  Uiese  were  fonad  ia^^i'** 
and  the  loft  above,  except  the  slid leftH" 
public  house, 

I  will  now  read,  gentlemen,  whit  waifcw^ 
Brunt's  house  :^<*Inanish  basket,  niMffps^ 
with  rope-yam,  tar  and  other  isgrewi 
some  steel  filings  in  a  paper,  abost  m^ 
ounce."  TTie  serieant  told  us  the  «e «  « 
filings  which  I  did  not  know  befcwj* 
another  rush  basket  were  fousd  fo«rgM>"'R 
three  papers  of  rope-yaro,  tar  and  other  sf» 
dients ;  two  bags  of  powder,  ooe  pow«Vj 
each ;  five  flannel  bags,  empty,  ooe  psptf " 
powder,  one  leathern  bag  oontaiuogij^ 
three  balls,  one  iron  pot,  ooe  p&e  bttd^ 
These  were  left  at  that  house;  tbej'^Jf 
wanted,  certainly,  for  the  aasassi»att»  *  " 
king's  ministers,  because  they  ^•'•."•'T 
them.  Then,  at  Tidd's,  which  yoskfj* 
been  described  as  the  d^pdt,  they  foonii  *! 
haveraack,  434  balls,  ITl  ball-cartnfl|*" 


of  powder,  ooe  pound  each,  ^**"'^^ 
into  which  powder  might  have  ^*' fjL 
small  bag,  with  tin  powder-tok  ^^JT 
powder,  sixty-eigbt  IniUs,  fear  fl*"^?^^ 
seven  fHke-liandles ;  also  a  boi,  cosMdm^ 
ball-cartridges.''  .    -^ 

'  Serjeant  Hanson  is  then  called;  M  ¥^ 
one  of  those  hand-grenades  ftr  yoef  ^^ 
tion,  and  you  see,  from  the  inipectioa 
its  nature  and  Uie  terrible  yniagy^^^ 
might  arise  from  such  an  ia^msMBt*^^ 
He  says,  that  the  flannel  bi«s,  «f  "^f^ 
in  them>  aro  in  imitation  of  caitn^g^  Tg 
pounder,  so  that  something  was  af*^, 
may  be  supposed,  besides  the  •fl"fc3i 
cannon  weie  haidly  to  he  ei^^cted  «•  «rj 
to  lord  Hanjo why's  din«owto«'  frji 
sut^a,  '* )  examined  them;  ^|^^f7^ ^ 
aictly.a  pound  of  veiy good  P^^T^ir' ^ 
not  006  flannel,  bat  seig«»  ^  ^l!Sh.  I 
this  would  ansvMr  Om  fW^^'^^ 


13333 


J&r  High  TreatoH, 


A.D.  1890; 


tl334 


tave  examined  ttie  fire-balls;  there  is  a  dif- 
erence  in  some  of  theniy  bat  they  are  generally 
omposed  of  oakam,  tar,  and  resin,  and  g^ne- 
ally  brimstone ;  but  I  found  one  without  brini- 
tone ;  the  steel  filings  would  be  part  of  the 
oraposition  of  the  priming  oi  the  fuse,  the 
ire-palls  would  set  any  wood  on  fire,  and 
rould  bum  three  or  four  minutes,  according 
o  their  size ;  if  thrown  into  barracks,  with  hay 
md  straw,  tliey  certainly  would  occasion  a 
ionilagratioo.  He  says,  the  grenade!  in  the 
ttmy  are  covered  with  iron;  these  grenades 
lo  not  seem  as  if  they  had  been  made  by  a 
oilitaiy  roan ;  but  tliey  would  effect  a  great 
leal  of  mischief."  Then,  he  says, ''  the  more 
lard  they  are  bound,  the  greater  will  be  the 
tzplosion."  Then  be  took  the  fuse  out  of 
»ne  of  the  hand-grenades,  and  poured  the 
K>wder  out ;  he  says,  *^  those  he  weighed  con- 
ained  three  ounces  and  a  half  of  powder,  and 
his  appeared  to  be  the  same;  that  quantity 
ras  more  than  Would  be  sufficient  for  a  nine- 
nch  shell,  and  quite  siiffitlent  to  explode  th^ 
^enade  in  which  it  was.  In  this  grenade 
here  were  26  pieces  of  iron ;  they  would  fly 
ound  the  room  like  so  many  shot,  and  were 
luita  sufficient  to  destroy  or  rdaifti  fifteen 
persons  in  a  room ;  they  explode  within  half  a 
oinute  after  their  being  a-light.'' 

Gentlemen,  this  is  the  evidence  for  the 
>rosecution :  for  the  prisoners,  you  heard  the 
wo  eloquent  speeches  of  the  learned  counsel ; 
rou  have  heard  also  the  prisoner  state  his 
»wn  case.  I  em  sure  you  paid  all  the  atten- 
lon  which  was  due  to  it,  and  perhaps  it  did 
lot  make  the  impression  upon  you  which  you 
vished  the  prisoner's  speech  to  make  upon 
four  minds ;  but  you  are  to  deal  with  it,  gen- 
lemen,  as  you  feel  to  be  proper ;  you  heand  it, 
ind  will  consider  it.  There  is  no  evidence  offer- 
d  ibr  the  prisoner ;  the  case  lies  entirely  upon 
be  evidence  for  the  Crown,  and  the  arguments 
m  both  sides,  which  arguments  you  had  the 
goodness  to  attend  to,  and  I  am  sure  they 
Dade  the  impression  upon  you  which  they 
Night.  With  respect  to  comment,  I  see  very 
attle  to  trouble  you  with ;  indeed,  hardly  a 
ivord.  As  1  said  before,  there  is  here  proved 
md  admitted  a  conspiracy  to  do  a  roost  nefa- 
ious  act :  it  is  broadly  stated  to  us,  that  the 
>bject  of  the  piiaoner  and  his  associates  were 
o  destroy  fifteen  of  the  king's  roinist'ers  as  (hey 
lat  at  dinner,  in  the  unsuspecting  hour  of 
fteerfiilness,  by  a  degree  of  violence,  and  in 
die  prosecution  of  a  plan  which  one  cannot 
ihink  of  without  ahuddertiig ;  that  is  admitted. 
b  thu  all  the  pMir^ese?  If  that  is  all  the 
miiose  of  these  men,  the  prisoner  is  not 
fiiilty  of  high  treaeon ;  but  yon  are  to  ask 
H>Qrselves^  gentlenetiy  whenher  that  could  be 
lie  sole  purpose :  why  afe  the  fifteen  princiMl 
■jaisten  of  the  king  to  be  destroyed  in  this 
nav  f  If  you  attend  to  the  evidence  of  Adams, 
md  many  of' the  otheri,  thete  is  no  question  at 
dl  that  there  was  an  ulterior  plan  and  inten- 
!bn,  and  that  ulterior  plan  and  intention  proves 
lirectiy,  if  you  believe  the  evidence,  the  trea* 


r 


ton  charged  against  the  prisoner  at  the  bar 
It  is  stated,  that  it  was  an  absurd  project;  s6 
absurd,  thai  it  is  not  only  improbable,  but  im- 
possible, that  it  should  be  ascribed  to  any 
reasonable  being :  it  has  been  said,  very  truly, 
that  the  attempt  or  the  project  to  destroy  the 
king's  ministers  is  such,  that  one  knows  not 
bow  te  deal  with  the  supposition  of  it,  but  it  is 
proved — ^it  is  true ;  the  prisoner  has  stated  it. 
and  his  counsel  are  obliged,  by  the  force  of 
evidence,  to  admit  it.  But  then  they  contend, 
that  they  entertained  no  other  project :  you  will 
judge  whether  that  is  the  case.  The  question 
is,  not  whether  these  people  were  likely  to 
succeed  in  their  atrocious  plans,  but  whethefr 
they  entered  into  them?  Did  they  compass^ 
or  imagine  or  intend  those  crimes  with  which 
the  indi<itment  charges  the  prisoner  at  the  bar  ? 

Does  the  evidence  prove  it  ?  if  not,  there  is 
no  question,  aentlemen,  how  the  verdict  ou^ht 
to  be  given.  If  vritli  all  the  great  attention  with 
which  I  have  observed  you  consider  tlie  evi^r 
dence  and  the  addresses  of  the  prisoner*s  coun- 
sel and  the  prisoner  himself— if,  1  say,  you  have 
a  reaiKniable  doubtupon  the  subject,  you  ought, 
as  in  all  criminal  tnals,  to  give  the  prisoner 
the  benefit  of  that  doubt ;  but  if,  giving  :|rour 
attention  gravely  to  this  important  subject, 
you  are  satisfied  that  the  charge  is  proved,  I 
need  not  tell  you,  gentlemen,  that  it  is  your 
duty  to  find  him  guilty.  You  will  now  con- 
sider, and  give  your  verdict.  I  am  sure  yott 
will  give  it  according  to  the  best  of  your  judg- 
toent,  and  according  to  the  necessary  inference 
to  be  drawn  from  the  evidence  you  have  heard. 

A  Juryman  (Mr.  GooefcWWJ-— My  lord,  1 
have  a  doubt  in  my  mind  on  a  point  of  law. 
I  conceive,  as  a  juror,  I  am  bound  to  receive 
the  law  from  your  lordship.  Your  lordship 
has  called  our  particular  attention  to  the  first 
and  third  counts ;  I  am  sure  your  lordship  has 
most  conscientiously  done  it ;  but  at  the  same 
time,  I  wish  to  ask  the  opinion  of  your  lord- 
ship, whether  should  the  evidence  bear  the 
construction,  that  an  actual  arming  had  taken 
place,  that  a  resistance  has  been  made  to  the 
civil  authority,  that  in  law  constitutes  a 
•levying  of  war  f 

Lord  Ckirf  Baron.'^l  wish  clearly  to  under- 
stand you;  have  the  goodness  to  state  the 
question  again. 

Mr.  GoocfcWa.— Whether,  if  the  evidence 
should  bear  out  the  opinion  that  an  actual 
arming  had  taken  place,  and  that  a  resistance 
had  been  rosfde  to  the  civil  authority,  that 
actual  arming,  and  that  resistance,  constitute 
the  crime  of  levying  war  ? 

Lord  (M^  &roii^— Not  resistance  merely  to 
the  civil  power,  unless  you  are  of  opinion  it  is 
an  arming  vrith  the  view  stated  in  the  indict- 
ment. 

Mr.  GoM2cAi2i.— The  question  is  intended  td 
include  that,  it  being  an  arming  with  a  view 
to  oblige  his  majesty  to  change  his  measures 
t^  force  of  arms. 


13351       I  GEORGE  IV. 


TrM  of  John  Tkomoi  Bnad 


tiaM 


Lord  Chief  Barm,--Tkkt  is  a  conspicing  to 
.kvy  war. 

Mr.  Gooddttld.^1  do  not,  my  lord,  ask 
whether  that  is  a  conspiring  to  levy  war,  bat 
whether  that  beoomes  a  levying  of  war  under 
the  fourth  count. 

Lord  Chief  Banm,^l  thought  it  best  to  sub- 
mit to  your  consideration  the  first  and  third 
counts,  because  I  think  there  is  less  difficulty 
upon  those  subjecu  than  any  others ;  the  first 
and  third  counts,  beyond  all  question,  charge 
high  treason  under  the  act  of  his  late  majesty. 

Mr.  GooddU&L— At  the  same  time  I  should 
feel  it  my  duty,  as  a  juror,  to  gite  a  Terdict  on 
tiie  whole  indictment  if  I  may  ask  your  lord- 
ship's  opinion  upon  the  law. 

Lord  GUef  Boron.— I  shall  be  very  happy  to 
^▼e  you  any  assistance  in  my  power ;  it  there 
is,  in  your  opinion,  evidence  of  a  levying  of 
war,  it  will  be  under  that  count;  do  I  make 
myself  understood  ? 

Mr.  GoMicfttU.— Perfectly,  my  lord. 

[The  jury  retired  at  twenty  minutes  before 
four,  and  returned  into  court  in  twenty 
minutes,  with  a  verdict,  finding  the  pri- 
soner Guilty  on  the  third  and  fourth 
counts.] 

Mr.  Attomev  GCTfra/.— My  lord,  I  yester- 
day  *  called  the  attention  of  the  Court  to  a 
publication  of  the  trial  of  Arthur  Thistlewood 
m  a  Sunday  newspaper,  called  The  Observer, 
in  violation  of  the  order  which  had  been  made 
by  the  Court  previously  to  that  trial.  I  was 
not  then  in  a  situation  to  bring  this  matter 
formally  before  your  lordship,  not  having  been 
furnished  with  the  documents  necessary  to 
bring  the  matter  in  such  a  shape  before  the 
Court  as  that  they  might  be  enabled  to  deal 
with  it.  I  have  now  an  affidavit,  stating  the 
purchase  of  one  of  the  Observer  newspapers, 
at  the  shop  of  the  prdfrietor,  Mr.  Clement,  in 
the  county  of  Middlesex,  on  Monday  the  24th 
of  April.  I  am  also  furnished  with  a  certificate 
from  the  Stamp-office,  accompanying  a  copy  of 
the  ori^al  affidavit  filed  at  that  office  by  Mr. 
Clement,  in  which  he  states  that  he  is  the  pub- 
lisher and  sole  proprietor  of  that  paper.  I 
apprehend,  therefore,  that  your  lordships  have 
evidence  now  before  you,  not  only  that  Mr. 
Clement  is  the  proprietor  and  publisher  of  the 
paper  in  question,  but  that  he  actually  sold 
this  paper ;  and  (if  it  were  necessary)'  that  he 
sold  it  with  a  full  knowledge  of  the  injunction 
of  the  Court,  for  I  have  only  to  call  your  lord- 
ship's attention  to  a  passage  in  the  newspaper 
itself,  to  satisfy  you  that  he  has  done  it  with  a 
fill  knowledge  of  the  order  made  previously 
to  the  trial,  for  he  states,  that  after  the  jury 
were  sworn,  the  lord  chief  justice  then  present 
thus  delivered  himself  i—*^  As  there  are  seve- 
ral persons  chaiged  with  the  offence  of  high 
treason  by  this  indictment,  whose  trials  are 


likely  to  be  taken  one  after  the  other,  1  thak 
it  is  necessaiy,  in  funheiance  of  ja8tioe,itiNiIf 
to  prohibit  the  publication  of  the  praceedags 
of  this  or  any  otner  day  until  the  wIk^  of  tk 
trials  shall  be  brought  to  a  cobcIusiod;  hi 
highly  necessary  to  the  purposes  of  justice  ila 
the  public  mind,  or  the  jurymea  who  are  ^ 
af^er  to  serve,  should  not  he  infloeoced  by  (k 
publication  of  any  of  the  proceedings  yM 
may  take  place  until  the  whole  of  those  pro- 
ceedings shall  be  finished ;  it  is  expected  tbt 
all  persons  therefore  will  attend  to  this  ad- 
monition." 

I  deem  this  to  be  a  mostJagiant,  wflHaiJ 
daring  violation  of  the  ordEw  of  the  Coyn;aH 
considering  the  benevolent  motive  wbid  »> 
tuated  the  minds  of  your  lordskipe  upon  tbt 
occasion,  I  think  it  would  he  unbeconuDg  ia 
me,  having  this  feet  bronght  to  ay  notice,  sol 
to  bring  it  under  the  consideration  of  iheOwl, 
that  they  may  deal  with  this  person  as  th^ 
their  wisdom  shall  think  fit  IshaUtheiefcn 
move  that  these  affidavits  be  wcei'*^».  ?J 
that  your  lordships  may  proceed  to  ponisktw 

Sinon  for  his  contempt  m  such  nimienstfct 
ourt  may  thii&  proper. 
Lord  CUrf  Bamnv— Let  the  affidtfils  br 
read. 

The  affidavit  of  George  HoblHck,JJ 
Yeat's-court,  Carey-street,  »w«Mn»J 
Elijah  Litchfield,  of  lincohiVim^UJ- 
man,  was  read;  George  HoWitA^ 
that  he  had  on  the  24th  ii»««^  PJ^^ 
the  newspaper  in  question,  at  the  rtjj 
Wittiam  InneU  Clement,  No.  1«9,  S« 


■*•-• 


f  See  the  commencement  of  the  present  trial. 


the  person  whose  name  is  subicnWw 
certificate  annexed  sign  the  same. 

The  certificate  annexed  was  reaj^ 

taining  a  copy  of  the  affidavit  of  wu^ 

Innell  Clement  (sworn  at  theSttoP*^ 

on  the  22nd  of  January  1816)  diathen| 

the  printer,  publisher,  and  sole  projne^ 

a  certain  newspaper ;  that  the  pn«^  ^^ 

paper  was  proposed  to  1»  P""Si,A, 

office  at  his  dwelUng-hoosc,  No  IW^^^ 

Strand,  and  that  it  was  intttnledW"' 

server.  « 

Mx.  Justice  mcAarAo».-*rr.  AttorD^^J 

ral,  have  you  looked  at  the  wl  «  P^ 

to  see  that  the  copy  of  the  affidawt,  socs"^ 

is  evidence  in  all  cases  t 

Mr.  JUom^  Oeund^lm^^^ 
lofd;  the  9th  section  of  the  ^^^^ 
cap.  78  diiecU  that  the  affidaij *«»« 
and  certified  copies  diall  in  «U  V''^^^ 
civil  and  criminal,  ioadiinimj^^ 
and  so  on,  be  received  and  ^^^sL^ 
dusive  evidence ;  we  add  to  ^^p^ 
actual  sale  of  the  pq>er  at  thedio?««"^»^ 
son  against  whom  I  apply* 

Ut,  Justice  JMrnAo^r^^T^''^ 
diitiiictjnoUtti^ 


13371 


Jw  l%A  TfMfoa. 


Mr.  ilHonwy  GoMvtrf.— That  b«  may  b« 
IMinished  for  bis  contempt  in  ludi  way  as  the 
Court  may  thiok  right 

Mr.  Jitftice  J{tcAartboii.<-It  win  be  proper  to 
direct  the  attendaoce  of  the  party,  that  we  may 
see  whether  he  has  any  excuse  to  offer. 

Mr,  Attorney  QeneraL — ^I  will  apply  in  the 
first  instance  lor  a  rule  to  shew  canscy  if  your 
lordship  pleases. 

Lsrrd  Ckkf  Boron.— This  is  undoubtedly 
ateiy  grave  accusation ;  the  order  was  certainly 


A.  n.  laso.         tjsSB 

made  after  gnat  eonsideractioa  by  the  Conrt. 
with  a  view  to  prevent  michief  and  injustice ; 
nothing  can  be  more  prejudicial  to  justice  than 
to  publish  proceedings  of  this  description  in  the 
course  of  an  inquiry.  The  person  must  ba 
ordered  to  attend  here  on  Friday  mornings  al^ 
the  sitting  of  the  court*  *    ' 

*See  .the  farther  proceedings  upon  this 
subject  on  Friday  April  the  28lh  at  the  cod* 
chunon  of  the  trial  ot  William  Davidson,  ani 
Richard  Tidd,  iii/rii. 


mmmtt 


705i  The  whole  Proceedings  on  the  Trial  of  William  Davidson 
and  Richard  Tidd,  for  High  Treason^  before  the  Court 
holden  under  a  Special  Commission^  for  the  Trial  of  certain 
Offences  therein  mentioned,  on  the  26th  and  97th  days  of. 
April :  1  Geo.  IV.  a.  d.  1820.* 


SESSIONS  HOUS^  OLD  BAILEY, 
WfiDKsaPAYy  ApaiL  26th|  1820. 

jihe  Hon*  nf r*  Soton  Gorrow^ 

The  Hon.  Mr.  Jtutke  Beti. 

The  Common  Seneantf 

And  others,  his  Majesty's  Jnstibes,  Sec 

Mr.  Borvfi  Oorrom, — Gentlemen  of  the  Jury, 
it  may  peihaps  have  surprised  you  that^me 
are  sittmg  and  voa  are  in  Court,  J^tf^^ 
not  have  proceeaed  to  business.  'S^Court 
are  so  anxious  to  show  that  we  attendwith  the 
ffreatest  solicitude  to  your  cooTenience,  thai  I 
dunk  it  proper  to  state,  thai  tiie  pause  is  at  the 
solicitation  of  the  learned  counsel  for  the  pri^ 
soner.  I  am  sure  that  you  will  feel  it  proper, 
that  we  should  wait  a  few  moments  to  give 
eifect  to  diat  solicitation. 

Mr.  CHnoomi.—- My  lord,  the  prisoner 
Davidson,  has  no  objection  to  uniting  in  his 
ekallenges  with  the  prisoner  Tidd,  whose  trial 
the  Attorney-general  had  proposed  to  take  nezt« 

Mr.  BarDfi&amw^-*-4Cjentlemen,Ihavenow 
to  communicate  that  to  you  to  which  it  would 
have  been  improper  to  advert  before.  The 
learned  counsel  for  the  prisoners  (whose  exer- 
tions have  been  witnessed  more  than  once) 
have  thought  it  necessaiy  to  communicate  with 
ihem,  whnber  it  would  be  necessary  to  pursue 
the  course  of  severing  their  challen^pos,  or 
whether  two  of  them  would  take  their  trial 
\j  the  same  jury.  We  have  in  effect  gained 
time  by  the  pause,  for  he  has  communicated 
to  me,  that  the  two  next  prisoners  are  content 
not  to  sever  their  challenges,  but  to  be  tried 
together. 

*  See  the  preceding  trials  of  Thistlewood, 
IpgSi  an4.BnmU 


[Richard  Tldd  and  William  Davidson  wei^ 
set  to  the  Bar.] 

The  Junr  Panel  was  called  over,  commeiio* 
ing  with  no.  145. 

JBAoord  ChtnUf  ttonemaaon,  diallenged  t>y  ilio 

prisoner. 
Jom  Majfotf  gentleman,  challenged  by  thd 

prisoner. 
DaM  Pom,  esquire^  challenged  by  the  pn» 

soner.  * 

Bkhard  IVc&er,  dieesemonger,  challenged  by 

the  prisoner. 
I%omai  BeaclUm^  farmer,  challenged  by  tha 

prisoner. 
Bobert  Cedtjff  rigger,  duUenged  by  the  pri- 
soner. 
TkomoM  Tagg^  psaniy  and  coadb-mtter,  chaU 

lenaad  by  die  Crown. 
Jlin(<£no  £ri(olber,  vintner,  excused  onaocovnt 

of  iUness. 
Honanwi  WaUon^  gentleman,  challenged  by 

the  prisoner. 
Ooorp  Birroiof,  silversmith  challenged  by  the 

pnsoner. 
Eanard  JEBk,  gentleman  and  stock^broker, 

cluillenged  by  the  prisoner. 
Bawmm  Bfyti,  organ-builder,  challenged  by 

the  prisoner. 
miiiom  Clmtf  feether-dresaer,  cfailleDgaa  by 

the  prisoner. 
Mm  Jackmmf  glast-cutter,  diallenged  bytiie 

prisoner. 
JiAn  Beckj  gentleman  and  seedsman, 

lenged  by  the  prisoner. 
Felix  Booih^  esquire  and  distiller,  diallenged. 

by  the  prisc^^. 
Chatki  Benham^  maiketrgardener,  diallenged. 

by  the  Cro! 
Samvel  LUi^jf^  baker^  excuaad  on  acoottn^ 

of  illness. 


ISSOl       1  GEORGB  IV. 


Trial  ofWUiktm  Davidson 


[U4a 


SVnmi  iMiw,  siltcninithy  cHftHi^fegcd  by  th«    tictilur  rfeasom  may  oecuiMi  in  tAJwiioQ  to  a 

Crown.  partieolv  individBAl,  bat  f  cannot  take  it  it 

FhUtdi  DotUl,  esq.^chall^it^  by  tke  prisoner,    granted  that  on  a  future  trial  yon  migjituot  be 
WUikm  Fercif^  olasterer,  awom.  ■  called  upon  to  serve  with  a  ready  usent  m 

JMii  Gtsrte  Hounden^  fuse-cutter,  swoni«  ■  both  sLdas^  therefore  I  cannot  dispense  lilb 

ArckiMdEitcheyf  stone-mason,  cbaHengedby    your  attendance  on  this  occauon;  I  wish  I 

the  Crown. 
John  J^ifVy  gentleman,  sworn. 
Ckarla  ElUm  Prttcott,  esqnire,  sworn. 
StrApihH  Rogfrfy  ftimier,  sworn. 
Itkkatd  Lapeodcy-e^wt  andcow^keeper,  diak 

lenged  by  the  prisoner. 
George  Fox,  sawyer,  challenged  by  the  Crown.' 
Wiliitom  Acockf  plumber,  diallenged  by  the 

Crown. 
Edward  Cudf  carpenter,  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
Qeor^  Goidingy  surveyor,  sworn. 
RoSert  RoberU,  oilman/  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
William  Bound^  fbtnder,  dudlenged  by  (he 

Crown* 
Charla  Pogty  e^uire  and  merchant,  sworn. 
WiOiam  &k,  farmer,  challenged  by  flia  pri- 
soner. 
John  Leukf  watch-maker,  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
Edipord   Flowefy  Mquire   and   schoolmaster, 

challenged  by  the  prisoner. 
JoAa  BtLny  gentleman  and  talloW'Cbandler, 

challenged  by  the  Crown. 
John  Taungy  gentleman  and  scale-malter,  sworn. 
StMnrd  Prkc.  gentleman  and  currier,  chaU 

ranged  by  tne  prisoner. 
Jamu  CarVy  joiner,  challenged  by  the  prisoner. 
WUliam  Edgecombe,  joif^er,  ckafleng«d  by  (be 

prisoner. 
Kkhard  Etnerr^  cooper,  challenged  by  (Ire 

Crown. 
Sl^hth  Gmad,  bricklayer,  challenge  by  tlie 

Crown. 
Thomm  Btm/ntf   mason,'  challenged  by  the 

Crown. 
WUliam  Butlety  baker,  sworn. 
WUliam    Benn^   farmer,   challenged   by   ^e 

Crown. 
Jokn  Bapety  gentleman,   challenged  by  the 

CroWn. 
fFiUiam  Norton^  sawyer,  challenged  by  fhc 

prisoner. 
William  BloMtotiy  gentleman,  challenged  by  ^c 

Crown. 
ThomoM  LaUr,  bookseller,  challenged  by  fhe 

Crown. 


Mr.  Letter.—JAy  lord,  as  this  is  the  thhd 
time  that  I  have  been  challenged,  *may  I 
teqatSi  (o  be  dismissed. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow,'^!  can  onlv  assure  yCu, 
iti  the  language  of  the  lord  chief  baron,  that 
though  the  objection  has  obtained  the  name 
cf  challenging  the  juror,  it  ought  not  to  be 
considered  as  giving  any  offence  to  him.    Par- 

*  He  had  been  challenged  in  the  previous 
cascjr  of  Arthur  ThiStlewood,  aad  John  Thomas 
Brunt. 


could. 

Mr.  Attonuy'Genend.^'Then  are  sefcni 
centtemen  .sworn  on  the  present  jafj,  who 
have  been  challenged  on  one  side  or  the  otber, 
dn  preceding  trials. 

Mr.  Baron  ^omw.— From  circnntflilicci 
of  a  private  nature  I  have  not  been  able  to 
attena  in  the  eariy  part  of  die  praoeediop 
bere,  but  that  whiji  I  stated  as  the  remit  d 
prwrtkal  ezperieiicft  is  eocenplified  on  tM 
present  occasion ;  for  gentlemen  who  hivt 
Dten  cbiilengei  en  fotmer  trials,  are  sworn  te 
try  the  prisoners  now  at  the  bar :  if  tbey  vm 
out  of  any  .supposed  incapadty  or  party  i»iB- 
ciple,  those  objections  would  contiDiie;  foN 
ther  information  may  induce  those,  protedioK 
the  interesiB  of  the  public,  or  of  theaocssed, 
to  do  in  other  instances  that  ^hich  they  «^ 
pear  to  have  done  in  several  instances  abea^* 
Jooqdi  Sheffield,  esquire  and  ironmoDger,s#oiBi 
Jo$q^  ifyieif  bhddayer,  challefiged  b/  da 

Crown. 
Roberi  Stephemon,  anchorsmitb,diaIleiigadl9 

the  Crown. 
Biehai^  Bbmi,  gendeman,  chadlengd  by  tti 

prisoner. 
Laac  Grimit,  baicer,  chaRenged  by  the  Crows. 
WUUam  Churddll,  gentleotfatf  and  ^ine  aer- 

chant,  swom. 
Tkmai  Wdkintohy  femef,  Chrflenged  by  fti 

priSotMf. 
Samvel  Ekh,  tobacconist,  diiffleoged  bf  v 

prisoner.  ^ 

Edmimd  ComngHdgef  wafet-glfder,  chalfcsiefl 

by  the  Crown. 

Wikak  S^ore,  ikrmer,  ehaSeUkged  by  w 

CSrotTn,  _    ^ 

Jo$iah  Bartholomew,  vnttcMMker,  didksF 

by  tbe  prisonei^. 
JohnJona,  carpenter^  dnllenged  by  the  Ci««2* 
Tkemm  Bristow,  cosohmaker,  cfaalleoged  17 

the  prisoner. 

THE  JURT. 

William  Per^,  Charles  Page, 

John  George  Holmden,  JohnYdong, 
John  King,  WiUiam  BaUer, 

Charles  Elton  Prescott,  Joseph  Sheffield, 
Benjamin  RoKecs,  Wilham  ChuRhiU, 

George  Oolding.  Samuel  Gxaoger. 

Mr.  Sft<f/lf)H.— Oite- of  the  Juiynwc  i«  <^. 
by  the  name  of  GoMtegj  I  am  loM h& nttie 
is  Goldring. 

Mr.  CWiwod.— We  have  no  objectioa  to 
him. 

Mr.  Otmey.— Nor  the  Oowa. 

Mr.  iStotoit^Tben  I  may  proceed. 


rieill  a»td 

Mr.  Qitmtjf^-^Ytif. 

The  Jnnr  were  charged  with  the  prisoner  in 
the  usual  form. 

J.  HE  Indictment  was  opened  by  Mr.  Bolland* 

Daoidton. — Will  yoar  lordship  be  pleased 
io  grant  OS  a  9eat  ? 

Mr.  Boron  Oarrow, — ^Yes,  certainly. 

Mr.  CfttrfMy.-«-Gentlemen  of  the  Jury;«^It 
is  my  doty  to  lay  before  you,  Yery  shortly,  a 
statement  of  the  oircumstances  which  wiU  be 
adduced  in  OYidence  on  the  part  of  the  Crown» 
in  support  of  this  indictment  You  will  have 
observed  that  the  charge  which  is  made  by  it 
against  the  two  prisoners  now  at  the  bar, 
'William  Davidson  and  Richard  Tidd,  is  not 
of  any  private  natnre ;  it  does  not  impute  to 
them  any  acts  affecting  the  interests  of  private 
ipdividiials,  but  it  accuses  them  of  the  highest 
crima  known  to  the  law,  of  that  which  strikes 
at  the  existence  of  the  govemmenty  and  aims 
at  its  entire  subversion— to  substitute,  in  its 
place,  some  provisional  government^  whose 
pledges  for  good  government  were  to  be 
slaughter  and  conflagration. 

It  will  not  be  necessary  for  me  to  state  to 
you  the  indictment  more  particularly  than  that 
in  the  first  count  it  charges  a  compassing  and 
imagining  (that  is  im  intent)  to  depose  the  king, 
and  in  another  a  compassing  to  levy  vrar 

r'  ist  the  king,  in  order  to  compel  him  to 
ge  his  measures.  The  evidence  which  we 
shall  la^  before  yovi  will  most  completely 
substantiate  both  of  those  changes. 
,  The  law  has  vrisely  made  the  intention  to 
commit  these  crimes  high  treason,  so  as  that 
intention  be  manilested  by  overt  Tor  open) 
acts ;  the  acts  done  in  furtherance  or  thi^  in* 
tention  are  charged  in  the  indictment,  and  will 
be  proved  by  the  witnesses. 
.  The  indictment  comprehends  several  per- 
sons, Arthur  Thistlewood,  James  Ings,  and 
John  nomas  Brunt  (whose  trials  have  taken 
place),  the  two  prisoners  at  the  bar,  Davidson 
and  Tidd,  upon  whose  &te  vou  are  to  pro- 
nounce (and  six  other  persons)  of  the  names  of 
Wilson,  Harrison,  Braabum,  Strange,  Gilchrist 
and  Cooper,  all  of  whom,  and  many  others 
irill  necessarily  be  introduced  to  you  in  the 
course  of  this  inquiry. 

.  Of  these  persons  the  first,  named  Arthur 
Thistlewood,  was  undoubtedly  the  leader;  he 
bftd  sustained  the  rank  of  a  gentleman ;  and  it 
is  a  striking  feature  in  this  case,  that  a  person 
ia  that -rank  should  be  found  associated  as  he 
1ms  been  vrith  the  other  persons  named  in  th« 
indictment,  most,  if  not  all,  of  whom  are 
working  mechanics. 

When  this  plan  wba  first  conceived,  it  may 
iiot  be  in  our  power  to  demonstrate;  ^yt  you 
win  find,  that  so  iar  back  as  the  month  of 
January,  it  had  arrived  at  considerabla 
i»aturity;  that  the  plan  (which  was  afterwards 
ag^tad  upon)  had  then,  been  formed-  to  assas- 
sinate nil  majssty's  ministers  at  a  cabinet 


TUdJbr  H/gA  Treason,         4LI  B<  109&* 


fl84« 


dinner;  and  it  was  thenboped,  whan  all  the 
persons  intrusted  hy  his  majesty  with  the 
direction  of  public  a&irs  should  have  been  cut 
off  at  one  blow,  that  by  following  that  up  by 
conflagrations  in  different  parts  of  the  metro* 
polis,andby  armed  men  acting  in  various  direct 
tions,  the  reins  of  government  might  be  seized 
by  these  conspirators  and  the  government 
itself  overthrown. 

To  perfect  this  plan,  and  enlist  into  its 
execution  as  many  persons  as  possible,  meet- 
ings were  held  in  various  places :  we  shall  pot 
have  occasion  to  follow  those  meetings  into 
different  parts  of  the  town  but  we  shall  confine 
our  evideuce  principsliy  to  meetings  which 
took  place  first  in  a  bade  room  at  a  public- 
house  called  the  White  Hart,  and  wera 
afterwards  removed,  for  greater  security,  to 
a  two-pair  of  stairs  back  room  in  a  honse, 
in  which  .the  prisoner  Brunt  (who  has  beea 
tried)  actually,  lodged  in^  Fox^-court,  Gray's-^ 
inn-lane.  It  was  contrived,  that  Ings  should 
take  the  lodging ;  that  he  should  profess  aa 
intention  to  bring  his  furniture  in;  but  na 
furniture  was  ever  brought  in :  the  key  of  the 
room  was  kept  by  Brunt ; .  and  in  this  room, 
sometimes  once  May  and  sometimes  twice  a* 
day,  the  n^eetings  of  these  conspirators  wrere 
held,  for  the  purpose  of  maturing  the  pla^  that 
had  been  conceived,  and  of  devising  all  the 
means  of  its  execution. 

The  death  of  his  late  majesty  (which  took 
place  on  the  29th  of  January)  for  some  time 
disconcerted  their  plan  of  operations.  Until 
after  his  late  majesty's  funeral,  of  coiirse 
cabinet  dinners  were  suspended ;  the  conspi- 
rators became  impatient  of  the  delay  which 
occurred,  and  that  impatience  gave  birth  to 
other  projects  for  carrying  the  same  object  into 
effect.  At  one  time  it  was  proposed  to  divide 
their  force  into  several  parties,  to  attack  the 
ministers  separately  at  their  respective  houses; 
and  it  was  thought  that  by  this  means,  though 
it  was  not  likely  all  should  take  effect,  they 
might  be  able  to  take  off  four  or  five  whom 
^ey  particularly  marked  for  destruction ;  at 
another  time,  another  project  was  entertained, 
to  break  out  on  the  night  of  his  late  ma- 
jestjr's  funeral,  at  which  time  the  cabinet 
ministers  would  necessarily  be.  at  Windsor, 
and  the  guards  wonUl  be  at  Windsor ;  when, 
therefore,  there  would  be  neither  Iba  head 
to  direct,  nor  the  arm  to  execute  the  resistance, 
to  the  measures  which  they  projected ;  and  it 
was  thought,  in  the  absence  of  all  those  means 
of  resistance,  they  might  cany  their  plan  into 
execution.  Tbis,  however,  was  on  consideration 
abandoned,  and  they  looked  forward  with 
eagerness  to  the  next  cabinet  dinner  that 
should  take  plaoe,  which  by  bringing  all  his 
majesty's  ministers  into,  one  house^  and  into 
one  rootn,  would  give  them  the  means^  at 
om  blow  of  efibcting  their  destruction. 

These  cabinet  dinners  take  place  daring  the 
sitting  of  Parliaiaeai;  at  the  houses  of  the  mam- 
bert  W'tbe  cabiifcet  altemal«ly,usually  I  believe, 
00  a  Wednesday ;  h\fi  though  no  notice  had 


134^3       1  Gfidttoe  It. 


Trid  tf  H^^iam  Damdioinmd 


[1344 


hwa  giTCOr  of  any  dinner,  they  wtte'oeitainlr 
locAung  forward  to  that  Wednesday  to  which 
yon  will  particulaiiy  direct  yoar  attention  (the 
i3rd  of  r  ebruary)  for  the  accomplishment  of 
their  pupoie;  and,  as  the  time  drew  near, 
every  exertion  was  made  to  complete  their 
preparations ;  pikes  were  provided  and  pike- 
handles,  coapoa^  of  rough  sticks  cut  from 
trees  seven  or  eight  feet  long,  fermled  at 
the  end,  with  holes  bored  for  the  admission  of 
pike-heads ;  pike-heads  were  procured,  some 
old  bayonets,  others  old  files  filed  to  a  point 
to  operate  as  a  bayonet  or  pike4ieul ;  pistols, 
blunderbusses,  swords,  hand-grenades  and 
fire-balls.  Ine  hand-grenades  which  were 
constructed  were  not  such  as  are  made  by 
military  men,  but,  for  the  purposes  of  destruc- 
tion, perhaps  scarcely  leas  eflective ;  about 
three  ounces  and  a  half  of  gunpowder  put  into 
a  tin  case  or  chamber  rather  smaller  than  this, 
which  I  hold  in  my  hand  [koldrng  9^  to  the 
jury  an  tnfc-iteiMt),  a  tin  fuse  braud  into  it, 
containing  a  powder  prepared  for  priming, 
which  communicated  with  the  gunpowder  in 
the  tin  case  or  chamber,  then  stewing  or  cloth 
cemented  round  the  tin  case;  a  number  of 
nails  or  other  pieces  of  iron  inserted  round  that; 
then  more  oloth  cemented;  and  the  whole 
bound  round  very  tight  by  tarred  string,  so 
as  clo^Iy  and  completely  to  pompress  it ;  and, 
as  you,  very  well  know,  it  requires  no 
military  skill  to  be  aware  that  if  fire  be  com- 
municated to  the  fuse,  and  so  to  the  powder 
in  the  chamber,  that  would  explode,  and  those 
pieces  of  iron  would  be  scattered  round  like 
io  many  ballots.  The  greatest  destruction 
would  be  thereby  effected.  It  was  proposed 
that  these  hand-grenades  should  be  one  means 
of  the  destruction  of  his  majesty's  ministers,  by 
being  tlirown  into  the  room  where  they  were 
assembled ;  but  ouiny  more  were  constructed 
than  were  requisite  or  could  be  used  for  that 
purpose,  these  were  intended  to  effect  the 
otlker  and  ulterior  objects  of  their  guilty  plan. 

Besides  these,  there  were  fire-balk,  com- 
posed of  pitch,  tar,  oakum,  brimstone,  and 
resin,  which  had  been  all  made  up  into  balls 
to  be  set  on  fire ;  these  thrown  into  the  windows 
of  buildings  would  infallibly  set  those  build- 
ings on  fire ;  a  ootiaiderable  number  of  these 
were  provided.  Besides  these  there  vras  a 
large  number  of  cartridges  for  muskets  and 
pMtob,  and  not  a  few  cartridges  for  cannon. 
Many  of  these  instruments  vrere  prepared  at' 
Fox-oourtt  many  in  other  places,  and  the  prin- 
cipal d^t  for  them  was  in  the  house  of  the' 
prisoner  Tidd ;  and  you  will  find,  that  though 
Arthur  Thistlewood  was  looked  up  to  by  these 
conspiraton  as  their  leader,  the  two  prisoners, 
Tidd  and  Davidson/  were  not  inconsiderable 
or  inactive  coadjutois,'  that  they  entered  into 
the  oonspiraey  heartUy  and  zealously,  that  they 
forwarded  it  to  die  utmost  of  their  pow«r,  and' 
that  they  were  amongst  the  most  eager  for  its 
oomplete  and  perfect  execution. 

On  the  Sunday  preceding  the  Wednesday 
which  I  have  mtmioned,  these  contpiTators 


held  a  larger  meeting  than  -usaol  tb'  eooeeit 
their  measures :  they  met  again  on  ihe  Mood^; 
they  met  again  on  the  Tuesday,  <m  irhidi 
morning  they  received  intelligeDce  thit  i 
newspaper  announced  a  cabinet  dioner  for  the 
next  day  at  the  earl  of  Harrowby's,  in  Gro- 
venor-square.  The  news  was  at  first  doobted ; 
but  the  newspaper  being  sent  for,  it  wu  foood 
correct.  Thu  excited  Uie  greatest  degree  of 
exultation,  expressed  by  some  in  the  mostn- 
vage  and  fefocious  terms,  by  another  in  lerss 
of  shocking  impiety ;  but  it  was  receired  liyaD 
as  gopd  news  that  now  all  their  enemies  were 
to  be  brought  together  within  one  room,  fl 
within  the  means  of  destruction ;  and  tbejr 
lost  no  time  in  proceeding  to  consider  and  ts 
develope  all  the  means  by  which  they  ahotdd 
effect  their  guilty  purpose.  Thistlewood  de- 
tailed those  means  to  tne  meeting  in  amaoner 
which  showed  that  they  had  been  all  well  coo- 
atdered;  the  detail  was  received  with  l^ 
quiescence  and  approbation,  and  a  detemiBir 
tion  that  the  plan  should  be  carried  ipto  exe* 
cution.  The  course  of  proceeding  whidiThiS' 
Uewood  proposed  was  this:  That  theyM^ 
proceed  in  a  body  to  the  house  of  the  eiri  of 
Harrowby  ;  that  Thistlewood  should  kaod^at 
the  door,  and  offer  to  the  porter  a  letter;  tha 
the  body  should  instantly  rash  into  the  hoese; 
that  two,  armed  with  swords  pistols  and  haod- 
grenades,  should  guard  the  staircase  wbidikd 
to  the  upper  part  of  &e  house ;  that  twoetoy 
similarly  armed,  should  guard  the  sUukmJ 
leading  to  the  lower  part  of  the  house  ;oid 
that  two  others,  with  the  same  i^eapoos,  sImdM 
be  left  to  guard  the  area;  and  that  tbenfoff- 
teen  shoidd  enter  the  noble  earrs  diniog-W 
armed  with  swords,  pistols  and  hand«greMdqf 
and  should  massacre  every  one  they  n<n^ 
there.  They  were  then  to  go  to  <^^^^ 
where  other  parties  were  to  act— for  J*^ 
parties  were  to  be  assembled  in  different  pan* 
of  London ;  one  to  set  fire  to  the  l^^^^jf 
King-street,  by  throwing  one  of  those  firej" 
into  the  hay4oft,  which  had  a  window  lootaOT 
into  a  mews ;  others  to  proceed  to  Gray  s-o»- 
lane,  to  seize  two  pieces  of  artilleiy  thatwj 
there;  others  to  proceed  to  theArtJileyP^ 
to  seize  four  pieces  of  aitiUeiy  wWdi «» 
there ;  to  marA  from  thence  to  the  »**^ 
house,  to  plant  the  cannon  so  as  to  hatterwyP 
case  those  within  should  refuse  to  saiRDiterf 
to  take  possesaion  of  the  Mansion-hdffl^w 
establish  therein  a  provisional  j[Wbb»«»» 
then  to  take  the  Bank,  and  to,giv«  ^^^^ 
pillage.  '* 

This  most  atrocious  plan,  as  I  ^>™^ Jf^ 
was  approved  of,  and  they  all  'W<^^JS 
upon  It;  and  every  degree  of  necessaiyacnw 

seemed  to  be  infused  into  eveiy  mind,  |^ 
ready  for  the  perpetration  of  the  cnme.  w 

parted,  to  enable  IbisUewood  t^  ^^^jZ 
to  visit  some  meetings  hi  another  ptrt<* 
town  (one  known  by  the  name  of  the  surj^ 
bone  Union)  and  it  was  settled  ^^ 
meet  there  the  next  day.  The  »«*  "i3«. 
did  meet  there ;  all  things  sstfaid  ^' 


13451 


Richard  TUd/or  High  TreatM. 


A.  D.  1820. 


C1346 


Thistle  wood  was  pleased  to  find  them  so  for- 
ward in  their  preparations ;  the  pistols  were 
flinted,  pikes  were  got  ready,  sent  off  to  their 
associates  in  other  parts  of  the  town,  and  the 
men  who  were  tliere  armed  and  accoutred 
themselves^  and  in  different  parties  proceeded 
from  Fox-court.  It  had  been  thought  that  that 
room  was  not  a  fit  place  of  rendezvous  from 
which  to  issue  forth  to  the  accomplishment  of 
their  purpose  in  Grosvenor-square,  and  another 
place  had  been  selected  and  engaged  by 
them,  which  seems  to  have  been  admirably 
adapted  for  their  purpose :  it  was  so  on  ac- 
count of  its  proximity  to  Grosvenor^uare ;  it 
was  so  also  on  account  of  the  obscurity  of  its 
situation,  which  was  not  likely  to  attract  public 
observation :  it  was  a  stable  and  cart-house 
with  a  loft  and  two  rooms  over  them,  in  a  very 
obscure  street  called  Cato-street,  one  end  of 
which  comes  into  John-street,  in  the  Edgware- 
load,  but  enters  only  by  a  gateway,  which 
looks  like  the  gateway  of  the  yard  of  a  public- 
house  ;  the  other  end  is  almost  equally  obscure. 
Just  as  you  enter  this  street  from  John-street, 
and  turn  to  the  right,  you  will  come  to  the 
stable  in  question.  This  had  been  vacant  for 
some  time,  and  it  was  taken  for  this  purpose. 

Some  of  the  conspirators  began  to  assemble 
early  in  the  afternoon ;  weapons  were  carried 
there  in  the  course  of  the  afternoon,  and  then, 
for  the  purpose  of  excluding  observation,  a 
cloth  was  nailed  against  the  window,  in  oider 
that  those  who  lived  opposite  might  not  see 
what  should  pass  therem.  They  were  within 
a  little  more  than  ten  minutes  walk  of  Gros- 
venor-square; they  would  have  to  go  down  the 
£dgware-road  and  Park-lane,  and  would  ar- 
rive there  almost  immediately;  and  it  was 
thought  (and  certainly  not  without  reason)  that 
they  had  chosen  a  convenient  nlace  of  rendez- 
vous, and  that  they  were  not  likely  to  be  dis- 
covered. 

In  this  lofl  and  io  this  stable  there  were 
assembled,  in  the  course  of  the  evening,  all 
the  persons  named  in  this  indictment,  and  as 
many  more  as  amounted  to  about  five-and- 
twenty,  all  armed  for  the  purpose.  To  guard 
against  surprise,  they  placed  sentries  in  the 
stable ;  one  of  those  sentries  was  the  prisoner 
Davidson ;  he  was  armed  with  a  sword  and  a 
carbine.  At  first  some  little  apprehension  was 
betrayed  that  their  force  was  insufficient,  and 
aome  alarm  was  excited  on  account  of  the  non- 
attendance  of  the  prisoner  Tidd,  who  was  looked 
up  to  as  a  person  of  importance  in  the  execu- 
tion of  the  plan.  Their  alarm  was  however 
removed  by  the  appearance  of  Tidd.  The 
time  approached  for  the  accomplishment  of 
their  purpose*  and  Thistlewood  had  just  called 
Out/the  fourteen  who  were  to  eater  the  diaing- 
Toom  at  the  earl  of  Harrowby's,  when  they 
were  surprised  by  the  officers  of  Bow-street, 
followed  by  a  party  of  the  guards,  who  had 
been  ordered  to  alteod  them.  When  the 
officers  entered  tlie  stable^  they  firand  Davidson 
and  IngS)  the  two  sentries.  The  officers  who 
were  foremost,  leaving  them  tQ  be  secured  by 

VOL.  XXXIIL 


their  followers,  ascended  by  a  ladder  into  the 
loft,  and  they  found  there  above  twenty  per- 
sons, with  that  magazine  of  arms  which  will  be 
exhibited  to  you.  They  announced  that  they 
were  officers,  and  called  upon  them  to  sur- 
render ;  instead  of  surrendering,  the  persons 
there,  conscious  of  the  nefarious  purpose  for 
which  they  were  assembled,  desperate  from  the 
knowledge  that  they  had  forfeited  their  lives 
by  what  they  had  already  done,  made  a  most 
determined  resistance,  and  Thistlewood  their 
leader  stabbed  one  of  the  officers,  Skailbers, 
who  fell  on  the  floor  a  lifeless  coipsel  The 
lights  were  extinguished ;  the  cry  was  ^lo  kill 
the  officers  ;*'  in  the  confusion  the  officers  were 
pushed  down  the  ladder ;  they  were  followed 
by  several  of  the  persons  there,  some  of  whom 
entirely  escaped,  but  those  who  are  included 
in  this  indictment  (with  the  exception  of  This-* 
tie  wood  and  Brunt)  were  taken.  These  des- 
perate men  were  not  content  with  taking  the 
life  of  Smithers,  but  Thistlewood  fired  at  ano- 
ther officer  and  made  a  cut  at  him  with  his 
sword.  The  prisoner  Davidson  was  pursued ; 
he  resisted  ;  with  his  sword  he  cut  at  one,  and 
he  fired  his  carbine  at  another.  Ings,  another 
of  the  prisoners  who  has  been  tried,  fired  at  ano- 
ther officer,  and  expressed  a  savage  regret  that  he 
had  not  killed  him.  The  prisoner  Tidd  resisted 
to  the  utmost  of  his  power ;  he  fired  a  pistol 
at  lieutenant  Fitzclaience,  and  was  taken  only 
by  the  superior  force  of  those  with  whom  he 
was  in  conflict. 

I  have  before  stated  that  Thistlewood  es- 
caped ;  he  was  apprehended  the  next  morning, 
not  at  his  own  residence,  but  at  another  part 
of  the  town,  where  he  had  taken  refuge. 
Brunt  also  escaped;  he  was  taken  the  next 
morning.  The  other  prisoners  were  appre- 
hended either  in  the  loft  in  the  stable,  or  in 
escaping  from  the  stable  In.  that  left  were 
found  guns,  bayonets,  pikes,  hand-grenades, 
fire-balls  and  cartridges.  This  was  the  maga^ 
zine  intended  for  that  party  which  was  to 
execute  the  first  and  most  important  part  of 
their  guilty  project — the  assassination  of  his 
majesty's  ministers. 

Gentlemen,  this  is  the  conspiracy  which  is 
charged  upon  the  prisoners, — this  is  the  high 
treason  waich  is  imputed  to  them  by  this 
indictment.  It  will  be  proved  to  you  by  evi- 
dence which  you  cannot  dpubt. 

To  give  you  those  details  which  can  be 
given  by  no  other  persons,  it  will  be  necessary 
to  call  before  you  accomplices  in  their  crime. 
Traitorous  conspirators  do  not  sound  a  trum- 
pet in  the  market-place  to  invite  honest  men  to 
their  coundls ;  they  adroit  none  to  their  coun- 
cils but  those  who  partake  in  their  guilty  plans. 
For  what  passed,  therefore,  in  their  private 
councils,  we  must  resort  to  the  evidence  of 
accomplices.  A  great  and  signal  benefit  t<» 
the  community  arises  from  that  circumstance, 
in  the  prevention  of  very  many  crimes ;  it  sows 
the  seeds  of  distrust  among  men  who  meditate 
those  crimes  which  cannot  be  committed  by  a 
single  hand,  but  require  the  cooperation  of 

4R- 


1347]       1  GEORGE  IV. 

numbers;  each  man  feels  and  fears  that  he 
who  shares  his  councils  may  at  some  luture  day 
be  a  witness  to  brin^  him  to  justice.  This 
consideration  deters  many  from  the  commission 
of  offences ;  but  if  accomplices  could  not  be 
received  as  witnesses  in  a  coutI  of  justice, 
offenders  would  be  emboldened  by  the  cei^ 
tainty  that  the  arm  of  justice  would  be  too 
short  to  reach  and  too  weak  to  punish  them. 
We  do  not  however  on  the  part  of  the  Crown 
present  to  you  accomplices  as  witnesses  who 
are  to  be  received  without  jealousy  and  caution. 
They  who  acknowledge  that  they  participated 
in  the  crime  which  is  charged  upon  the  pti- 
sonersy  are  not  to  be  received  on  the  same 
footing  with  honest  and  loyal  men  of  untainted 
character.  You  will  look  at  their  evidence ; 
you  will  watch  their  demeanour;  you  will 
observe  whether,  in  the  relation  of  their  story, 
they  present  means  of  contradiction^  because, 
if  men  are  fabricating  a  story,  they  will  take 
care  to  give  no  means  of  contradiction— thev 
will  lay  the  scene  as  between  themselves  and 
the  persons  accused  alone,  and  thus  deprive 
Ibe  accused  of  the  means  of  defence  which 
might  arise  from  the  contradiction  of  their 
evidence.  But,  above  all,  you  will  look  to  the 
confirmation  which  they  shall  receive  from 
ether  sources. — Confirmation  as  to  what  took 
place  in  their  consultation-rooms  it  is  abso- 
lutely impossible  they  should  receive,  for  none 
but  accomplices  can  know  what  passes  there ; 
but  if  you  find  that  in  every  instance  in  which 
they  can,  it  will  be  impossible  for  you  to  doubt 
that  they  are  speaking  truth  in  tiiose  parts  in 
which  they  do  not  receive  confirmation,  only 
because  in  the  nature  of  things  they  cannot 
leceive  it. 

The  confirmation  of  the  accomplices  that 
will  be  given  to  you  by  the  witnesses  which 
we  shall  call,  will  be  the  most  complete  and 
the  most  perfect  that,  in  a  long  experience  in 
the  profession,  I  remember  ever  to  nave  heard. 

The  principal  accomplice,  Adams,  will  be 
confirmed  as  to  the  meetings  in  Fox-court,  hj 
the  apprentice  of  Brunt,  who  lived  with  his 
master,  who  saw  those  meetings,  who  saw  the 
persons  who  attended  there,  who  saw  them 
go  out  on  Wednesday  the  23rd,  who  saw  his 
master  return  in  a  dirty  condition  which 
showed  h^  had  been  engaged  in  some  con* 
ilict,  who  heard  him  divulge  to  his  wife  that  it 
was  ^*  all  up,**  that  the  officers  had  come  in 
npon  them,  and  that  he  had  escaped  only 
with  his  life. 

The  accomplice  will  receive  confirmation 
in  another  point,  which  I  omitted  iik  the  course 
of  my  relation  to  state  to  you ;  for  on  the  last 
day  on  which  they  were  assembled,  it  was 
considered  that  some  proclamations  would  be 
necessary  to  be  issued  to  the  multitude  during 
their  operations  in  the  night;  it  was  suggested, 
that  cartridge  paper  would  be  convenient  paper 
ler  the  purpose.  Brunt  sent  his  apprentice  to 
purchase  six  sheets  of  cartridge  paper;  on 
them  Thistlewood  wrote  his  proclamations  in 
these  words,  <<  Your  tyrants  are  destroyed. 


ofWimmIkfM$mkma' 


\ym 


The  friends  of  liberty  are  dcsiied  to  cone 
forward,  as  the  provisional  govermaent  is  mv 
sitling.y  It  will  be  proved  to  yea  hy  tbe  a^ 
prentice,-i-not  that  the  proclamation  was  viit- 
ten,  not  that  it  was  read,  for  he  was  net  inibe 
room,-— but  that  he  was  sent  for  the  papa, 
that  he  purchased  the  paper,  that  be  gave  it  t» 
his  master  Brunt,  and  HbsX  Brant  carried  it 
into  the  room  in  which  Thislkwood  andtiir 
other  persons  were  assembled. 

Another  confirmation  occum  from  thiscir*^ 
Constance ;  some  alarm  bad  been  excited,  Am 
an  incident  that  was  coma^unicated  to  tlwiB, 
that  their  meetings  were  suspected  by  pyvcn- 
ment,  and  that  information  had  reacbed  tiis 
office  of  lord  SidnMuth,  who  you  loiow  is 
secretary  of  state  for  the  hone  depsrtaent; 
and  it  was  resolved,  therefore^  that  KDtiiei 
should  be  phiced  in  Orosvenor«squatt,toiildi 
the  house  of  lord  Harrowby,  to  see  ^etkr 
police  officers  or  soldiers  were  introdncediBle 
It ;  concluding,  that  if  that  were  not  the  oify 
they  might  proceed  safoly,  because  they  night 
suppose  that  no  information  wbaterer  m> 
been  given.  Sentries  were  apeordiogly  pheed  p 
the  prisoner  Davidson  was  sentry  on  tb<9TB»> 
day-evening,  from  six  o'clock  till  nine;  va 
we  will  prove  to  you  by  the  watchmaa,  tbatbe 
was  there  sauntering  abouU  Brant  aad  Adaitf 
went  from  nine  till  twelve ;  daring  a  part  v 
the  time  they  went  to  take  refresbnent  ins 
public-house ;  and  we  will  call  a  peisos  vb» 
saw  them  there,  and  who  played  at  domiw* 
for  some  time  with  Brunt  in  that  pabk-bonff. 
These  are  important  confimatioDSof  tbea^ 
count  which  will  be  given  you  by  the  aceon- 
plice. 

Another  and  very  important  confinntios 
arises  from  disclosures  made  to  a  person  of  tK 
name  of  Hiden ;  he  was  solicited  to  take  a  part 
in  this  guilty  plan ;  it  wa»  divulged  to  ta» 
very  distinctly  by  one  of  the  prisonen;  ^ 
appeared  to  listen  to  il,  for  he  ^^^J^. 
posed  that  the  pereen  who  was  so  coofided  i^ 
and  who  should  at  once  rqect  it,  *^""Jv* 
very  safe;  indeed,  he  was  given  eotousd* 
stand,  but  he  showed  that  it  was»othi«»- 
tention  to  parUke  in  it,  \ff  iiwwdtt«»r 
writing  a  letter  to  lord  Castleresgb,  to  «»«- 
municate  it  to  him,  by  endeavooring  toj^ 
access  to  lord  Castlmagh— not  getlipg«tfj 
to  him,  by  going  to  the  house  of  l«rf  ^^ 
by— by  following  him  to  the  park,  viApm 
to  him  the  letter,  and  aflerwanis  \^T 
pointment  with  lord  Harrowby,  ^^•''Xx  j! 
the  next  morning  (Wednesday  the  W» 
Hyde-park,  and  making  fonber  «in»8«2J 


tions  to  him.  This,  gentlemen,  i«  «>!"P^ 
confirmation,  for  the  plan  in  it*  "^^ 
given  to  him,  and  as  the  tiaae  ^W^J^^ 
nearer  (namely,  on  the  afternoon  of  ^eo^ 
day)  he  saw  some  of  the  c<>d*P****^5Ld' 
spot,  and  among  them  the  pn«^°*''. .  ?^' 
and  the  Ume  was  appointed  for  ^rJ^ 
those  who  were  then  assembled  in  wfJ'Li 
Further  confirmation  arises  fr<>"***JlJJIiI 
of  the  badt  room  in  Foxrceart,  the  aeS"*^ 


isml 


^SkAarS  TUtifat  High  THa»n. 


A.  D.  1690. 


[1359 


Itagy  wben  Bnint  was  apptehended,  whin  thftre 
were  found  a  pike-staff,  gunpowder^  gunpow- 
der in  flannel  bags  as  cartridges  for  cannon, 
bandvgretiades^  and  fire  balls^  whi^h  Brant  ^as 
packing  up  for  the  purpose  of  sending  to  the 
■oosc  of  another  oi  his  associates,  where  he 
thought  they  might  be  deposited  with  more 
iafety  than  in  his  o#n«' 

Further  confirmation  arises  from  the  search 
on  that  same  morning  in  the  house  of  the  pri- 
soner Tidd,  where  were  found  more  hand- 
grenades,  more  fire-balls,  a  number  of  pike- 
staves,  ft  quantity  of  gunpowder,  many  of 
those  cartridges  for  cannon,  and  an  immense 
number  of  musket-cartridges  made  up  in  par- 
cels of  fives.  This  lodging  of  Xidd's  I  stated 
to  you  had  been  used  as  the  d^pot,  wherb 
their  ammunition  was  placed.— -The  finding 
this  quantity  there,  is  considerable  confirmation 
of  the  eviden<fe  of  the  accomplice. 
.  Bvt  if  all  these  confirmations  were  blotted 
out,  if  no  one  of  them  eiisted,  it  appears  to 
ape  that  Cato-street  itself  is  confirmation  above 
all  confirmations ;  that  alone  proVes  that  the 
accomplices  are  speaking  truth.  There  are 
found  assembled  in  a  hay-loft,  a  man  in  the 
rank  of  a  gentlemani  with  five-and-twenty 
mechanics,  with  this  vast  store  of  arms  for 
different  purposes ;  when  they  are  found  they 
make  that  desperatie  resistance  which  is  toever 
made  but  by  persons  who  know  that  when 
they  are  taken  their  lives  are  forfeited  to  the 
law;  the  finding  them  assembled  there,  the 
magazine  of  arms  with  which  they  were  pro* 
i^ided,  and  their  conduct  when>  surprised,  all 
combine  to  demonstrate  their  purpose ;  and  if 
any  thing  more  were  necessajy,  the  prisoner 
Davidson,  when  he  was  taken^  exclaimed 
^damn  him  who  will  not  die  in  liberty's 
tsause/'  Thus  do  assassins  and  traitors  pro^ 
lane  the  name  of  liberty.  It  has  been  tneir 
cant  in  all  timesi  These  mei)  have  conspired 
fo  destroy  the  government  under  which  we 
live,  and  to  substitute  a  government  of  their 
own.  To  deprive  as  of  the  rights  and  the 
laws  whieh  we  inherit  from  oor' ancestors,  and 
to  give  us  in  exchange  their  own  rule  and 
dominion,  eommencing  in  ahd  to  be  eemented 
by  the  most  atrocious  Crimes. 

In  answer  to  this  case,  What  defence  is  to 
be  made  ?  It  will  be  said,  perhaps,  ^  true  it 
is  there  was  a  plot  to  assassinate  his  majesty's 
ministers,  but  the  assassination  of  his  majest/s 
ministers  is  not  of  itself  high  treason."  Un- 
doubtedly it  is  not ;  the  assassination  of  all  the 
Privy  councU,  aye  and  all  the  members  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament,  singly  and  individually, 
apd  with  no  other  object  (if  such  a  thing  were 
possible),  is  not  of  itself  high  treason  ;  but  for 
tfhatbuta  treasonable  purpose  could  such  a 
•bhicfc  and  guihy  design  enter  into  the  heart 
-ev«n  of  the  most  depmved  and  abandoned  of 
'lAankind  ?  These  miserable  men  had  never 
come  in  contact  with  :his  majesty's  ministers, 
so  as  to  harbour  private  malice  or  private  re- 
venge against  them ;  they  had  no  hatred  or 
4Mtice  against- lord  iiarrowhyf  it  wa^  against 


the  president  of  the  council ;  none  against  the 
earl  of  Liverpool,  it  was  against  the  first  lord 
of  the  Treasury ;  none  against  the  hero  of  fifty 
victories,  but  the  master  general  of  the  Ord- 
nance. The  private  characters  of  the  ministers 
are  above  all  reproach ;  their  personal  virtues 
have  secured  them  the  esteem  not  less  of  those 
who  politically  differ  from  them,  than  of  those 
who  are  their  professed  friends  and  supporters. 
To  say  that  ministers  have  not  given  satisfac^ 
tion  to  all,  is  to  say  that  they  are  but  men,  and 
that  we  are  but  men.  Whatever  political  dif<4 
ferences  exist^  no  man  can  doubt  but  that  they 
must  wish  to  identify  themselves  with  the 
greatness  and  the  glory  of  their  country.  They 
have  condneted  the  affairs  of  the  state  iti 
arduous  and  critical  times.  If,  afler  the  ex- 
haustion of  a  long  and  expensive  war,  the 
people  are  now  suffering  some  of  its  conse- 
quences, let  it  be  recollected  that  the  country 
stands  6n  a  proud  and  eommanding  eminence^ 
and  that  it  has  acquired  and  maintained  a  cha^ 
racter  not  Unworthy  of  its  ancient  renown. 

Political  differences  among  Englishmen  have 
never  led  to  a  crime  so  black  and  atrocious  ai 
assassination;  and  for  nOne  other  than  the 
treasonable  purpose  imputed  could  these  mem 
have  ever  entertained  such  a  design.  That 
assassination  was  to  be  the  commencement  of 
those  operations  which  they  vainly  hoped 
would  end  in  the  substitution  of  themselves  in 
the  plaOes  of  those  whom  they  were  to  assassi- 
nate, and  in  the  establishment  of  that  pro- 
visional government  which  could  be  establish- 
ed only  by  the  deposition  of  the  king. 

It  may  next  be  said  that  the  project  was 
weak,  that  their  means  were  totally  inadequate 
to  their  end,  that  their  numbers  were  unequal 
to  the  accomplishment  of  their  purpose. 
There  never  yet  stood  at  the  bar  of  this  or  any 
other  tribunal  men  accused  of  a  treasonable 
conspiracy  of  whom  that  observation  might  not 
be  made,  and  of  most  of  them  t^ith  infinitely 
more  truth  than  in  the  present  case.  History 
is  foil  of  weak  plans,  of  ill-contrived  plots  and 
abortive  conspiracies:  but  are  we  on  that  ac- 
count to  reject  all  history?  Nay,  our  own 
times  have  furnished  us  with  instances  of  con- 
spiracies more  weak,  with  means  more  inade- 
quate, conceived  by  men  of  higher  intellect 
and  for  better  means  of  information.  Colonel 
Despard  was  an  officer  of  great  military  skill 
and  experienee  ;^bb  plan,  compared  with  the 
plan  of  these  conspirators,  was  weal^  and 
iwerile. 

In  the  cool  consideration  of  detjiQ)^  and 
defeated  projects  we  are  apt  to  reject  that  as 
impracticable  and  visionary  which  political 
enthusiasts  have  contemplated  as  easy  of  ex- 
ecution. These  guilty  men — ^founding  their 
hopes  on  the  existence  of  popular  discontent 
(which  discontent  had  been  excited  and' fo- 
mented for  some  months  before  by  speeches 
and  writings  of  the  most  flagitious  charactei) 
which  they  supposed  to  have  spread  further 
and  wider  than  it  had,  heating  each  othei^s 
miuds  by  seditious  and  treasonable  discourse, 


13511 


J  GEORGE  IV. 


Trid  of  WUIimn  DoMitm  and 


[1353 


till  they  persuaded  theraseWes  that  all  men 
thought  and  felt  as  they  did,  that  they  wished 
for  a  change,  and  were  ready  to  enlist  under 
their  standanl,— imagined  that  if  they  could 
but  strike  some  gr^^  ^^^  frightful  blow,  if 
they  could  but  destroy  those  who  were  in* 
trusted  with  the  suprenne  administration  of 
affain,  and  introduce  confusio^,  and  inspire 
terror  into  the  metropolis  by  means  of  con« 
flagrations,  that  they  could  then  carry  on  their 
further  operations  by  the  armed  men  whom 
they  had  provided,  and  that  they  mi^t  count 
on  such  an  increase  of  force  from  malcontents 
as  might  enable  them  to  subvert  tliat  govem- 
ment  which  was  the  object  of  their  hatred.  Al- 
though the  design  was  impracticable,  I  admit, 
with  respect  to  ultimate  success,  yet  as  to  tem- 
porary suspension  of  the  functions  of  govern- 
ment, and  temporary  confusion  and  anarchy, 
I  am  afraid  that,  however  the  design  is  to  ^ 
branded  as  wicked  and  atrocious,  it  does  not 
be&r  the  character  of  weakness  and  of  folly. 

This  is  the  case  which  we  shaU  lay  before 
you ;  you  will  hear  and  you  will  attend  to  the 
evidence  according  to  which  you  are  sworn  to 
decide,  and  you  will  follow  that  evidence  im- 
plicitly, whether  it  lead  to  a  verdict  of  convio* 
tion  or  of  acquittal, 

Mr.  Boron  Oorroto.— Is  it  wished  that  the 
other  prisoners  should  be  put  to  the  bar. 

Mr.  Attorney  General. — ^If  your  lordship 
pleases. 

Mr.  Baron  (Torroio.— Perhaps  I  ought  to 
address  myself  to  the  counsel  for  the  prisoners 
as  well  as  the  counsel  for  the  Crown.  It  is 
merely  to  enable  the  witnesses  to  speak  to 
their  identity;  but  if  it  is  understood  that 
when  they  speak  of  A.  they  are  speaking 
of  the  prisoner  A,  and  that  when  they  speak 
of  B.  they  are  speaking  of  the  prisoner  B,  it 
may  not  be  necessary. 

Mr.  Adolpfms. — I  have  no  wish  at  all,  my 
lord,  upon  the  subject. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — ^It  is  better,  perhaps, 
that  they  should  come,  to  prevent  any  mistake 
of  their  persons ;  it  is  for  the  prisoners'  benefit 
that  they  should  be  there  certainly  when  they 
are  spoken  of. 

Jamet  Wiiliam  Wlieon,  John  HarrUon, 
Bichard  Bradhumy  John  Shaw  Strange, 
James  GiUMet^  and  Charlee  Cooper  were 
jbioed  at  the  bar  behind  the  priionert  on 

EVIDENCE   FOR  THE  CROWV. 

JHobert  Adamt  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr^  SolicUor  General, 

What  are  you  by  trade  ?— A  shoemaker. 

Where  did  you  live  before  you  were  in  con- 
finement ?— No.  4,  Holfr-in^the-wall  passaffe. 
BrookVmarket  ^^^ 

You  are  now  come  up  in  custody  ?— Yes. 

Ware  yon  ever  in  the  army  J—Yes, 


In  what  regiment  F — The  royal  re^ment  of 
Hoffse-guards. 

The  Blues?— Yes. 

When  did  you  leave  the  aimyP^Aboit 
eighteen  years  ago. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner,  John  Tbonu 
Brunt  ?— Yes. 

Where  did  you  first  become  acquisted 
with  him  ?— 'At  Cambray,  in  France. 

How  long  is  that  ago? — ^In  1816. 

Was  the  English  army  at  that  time  at 
Cambray  P— Yes,  the  head-quarters  were. 

What  were  you  doing  at  that  time  at  Cam- 
bray ? — Following  my  trade. 

With  the  army  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  seeing  Bront  carij  ia 
the  present  year  at  his  lodgings  ?— Yes. 

Where  were  his  lodgings  P— In  Fox*ooiirt| 
Gray's-inn-lane. 

What  was  Brunt  by  trade  ?— A  boot-ekiser. 

Did  he  make  any  proposal  ahoatintrododDg 
you  to  Thistlewood  f — ^Yes. 

Did  you,  in  consequence  of  that,  accompesy 
him  to  Thistlewood's  lodgings?— I  did. 

When  was  that  as  neany  as  you  can  tvA» 
lect  P-— The  12th  of  January,  a  Wednesday. 

Did  you  go  aioDe  with  him,  or  was  thoe 
any  other  person  in  company  ?— Bnmt  aad 
Inn. 

Tellus  what  passed  at  Thistlewood's  k^dfiags 
when  you  went  with  Brant  and  lD2S?-0a 
Brunt  introducing  me  to  Thistlewood,  Bnol 
said  to  Tbistlewood  « this  was  the  bwJ 
was  speaking  to  you  about."  Tliistlevood 
said,) ••you  were  in  the  life-guaids ?"  I|«J 
him  «  No,  I  belonged  formerly  to  the  (Wj 
blues ;"  he  says,  "  I  presume  you  arc  a  g«oj 
soldier  ?''  and  after  that,  that  he  soppoaed  m 
I  was  a  good  swordsman ;  I  told  him  I  oo^ 
was,  and  that  I  could  use  the  sword  oovu  it 
were  required  to  defend  myself,  but  it  ««*  * 
long  time  since  I  had  used  a  sword  or  anas  oi 
any  description ;  he  turned-  the  disconiie  opj* 
thedifferentshopkeeper8ofIxmdoDparttatia|7i 
sajrine  they  were  a  set  of  aristocxats  altogtlMry 
and  that  they  were  all  woiking  under  one  s^ 
tem  of  government,  and  he  should  g^  J'J'J! 
the  day  that  the  shops  were  shut  up,  and  «<» 
plundered ;  he  turned  his  discourse  apoB  v* 
Hunt,  saying  Mr.  Hunt  was  a  cowaid,  «n  ao 
friend  to  the  people ;  that  he  had  do  dm 
could  he  get  into  Whitehall,  and  oterlook  w 
books,  he  should  find  his  name  ^^^.*Z 
to  the  government ;  he  next  t'>™*^^""'i2r 
course  upon  Mr.  Cobbett,  that  Mr.  CobW 
with  all  his  writings,  he  did  not  c^^ 
as  any  friend  to  the  people,  and  be  bad  w 
doubt  upon  his  mind  that  Cobbett  was  a«w 

equally  the  same.  ,r^ 

Did  any  thing  further  pass  at  that  neemj 

that  you  lecoUect ?--Mr.  Bront  •Wo^J? JJV: 
men  that  he  had  to  call  upon  in  C^^ 
market;  and  asked  Mr.  A»dewoodJiJ 
would  walk  with  him ;  ThisUewood  i^ 
this,  saying  he  had  somewhere  to  ctU|JJ"7 
we  left  the  room,  Brunt  told  'H^WewoaJ'^ 


spectiog  of  a  bltinderbttss  that  was 


tobei*^ 


1363] 


m^ard  Tiddfor  High  TreoMn. 


A.D.  1890. 


[1354 


for,  and  asked  fahn  if  he  would  be  Ihere; 
Thittlewood,  to  the  best  of  my  xeeollectioDy 
told  him  that  he  would. 

Did  you  then  leave  Thistlewood } — On  this, 
I  believe  we  left ;  I  do  not  recollect  any  thing 
else  at  that  time. 

On  going  from  Brunt's  to  Thistlewood*s,  or 
at  any  otto  time  had  Brunt  stated  any  thing 
to  you  as  to  any  plan  they  had  in  agitation  I 
— ^A  plan  was  stated  to  me  previously  to  our 
getting  to  Thistlewood's. 

What  did  he  state  to  you? — ^He  told  me 
there  was  a  plan  that  was  drawn  up  by  two  or 
three,  and  he  had  no  doubt,  if  I  would  consent 
to  join  them,  it  would  meet  my  approbation. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  this  plan  was  ? — ^This 
plan  was  to  assassinate  the  romisten,  the  first 
time  they  met  toother  to  dine. 

That  was  belore  you  arrived  at  ThisUe- 
'wood's?— Yes,  it  was ;  he  likewise  told  me  at 
this  time,  ^*  besides,"  says  he,  **we  have  got 
information  where  the  thieves  keep  their  money, 
to  the  amount  of  upwards  of  three  million  ul 
in  hard  specie ;  after  we  have  done  this  we  in- 
tend to  go  to  that  place  and  plunder  it.*' 

Did  he  say  where  the  place  was  ? — ^Not  at 
that  time. 

Some  time  after  this,  were  you  in  confine- 
ment for  debt  ? — ^I  was* 

In  the  Whitecross-street  prison  ? — ^Yes. 

When  did  you  come  out  of  prison? — ^The 
^ayafter  the  death  of  our  late  king. 

That  was  the  30th  of  January,  the  Sunday  ? 
— ^Yes. 

After  you  had  come  out  of  prison,  did  you 

Sto  any  meeting  in  Fox-court? — On  the 
onday  evening  I  called. 

You  have  told  us  that  Brunt  lived  in  Fox- 
court? — ^Hedid. 

Was  that  room  in  the  same  house  in  which 
Brunt  lived  ? — On  the  same  floor. 

Brunt  lived  in  the  two-pair  of  stairs  front 
toom  P — ^Yes. 

Ihis  meeting  was  in  the  back  room  f — Yes. 

Did  you  learn  from  Brunt  who  hired  that 
room  ? — I  beard  him  say  he  had  hired  it  of  the 
landlady  for  Ings. 

Was  there  any  furniture  in  that  room  f — 
Only  a  stove  fixed. 

Did  meetings  continue  to  be  held  in  that 
room  up  to  the  23rd  of  February  ? — ^They  were 
held  twice  a  day,  except  that  there  was  none 
on  Sunday  evenings. 

What  peisons  usually  attended  those  roeeU 
iogsr— Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Ings,  Hall,  David- 
son, Harrison,  Wibon,  Bradbuniy  Tidd  oc- 
casionally. 

Any  more  that  you  remember? — ^Edwards. 

Do  you  remember  the  names  of  any  more, 
at  this  moment  P — ^Not  at  this  moment. 

You  tell  us  you  came  out  of  prison  on  the 
30th  of  January ;  that,  on  Monday  evening, 
the  day  afterwards,  you  attended  one  of  those 
meetings  ? — Yes. 

Can  you  tell  us  any  thing  particular  that 
fMssed  at  those  meetings  P— ^Kot  on  ^  Mon- 
^ynis^t 


Do  you  recollect  any  time  when  Harrison 
was  there  ? — A  Wednesday  night. 

When  you  went  to  the  room,  whom  did  yon 
find  there?— I  saw  Thistlewood,  Harrison,  and 
in  the  course  of  the  evening  Ings  was  there,- 
and  Wilson,  and  Edwards. 

Tell  us  what  passed  when  you  went  in  ?-* 
When  I  went  in,  Thistlewood  and  Harrison 
seemed  in  deep  discourse,  respecting  some 
conversation  they  had  heard ;  inmrmation  they 
had  gained  of  the  life-guards  and  foot-guards 
being  to  leave  London  to  attend  the  funeral  of 
the  late  king.  Harrison  was  told  bv  a  life» 
guardsman,  that  every  man  in  the  li»-guards 
that  could  be  mounted  and  could  be  spared, 
was  to  attend  the  funeral  of  the  late  king,  as 
well  as  the  fbot>gnards,  and  likewise  the  police 
officers ;  after  he  had  left  the  life-guardsman, 
he  said  it  came  to  his  mind  that  it  would  be 
an  excellent  opportunity  to  kick  up  a  row  in 
London  that  nisht.  Mi.  Thistlewood  agreed 
to  the  plan ;  and  proposed  that  it  should  be 
done  Of  collecting  what'  men  they  had  among 
themselves  together,  and  to  take  the  cannon  in 
Gray's-inn<lane,  as  well  as  the  cantmn  in  the 
Artillery-ground,  and  likewise  for  the  fire-balls 
to  be  made  use  of  to  set  fire  to  the  different 
buildings ;  thinking  it  would  be  an  excellent 
opportunity,  as  the  soldiers  and  what  police 
officere  could  be  spared  would  be  out  of  Lon« 
don,  that  there  would  not  be  sufficient  strength 
left  in  London  to  protect  it 

What  further  passed  ? — ^Thistlewood  said,  it 
would  be  necessary  to  send  a  party  up  to  Hyde 
Park  comer,  in  oider  to  prevent  any  orderly 
leaving  London  for  Windsor  to  communicate 
what  was  passing  in  London. 

Any  thing  further?— He  likewise  proposed, 
that  the  telegraph  over  the  water  should  be 
taken,  in  order  to  prevent  it  communicating 
any  intelligence  to  Woolwich. 

Did  this  plan  meet  with  the  assent  of  those 
persons  who  were  at  that  time  assembled  P— > 
it  met  with  the  assent  of  those  persons  then  in 
the  room. 

After  that,  did  Brunt  and  any  other  person 
come  into  the  room  ?— Brunt  and  Ings  at  this 
time. 

When  Brunt  and  Ings  came  into  the  room, 
was  this  plan  which  had  been  in  agitation 
communicated  to  them? — ^It  was  communis 
cated  to  them  by  Thistlewood. 

On  its  being  communicated  to  them  by 
Thistlewood,  what  passed  ?— Brunt  and  Ings 
boUi  declared  there  was  nothing  short  of  the 
assassination  of  the  ministers  which  they  had 
in  view,  that  could  satisfy  them. 

In  consequence  of  this,  was  that  project 
which  had  hieenso  mentioned  given  up? — ^It 


Do  you  recollect  a  meeting  which  took 
place  on  Saturday  the  19tli  of  February  P-« 
les. 

Who  was  at  that  meeting  P — There  were 
Thistlewood,  Harrison,  Brunt,  Ings  and  HalK 

What  passed  at  that  meeting? — On  my 
going  into  the  nHnB,  they  seemed  to  be  in  A 


tS44T       1  GEOBGEIV.' 

st»dfhdtmw6  thetttelrcB;  they^ot  up,  tttad 
Thistlewood  said,  '*  weH,  it  is  agreed  <»,  thai 
if  DOttnng  happeos  between  Ma  and  next 
^•daaaday  night,  on  Wednesday  night  to  go 
10  work." 

Did  anything  further  pais  at  thait  laeeting  I 
«— Yea$  Thistlewood  giaro  inscnictioiif  to 
Bniat« 

Did  he  SMign  any  reaaon  why  they  orast 
go  to  work  the  next  Wednesday  night  I-^Hm 
leaeon  he  assigned  was^  that  Chey  were  all  so 
poor  they  could  wait  no  longer ;  he  gave  in- 
stnictioBS  to  Bnin«,  and  thoae  in  theroomi 
that  there  sheoU  be  a  meeting  sit  the  next 
■lomiDg  at  nine  o'clock,  to  draw  vp  a  plan  to 
iettle  how  ihey  shonld  act. 

Did  they  separate  after  that  r----Yeiy  at  least 
th^weotaway. 

Did  a  meeting  take  place  en  the  nest  mom* 
ing  T**-Yes. 

Was  that  meeting  larger  than  ainal? — It 
was. 

Were  the  prisoners  at  the  bar  among  the 
party  who  met  that  morning?— •Yes. 

Both  of  them  f^Yea. 

Tell  as  what  passed  on  Stooday  monUng, 
the  30th  of  Febitiaty ;  what  tiaw  did  yon  get 
there  f — sTost  before  eleven  oVlock  ;  Thistle- 
wood  said)  on  looking  round,  ''there  are 
twelve  of  us,  it  is  time  to  proceed  to  businen ;'' 
he  proposed  Tidd  to  take  the  chair.  Tidd 
tflJces  the  chair  with  h  pike  in  lAs  Iwnd  ;  and 
be  began  by  Mating,  that  <'we,"  he  said, 
^  hate  come  to  a  determination,  that  if  no* 
thing  transpires  between  this  and  next  Wednes* 
day  night,  we  intend  to  go  to  work,  for  we  have 
been  waiting  so  lone  expecting  the  ministers 
to  dine  together  ^  nnding  they  do  not,  we 
intend  if  nothing  happens,  that  they  do  dine 
together  between  this  and  that,  to  take  them 
separately."  On  this,  he  began  to  propose  his 
plan,  saymg,  he  intended  to  take  the  two  pieces 
of  cannon  in  Gfay's-inn-lane,  the  six  camion 
in  the  Artillery-ground,  and  for  Mr.  PaUn  to 
take  upon  himself  to  set  fire  to  the  different 
bnildinn. 

Was  ralin  to  do  that  alone,  or  how? — ^He 
was  to  have  assistance  from  men  that  he  had 
4*oUected  himself.  Mr.  Thistlewood  said,  this 
was  an  outline  of  the  plan  at  present ;  and  as 
Mr.  Brunt  had  got  a  plan  to  propose  respect- 
ing the  assassination,  ne  should  drop  it  for  the 
present,  and  leave  it  to  Mr.  Bmnt  to  speak. 

Upon  this  what  took  place? — Upon  this 
Prunt  came  forwards  to  explain  his  plan; 
Thistlewood  stopped  him,  saying  "let  my 
plan  first  be  put  trom  the  chair  3  if  any  one  in 
the  room  hks  any  thing  to  say  upon  it  let  him 
epeak.** 

Was  it  put  from  the  chair?— Yes;  and 
agreed  to  by  all  present. 

The  prisoner^  Tidd,  being  in  the  chair? — 
Yes. 

After  this  was  put  from  the  chair  and  agreed 
io,  what  took  place  ?  did  Brant  come  forward  ? 
•-Brunt  came  forward;  and  spoke  to  this 
•ffect  I  Broat  said,  as  we  oaaoot  get  the  mi- 


9f  It^iOmm  Damis&M  md 


[US0 


nisten  all  together,  afa  if  was  tnoptedtotile 
them  separate,^  I  propose  to  yon  tbect  ibflbc 
as  many  as  we  think  we  can  take;  as  mmf 
men  as  we  can  get  shall  be  kepaiated  inlOM 
many  parts,  ai^  from  each,  allotmat  ta 
shall  be  a  man  drawn,  and  that  mm  iktt  ii 
drawn,  is  the  man  that  is  to  do  (he  deed. 

The  men  should  be  divided  into  a  ootm 
nnariMr  of  parts^  and  from  each  put  t  dh 
drawB  for  the  |{uxpose  of  coanoitiiBg  evh 
murder  ?— Yes,  just  so ;  that  man  that  the  bt 
fell  upoh,  if  be  attempted  it  and  didaotdstibe 
thing,  if  there  was  any  signs  of  cowaidice,h 
ShonM  be  ran  through  tkpon  (hespotdirectij; 
upon  this  I  got  upmyeelf;  I  asksdUinifke 
thought  it  was  impcttible  for  a  mm  to  H- 
tempt  to  do  A  thing  of  diat  kind  and  lul;  up 
I,  **  if  a  man  foils,  is  he  to  be  raatiwosghN 
the  spot  immediately;''  he  said  «<bo,  ooks 
there  is  signs  that  he  is  a  ooward.**  IVsm' 
tion  was  put  from  the  chair  m  beibn^  fd 
agieed  to ;  directly  after  this,  in  ctsie  Fifi% 
Potter  and  Strange* 

Falin,  Whose  name  you  hare  bdiKHKi* 
tioned,  and  PoUer  and  Strange,  caaeiaioAe 
moml— Yesr         ,    •  . 

Was  that  the  Palin  who  was  to  hod  th 
party  for  firing  P-*  Yes. 

On  their  coming  into  the  room,  v^* 
circumstances  that  had  passed  commoD^ 
10  them?— Yes,  they  were;  aad  tbeyigiw 
to  them  after  Ihistlewoqd  and  Brant  liad  00- 
mimicatfed  the  same  to  those  as  be  ted  to  tu 
in  the  room  before ;  Palin  got  up  to  spew  » 
the  chairman,  saying  he  wishsd  to  07  s*^ 
thing,  that  he  had  paid  due  sUeotioo,  » 
that  he  amongst  the  rest  had  agreed  to  *» 
had  been  pn^wsed  ;  but  he  wished  to^ 
how  those  things,  as  they  had  so  mftiiyelS^ 
to  be  carried  at  the  same  time,  were  to  K 
done ;  «you  tidk  of  the  Wml^  j«bt« 
ifom  forty  to  fifty  men#"  ^e^M 

Had  that  number  been  mentioofld  for  WJ 

called  the  West-^ild  job  7— Yes,  it  Wli» 
by  Thistlewood.  ,  ^» 

What  was  the  meaningof  «he  West^sdjC" 
—That  meant  the  assassination  of  the  ««■* 
ters;  it  was  so  oalled.  ^jlm 

And  from  forty  to  fifty  rhea  ^ere  tWJ 
neieessaiy  for  thia  purpose?— Yeo;  JL 
talk  of  taking  the  two  pieces  of  ciiid^b  vm 
GmyVion-lane,  and  six  pieces  cf  cam*  "^ 
the  Artillery-ground,  and  my  »««"*.  rr*. 
the  buiMings;  I  wish  to  know  »»*»»"" 
be  done ;  you  oug^l  to  know  *'**^ 
have  men  |o  depend  uponsofficieot:  1<^ 
give  you  any  satisiaction  on  that  P^^^jj 
can  see  what  men  I  can  speak  tD|l  ^ 
have  instructions  from  hew  wtea^'^ 
communicate  to  them  what  hst  f***'' 


this  morning. 


» 


d 


What  was  answered  to  that  ?-U  ^  ^ 

md  D|«|'^ 

there  was  no  doubt  that  Palin 


from  the  chair, ThisUewood  sad  Bn««»^ 
there  was  no  doubt  that  Palin  cerUiiflT  .^ 
the  men  he  had  spoken  to  ^^^Pf^^J^U 
Palin  was  satisfied  wijhin  ^BBtt^^f^  ^ 
got  such  men  as  he  could  depend'^*' 


RkkMttd  TkUfor  Higk  Treatoh. 


«u  at  liberty  to  iwt,  and  to  tstt  tliem  what- 
had  passed. 

•  Upon  tllat  was  ke  satisfied? — Upon  that 
he  sat  down  satisfied. 

Afesi  this  had  taken  place,  did  the  meetifig 
faoreak  up  ?)^The  chair  was  left  upon  this. 

Did  any  thing  further  take  plactF — lliey 
were  pretty  well  all  standing;  at  this  tine 
Thistlewood  suddenly  turns  himself  rounds 
**  Ob,  Brunt,  weU  thought  of,  now  as  Palin  is 
hero,  you  may  aa  well  take  him  to  this  spot 
doss  by  here,  and  let  him  see  whether  he 
thinks  it  is  practicahle." 

What  place  waa  that  ?«^  That  place  was 
FumiTal's-iniwbuildiacs. 

Fumival'Mnn»builcmigs  was  at  that  tkae 
not  fiaisliedl— The  b^  part  of  it  was  not. 

Was  that  near  the  back  of  Fox^ourt  ? — Yes. 

la  consequenoe  of  that,  did  Brant  and  Palin 
go  out  ?-«-^They  did. 

Did  they  return  before  you  quitted  the 
place  ?— They  did. 

What  passed,  on  tbeit  return? — On  their 
return,  Mr.  Pajin  ga?e  it  in  that  it  was  a  itery 
good  job,^  and  a  very  easy  one^  and  would  mid^e 
a  very  good  fire. 

^  Did  any  thing  further  pasa  OB  that  occasion? 
-r^Yea;  Tkustfewood  said,  that  it  would  be 
highly  necessary  (if  it  was  possible)  to  get  the 
BMu  together,  and  to  coosmunicate  their  in« 
tipntions  to  h^iTe  them,  if  possible,  to  give  them 
a  treat ;  but  be  said  ^  aid  not  know  how  it 
waa  to  be  done,  for  they  were  all  so.  poor ;  on 
this,  Brunt  turned  himself  te  the  fire,  walked 
%ci08a  the  room  and  baok  again,  and  said  he  had 
a  pound  note  he  had  reserved  fer  the  purpose, 
diough  he  had  done  Mttie  or  no  work  lately, 
but  he  would  be  damned  il  he  did  not  spend 
it  upo^hia  ipes}  Thietlevood  said,  ''where 
shall  we  take  them  to?  I  suppose  Hobhs  would 
have  no  objection  to  letting  us  ha^  the  roon^ 
iq>  stairs." 

Hobbs  kept  the  Whiite  Hart  P-^Tea. 

Had  these  been  aag^meetings  at  the  White 
Bart  preiious  to,  ^bom  meetings  held  in  die 
back  room  at  Brunt's  lodgings  ?<~Yes. 

Were  those  meetingB  hela  in  a  room  at  the 
White  Hart,  or  in  eback  loom^Inabadc; 
noaa  in  the  yaid.  Those  meetingi  were  dis-^ 
eoDtinaedTilhile  yeifcwei»in  pnsoa  for  debt? 
T^Yes. 

Now  proceed. —••.Bmnt  said,  he  did  not 
mnch  like  it  after  what  had  dropped  from  my 
Montk  ^bnt  neaer  mind,''  saffa  Brant,  '^we 
can  go  there,  as  time  flets.  so>  riioit ;  I  do  not 
see  what  occasion  we  have  to  inr  the  tiaps," 
or  some  egression  oS  that  kind. 

Had  you,  in  point  of  fhot,  made  some  oo»» 
munieation  to  them  of  what  had  passed  be« 
tween  you  and  Hobbs  f—-Yea;  he  said  he 
wioald  calion  Hobbs,  and  heas  what  he  had  to 
aay ;  en  second  recoibction^  he  said  he  would 
gi^e  hie  bcnr.  a  holiday  that  day^  send  his  udfe 
eat,  and  wat  men  he  had  to  coUect  togetheiv 
to  have  them  in  his  own  room. 

ARer  this  ednversatieii  had  passed,  I  be- 
lieve you  sepaiatBd?-p*Ye8, 


A.  TL  1820. 


Cissa 


Tell  us  whether  yoU  luid  seen  any  arms  Jn 
that  back  room  at  different  periods  ? — ^I  had« 

Had  you  seen  among  other  things,  any  pike^ 
staTea?--*Yes. 

In  what  state  were  they  ?---In  the  roagh. 

Had  any  thi^  been  done  to  the  ends  of 
them  ? — ^No  more  than  just  as  th^  were  cut 
from  the  tree  they  grew  on. 

Waa  any  thing  done  after  they  were  brought 
in  there  ?-^Bradburu  sawed  the  ends  of  diem 
off  widi  a  saw,  and  ferraled  them. 

Was  that  done  in  that  back  room  P — ^Yes. 

Were  there  anyaoeketa  or  holes  made  id 
t)Mm?«*Yea. 

After  those  ferrules  had  been  put  on  in  the 
ioanner  you  detcrihed,  by  Bradbum,  what 
passed  ^-*-There  was  an  aheiation,  it  was  con- 
sidered, after  the  ends  of  the  pike  stick  had 
been  pared  down  to  the  ferrule  that  wae 
knocked  down,  that  the  pike  staff  was  so  wedq 
it  would  not  support  the  pike ;  in  consequence 
of  that,  every  ferrule  was  cut  off  again,  and 
bigger  ones  were  got  and  pot  oo. 

Was  that  done  also  io  the  room  ?«— Yes. 

Besides  those  pike*staves,  were  there  any 
hand-grenades  brought  there?— There  were 
some  that  were  brought  kt  there  ready  made, 
and  some  made  th^e^ 

Did  you  see  Dandson  db  any  thing  therein 
•«^Yes,  Davidson  and  Harrison ;  there  was  a 
kind  of  a  thing  that  was  wound  round  a  tin 
case  first,  and  some  pitch  that  was  melted  in 
an  iron-pot;  after  this  was  put  in,  there  were 
some  nails  bound  round. 

Did  you  see  Harrison  make  any  of  them:? 
^Yes. 

Did  you  see  Davidson  also  do  any  thin^ 
towards  making  them?-^I  did. 

Was  there  any  other  place  where  Aey  were 
afterwasda  canied  to?— -They  were  canied  to 
TuU*8. 

To  Tldd*8  lodgings  ?^Yei^  in  Ilole4«.the 
wall  passage* 

What  was  tint  caDed  ?i-«The  ddpdt. 

Who  was  it  that  suggested  th^  should  be 
leasoied  from  die  voom  F^-^Thistlewood. 

Wbait  reason  did  he  gie e  l*-He  assigned  the 
reason,  that  there  should  be  nothing  kept  ia 
that  room,  in  case  diere  should  be  any 
persons  come  ta  thai  room  who  might  give 
information. 

In  consequence  of  that,  were  the  tbing» 
from  time  to  time  removed  to  Tidd^sT— They 
were. 

00  you  remember  a  meeting  which  took 
place  on  tkfB  Tuesday  morning,  the  22od  of 
Febraary  ?— Yes. 

The  meeting  of  which  you  have  been  speak- 
ing was  the  Sunday  ?'— Yes. 

Where  was  that  meeting  on  the  Tuesday 
held  P-*In  the  same  room  as  Brunt's^ 

About  vrhat  time  l^*%^bout  ten  ofolock. 

Who  were  the  persons  present  f«^There  wae 
Thistlewood^  Brant  i  there  wae  Hall ;  there  was 
Ings  at  this  time ;  and,  jnst  after  this,  Edward* 
oomesin,  and  brings  the  accouatof  theinftmna- 
tion  be  had  seen  in  the  paper,  of  a  dinner  that 
was  to  be  held  on  the  Wean^ay  night. 


1350]       1  GEORGE  lY. 


Tfitd  ^  BltUam  Damdstm  tmd 


naao 


A  cabinet  dfamer  ?— Yet. 

At  what  place  ?— Lord  Uarrowby's,  in  Gro»- 
▼enor-tquare. 

In  consequence  of  this,  was  a  newspaper 
sent  for  ?— Yes ;  Mali  fetched  it. 

Did  it  appear  by  the  newspaper  thai  the  iiw 
formation  was  true  ?— Yes. 

What  passed  on  this  information  being  com* 
mnnicated  ? — On  dits  being  communicated^ 
Brunt  expressed  himself,  '^now,  damn  my 
eyes,''  says  he,  **  I  beUeve  there  is  a  Ood ;  i 
have  often  prayed  that  those  thieres  vutj  be 
called  togetner,  that  we  nm^  have  an  op- 
portunity to  destroy  them,  and  now  '*  says  he, 
<«  God  has  heard  mypityer.*' 
.  Was  any  thing  else  said,  that  you  remember? 
— Ings  was  equally  alive  to  it;  upon  this 
Tbistlewood  proposed  that  there  should  be  a 
eommittee  sit  directly,  in  order  to  alter  the 
plan  of  assassination  which  had  been  agreed 
•n  on  the  Sunday, 

Referring  to  the  plan  of  individual  assassi- 
nation ?— «Yes ;  my  sitting  in  the  chair.  Thistle- 
wood  proposed  me  to  take  the  chair ;  I  takes 
the  chair,  and  called  to  order.  Tbistlewood 
was  going  to  speak ;  lanterrupted  him ;  I  said, 
**  Gentlemen,  I  hope  from  what  fell  from  my 
mouth  yesterday  morning,  you  have  given  it  a 
due  consideration/' 

.  That  was  the  communication  that  had  been 
made  to  yon  by  Hobbs,  the  landlord  of  the 
White  Hart  ?— Yes. 

Suggesting  something,  I  believe,  respecting 
the  police  officers  having  inquired  at  Hobbs's ; 
—Yes. 

You  communicated  that  to  the  meeting? — ^I 
did. 

Tell  us  what'^took  place  T — ^Upon  this  Brunt 
put  himself  into  a  bit  of  a  passion,  and  so  did 
all  of  them,  and  particularly  Harrison,  so  much 
that  he  walked  about  andthreatened  the  first  man 
that  attempted  to  fling  cold  water  upon  the  con- 
cern, he  would  run  that  man  through  directly 
with  a  sword ;  upon  this  I  opened  my  coat  in 
this  wa]r,  and  said,  Harrison,  if  you  have  any 
conception  that  I  am  not  a  friend  to  you  and 
every  man  in  this  room,  do  it  now;  Palin 
and  Potter  and  Brad  bum  were  in  the  room ; 
Palin  got  up,  surprised  from  what  he  had  seen, 
and  walked  across  the  room ;  and  Palin  was 
the  man  thatholla'd  out,  insisting  on  my  being 
heard. 

Was  Hall  in  the  room  at  that  time  ?— He 
was. 

In  consequence  of  this  conversation  that 
took  place,  did  Brunt  make  any  proposal  ?— 
On  Mr.  Palin  insisting  on  some  explanation 
being  given  of  that  I  had  alluded  to,  Brunt 
got  up  and  said  he.  would  get  up  and  tell  the 
whole ;  Brunt  got  up  and  communicated  it. 

Did  Brunt  make  any  proposition  ?— He 
made  a  proposition,  that  lord  Harrowby's  house 
should  be  watched. 

When  was  that  watch  to  commenoe  ?--At 
six  o'clock  that  evening. 

Who  were  the  two  men  that  were  at  the 
ftrst  on  the  watch  ?-*Davidfon  was  one,  but 


the  other  I  cannot  remcata^  and  Brant  «d 
Tidd  were  to  relieve  them. 

When  were  they  to  relieve  them  ?— Atme 
o'clock. 

It  was  to  be  a  three  hours  watdi?—Y«i 

Were  Davidson  and  Tidd  both  pranta 
the  room  at  that  time  ?— Yes. 

Was  it  said  why  that  watch  was  ta  be  ap- 
pointed ? — That  watch  was  to  be  appdsiedto 
see  if  there  were  any  police  officer  CBtecd 
the  boose,  or  any  soldiers ;  if  there  wv  m 
thing  of  that  kind  entered  the  home  of  bii 
Harrowby,  it  was  to  be  commnmcstri  td  th» 
ooomiittee;  if  there  wasnodungof  thatlnd 
seen.  Brunt  insisted  upon  it  that  the  boiiea 
should  be  done  the  following  night 

After  this  did  you  separate?— Noyie^ 
not ;  after  this  proposition  of  Brant's  wii  at- 
Ued,  Tbistlewood  directly  proposed  Tidd  a 
take  the  chair,  in  consequence  of  my  iotenpt- 
ing  their  business. 

Did  Tidd  take  the  chair  thenf-Tei,  k 
did ;  then  Tbistlewood  came  ibrwiid  with  th 
proposition  of  a  fresh  plan,  respectingthei^ 
sassination  of  the  ministers;  he  pnfom 
going  himself  to  lord  Harrowb/s  doorvtta 
note  in  his  hand,  for  the  servant  to  give  «>  ^ 
master,  telling  him  he  must  hare  an  tasM\ 
at  the  time  he  got  in,  the  othen  weie  to  m 
in  liter  him,  and  to  secure  the  sermti,|in* 
senting  a  pistol  to  their  breast,  thmtoi^ 
them  with  instant  death  in  case  they  aade 
any  resistance ;  at  the  same  time  oilier  pf- 
sons  were  to  go  to  take  commaad  of  tbeitaia 
leading  to  the  bottom  part  of  the  koet; 
another  party  to  take  the  coaunand  of  tbeaias 
to  the  upper  part  of  the  boose,  and  two  an 
to  the  area;  these  men  were  to  take,  toea* 
sUtion,  a  hand-grenade  a  pieoe,  »  *^  "^ 
pistols  and  blunderbuss;  it  any  «"«"J|f' 
tempted  to  retreat  from  the  upper  or  wg 
part  of  the  house,  or  the  area,  a  hanigw** 
was  to  be  thrown  among  them,  with  a  net " 
destroy  them;  at  the  same  time  it  was  pnp 
sed  that  they  should  enter  the  >«*■•*? 
was  the  man  that  ofiered  himself  «<>  ta«  » 
command,  to  lead  into  the  room.  W  P^ 
posed  to  go  in  this  kind  of  way;  ^'^^T 
entered  the  room  he  was  to  aooost  tbar  ih|- 

ships  l^  saying,  «  Now,  my  lonU,  1  »»*  I; 
good  men  here  as  the  Manchester  yeoW| 
enter  citiaens  and  do  your  duty;"  «»«  ^ 
swordsmen  were  to  follow  in  afierh»»- 

Who  were  the  two  swordsmen?-! «"  ^ 
myself,  and  Harrison  another.  . . 

Harrison  had  been  in  the  liM"*^ 
He  had;  on  this  being  done,  the  swoia^ 

entering  the  room,  Mowed  by  die  pt>e;*r 
Ings  declared  he  would  fbUow  and  cat  «*^ 
head  off  as  he  came  to  them.  ,  ,  ,.  «•< 
What  was  Ings  by  tnide?-!  "^^JV; 
led  to  believe  that  he  was  a  butcher ;  m»  ^ 
well  as  that,  he  proposed  ^^^^^ 
lord  Casamagh's  hands  o£  loP  "^ 

bags  with  him.  .     l— t4ie 

What  was  he  to  do  with  thej^  ^ 
proposed  to  bring,  away  ths  hia» 


13611 


Itickard  lUlfor  High  Trmm.  A.  D.  1830^ 


ri36« 


Castkreagfa  and  lord  Sid  mouth  in  the  bags; 
he  would  have  one  of  lord  Castlereagb*s  bands, 
saying,  that  he  would  cure  that,  as  it  would  be 
thought  a  great  deal  of  in  a  future  dav.  Ings 
had  on  a  former  day  said,  he  would  exhibit 
those  heads  on  poles,  and  carry  them  through 
the  streets;  on  the  house  beine  left,  after  thev 
had  done  what  they  had  to  do,  it  was  proposed, 
and  Harrison  undertook  it,  to  eo  to  the  King- 
street  barracks,  and  set  fire  to  the  shed  where 
the  straw  and  hay  were  deposited,  and  to  de« 
stroy  the  whole  building. 

Was  any  further  use  to  be  made  of  the 
heads,,  when  they  were  brought  away  ? — ^Yes, 
this  thing  was  often  talked  of ;  this  discourse 
finished  on  the  Wednesday  afternoon ;  those 
heads,  afier  they  were  brought  away,  which 
had  been  proposed  by  Ings,  saying  he  would 
exhibit  them  about  on  a  pole,  Thistlewood 
said,  '^no,  the  best  way  of  carrying  them  will 
be  to  put  them  on  a  pike  each,  and  carry  them 
behina  the  cannon  to  terrify  the  people,  to 
make  them  belieye  that  there  was  somebody 
of  more  consequence  than  they  were  aware  of 
at  the  head  of  them." 

Was  any  further  use  to  be  made  of  either  of 
them  after  that,  of  lord  Castlereagh's  head  for 
instance?— It  was  proposed  after  this,  by 
Bradbum,  after  it  had  been  exhibited  about 
the  streets  for  two  or  three  days,  says  he,  ^  I 
will  make  a  box  and  inclose  it,  and  send  it 
to  Ireland,  or  take  it  over  myself  to  be  ex- 
liibited  there." 

Did  any  thing  further  pass  at  that  meeting, 
ss  to  the  plan? — Yes,  it  was  proposed  that 
after  they  had  done  at  lord  Harrewby's,  Har- 
nson  was  to  go  to  the  horse  barracks,  support- 
ed by  Wilson,  to  set  them  on  fire,  by  a  ball 
fnrepared  for  that  purpose,  and  others  were  to 
proceed  to  Gray  Vinn  lane ;  if  they  met  with 
ftny- interruption  from  the  people,  it  was  pro- 
posed to  run  the  pikes  through  them,  and  to  fire 
upon  them  occasionally;  and  after  they  met 
the  party  in  Gray's-inn-lane,  to  assist  them  in 
takhig  those  two  pieces  of  cannon  at  the  Light- 
horse  stables,  ana  to  proceed  from  there  to  the 
Artillery-ground  to  taxe  the  six  cannon  there. 
Who  was  to  head  the  party  that  was  to  take 
the  six  cannon   at 'the  Artillery-ground? — 
Cook ;  after  Cook  had  got  the  six  pieces  of 
cannon  he  was  to  load  tliem,  and  bnng  them 
into  the  street,  and  if  there  was  any  interrup- 
tion to  fire ;  if  he  found  the  people  came  oyer 
to  him,  to  enable  him  to  advance,  he  was  to 
advance  to  the  Mansion-house,   divide   the 
cannon  into  two  parts,  place  ^ree  on  each 
side  of  the  Mansion-house,  and  demand  an  en- 
trance ;  and  if  it  was  refbsed,  fire  upon  it  on 
both  sides. 

What  was  to  be  done  with  the  Mansion- 
house? — ^Tfae  Mansion-house  was  proposed, 
by  Thistlewood,  for  the  seat  of  the  provisional 
government. 

Cook  was  not  to  be  of  the  party  at  lord 

Harrowby's? — No,  he  was  to  command  the 

party  that  was  to  go  into  the  city;  then  it  was 

proposed  that  they  should  take  the  Baoik  of 

VOL.  XXXIII, 


'England,  and  plunder  it ;  but  the  books  were 
not  to  be  meddled  with,  as  Thistlewood  thought, 
by  preserving  the  books,  they  would  com- 
municate to  them  something  more  than  they 
were  aware  of. 

You  afterwards  broke  up,  for  the  purpose  of 
making  preparations  ? — Yes>  that  is  the  outline 
of  it. 

On  the  Wednesday^  what  time  did  you  go 
there? — I  went  up  about  two  o'clock,  as  near 
as  I  can  guess. 

Was  any  thing  said  as  to  a  sign  or  counter* 
sign  P— Harrison  was  the  man  that  proposed 
this ;  saying  the  men  that  had  to  go  round 
to  communicate  it  to  what  men  they  could  col- 
lect  

It  was  proposed,  then,  that  the  persons 
there  should  go  round  for  the  purpose  of  con^ 
municating  what  they  had  in  view  to  their 
associates  f — Yes. 

What  was  proposed  as  to  that? — ^Harrison 
proposed  that  bvtUm  should  be  the  countersign. 
How  was  that  to  be  ? — ^The  roan  appointed 
to  stand  in  Oxford-road  was  to  pronounce  the 
letters  6, «,  f,  and  the  man  in  waiting  to  say 
t,  o,  n  ;  on  doing  this  he  was  to  be  considered 
a  man  friendly  to  their  concern. 

Where  was  that  station  to  be  ? — The  end  of 
Oxford-road,  by  Tyburn-turnpike. 

After  they  had  made  those  arrangements 
did  you  separate  for  the  purposes  of  prepara- 
tion ? — ^Yes. 

Did  Davidson  and  the  other  men  go  upon 
the  watch  on  the  Tuesday,  as  had  been  ap-- 
pointed? — Yes,  I  found  Davidson  on  the 
watch ;  but  the  other  man  I  did  not  know. 

At  what  time  did  they  go  upon  the  watch  ? 
— ^They  went  upon  the  watch  at  six  o'clock. 

You  state  it  had  been  originally  proposed, 
that  Tidd  and  Brunt  should  go  upon  the 
watch  at  nine  o'clock  for  the  purpose  of  re- 
lieving'Davidson  and  his  associate  ?— Yes. 

Did  they  go  upon  that  watch  ? — They  set- 
tled for  that ;  but  Brunt  came  back  in  about 
five  minutes^  saying,  that  Tidd  had  called  at 
his  house,  and  found  the  man  that  he  had 
appointed;  and  that  he  was  a  man  of  too 
much  consequence  to  be  left,  and  that  there- 
fore he  could  not  go  on  the  watch. 

In  consequence  of  that,  what  proposal  was 
made  ?— For  me  to  go  instead  of  Tidd. 

Did  you,  in  consequence  of  that,  go  upon 
the  watch  with  Brunt  instead  of  Tidd  ? — ^Yes, 
I  did. 

When  you  got  upon  the  watch  did  you  see 
Davidson  there  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  and  Brunt  continue  on  the  watch 
till  twelve  ? — Not  in  the  square  all  the  while. 

Did  you,  part  of  the  time,  go  into  any  pub- 
lic-house in  the  neighbourhood  ? — Yes. 

Where  was  that  public-house  situate  ?->At 
the  back  of  the  square;  a  public-house  at  the 
comer  of  the  mews. 

Did  Brunt  do  any  thing  there  ? — He  played 
at  dominos  there. 

Did  you,  during  that  time,  go  out  into  the . 
square  to  see  whedier  all  was  quiet,  and  re- 

4S 


1363]       1  GEORGE  iV. 


Trial  of  WiUiam  Davidum  and 


[\m 


turn  again  ?— Yes ;  and  I  went  out  at  eleven  t 
o'clock,  and  stopped  till  the  turn  of  twelve^ 
and  then  went  home. 

Yon  found  all  quiet? — Yes. 

Do  you  recollect  on  Tuesday  afternoon,  or 
evening,  going  to  Fox-court,  and  smelling  any 
strange  smelW — Yes;  on  going  up  stairs,  I 
smelt  a  strange  smell ;  on  going  in,  I  found 
Edwards,  Ings,  and  Hall.  Ings  and  Hall 
were  employed  in  making  illumination-balls  to 
fire  the  buildings,  and  Edwards  in  making  the 
touch-paper  for  the  grenades.  Hall  was  laying 
the  paper  on  the  floor,  to  receive  the  balls,  to 
prevent  their  sticking  to  the  band. 

Did  you  stay  there  any  time,  or  go  away? — 
I  went  away  almost  directly. 

The  next  day,  I  believe,  you  did  not  go  very 
yearly  to  the  room  did  you  ? — No. 

Some  business  of  your  own  kept  you  away  ? 
— Yes, 

What  time  did  you  go  ? — About  two  o'clock. 

Whom  did  you  find  when  you  went  there? 
»-I  found  Brunt  in  his  own  room,  the  front 
room. 

While  you  were  in  that  front  room,  did 
Strange  come  in  ? — Strange  was  the  first  man 
that  came  in  after  myself. 

Did  Strange  come  in  by  himself,  or  accom- 
panied by  other  peisonsr-^By  himself;  there 
were  one  or  two  strangers  came  in  afterwards. 

What  were  they  employed  about?— There 
were  some  pistols  laid  upon  the  drawers  in 
•Brunt*s  room. 

How  many  ? — I  saw  half  a  dozen. 

What  were  they  doing  with  those  pistob? 
— They  were  endeavouring  to  fix  the  flints  in 
them. 

Was  any  thing  said  by  Brunt  ? — On  these 
.last  men  coming  in,   Brunt  proposed  they 
should  go  into  the  other  room. 

Did  they  in  consequence  of  that  go  with  the 
pistols  into  the  other  room  ? — Yes.       * 

You  went  into  the  other  room  too  f — ^Yes. 

Whom  did  you  find  at  that  time  in  the  other 
room? — ^There  were  no  other  persons  in  the 
room  at  tliat  time,  except  those  who  followed 
from  Brunt's. room. 

Who  came  in  afterwards  ?  —  Thistlewood 
came  in  soon  afterwards. 

Was  Ings  there  P — Not  at  that  time. 

Did  you  see  him  there  in  the  course  of  the 
afternoon  ? — Yes. 

Wliat  was  Ings  doing  ? — Ings,  within  a  veiy 
little  time  after  he  came  into  the  room,  began 
to  equip  himself. 

Did  any  thing  take  place  before  Ings  came 
.in  ? — ^The  different  strangers  that  were  then  in 
the  room  were  busy  in  fixing  the  different 
.ftints  to  their  pistols,  and  likewise  the  slings 
to  the  cutlasses  that  I  saw  lying  in  the  room. 

Did  any  body  make  any  proposition  to  them? 
--Not  as  yet ;  on  Thistlewood  coming  into  the 
room,  he  looks  round. 

When  Thistlewood  came  in,  were  they  pre- 
paring themselves  ? — Yes,  they  were ;  and  he 
said,  "this  looks  something  like  as  if  you 
were  going  to  work;"  he  claps  bis  hand  on 


my  shoulder,  and  asked  me  how  Hid ;  I  aid 
'<  I  am  rather  unwell,  and  very  low  in  spirits;" 
in  consequence  of  this,  he  pmposed  to  Bnat 
to  send  for  something  to  drink  to  pat  me  in 
spirits ;  and  he  proposed  directly  after  tkii, 
that  there  should  be  some  paper  fetched,  is  he 
wanted  to  draw  up  some  bills,  and  mooej  is 
produced  from  Thistlewood  to  Bront. 

Was  any  thing  said  about  the  sort  of  paper! 
—Thistlewood  wanted  such  paper  as  the 
newspapers  were  printed  upon ;  he  did  sot 
know  the  name  of  it,  and  I  proposed  tohia 
to  have  some  cartridge  paper ;  in  conseqneace 
of  this,  cartridge  paper  was  sent  for,  aad 
Brunt  said  his  apprentice  or  his  bojsboald 
fetch  it. 

Brunt  has  a  son  as  well  as  an  apprestittf 
—Yes. 

Did  Brant  go  out  for  that  purpose  ?-Vi^ 
and  the  cartridge  paper  was  brought 

Was  there  anv  table  in  the  room  ?— A  tilile 
and  chair  were  brought  in  from  Bront's  ma 
at  the  time. 

What  was  done  with  tliem .'— ThistlevMd 
sat  down,  and  wrote  three  bills  ? 

What  were  the  contents  of  those  bills?- 
Thistlewood  wrote  "  Your  tyrants  aie  de- 
stroyed. The  friends  of  liberty  are  caBcd 
upon  to  come  forward.  The  provisioDilfH 
vernment  is  now  sitting.  James  lagSi  scot- 
tary.    February  23rd,  1820.'' 

As  he  was  writing  the  third  bill,  did  j» 
make  any  observation  upon  him?— On  sj 
looking  at  Thistlewood,  I  perceived  him  to  m 
very  much  agitated,  and  he  could  not  ^nH 
any  more,  and  he  wished  somebody  else » 
Uke  the  pen,  and  proposed  Hall  to  take  w 
pen ;  HaU  refused  it;  there  was  anotherBM» 
a  strange  man,  in  the  room,  who  reMtf 
first  to  take  the  pen,  but  afterwards  toektf^ 

Did  he  proceed  to  write  any  other  Ml.- 
Yes,  he  did.  ^ 

We  must  not  ask  you  the  contents  w  *» 
bill;  what  was  to  be  done  with  those biUs?-- 
Those  bills  were  to  be  stuck  up  at  thende « 
different  buildings  that  were  to  be  set  fire  ttM» 
order  to  communicate  to  the  public  whati* 
been  done.  ^^ 

After  those  bills  were  Irritten,  whatfirt» 
took  place  at  the  meeting?  how  was  i^ 
equipped  ?— Ings  equipped  himself  by  pii^J 
a  black  belt  round  his  loins,  another  hao^ 
upon  his  shoulder  to  support  the  cn^jS 
with  a  couple  of  bags  in  toe  form  of  a  soW«» 
haversack. 

Were  these  under  his  great  coat  ?-w  o^ 
each  shoulder.  .v. 

Under  his  great  coat?— Under  the coit» 

wore  at  top,  he  put  on  his  great  ***^*^ 
vntrds ;  the  belt  round  his  loins  was  to  coo^ 
a  brace  of  pistols,  a  belt  for  his  cntlass; »» 
on  viewing  himself,  he  perceived  that  W"* 
forgotten  to  bring  his  steel.  .  ^  ^o. 

Had  he  any  knife?— Yes,  a  large b«tt»ff' 
knife,  with  wax-end  round  the  handle. 

Was  he  asked  any  question  ^^l^^ 
enc^  was  wonnd  round  the  handle  .*»•» 


1365] 


lUdiard  Tiddftr  High  Treaton. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1366 


was  asked  the  reason^  and  be  said  it  was  to 
preveDt  its  slipping  in  his  hand  when  he  was 
doing  the  joh. 

Was  that  like  a  butcher's  knife  P — No,  a 
butclier's  knife  is  sharp  at  the  point ;  he  said 
he  had  procured  it  for  that  purpose;  about 
this  time  Bradbum  came  up,  saying  he  wished 
Thistlewood  to  send  some  person  to  the  men 
he  had  collected  together,  at  a  spot  where  they 
nught  be  more  handy. 

Who  was  appointed  for  that  purpose? — 
Tidd  was  appointed ;  Tidd  was  not  very  will- 
ing to  go,  as  he  said,  because  they  were  Irish- 
men ;  he  thought  it  would  be  better  for  one  of 
their  own  country  to  go ;  for  one  of  their  own 
country  would  do  better  with  them. 

Did  he  at  last  go  ?  —Yes,  he  did. 

Do  you  happen  to  recollect  how  the  pri- 
soner DavidsoD  was  accoutred? — I  cannot 
cha^e  my  memory  that  I  saw  any  thing  of 
chat  kind. 

Tldk, — My  lord,  I  did  not  understand  the 
evidence  the  last  time  he  brought  my  name 
into  question. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — You  do  very  rightly,  if 
any  thing  passes  which  you  do  not  hear  dis- 
tinctly, to  inform  us  of  it,  and  it  shall  be  re- 
peated :  the  last  he  has  stated  respecting  you 
iwas,  that  on  Bradbum  coming  up,  and  saying 
be  wished  Thistlewood  to  send  some  person  to 
the  men  he  had  collected  near  the  spot,  you 
were  desired  to  go ;  that  at  first  you  rather 
objected  to  that,  stating  that  the  men  who  were 
to  be  met  were  Irish,  and  that  one  of  their 
own  countrymen  would  manage  better  with 
them  than  you  who  were  English,  and  that 
you  at  last  consented. 

Tidd, — You  have  made  a  mistake  there. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — ^You  will  have  an  op- 
portunity, by  your  counsel  or  yourself,  to  put 
any  questions  that  you  think  proper ;  but  it  is 
DOt  only  more  regular,  but  it  is  more  advan- 
tageous to  you  to  wait  till  he  has  concluded 
bis  examination  before  you  put  any  (juestions ; 
jou  shall  have  the  full  opportunity  in  its  pro- 
per time. 

Mr,  SoUeUor  General, — Do  you  remember 
Falin's  coming  in  ? — ^Yes. 

On  his  coming  in,  did  anything  pass? — 
Yes ;  Palin,  seizing  the  opportunity  of  This* 
tlewood  and  Brunt  being  out  of  the  room, 
begins  to  address  himself  to  what  were  in  the 
room ;  saying,  **  Gentlemen,  what  you  are  met 
bere  for,  I  hope  you  all  know  what  it  is;  if 
such,  I  hope  you  will  give  it  a  consideration ; 
first  ask  yourselves  respecting  the  deed  of 
the  assassination,  whether  you  conceive,  within 
yourselves,  it  will  be  a  matter  of  consequence 
to  your  country ;  if  you  conceive  it  will  be  of 
eooiequence  to  yonr  country,  then  in  the  next 
place  you  ought  to  come  to  a  determination 
to  stick  true  to  each  other ;  unless  yott  come  to 
this  determination,  you  can  do  no  good ;  any 
sun  that  is  seen^  after  you  .begin  this,  to  .show 


the  least  signs  of  cowardice,  that  man  ought 
to  be  run  through  upon  the  spot ;"  a  tall  man 
that  was  in  the  room,  whose  name  I  do  not 
know,  spoke,  saying  he  could  pretty  well  see 
the  meaning  of  his  speech ;  "  out,"  says  he, 
<<you  speak  as  if  all  that  were  in  the  room: 
knew  wnat  we  were  met  here  for;  that  is  what 
I  and  some  of  us  wish  to  know ;  I  am  not  a 
man  that  am  afraid  of  myself,  nor  should  any 
man  that  turns  out  on  such  a  thing  as  this  be 
afraid  of  his  life ;  I  will  be  the  ftrst  man,  if  I 
see  any  man  a  coward,  to  run  him  through." 
Palin  was  going  to  speak  again ;  at  this  mo- 
ment, in  came  Brunt  into  the  room. 

Did  Brunt  come  alone,  or  Brunt  and 
Thistlewood?— Brunt  alone.  Brunt  seeing,, 
as  it  appeared  to  roe,  an  alteration  ii\^ 
the  countenances  of  the  men  in  the  room, 
wished  to  know  the  cause;  he  was  told  that 
there  were  those  in  the  room,  who  did  not 
know  what  they  were  met  there  upon,  and 
wished  to  know.  Brunt  said  directly,  "This 
is  not  the  room  where  you  are  to  be  informed, 
go  along  with  me  to  the  room  in  the  Edgware- 
road,  there  I  will  tell  you."  Brunt  said  then, 
"any  man  that  goes  along  with  me,  I  will 
treat  him  with  a  drop  of  something  that  is 
good,  in  order  to  put  them  in  spirits  for  what 
they  are  going  about."  The  tall  man  made 
answer,  "I  hope  whoever  is  going  on  this 
piece  of  business  will  not  go  and  drink,  for  a 
drunken  man  in  such  a  business  as  this  is  not 
fit  to  be  trusted ;  for  a  man  so  doing  would 
throw  himself  into  the  hands  of  his  enemies." 
On  this  Brunt  began  to  put  the  men  on  the 
move  to  go  to  the  Edgware-road,  saying  (and 
that  was  the  first  time  I  heard  that),  that  Palin 
would  want  that  room  to  bring  his  men  to. 

DavMiion.— Mr.  Attorney-general,  you  asked 
the  witness  how  Davidson  was  accoutred ;  does 
the  witness  mean  to  say  that  I  was  at  Fox- 
court  that  evening. 

Mr.  iSWicifor-Gcnerfl/.— Was  Davidson  at 
Fox*court  that  evening  ? — I  have  not  said  he 
was :  I  did  not  see  him  there  that  afternoon,  at 
the  time  I  am  speaking  of. 

You  have  given  an  account  of  meetings  that 
took  place  from  the  beginning  of  January  to 
the  23rd  of  February;  was  Davidson  fre- 
quently at  those  meetings  in  that  place?-* 
Yes. 

But  he  was  not  at  the  particular  meeting  to 
which  you  now  speak  ? — No,  he  was  not. 

Mr.  Boron  Garrow. — ^I  have  been  looking 
to  my  note  of  what  passed  on  a  former  day,  as 
well  as  the  present,  and  he  did  not  name  you 
as  one  of  the  persons  present  at  that  time. 

Davidson. — ^Thank  you,  my  lord. 

^  Mr.  Solicitor  General. — ^Was  be  at  the  meet- 
ing on  Sunday,  when  this  meeting  was.  ar- 
ranged ? — Yes,  he  was. 

And  be  had  been  at  several  of  the  previous  ? 
— ^Yes;  the  first  of  my  knowing  Davidson  was 
on  the  loth  of  January. 


1367]         1  GJBORGB  IV. 

That  was  before  you  went  to  priion  ?— Yes. 

After  this  had  takea  place,  aod  firant  put 
the  men  on  the  move,  did  you  go  up  Ozfocd- 
Btreet  ? — I  did. 

Did  you  meet  Thistlewood  in  the  Edgwaie* 
road  ?— Yes« 

Was  Brunt  with  you  at  that  time? — Brant 
and  another  man. 

Did  you  all  go  together  to  the  stable  in 
Cato-street? — ^Yes. 

When  you  went  into  the  stable  did  you  see 
any  person  in  the  stable  on  the  ground 
floor? — I  saw  Davidson  sitting,  and  Wilson 
standing,  apparently,  as  it  appeared  to  me 
ia  walking  along,  doing  something  to  the 
pikes. 

Did  you  go  up  into  the  loft  ? — ^I  did. 

How  many  men  did  you  find  assembled  al* 
together,  including  those  that  were  below  ? — 
There  were  about  six  or  seven  of  them,  or 
there  might  be  more. 

What  was  there  up  stairs  in  the  room  ? — On 
the  bench  in  the  room,  there  were  pistols  and 
cutlasses. 

What  kind  of  a  bench  was  it  ? — ^I  did  not 
take  particular  notice  of  the  bench. 

Was  it  like  a  carpenter's  bench  T — Yes. 

What  passed  up  there ;  did  more  men  come 
in? — There  were  more  came  in  the  course  of 
the  evening.  From  the  accounts  that  Thistle- 
wood  gave,  counting  the  men  that  were  in  the 
room,  there  were  eighteen  men  in  the  room  up 
stairs,  and  two  below,  which  made  twenty. 
'  Did  they  appear  to  you  to  be  as  numerous 
as  that? — ^Yes»  they  did» 

Were  you  yourself  armed  in  any  way? — ^I 
bad  a  blunderbuss,  which  I  took  off  and  laid 
upon  the  bench,  and  a  broomstick,  that  had 
been  prepared  for  the  reception  of  a  bayonet, 
ibr  Brunt ;  I  delivered  them  both. 

Was  Tidd  there  at  that  time  ? — He  was  not. 
*  Was  Brunt  there? — Brunt  was  up  in  the 
loft  when  I  went  up. 

And  Thistlewood  went  up  with  you  ?— Yes, 
he  went  up  before  me. 

Did  any  thing  pass  about  Tidd  not  being 
there  ? — In  going  up  from  the  stable,  Thistle- 
wood and  Brunt  were  in  discourse  together. 

Thistlewood  seemed  rather  agitated,  for 
fear,  as  it  appeared  to  me  afterwards,  Tidd 
would  not  come.  Brunt  perceiving  there  was 
an  alteration  in  the  countenance  of  what  men 
were  in  the  room,  and  Ings  as  well,  Ings  began 
to  stamp  and  swear :  he  hoped  they  would  not 
stop  now ;  if  they  did,  he  should  either  hane 
himself  or  cut  his  throau  On  this,  Thistlewood 
goes  to  the  end  of  the  table ;  just  after  tfiis 
Tidd  came. 

Had  any  thing  passed  about  Tidd's  not 
coming? — Brunt  turned  himself  round  to  the 
bench,  and  said,  he  would  venture  his  life  that 
Tidd  would  come ;  (bat  he  was  confident  of 
it,  and  shortly  after  this  Tidd  came  into  tha 
room. 

Tell  us  what  passed  ? — I  saw  Tidd  talking 
to  Thistlewood ;  Thistlewood  seemed  at  this 
time  a  little  agiuted,  and  so  did  TiddfaisMelf ; 


Thistlewood  saeing  me  lodkingat  him  tnmi 
himself  away;  Tidd  came  towudsme,  aail 
said  to  Tidd,  ^  Tidd  do  not  you  tbink  Uiitii 
a  pretty  set  out;  do  you  think  it  ispoaiUe 
for  the  men  here  to  do  that  which  is  talked 
of  ;*'  Tidd  said,   *^  no,  it  never  can  be  done.* 

2W.^My  lord,  I  have  no  oppertimitjif 
speaking. 

Mr.  Barsm  Gmrcw.-^lt  would  be  modb 
better  for  yourself  you  should  postpone  it; 
you  may  be  sure  your  learned  coaosel  viH 
take  a  note  of  it. 

2W.— It  immediately  oonoens  abal  Mr. 
Adams  said  last. 

Mr.  Baron  Gomw.— It  is  irregulw  «Br  jw 
to  break  in,  but  I  would  not  on  that  aocont 
if  you  tell  me  you  prefer  doing  it  now,  forW 
your  doing  it ;  but  you  may  be  quite  sore  it  ii 
more  for  your  advantage  to  bear  aH  hei^i 
before  vou  put  any  question,  than  tobiwkii 
upon  his  narrative ;  if  you  should  ooiiil « 
consequence  of  baving  your  mind  oocnpieai  I 
undertake  to  remind  you  before  the  proper 
season  for  your  putting  questions  ii  gOK  ^' 

Mr.  Soiidtor  GoierflZ.— Did  Thistlewwd  ar 
any  thing  upon  this  ?— Thistlewood  w^  "I 
hope  for  God's  sake  you  will  not  tldnkflj 
dropping  the  concern  now,  if  you  do,  it  wj 
turn  out  a  second  Despard's  job;"  saying,  tW 
there  were  quite  men  enough  in  the  roon^  aj 
"  you  seem  to  be  frightened  for  fear  of  wt 
having  strength  enough."  Thistlewood  s«i 
"  supposing  lord  Harrowby  to  have  Mtw 
servants  in  his  bouse,  they  will  not  be  pn* 
pared  as  you  are  ;  but  not  only  that,  bat  tjj 
will  be  terrified,  and  from  going  into  tlieM* 
to  coming  out  of  it  again,  will  not  ««* j" 
minutes.^  He  just  went  over  it  »y*^^ 
fourteen  men,  he  thought,  would  be  esoap* 
go  into  the  room ;  these  fourteen  ^.^ 
proposed,  after  its  first  being  put  to  aU law 
room,  whether  all  in  the  room  preseatwet 
agreeable  to  go.  ^. 

It  was  put  to  the  persona  in  the  room,  «*• 
ther  they  were  agreeable  to  go  ?— Yes. 

What  was  done  upon  that'-Ontheircj 
senting  to  go^  there  were  foorteea  ■»  P*** 

For  what  were  those  fburteea  i«*VrT 
out ?— Thejr  were  picked  out  for  the iofc!P 
pose  of  gomgintothewK)mtodotij«»""r 

What  were  the  others  to  do?-T«  ^ 
six  were  to  secure  the  seivants. 

The  six  were  to  be  employed  in  w^'JJ'J 
you  represented  before,  to  guaid  theitan 
the  area  P-^-Yes.  ^ 

Was  any  thing  done  in  thewtyofsep^ 
them  from  the  rest?— The  men  •^•Vj , 
tinw  where  they  were,  and  Brunt  pw^^  j 
bottle,  and  just  at  the  condusioo of  m 
heard  a  noise  dawa  stain.  ^ 

I  want  to  know  whether  te  "^^Lt} 
moved  to  any  sapaxata  part  of  ^f^t^  • 
-•No,  nottoth(Bopp«ilta*«^"*'^ 


1369] 


Bkhari  Tiddfxr  High  TrtuoH. 


A.IX  1890. 


Liara 


after  the  officers  came  into  the  room,   they 
sidled  into  the  little  room. 

Were  the  fourteen  men  tingled  out  for  the 
purpose  of  doing  this  ? — Yes. 

what  did  they  do  ? — They  agreed  to  go  into 
the  room. 

Who  were  those  menf — There  were,  This- 
iiewood  was  one;  Ings  was  another;  Brunt 
was  another;.  Ually  Wilson^  and  Dayidson 
was  proposed. 

Where  was  he  f— He  was  down  below. 
.  Do  yon  remember  any  more? — I  do  not 
know ;  I  ha?e  mentioned  all  the  names  I 
know,  and  Biadbum  and  some  others  that  I 
4o  net  know.  Were  they  separated  to  a  dif- 
ferent part  of  the  room  from  the  rest  P — ^Those 
who  were  to  go  in. 

After  that  separation  had  taken  place^  or 
while  that  was  going  on,  was  there  any  alarm 
l^iven  below  ?— x  es. 

Mr.  Banm  Oamw, — Before  this,  had  any 
other  person  mnde  any  address  to  the  people  i 
-—Mr.  Brant  made  an  address  to  the  people ; 
he  turned  round  to  the  bench  again,  and  said 
^You  seem  to  think  there  is  not  sufficient 
strength  to  go ;''  he  declared  that  if  there  were 
not  more  than  eight  or  nine  men,  he  himself 
vras  determined  to  go;  he  directly  said  if  there 
^ere  not  more  than  five  or  six  men  he  would 
go.  ^'We  hare  things  here  which  some  of 
you  knownothinff  about,  that  will  blow  the 
houae  up,  and  if  I  go  with  fi?e  or  six  and  find 
myself  in  danger,  iwill  clap  fire  to  it,  and 
Uow  the  house  down  orer  our  heads.'' 

Mr.  SolkUor  QtneraL  —  You  state,  thai 
while  the  picking  out  the  men  was  going  for- 
wardy  you  heard  a  noise  below ;  what  kind  of 
noise  was  that  ? — ^Tbe  sound  of  a  pistol ;  6u 
■ecdy  after  this,  at  Uie  bottom  of  the  ladder, 
Ifae  word  was  given  "  Holloa,  show  a  light  T 
on  this,  Thistlewood  turns  to  the  bench,  takes 
the  candle,  and  from  that  goes  to  the  head  of 
<be  ladder  in  the  room,  looks  down,  saw  they 
ivere  coming,  turned  round,  and  set  the  candle 
«n  the  bench ;  on  this  they  began  to  sidle  off 
^which  was  the  first  time  I  saw  this  little  room) 
into  the  little  room ;  the  officers  came  into  the 
soom. 

They  came  up  the  ladder  ? — ^Yes :  and  took 
the  command  of  the  room,  with  their  pistols 
presented. 

You  need  not  describe  what  took  place  at 
tiiat  time,  as  we  shall  have  that  from  the  offi« 
eers  tfaonselves;  I  believe  the  lights  were 
blown  out  after  Smithers  was  killeid  ?-*Yes ; 
as  soon  as  the  pistol  went  off. 

And  you^made  your  escape? — Yes. 

When  Thistlewood  said  that  fourteen  men 
^vould  be  sufficient  to  go  into  the  room,  was 
Tidd  in  the  room  f— He  was ;  but  I  am  pretty 
sore  that  Tidd  was  not  one  that  was  to  go  into 
elie  room. 

Was  he  in  the  room  at  the  time  when  they 
gave  the  assent  to  what  Thistlewood  proposed, 
theft  tb^  should  go  on  with  the  measure  f^- 
Yes^he  WB8* 


Mr.  Baton  Ganvw, — ^Was  he  there  when 
Bnint  made  the  speech  you  have  just  stated  ? 
•—He  was« 

Was  that  after  you  had  made  the  observa- 
tion to  Tidd, ''  A  pretty  set  out;  do  you  think 
these  men  can  accomplish  the  woriir— After 
I  had  made  the  remark. 

Mr.  SoUdtor  General. — ^Both  Brunt's  and 
Thistlewood's  speeches  were  after  that  ? — ^Yes. 

And  Tidd  remained  in  the  room  ?— Yes. 

When  were  you  first  apprehended  ?— On 
Friday  the  25th. 

When  you  made  your  escape,  did  you  go 
back  to  your  own  apartment? — ^Yes,  and  re- 
mained there  till  I  was  apprehended. 

You  were  afterwards,  I  believe,  examined 
at  Whitehall,  with  the  other  prisoners  ? — ^I  was 
not  examined  that  day. 

But  you  were  afterwards  P — ^Yes. 

Tiaheri  Adaum^  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Cunoood, 

As  all  the  jury  have  not  had  the  misfortune 
to  meet  yoK'  three  times,  just  tell  iee  what  yon 
told  us — that  among  your  other  virtues,  yon 
abandoned  your  religion;  that  is  se>  is  it  notf 
— It  was  so. 

You  became  a  disbeliever  in  Christianity? 
—I  did. 

And  that  at  the  age  of  forty-five  years?—- 
Yes. 

You  do  call  yourself  a  christian  now  ?— Yes. 

When  did  you  come  back  to  the  belief  of 
Christianity  ?-^I  may  say  that  I  oame  back  to 
the  belief  of  Christianity  about  the  24th,  but  I 
was  convinced  beibre  that. 

Though  you  were  convinced  of  it  before, 
yon  did  not  come  bade  to  the  belief  till  the 
24th  ?— I  did  not  exactly. 

That  was  the  day  after  you  were  in  mar- 
vellous great  danger  of  Ming  hanged? — It 
was  so. 

So  that  the  fear  of  the  halter  brought  you 
back  to  your  old  belief  ?— It  might  have  some 
effect. 

I  observe  you  have  very  much  altered  your 

'  manner;  you  do  not  seem  quite  so  vehement; 

has  any  body  been  talking  to  you  since  you 

were  exam'ined  here  ? — No ;  I  do  not  want  any 

body  to  talk  to  me. 

You  have  changed  it  because  you  think  it 
somewhat  more  decent? — ^No;  I  am  rather 
onweil. 

Had  you  mixed  much  in  political  society 
before  you  met  Mr.  Thistlewood  f — ^Never  in 
my  life ;  I  have  had  my  political  c^inioBS,  but 
never  to  join  a  party. 

Was  it  among  your  political  opinions,  that 
it  was  lawful  to  sweep  off  fifteen  men  in  cold 
blood  ? — It  never  was  lawftil  in  my  sight. 

I  dare  say  you  thought  it  a  very  atrocious 
act?— I  thought  it  a  very  cruel  one  at  the 
first  proposal. 

You  reoottect  you  told  me  it  was  first  pro* 
posed  to  yoa  on  the  2nd  of  January  ?— Yes. 
.  And  notsrithstanding  yog  thoughiit  so  itniel 


137r]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  William  Davidson  and  [137} 


tn  act,  ]roii  consented  to  be  introduced  to  Mr. 
Thistlewood  ten  days,  after^  on  the  ISthP — ^I 
did. 

And  from  the  12th  of  January  to  the  2Srd 
of  February,  when  you  were  disappointed  all 
•f  youy  you  still  continued  to  freauent  meetings 
vrhere  that  matter  was  debatedi  settled  and 
determined  on  ? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

Notwithstanding  all  your  private  opinions, 
and  thinking  it  was  a  cruel  act  ?  looV  to  the 
jury? — t  did ;  I  am  not  going  to  enter  into 
debate  at  all  upon  it ;  I  shall  answer  you,  yes 
or  no. 

And  you  took  no  inconsiderable  part  in 
those  meetings  according  to  your  own  account ; 
^-I  have  stated  every  part  that  I  recollect; 
if  you  are  in  possession  of  any  part  I  have  not 
communicated  I  am  ready  to  do  it. 

I  am  in  possession  of  more  than  the  jury 
know  of  you,  or  than  I  wish  to  know  ? — ^I  will 
state  every  thing  to  the  jury. 

You  were  at  one  time  appointed  chairman 
of  this  committee  of  assassination  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  call  yourselves  so  ?  What  did  you 
call  yourselves?  most  committees  have  a 
name  ? — ^If  I  may  be  allowed  to  make  a  remari^ 
upon  that— 

Mr.  SolkUor  Genera/.— Make  no  remarks, 
but  answer  the  question.  There  was  no  par- 
ticular name  appointed. 

Mr.  Cunoood. — Were  they  all  members  of 
the  committee? — ^They  were  regular  exoept 
Cook,  on  the  Sunday  morning;  that  was  the 
first  time  that  the  committee  met. 
-  A  committee  is  part  of  a  larger  body ;  where 
was  your  large  body  ? — The  larger  body  tliat 
was  got  together  was  in  the  room  in  Cato- 
street ;  that  was  the  largest  number  that  was 
ever  collected  together  to  my  knowledge. 

Weie  they  the  whole  of  those  you  expected 
to  revolutionise  the  government  with  ? — ^Tbere 
was  a  talk  of  a  vast  many  more  attending. 

Do  you  know  of  any  others  ?— I  do  not ; 
not  by  name. 

Could  you  have  brought  any  men  into  the 
field  ?— No. 

Your  single  sword  was  all  you  could  con- 
tribute?— I  never  got  that,  nor  the  worth  of  a 
•hot  towards  it. 

That  was  all  you  agreed  to  contribute  ?— 
That  was  all  I  agreed  to  contribute. 

Keep  to  your  own  account ;  *'  all  the  com- 
mittee themselves  did  not  know  what  was 
going  forward  ?*'— Those  that  were  upon  the 
committee  knew  what  was  going  to  be  dtne ; 
there  were  some  that  attended  after  the  com- 
mittee ;  it  was  not  regularly  termed  a  com- 
mittee each  time. 

All  the  meetinn  did  not  know  what  they 
were  going  to  do  f— No,  some  did  not. 

You  knew  what  was  going  to  be  done  ?— • 
Yes. 

But  some  roan  in  a  brown  coat  got  up  and 
said,  *'  You  suppose  we  all  know  -what  we  -are 
goinsr  about,  but  I  wish  to  know  P*'-.Yes. 

When  he  said  that  the  design  being  to 


assassinate  the  cabinet  ministers,  Mr.  Bnst 
said,  *'  You  must  come  to  another  room,  lod 
there  you  shall  know  P" — Yes. 

And  upon  that,  men  joined  yoa?-TWf 
followed  us. 

It  was  not  the  same  party  that  were  to  go 
from  Cato-street  to  lord  Hanowby's,  that  wot 
to  seize  the  cannon  in  Gray's-inn-lane?— Hk 
same  party  that  were  to  do  the  west-eod  job^ 
were  to  go  to  GrayVinn-lane. 

Did  not  you  tell  us,  that  Mr.  Cook  vm  it 
the  bead  of  the  party  to  seize  the  cannon  ?- 
That  was  at  the  Artillery-ground. 

But  not  the  west-end  job  party?— No. 

Did  you  know  where  Mr.  Cook's  partj  i« 
to  come  from  ? — No. 

You  never  heard  where  his  diTim  bit 
themselves  ? — No ;  I  have  seen  Mr.  Cod 
himself. 

Was  Mr.  Palin  to  fire  the  town  vitb  iiis 
own  hand  P — He  and  others. 

Where  were  his  men  to  come  from?— I « 
not  know. 

You  have  told  us  about  a  proclaaatios;  I 
suppose  that  proclamation  received  uoiverw 
consent  when  it  was  read  ?— The  three  hills. 

The  three  bills,  saying,  "Your  tyraots « 
destroyed  ?"— Yes  ;  1  did  not  hear  any  Wj 
object  to  it. 

it  was  part  of  ihe  plan  that  those  hills  weR 
to  be  stuck  up  in  the  streets  the  same  nigtt- 
—It  was  proposed  by  Thistlewood ;  it  wmwJ 
put  from  the  chair ;  it  was  said  by  Thistleww 
they  were  to  be  stuck  up  arainst  the  hooso. 

What  became  of  them  r— I  cannot  say; » 
saw  them  in  the  room,  but  nefer  out  of  it 

Who  were  to  stick  them  up  ?— I  do  notkiMJJ. 

I  will  not  go  through  the  whole  of  iw 
story ;  but  ask  you,  do  you  know  1  mas  of  tte 
name  of  Thomas  Chambers  ?— I  do  noL 

Then  if  you  do  not  know  him,  yoo  nerff « 
course  called  on  a  roan  of  that  name,  «■ 
solicited  him  to  join  you  in  killing  his  m^ 
ty's  ministers ;  telling  him,  at  the  same  tine, 
you  wouW  have  blood  and  wine  forsupptfj 
I  do  not  know  that  ever  I  was  acqoii"W 
with  such  a  man.  . .  . . 

Will  you  deny  this  fact  ?r-I  wifl  poMtff^ 
if  I  were  guilty  of  the  fact  I  would  a^«J«" 
ledge  it ;  but  I  am  not  and  wiU  not  acki»fr 
ledge  it. 

On  the  night  of  the  23rd,  the  night  yos^ 
all  detected,  did  you  and  Edwards  «»'*T 
man,  Chambers,  and  desire  to  lea«  *r 
arms  with  him? — ^I  never  saw  Edwaiw »» 
the  Wednesday  rooming.  ?  t&I 

Then  you  mean  to  say  you  did  not?— *Of 
will  swear  I  did  not  .        ^ 

That  we  may  have  no  mistake  ^7 
man,  the  Chamben  I  mean  lives  m  o0b^ 
cock-court,  in  the  Strand?-!  do  ^  "* 
that  I  could  find  out  Healhcock-couit  ^ 

You  have  never  been  in  that  court, 
that  I  know  of;  I  may  have  becainUf'^ 

'  I  do  not  know  it.  .        ^ 

You  have  omitted  some  things  in  J'J' 

dencc  to-day  P— I  have  omitted  a  giw'^ 


en- 


J 


13731 


Rkhttrd  Tidd/or  High  TrmuM. 


A'f>.  18Sa 


U374 


You  stated  before^  that  tliere  were  to  be 
messages  sent  to  the  out-ports,  to  present  aoy 
gentlemen' leaving  the  kingdom  withoat  an 
order  from  the  provisional  government  ? — Yes. 

That  Brighton  was  to  be  taken  possession  of 
by  a  force?— Yes. 

What  had  Brighton  done?— Nothing  more 
than  the  other  places. 

.  Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — ^You  will  find  that  con* 
nected  with  the  circumstance  of  their  permit- 
ting no  persons  to  go  out. 

Mr.  Solicitor  GeneraL — I  have  omitted  many 
circumstances,  in  consequence  of  my  desire  to 
shorten  the  case. 

Mr.  Curxvood, — ^His  lordship  has  reminded 
me,  very  properly,  of  a  circumstance ;  they 
were  all  10  be  plundered  if  they  permitted  any 
person  to  go  out  of  the  kingdom  ? — Yes. 

Where  was  the  force  to  come  from  to  do 
this? — I  cannot  say,  but  they  expected  the 
people  to  come  over. 

As  you  were  a  leader,  what  were  the  ar- 
rangements for  all  this  ? — I  had  not  the  am- 
bition about  me  to  be  a  leader;  I  did  not 
expect  they  would  bring  things  to  such  a 
pitch. 

What  were  your  motives  ? — I  have  told  you 
before ;  I  had  a  reason  for  it,  and  shall  not 
make  allusion  to  that  again. 

You  stand  here  to  give  us  the  tnith,  and  the 
whole  truth;  what  was  your  object?— My 
object  was  to  search  further  into  the  principles 
of  Brunt,  as  I  stated  the  last  time. 

What  had  you  to  do  with  Brunt's  prin- 
ciples ? — I  had  a  foolish  and  curious  idea, 
wnich  I  call  a  very  weak  one. 

A  foolish  and  curious  ideaP — ^And  very 
weak  indeed  to  run  myself  into  so  much 
danger  for  that. 

You  wish  the  jury  to  understand,  that  you 
joined  men  for  the  purpose  of  assassination, 
firing  the  city,  and  overturning  tlie  goyem- 
ment,  because  you  had  a  foolish  and  curious 
idea,  to  know  what  were  Brunt's  principles ; 
do  you  mean  to  state  that  to  the  jur^  7 — I  state 
to  the  jury,  that  that  v^as  my  motive ;  that  I 
took  Brunt  by  the  hand,  and  I  had  not  been 
iong  acquainted  with  Brunt  before  I  had 
reason  to  believe  what  I  thought  of  Brunt  was 
confirmed. 

So  because  you  thought  something  of  Brunt, 
and  you  wanted  to  know  whether  it  was  well 
founded  or  not,  you  mixed  with  a  plot  to  as* 
saitsinate  fifteen  illustrious  men,  to  fire  the 
city,  and  to  overturn  the  empire? — ^There  was 
no  number  of  men  mentioned  at  that  time. 

His  majesty's  ministers,  who  amounted  to 
fifteen? — ^Yes. 

You  state  to  the  jury,  that  was  your  only 
reason  for  joining  in  this  plot? — I  do. 

Do  you  know  a  man  ot  the  name  of  What- 
man ? — No. 

You  have  told  us,  that  there  was  a  con- 
versation in  the  loft  at  Gato-street,  in  which 
some  one  said  to  Tidd  or  you^  I  believe,  *^  This 


is  a  pretty  business,  do  you  think  there  are 
enough  of  us  here  to  do  such  a  job ;"  and  he 
said, ''  No ;"  did  not  Tidd  tell  you  he  had  been 
deceived  in  the  business- which  had  brought 
him  to  that  loft,  but  finding  what  it  was  h^ 
would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it  ? — He  did 
not  say  he  had  been  deceived,  but  his  answer 
to  me  was,  **  No,  it  never  can  be  done." 
Was  that  all  that  he  said^?— Yes. 

Mr.  Boron  Garrow. — Prisoner  Tidd,  you  hare 
heard  the  last  question  put  by  your  learned 
counsel,  and  ^he  answer  given  to  it ;  if  yon 
wish  to  pursue  that  question  further,  you  may 
do  60,  and  if  you  wish  me  to  refresh  your 
recollection  by  repeating  to  you  the  question  to 
which  your  former  interposition  referred,  I  will 
do  it. 

Tm/J.— Thank  you,  my  lord;  with  respect 
to  the  last  question  put  to  him,  that  was  the 
question  I  intended  to  put  to  him ;  but  what  I 
stated  to  him  was  this,  when  I  came  up  to  him 
he  said,  **  this  is  a  pretty  piece  of  business^' 
I  observed  to  him 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow* — Before  you  go  further,. 
I  would  suggest  to  you,  whether  it  may  not  be 
more  prudent  in  you  to  confer  with  vour 
counsel,  and  to  put  yourself  in  the  guardian- 
ship of  his  discretion  and  judgment,  rather 
than  to  put  the  questions  yourself.  You  will 
exercise  your  own  discretion.  Do  not  imagine 
for  a  moment,  that  the  Court  wishes  to  prevent 
your  putting  any  question  which  you  may 
think  for  your  advantage;  the  court  interposes 
because  sometimes  persons  put  questions  which 
they  suppose  may  benefit  them  by  their 
answer,  and  they  do  them  an  injury;  when 
they  have  the  benefit  of  such  assistance  as  yoa 
have,  perhaps  it  will  be  better  to  suggest  the 
question  to  your  counsel.  Having  stated  that 
1  am  ready  to  take  down  any  question  you 
may  propose. 

7W.— I  am  very  much  obliged  to  you  my 
lord. 

Davidion,^'!  will  send  my  question  to  ay 
counsel. 

Mr.  Curwood. — ^With  respect  to  Davidson, 
^ou  have  stated  that  he  was  not  at  the  meet- 
ing on  the  23rd  ?— Yes. 

Was  he  armed  when  he  was  in  Cato-streetl 
— I  do  not  recollect  seeing  him  armed. 

Do  you  remember  seeing  him  there  at  all  ? 
—I  do. 

If  he  had  been  armed  in  any  extraordinary 
way  must  you  have  noticed  it? — ^I  saw  him 
both  in  the  stable  and  up  in  the  loft. 

Had  he  at  that  time  a  belt  round  him,  with 
a  sword  and  pistols  and  musket?— I  did  not 
observe  that  he  had  any  arms ;  I  saw  that  he 
was  very  busy  amongst  them. 

But  YOU  did  not  observe  that  he  was  armed? 
—I  did  not. 

If  he  had  been  armed,  must  it  not  have  aU 
tracted  your  attention  ? — Of  course,  if  he  had 
had  them  about  him  perceivable,  I  should  hive 


1975J       t  GBOSGB  IV. 


Triat^Wdlitm  iknUmiKuii 


\\n 


seen  theiD|  Vat  for  me  to  say  he  had  no  aias 
abonthim,  I  cannot;  he  might  have  them  in 
hispocket. 

Had  be  a  sword  by  his  side?— I  did  not 
observe  that. 

Had  he  pistob  in  his  belt  ?— I  did  not  see 
ihem. 

Or  a  mnsket  in  bis  band  ? — ^I  think  I  mnst 
have  seen  it;  but  when  the  officers  entered, 
the  arms  were  principally  lying  on  the  bench ; 
if  thev  had  not,  I  think  uie  consequences  must 
have  been  more  fatal  than  they  were. 

Bobert  Aiam»  re-examined  by 
Mr.  SoUeUor  Gemnd, 

Do  you  remember  anv  person  erer  bringing 
any  bullets  to  the  room  r — ^Yes. 

How  .many  ? — He  stated  the  number  to  be 
about  fire  hundred ;  this  was  at  the  room  in 
Foz-courty  on  the  Tuesday  morning,  and  he 
had  a  hand-saw  in  his  right  hand. 

You  have  been  asked  about  the  Christian 
religion ;  what  was  it  that  ledvou  to  disbeliere 
in  the  Christian  religion  ?'-Tbe  thing  that  led 
mt  to  disbelieve  the  Christian  leligion,  was 
the  works  of  Paine  on  the  Christian  religiott, 
that  were  put  into  my  hands  by  Mr.  Tidd 
•himself. 

You  have  been  asked  as  to  other  persons; 
was  Palin  in  Cato^treet  ?— No. 

Was  Potter  in  Cato^treet !— No. 

Was  Cook  in  Cato-stieet!— No,  not  to  my 
knowledge ;  I  did  not  see  him  there. 

Did  you  find  any  of  the  persons  to  whom 
Palin  alluded  as  his  men  ?— No,  I  did  not. 

There  were  some  persons  who  were  to  set 
^fiie  to  the  town,  of  whom  you  knew  nothing? 
—No;  he  had  a  parly  from  his  own  month, 
•that  he  was  to  ladl  on,  of  whom  I  knew 
nothing. 

Did  you  know  any  thing  of  Cook's  party  ? — 
I  did  not. 

You  knew  nothing  either  of  Palla's  or  Cook's 
party ;  the  one  being  to  take  possession  of  the 
cannon,  and  the  other  to  set  nre  to  the  town? 
—No. 

I  think  you  say  Hall  was  in  the  room  at  the 
time  those  proclamations  were  written  P— Yes. 

Mr.  Btmm  Qarrmo, — ^Hall  is  not  to  be  tried  ? 

Jdr.  SoUcUor  Genervtf.— No,  my  lord. 

EUtmor  WaOotr  swomd— Bzamined  by 
Mr.  Onra^. 

I  believe  you  are  the  niece  and  servant  of 
Mrs.  Rogers,  of  No.  4,  Fox-court,  GrayVinn- 
lane  ?— Yes. 

Did  Brunt,  who  has  been  tried  here,  lodge 
in  your  house  ? — ^Yes. 

Had  he  lodged  there  for  many  months  before 
'last  Januaiy  ? — ^It  would  have  been  a  twelve 
month  this  last  Easter. 

What  rooms  did  he  occupy  P — The  two  front 
rooms  on  the  second-floor. 

In  the  month  of  Jsmuaxy  last,  did  he  intro- 
duce any  person  to  you  to  take  another  room  ? 
—Yes, 


Whet  room  was  diatf— tbe  two-pn  of 
stairs  back  room. 

Who  vras  the  person  whom  he  soiotrodwd? 
— Ings. 

The  person  who  has  been  tried  ?— Tes. 

Did  be  state  to  you  what  lags  ivu?— Ib^ 
he  did  not. 

Was  it  at  all  mentioned  what  bosnes  lap 
was  f — ^No ;  he  said  -peihaps  he  mfjbi  brios 
his  goods  in  in  a  week. 

The  room  vras  unf umiahed  ?— Yes.    . 

The  rent  was  three  shillings  a  week  ?-Tes. 

Did  Ings  ever  bring  any  goods  ia  ?— Not  1» 
my  knovrledge. 

Mmy  IZc^iers  sworn.— Exuninedbj 
Mr.  Gim^. 

We  have  learnt  from  your  niece,  that  in  di; 
month  of  January  last,  a  two-psir  of  stsn 
back  room  was  let  to  a  person?— Tei. 

Whom  did  that  person  tun  out  tobe?- 
Ings,  I  understand. 

How  many  weeks  did  that  perxnoccipj 
the  room  ? — Four  or  five. 

How  many  did  he  pay  for?— Foor,  to  the 
best  of  my  knowledse ;  he  left  one  urDsid. 

In  the  course  of  those  four  weeks,  aid  jn 
make  inquiry  of  Brunt  as  to  who  aid  vkal 
Ings  was  ? — I  did. 

What  did  he  sUte  to  you  wss  Ing8'shB9ics| 
—He  stated  thathe  vras  a  batcher, and  that » 
knew  nothing  more  of  him  thsn  seeing  kin  ^ 
a  public«house^  and  hearing  him  inqiiiR  Kir » 
lodging.  . 

Did  Ings  ever  bring  any  fonutare  lai-^ 

In  the  course  of  the  time  thathe  oocnpiMi^ 
do  you  recollect  any  evening  seeing  as;  p^ 

sons  go  up  stairs  ? — Ves,  ^^rvwdL 
How  many  in  number? — Three  »«■*, 
Was   there  any  thing  ^emMk^^ 

person  of  either  of  the  three  r—lbe  middle » 

was.abla^man. 

[ApaKrvfOihmdedtothecimrtkl^l'^ 

DmAoR.] 

Mr.  Barm  Gomnv.— Do  y on  wiA  4» 
question  to  be  putf 

Dditniboiir— TlMy  are  pretendisg  to  ^ 
me,  but  I  do  Hot  press  the  questioD. 


Mr.  Bank  Gmww*— Do  not  ^^  J^ 
self :  the  question  you  hare  now  hasdM  <P 
be  put  bv  your  eooneel,  is  oaewbch"* 
present  form  be  would  not  bsve  ^JZ 
probably  would  not  have  put  at  sU :  ^at«<v 
abo  do  well  to  be  att^tive  to  the  end^"^ 
she  faasnot  said  that  she  has  known  jeoy^ 
not  asked  whether  you  are  the  P^^^y 
therefiwe  the  jury  and  I  shaU  not  take  itj^ 
she  at  least  has  proved  that  yoa  ^  >J^ 
your  question  is 4>ut,  itw^^t"*^??^ 
ble  that  better  recollection  might  fix  tn»  r* 

■were. 

Dotwboii.— I  understood  st  W  **  ** 
did  speak  to  knowing  me. 


1877]; 


BiAari  TkUJbr  High  Trmok, 


A.  D.  ISSOi. 


11378 


Mr«.  Batm-  Gmrmo.^-^o^  'she  neither  has 
done  ao  upon  this  nor  upon  a  former  occasion. 

Daoidion. — I  am  obliged  to  your  lordship. 

.     Jimpk  Hale  sworn* — Examined  by 
Mr.  Curney, 

Wer#  yon  apfmntice  to  ihe  prisoner  Brant| 
who  has  been  tried?*- Yes. 

Did  yon  live  with  him  at  his  lodgings  in 
Fox-coort  ? — ^Yes. 

He  occapied  two  rooms } — ^Yes. 

One  he  occupied  asaworfcshop^  and-  the 
other  as  a  room  to  lite  in  f — Yes. 

Did  you  sleep  in  theworkshop?—* Yes. 

Do  you  remember' a  back  room  on  the  same 
floor  being  looked  at  by  a  person  in  January 
last?— Yes. 

By  whom  I — ^Bv-Ii)g»  and  Bmnt. 

After  they  had  looked  at  it  together,  did 
yon  hear  either  of  them  speak  to  the  other 
upon  the  subject  ? — I  did. 

Who  spoke  P— Bmnt  spoke. 

What  did  Brunt  say  to  Ings  ?— He  said  ^<  li 
witt  do ;  go  down  and  give  them  a  shilling.^' 

Did  Ings- go  down? — ^Yes. 

Had  you  known  Ings  before  that  ? — Yes. 

How  long  f — About  a  fortnight  before  was 
die  first  time  I  had  ever  seen  him.  ' 

In  whose  company  had  you  seen  him  ?— He 
was  with  Thistlewood  in  Brunt's  workshop. 

How •  many  times -had  you  seen  him  at 
Brunt's  in  the  course  of  that  fortnight?— I  do 
not  remember  seeing  him  but  twice  before  he 
took  the  room. 

The  same  evening  in  which  Bmnt  and  Ings 
had  looked  at  the  room,  did  Ings  come  there  ? 
—Yes. 

How  did  he  get  into  the  room  ? — ^He  came 
and  asked  Mrs.  Brant  for  the  key. 

She.had  the  key  ?— Yes. 

Did  she  give  it  him  ?— Yes. 
'^    Did  he  go  into  the' room  ?-*Yes,  he  did. 

Did  any  other  persons  come  into  that  room; 
on- that  night  ?*— Hall,  the  tailor,  came  with 
Inffs.  > 

Though  you  might  not  see,  did  you  hear  any 
other  peqH>nfl  come  into  that  room  on  that 
niflbt  ? — ^Yes,  I  believe  there  w^re. 

xour  master  was  taken  up,  I  believe,  on 
Thursday  the  24th  of  February  ?— Yes.   . 

From  the  time  that  the  room  was  taken  by 
Ings,  till  ynur  master  was  taken  up,  were  any 
meetings  of  persons  held  in  that  room  ? — Yes. 

At  what  time  of  the  day  do  you  recollect 
meetings  to  have  been  held? — Mostly  they 
were  hAd  about  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening. 

Give  me  the  names  of  persons  that  you  have 
seen  come  to  those  meetings?.— Thistlewood, 
IngsDavidson 

B^  Davidson,  do  you  mean  the  prisoner  ? 
—Yes;  Brant,  Bradburo,  Adams,  Strange, 
Potter,  Hall,  Edwards. 

'    Look  at  the  bar,  and  see  whether  you  see 
any  other  person  there? — No,  I  do  not  re* 
-meniber  seeing  any  other. 
•    Do  yon  know  any  penon  of  the  dMne  of 
ridd?-Yes. 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


Do  you  know  his  person,  or  only  his  name  ? 
—I  know  his  person. 

Do  you  see  him  at  the  bar  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  vou  ever  see  Tidd  there  ?— Yes. 

I  did  not  hear  you  to  repeat  that  name,  but 
I  understand  you  did? 

Mr.  Baron  Garroto.— I  have  taken  him  to 
mention  the  name  of  Tidd. 

A  Jurynunh-^yfe  did  not  hear  him  nam« 
him  before.- 

Another  Juryman, — I  did.  . 

Mr.  Gvmey, — I  will  put  the  question ;  did 
you  see  Tidd  come  to  that  room  ? — ^Yes. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — Thistlewood,  Jngs^ 
Tidd,  Hall,  Davidson,  Edwards,  Potter, 
Adams,  Strange,  Bradbura;  do  you  recollect 
any  othen? — ^Mo. 

Mr.  Gunuy.— Did  you  know  Tidd  well  ?— • 
I  have  seen  him  coming  to  grant's  many 
times.  • 

Was  he  of  the  same  trade  as  your  masterl 
—Yes. 

Did  he  oorae  to  your  master  about  woikr— ^ 
I  do  not  know  that  he  did,  but  I  have  seev 
him  at  4>ur  lodgings. 

Have  you  ever  been  at  his  lodgings?— Yes. r 

Where  were  they?— In  Hole-in-the»walI- 
passage,  Brool^s-mari^et. 

On  any  occasion  when  vou  passed  the  dooi^ 
of  that  room,  was  it  open  ?— Yes. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  in  it  ? — ^Yes. 

What  ?— I  saw  some  long  poles,  like  branch- 
es of  trees,  rough  as  the^r  came  from  the  tree. 

About  how  many  in  number  ?— About 
twenty. 

In  the  oourae  of  the  time  this  room  was  used 
in  this  way,  did  you  hear  any  work  going  on 
in  it  ? — ^Yes. 

What  kind  of  woritP-— I  have  heard  ham*' 
mering  and  sawing. 

On  the  Sunday  before  your  master  was 
taken  up,  was  there  any  meeting  in  that  room? 
—Yes. 

At  what  time  of  the  day  ?— In  the  morning. 

Was  it  a  larger  or  a  smaller  meeting  than 
usual  ? — I  believe  it  was  a  larger  one. 

Were  the  persons  whom  you  have  named  all 
there  ? — ^Yes. 

Are  you  sure,  particularly,-  that.  Tidd  was 
there? — Yes. 

Are  you  sure  Davidson  was  there  ? — Yes.  * 

Did  they  all  go  away*  together,  or  separ^ 
ately  ?-^Separately,  one  or  two -at  a  time; 

Was  your  master  in  the  room  with  them  7-^ 
Yes. 

After  the  meeting  broke  up,  did  anypersov 
come  out  of  the  room  with  your  master,  int9 
your  roaster's  room  ?— Yes.   •  ; 

Who  was  that? — Strange. 

On  the  Monday  and  >on-  the  IHiesday,"  weVe 
their  meetings  held  in  that  room  ? — Yes. 

On  the  Wednesday,  was  there  any  numbab 
of  persons- there  ?"— Yes. 

Dayou^remember  any  perRlna  being  thei!» 
at  about  two  o'clock  ?— I  es.  *  -     •     < 

4T 


19T91      1  GBOIIGS IV. 


^  T^^V  t|^    ■»  w^^^K^K  ^#^^^Hi^^^V 


»S*      I 


wbom  I  do  not  know. 

Did  Stnuigt  and  tlitl  pt iwn  cmm  inio  jfiir 
workshop  7-- Ye9. 

WiMl  did  Ihf7  do  ihm^^Tl^yvm  Mint- 
ing pistols. 

How  manT  pistols  ? — Tire  ox  six. 

Did  they  finish  th^  dinting  of  diem,  or  did 
any  thing  interrapt  them  T— Hiete  were  pet>* 
aoM  overlooking  them. 

Who  obeerred  that7— I  do  not  know  IIm 


That  stranger  ohserred  that  T— Tea, 

What  did  Brant  say  upon  that !— Bmnt  told 
Ihem  to  go  into  the  back-room. 

DidttM^dosoT-^Yee. 

In  the  eowte  of  that  aAemeony  were  llrtie 
iereval  pertons  in  the  baoki^oomf—Yei. 

Did  any  person  come  ont  of  Uie  bedMrnens^ 
Mid  ask  you  fbr  eat  thingf-*>Yei. 

Whodidr**-Tbistlewood. 

What  did  he  %A  you  for?— A  pieot  of 
liiiliiig  peper* 

Did  you  give  it  him? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

Wheie  dSd  he  go  vitk  ii>--lMo  te  baet. 


AAer  that,  did  any  other  peitoa  eeom  Ml  el 
*e  baek-iiooln  lo  yoti  l-^Yes. 

Wiio7— Brant 

What  did  he  desire  yon  in  do  Y-»Heteldinf 
ti  fb  aAd  get  some  paitridge  paper. 

How  much  P-^-Six  sheets* 

Did  you  go  and  buT  it  f— Yes* 

Did  you  n^e  it  to  him  ^-*Yes. 

Wheie  did  he  take  il  to  ?— Into  the  beclb* 


Thii  was  on  the  Wednesday  f — Yes. 

At  about  what  time  did  yowr  mailer  go 
e«t  ?«*^t  about  six  o'dook. 

After  this,  had  your  mistress  occasion  for 
any  thing  for  the  puipcee  of  making  leal- 
Yes,  she  wanted  a  table. 

Vbe  table  vaa  efdinarifar  in  your  Uring 
«mmP— Yes. 

To  what  place  did  she  send  yea  le  gel  it?— 
To  the  baefe*foom. 

Did  you  knock  attbe4oor7---Ye9* 

Who  opened  it  ?-*Potter  opened  it* 

Did  be  give  it  you.?— Yes»  he  did. 

After  that,  did  any  other  person  oellf"<^Yei^ 

Whooeltad?— TiM. 

Did  he  come  into  Mrs.  Brunt's  ioaml-«r 
Tea. 

Did  she  show  bim  anv  thing)— Yee* 

What  T^fihe  showed  him  0  piko-bwkd  avd  • 
ewoid,  which  hang  in  onoLof  the  cupboardk 

What  did  she  ask  him  ?-^e  asked  ki« 
what  she  oould  do  with  tko»< 
c  What  did  he  siqrlr-«etv<  if  sbo  wohU 
gWe  them  to  him,  he  fiould  lake  th«m  ow v« 

Did  he  take  tbem?->Yee. 
'  ISoiAttpiilMK-SQtbobiMlMQViik 

After  tbat,  did  fw  hm  m^  fiwin  f» 
4ota  aiaiia  fiom  that  iopint»-"Yoi. 

After  those  persons  were  fene^  did  009 
hoit  ootne  into  your  aieftiHWi  tmm  ind 
apeak  to  her  T— Yea. 


WliMiaaie«go  dad  be 
if  oiqrinraanooatted^  abo 
the  White  Hert, 

lliat  is  a  public-house  dose  by  ? — ^Yes. 

Shoilly  allef,did  any  peiaows  eallf— Yes. 

How  many  ? — Ibreo. 

Did  yowr  wditiem  diiool  tbom  iw  thw  lUis 
Hart  ?— Yes. 

Did  tiMOF.  know  tbo  wni  l^lio* 

What  was  done  to  show  tbom  tte  imgp  f*^ 
went  and  showod  tbom  Ibe  wa^« 

Upon  your  i«t«ea»  did  yow  ftad  em]FOiber 
persons  r—Wben  I  eeoko  lo  tbo  dbor»  I  m§ 
there  two  or  tbioO  minnto%  and  Pofltor  «a«M  up. 

Did  yoi  dimt  bim  10  tbe  WbiAo  ilwiiiv>r 

-Yet, 

Were  there  any  persons  with  bim^-^Yo^ 

Did  you  |o  t*  lU  White  Ban  lo 
tbo  woy  f «^o. 

Why  did  yoo  wii2— He  eppaewo>l  lo 
know  the  way. 

At  about  wboi  time  did  yo«r 
homo  1^ Alt  about  nine  o^doek* 

Weio  Ikr  M  of  has  freot  coeir  «»4  iw 
in  the  same  condilioo  as  wbest  his 
No. 

In  wbnt  oonditaoii  were  tbejf — XWir 
TOrr  muddy* 

Did  yoo  bear  what  ho  soid  lo  bio 
bocomoinV-^-Yoaw 

What  did  he  s^  ?.-r^  aoid  it  wm  oil  w^ 
or  words  to  thai  ettiet« 

Dtdbetypeor^ompQeedof  mbogwigof  Ue 
appeared  conftued* 

WhaisaoM  didbottyf^-ao  oaadkaM 
Mved  hia  Hfe^  and  that  was.alU 

Did  he  say  what  bad  happened  to  poahin 
lile  in  danger  N-"Yoi;  bo  aoM  wimio  lio  bod 
been  a  lot  of  oAoers  had  come  in. 

Just  after  he  bad  said  tb«^  did  awy 
person  come  in  T-**Yee. 

Wbi  that  nemon  known  lo , 
to  you  ?-^  do  «ec  knew  who  it  ik 

How  did  fiaaat  mceim  himl««-B« 
hands  with  him,  and  asked  bim  if  hie 

WwWWi»    woo   ^MWHbrWOO^w^pW 

Mr*  Bifwi  Gtf^fowb-^ITfy  to  gliw  ws  _  . 
words.— Ue  shook  bonds  with  biwH  amd 
**Doyoukn^wwliobaiialbnDed  Urn.* 

Mr.  Ovmejf^ — Can  yon  remember  the  ttal 
words  be  nsedv.when  fie  Game  int— 1^ 
were  the  words  to  Ibe  beet  of  my  leocllecti 

What  did  the  stranger  I87r— Ho  saiii| 
he  did  not. 

From  the  manner  ef  tfieir  8pealtin|  to 
other,  did  it  appear  to  yon  fhat  tbey  nd 
together  ?— Toi. 

What  more  did  the  stranger  say  ?—^B^  laid 
be  had  had  a  dreadful  blow  on  tbo  sidhf  and 
was  knocked  down. 

Mr.  fioron  6erHNs.«*-'niat.  Jfi^^^gf^mtieii 
to  be  sp— ^"*^  tn  thn  samct  trsnsaf  llfm  nf  wisfn 

yonr  n^a^torbad  boeo  jgtca^llt^^^'^^^ 
Mr.  Gormyi— After  tM*.  didyow 
107  ao9^  tbibsli^Toii  boamd^^ilhoao  9 
thing  to  be  done  yet*'* 


1981] 


tlkhm4  TUdJbt  High  TrmMB* 


A.  D.  IMD. 


tlStt 


AftAr  wpa^  ^sty  wtet  did  be  laid  lh« 
stranger  do  ?— Tbey  belli  went  awiy  togeHttf. 

After  (bey  weie  fl^ef  did  Mn.  Brent  end 
yon  ffo  into  tbe  back  room  P— Yes. 

What  did  3Pe«  see  Ibcief— I  sSw  in  sone  of 
the  eupboards  a  lot  of  rolls  of  brown  paper^ 
with  tar  in  them,  and  ionr  large  baUs,  maae  of 
strief  tanedy  as  big  as  my  two  fists. 

What  do  yon  now  underatand  them  to  be? — I 
have  heard  since  that  they  are  hand-grenades. 

Any  thing  else?— -Yes,  sotne  flannel  bags; 
two  of  them  were  Aill  of  something. 

The  otiiets  were  emp^t-- -Yes;  and  tome 
cartridge  paper. 

Was  there  nx^f  iron  pot?— Yes. 

To  whom  did  that  pot  belong!— Bnint 

Did  yonr  mistress  take  the  things  out,  or 
leave  them  in  ihecupboaxdP*-»Len  them  ia 
Ifae  cnpboatd* 

At  what  time  did  vonr  master  come  home  t 
s— At  aboat  eleven  o  elo6k. 

Before  he  went  to  bed  did  he  give  you  any 
instructions  Ibr  the  next  moming  ?— Yes,  he 
told  me  to  get  up  as  soon  as  I  oomd,  and  clean 
his  booto. 

Did  you  get  i^  soon  in  the  morning,  Aud 
cleaa  hb  boots  7— Yes,  I  did. 

After  that,  did  he  m^ke  any  inquiry  of  you  f 
•—Yes. 

What  was  that  P-^e  asked  me  if  I  knew 
the  Boroufiby  I  told  him  yes. 

Did  he  ask  yon  whether  vou  knew  aur  place 
In  the  Borough  ^— He  asked  me  if  I  knew 
Snow's  ilelds ;  t  told  him.  no. 

Did  he  then  tell  you  wliere  to  go  to?— Yes, 
ipjn>  to  Kirby^stseet  Snow's  fields. 

T6  whose  house  ? — ^To  the  house  of  a  man 
of  the  name  of  Potter. 

Did  he  tell  you  what  you  were  to  take  ?— * 
He  said  I  was  lo  take  the  things  thai  were  in 
the  bask  room. 

Did  he  and  you  go  together  into  the  baolL 
room  ?-*Yes. 

What  did  you  take  with  you  ?— We  took 
two  rush  baskets. 

What  did  he  direct  vou  to  put  into  those 
baskets? — ^The  things  that  were  in  the  cnp- 
bowrd. 

These  things  you  had  seen  the  night  befi»e  ? 

Dsd  you  do  se  ?— Yea. 

After  that,  was  any  thing  done  with  resped 
So  either  of  Ihe  basketoP-^Yce,  eoe  of  tuem 
IMS  tied  up  ia  a  Uue  apiott  beleagiag  to  Hie. 
Brunt. 

What  «ei  Imd  bean  mftde  of  theft  blue  apron 
Ibr  some  liaM  l»sfi>re  f'^It  had  been  nied  u  « 
iMftain  to  fthe  window  of  the  beek  joem. 

Was  the  other  basket  tied  up  in  any  thaeg? 

Did  your  master  go  into,  his  esMS  roomP—- 
Yes. 

'  What  hap)>eMd  m,  thit  timeP-^Whtle  we 
^insve  them  locAiittf  fetr  sosoeOiliig  to  4le  M 
other  basket  in,  two  ogcefs  came  in. 

DUmMfylakeyMirsoeeieriiiie  ouiiDiyt— 
Yee. 


They  losk  possession  of  the  iWo  baskeU 
containing  those  things,  and  the  iron  pot  ?— 
Yes. 

Jo$tfk  Bde  cress^xamined  by 
Mr*  Curwood* 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Dwyer? 
—No. 

Yon  say  you  do  ktiow  Edwsrds  !— Yes. 

And  Adams  ?— Yes. 

They  were  frequently  there?— Yes. 

Were  you  near  enough  to  heat  their  vdctt 
when  they  spoke  ?— No. 

Mr.  Ow^, — ^WiU  you  ferf»ve  me  asking 
one  question  r  You  have  sMntioned  Thistle- 
woqil  as  one  of  the  persons  who  used  to  come  P 
—Yes. 

By  what  nanM  did  the  others  use  to  address 
him  ? — Sometimes  T.  and  sometimes  Arikur. 

Did  yon  hear  the  other  persons  cell  eaeh 
other  by  their  names  P— >Yes. 

Mr.  CuntfootL-^l  dare  sfl^  ^ou  have  heard 
the  nian  called  by  his  Christian  name  many 
times,  have  not  you?— Yes. 

And  sometimes  by  the  first  letter  of  hfk 
name? — Yes;  and  sometimes  by  his  nam^ 
Thistlewood. 

Yousqr  Adams  and  fidwaids  vrere  frequently 
there?— Yes. 

More  frequently  than  the  other  people  do 
you  think  P — £dvrards  was  there  oftener  than 
Adams,  but  AdSmS  used  sometimes  to  com^ 
up. 

Tkohm  SrnaH  sworn.— fixsmiued  by 
Mt.  iJUkdak. 

AfB  yon  a  wntehmea  ?— Yes. 
Were  you  el  wateh  on  the  night  of  the  SSai 
of  Febraaiy  last»  in  GrosvenorHN|naie  ?*— I 

WPS. 

Did  you  see  any  men  there  who  perticalarijr 
attracted  your  Uotiee  ?'^I  saw  four. 

Whet  time  of  niflit  was  it?— It  was  about 
half-past  eiffht,  or  a  quarter  befose  nine,  at  tbe 
iunhast ;  i^  I  had  eelkd  half-pest  eight. 

What  were  they  doing  ?— They  were  looking 
through  the  pelisades ;  Uiey  stood  at  the  comer 
When  I  went  up  to  them.     ' 

Where  was  that  ?— It  was  at  Mr.  Maberl/s 
house  they  wore  at  that  time;  they  were  look- 
ing about,  and  I  went  up  to  see  what  thejr 
wanted. 

Did  yen  eey  any  thing  to  them  P-^They 
asked  me  what  c^eledc  il  was,  and  I  told  them 
H  Was  neef  nine. 

Did  you  observe  any  thing  about  the  afu 
peerenee  of  niy  of  them?—!  thought  Aev 
Weie  vefy  eusplaoui  iteraolers ;  oaeof  diedt 
had  a  stick. 

Wei  One  of  them  e  daik  aMa?'^Yes;  a 
mea  of  eoleuh 

Do  ¥0a  know  Whether  Bissix  was  a  watch* 
man  tnere  P-^Yes,  I  called  Bissix  to  make 
otiseieatioai  ^sMing-  himi  saw  some  suspicious 
characters. 


I38T]       1  GBOHOB  FT. 


^Md  tfW^iam  Onidtm  *»i 


118M 


tny  pencil  arritv  Wfera  tmn  o'clock  ? 

Wlnt  did  be  do?«-I  aiked  hjM  wImk  k  wm 
we  were  going  lo  s  he  teid,  et  a  mewt  in  Edge^* 
were-road ;  he  went  to  a  box  at  a  comer  of  3ie 
loom,  and  took  out  a  pistol,  which  he  pot  into 
a  belt  which  was  round  his  body. 

What  else  did  he  take  ?*-AhoQt  six  or  eight 
pOte-headi  wrapped  up  in  brown  paper. 

Did  yen  look  at  tli^e  pike<4ietds  paitie»> 
larlT?--No,  I  did  not  ewnine  them. 

xott  did  not  see  whether  they  weie bayonets 
oriilesT-^lliey  appeared  to  be  these  square 
like  bayonets;  then  he  took  a  stiff  of  abovt 
four  feet  long,  with  a  hole  at  the  eiidy  as  if  to 
pat  a  p&e  in. 

After  he  had  thos  proiided  hinseify  did  you 
go  oat  togetlMr?— Yes. 

You  went  down  into  Holborsy  and  from 
thence  into  Oxford-street  f— Yes. 

While  you'  were  going  along,  what  passed 
between  you? — ^I  asked  him  what  we  were 
going  about ;  and  be  said,  I  should  know  when 
we  got  there;  I  then  asked  htm,  whether  we 
^^ore  going  to  the  House  of  CooMnoos;  he  said, 
no ;  there  were  too  many  soldiers  near  there;  I 
iMked  him  again  where  we  were  going  to,  he 
•aid  to  GfQevenor-s()ttare;  I  asked  him^  whi^ 
tfaer  any  one  ia  parueular  lived  there ;  and  he 
said  there  was  to  be  a  cabnet  dinner  there 
HHut  evening. 

Upon  his  saying  tiiat,  did  you  undentaad 
intended  r— Yes;  I  did  net  ask  him 


any  1 
D 


^id  you  go  on  with  him  towards  Edgware- 
road  f — ^Yes. 

Did  you  come  to  an  archwsy  that  leads  into 
a  narrow  street? — Yeu 

When  you  got  under  that  atehwity,  did  jrou 
find  any  persons  there  ?— 'Yes,  two  men« 

Dki may coufersation  pass? — ^Tiddwasbe* 
fore  me;  he  spoke  to  them,  I  belieTeaftnr 
Words,  and  then  we  eotersd  into  a  sieble. 

Did  you  find  any  persons  there  ?— Yes,  three 
or  four  men. 

At  the  farther  extrsmity  of  thit  staUe  there 
was  a  ladder?— Yes. 

Did  you  go  up  that  ladder?— Yes,  I  went 
up  after  Tidd. 

Did  you  Bnd  any  perteos  in  the  loft  above  ? 
*-Yes ;  about  three  or  four-and- twenty  psraons. 

Did  you  see  any  thing  like  a  carpenter's 
bench  ?-^Ye8« 

With  what  was  that  covered  ?— Swords  and 
pistols. 

Was  Thisliewood  among  the  pewoas  whom 
you  found  there  f— Yes. 

Cm  yon  tell  us  viliat  passed  in  the  room 
after  you  got  there  ? — ^There  was  a  man  ia  a 
hvbwn  great  eoat  sitdag  oa  the  other  side  of 
the  earpeaier's  bench,  who  spoke  of  (he  iaii. 
propriety  of  soing  to  lord  Harrowby's  with  so 
small  a  nomber  as  ftfe«and«>twenty  men. 

UM  the  number  been  mentioned  before  f— 
Yes;  some  person  was  going  to  eoantthem, 
and  Thistlewood  said  the#e  was  no  oocasle«, 
«he«s  fPSie  fivoMiad-4weaiy. 


Jxnk  at  the  prisoner  Da^dson;  ^id  joa 
him  there  that  evening  ?— Yes. 

Did  he  come  into  the  loft  after  yon,  or  did 
jrou  find  him  theref-*!  do  not  think  ka  was 
in  when  I  first  went  in,  but  he  came  in  aftei^ 
wards. 

Had  you  ever  seen  him  befofe?'-— At  one  or 
two  meetings  In  Smithfield. 

So  that  you  knew  Us  penon  ?— Tea. 

Mr.  Bsroii  Gerrew^— What  do  ye« 
meetings  in  Smithfield  ?— Public 
Are  you  sure  of  his  person  K— Yes* 
Had  he  taken  any  promiBent  part  in 
tiaciy  so  as  to  give  you  an  opi 


obserring  hie  person  ?*«hNo»  I  never  faaaid 
speak. 
But  you  h«ro  ao  doabt  of  his  peeaoia  f— Ho. 


Mr. 


Gflierat.— Did  yoa  the  feBow- 


inff  day,  or  soon  afterwards,  see  him  at  Whit^ 
hall  ? — I  saw  him  not  the  following  ds^,  for 
we  were  put  in  separate  rooms;  but  the  dsf 
we  were  taken^to  the  Tower,  and  the  day 
before  that,  we  were  all  put  into  a  room  toge* 
ther. 

Mr.  Banm  Gtartomj^Ymi  say  tbat  Ais  pe^ 
son  remarkedea  the  impropriety  of  going  lo  loi€ 
Harrowby's  with  so  small  attuasber;  did  he 
meatiott  loid  Banwwby's  aamo  f-^Yes^  I  linak 
he  did. 

Mr.  Soliator  CeaeroiL— Repeat  whatpes^' 
ed?— On  his  saying  this,  Thistlewood  said  he 
only  wanted  iotute^i  men  to  go  into  the  room; 
and,  supposing  lord  Harrowby  had  sixteen 
men  servants,  that  number  would  be  <piita 
sufficient :  upon  which  the  nwn  in  tlie  Wown 
coat  said,  *^  when  we  come  out  of  the  rooos,  of 
course  there  will  be  a  crowd  roand  the  doer — 
how  are  we  to  set  away?*'  Thistlewood  said, 
"you  know   tne  largest  par^  are   wlktstdj 

£me  ;^  upon  which  l^vidson  told  the  man  ia 
e  brown  great  coat  not  to  throw  cold  watsr 
upon  their  proceedings. 

Was  the  Davidson  you  speak  of  the  pt^ 
soner  at  the  bar? — ^Yes;  for  if  he  waa  afiaid 
of  bis  life»  he  might  ^o,  tiiey  would  do  vnthoai 
him;  and  Brunt  said,  that  sooner  thanthqf 
should  go  from  the  business  they  were  goias 
to  do,  he  would  go  into  the  room  by  himss^ 
and  blow  it  all  up,  if  he  perished  with  them; 
and  he  said,  *^  you  know  we  have  got  that  that 
can  do  it.^ 

After  this  conversation  had  taken  piaos^ 
were  any  parties  separated  ftom  the  rest  la  go 
into  the  room  2— Yes» 

Mr.  Jhvoa  Omrmr^JM  the  vaaa  la  <tto 
groat  coat  make  aaysMBwer  to  tiset  f-^-Vai; 
he  said  as  thej^  dl  seeoMd  for  it,  Urni^  lio 
did  not  like  gomg  with  so  small  anlnahmiiia 
woidd  not  be' against  it  j  ead  herpibposieiiaat 
they  should  all  pot  fhemselvaB  '•ader  iM 
orders  of  TMstleWood ;  erpon  wUoh  TMstfc 
wood  said,  that  every  one  engaged  ia  tftil 
buaiaess  woid4  base  IM  eaaieMM^arsi" 
sei^     " 


1889] 


Tiiifii 


JLD.]80(L 


Mr.  StMikiT  GeiMr4»--After  thai  coqvok 
Mtion  kid  uyieo  plaoe,  wert  the  (misods  who 
vwe  to  90  into  Um  xoom  Kpamt«d  l^m  th« 
^ei«?^Y#a)  Thiotlewood  ,th«a  piQpoetd 
th«t  th9  lovnteii  BMD  to  go  into  the  room 
should  Tolunteer  from  the  pervons  theii  eesemp 
Vled»  vA  that  thoie  who  so  Tol«Ate«red  should 
pleot  themMl?e»  at  one  side  of  the  loom. 

Upon  that  proposition  being  made^  did  any 
of  them  separata  ihemselres  for  that  pivrpoee  ? 
— Yesy  about  twelte  or  Ihirleeo. 

Can  ]F0«  tell  ua  the  namesrol  any  of  them ; 
yoa  do  not  know  the  names  of  many  of  the 

Sute  any  withw  yowc  knowledge  ?«-Tidd« 
SnmtyDafidfOQ  and  Wilsoo ;  tlMit  «i  aU  that  I 
recollect. 

While  this  i)«a  going  on»  did  any  alarm  take 
place  below  ?— I  did  not  hear  any;  Thiatl&p 
wood  weat  down  staiis  and  came  up  again^ 
and  said,  he  had  iust  received  inteliigence  that 
the  duke  ol  Welllugton  and  lord  Sidmoutb^ 
had  just  avrived  aa  Ivd  Harrowby's. 

Shortly  after  that,  did  any  alarm  take  place 
below  ^^X  did  not  hear  any  alarm  till  I  per- 
ceived the  men  at  the  top  of  the  stairs;  they 
laid  they  were  oAoeia^  and  bade  them  anr- 
i:ender« 

I  will  uot  ask  as  te»  whajt  passed^  beoause 
we  will  have  that  from  other  persona;  you 
were  taken  into  euatody  yourself  r-^ Yes. 

Smitheis  was  kOled?--!  did  not  know  it 
was  him  till  afterunupds;  there  was  a  man 

.    Yo«iwuie«xamiin«la|tWhitebs]l?—Yes. 

Od  oae  of  those  oocasiousi  were  you  band^ 
cuffed  to  ThisOewood?— Yes,  both  the  last 
limes  I  went 

State  what  ThisUewood  said  to  you  ?-— He 
said,  if  I.was  asked  who  led  me  into  that  bu'i 
uiMss  and  took  me  to  tJie  meetings,  that  I  was 
to  say  it  was  a  man  of  the  uame  of  Edwarda. 

miat  did  you  answer  to  thatP^I  said, 
^Hisw  can  I  tell  that  fiUsehood,  when  you 
Iluow  I  sever  saw  the  maa;"  he  said  that  was 
«fuo  consequence;  if  I  was  asked  what  sort 
«£u  man  he  was,  I  was  le  say  that  he  was  not 
amchl^lier  than  sasrseU^  of  a  sallow  com- 
yleiftou^  and  dressed  in  a  brown  great  coat* 

l^h^  l&smmail  cro8S*>e]iamined  by 
Mr.  Cunoood 

-   You  bad  joined  in  thb  plan  to  assassinate 
ids  majes^s  lainisten  .'^-Unwillingly. 

You  did  join  it?«<»Xhrottgh  fbar^ 
.  Bow  through  fear  7— I  was  afraid  if  I  did 
^t  join  it,  il  would  be  the  worse  for  me;  Ibr 
when  Brunt  came  on  tlie  22nd  of  February,  hp 
isaadt  that  any  one  that  was  auy  wiqrs  qdo. 
iianrnd  with  them,  and  did  not  go,  would 
flm  tuHifoyed* 

Xhefuteeyaahaiiini  been  ooDceroed  with 
tb«n'      'No  more  than  what  I  hara  stated. 

Bud  yeu  beeft  octocened  wiihxtbeaa  baiore  ? 


ri8M 


^  iiai«tyeut(9ldi»allthatyottknefwtOi4ay? 
*»Yes ;  all  I  can  rec<^leiU* 


You  do  not  kaow  any  tlaig  of  any  ether 
aohemea  or  plans  ?-^No. 

Yottknow  BOtbingabout  a  prsttlamatimi?-^ 

Mo. 

You  know  nothing  of  a  plan  to  raise  rebeU 
lien,  and  levy  war  7---»Nob 

All  you  know  is  aboat  a  plan  to  **miirinttfu 
his  majealy'a  miolatem  P-^Um. 

Mr.  l^aron  Garrow.^^U  not  that  ezaminatiou 
into  the  legal  consequences  ? 

Mr.  SoUcUor  Generd.—!  understand  you  to 
say,  you  have  told  us  all  you  know?— Yes. 

Mr.  Oarwood, — I  will  ask  one  question  more 
if  you  please :  did  not  'Hdd,  when  you  were  ia 
the  lort,  tell  you  he  had  been  deceived,  and 

Sersuade  you  to  go  away  with  him  and  leave 
le  party?— No.  he  did  not;  I  wish  for  hia 
own  sake  aawell  as  mine,  that  he  had» 

VimaoM  Mmumeid  sworn.— 'Examined  by 
Mr.  SoUator  QenerdL 

You  are  brother  to  the  last  witncea  ?•— Yea. 

Are  you  a  shoemaker?— ^Yes,  I  am. 

Do  you  live  with  yonr  brother  ^— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  Thistlewood  calling  upem 
your  brother  at  his  lodgings  ?•— Yes. 

Did  Thistlewood  call  alone  P— Mo,  be  was 
accompanied  by  firunt. 

Do  you  remember  Thietlewood  going  out 
to  have  some  convenation  with  yonr  bretherr 
^Yee,  he  asked  my  brother  if  he  could  apeak 
with  him. 

Udou  Thistlewood  askiuff  your  brother  if  h« 
could  speak  with  him,  did  they  go  out  of  th» 
room  together?— Yea. 

Did  they  renmin  ailMent  for  a  short  time?-^ 
Yes,  diree  or  four  nunutea. 

Did  Thistlewood  and  Brunt  to  awav 
together  P-^Yes. 

Do  you  remember,  ea  Tuesday  die  92nd  of 
February,  Brant  ciUling  upon  your  brother  ^p^ 
Yes. 

Alone,  or  in  oompanv  with  any  peisou  V^ 
In  company  with  Tidd  the  prisoner. 

What  paused  when  they  came  w^Msr 
brother  said,  ^  I  tbou^t  I  had  lost  you." 

What  did  Bnmt  say  in  answer  to  that?-— 
Something  was  said  ooaeemiag  tiie  kh^e 
death;  it  was  said,  that  had  made  an  alteiatioB 
in  their  plans. 

What  did  your  brother  answer  to  tfaat?*^ 
My  brother  asked  him  what  pUna ;  he  said 
they  bad  different  objects  in  view. 

What  Aen  took  place  ?— Btant  ashed  Tidd 
if  they  should  give  us  aa  outline  of  the  plaa, 
but  I  do  not  know  whether  Tidd  made  ai^ 
anawet ;  I  did  not  hear  any  aaawtr.  Brunt 
said  wo  wuie  to  meet  the  followiug  evtmng  at 
six  o'elod^  at  TybunHtampfta^  awl  h^ihstt 
gaare  ua  the  pass-word. 

What  waa  it?^That  w«  weia  to  use  tha 
lettem  At^  aadif  any  of  their  party  warn  than 

thef  uBould  anawer  ^yiVS  and  then  wo  should 
know  theib. 

Did  anj^thiag  poio  pasal-<4fa^ 


laOl]        1  GEORGE  IT. 


TnalqfWUIiam^DaMumand 


[im 


Did  Bniiit  say^uiy  thing  about  oalliog  the 
next  day  ? — No,  he  did  not,  but  he  came  the 
next  afternoon,  ^ween  four  and  five  o'clock ; 
my  brother  could  not  go  with  him,  for  he  had 
work  to  finish ;  then  Brunt  said,  you  must  call 
onTidd  in  Hole-in-the-wall  passage,  and  he 
will  take  you. 

Did  your  brother  go,  and  if  so  at  what  hour  ? 
—I  believe  it  was  near  seven  o'clock ;  I  did 
not  see  him  afterwards. 

You  did  not  go  yourself? — ^No,  I  did  not. 

TTiomas  Hiden  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Gurtiey. 

Hate  you  carried  on  the  business  of  a  cow- 
keeper  and  dairyman  in  Manchester*mews  ?— • 
I  have. 

You  have  now  the  misfortune,  I  believe,  to 
be  in  prison  for  debt?^I  have. 

How  long  have  yod  been  so  ? — ^I  have  been 
in  a  week  ago  last  Saturday  morning. 

Do  you  know  the  prisoner,  Wilson  ?-^Yes, 
I  do,  perfectly  well. 

.A  lew  days  before  the  22nd  of  February,  did 
he  make  any  jproposition  to  you  P — He  did. 

What  proposition  did  he  make  to  you  ? — He 
met  me,  and  asked  me  if  I  would  make  one  of 
a  party. 

Foe  whatf-*To  destroy  all  his  majesty's 
ministers. 

Where? — ^At  a  cabinet  dinner;  that  they 
were  waiting  for  a  cabinet  dinner. 
.  Did  he  say  whether  they. had  provided  any 
thing  for  the  purpose  ? — He  said  the^  had  got 
every  thing  ready^  and  were  waiting  for  a 
cabinet  dinner.. 

Did  he  describe  what  sort  of  things  they 
had  ready  ?-^He  told  me  they  had  got  such 
sort  of  things  as  I  never  saw ;  that  they  were 
covered  with  tarpaulin,  and  bound  round  with 
cords,  filled  full  of  nails  and  other  things,  and 
that  they  had  got  some  made  of  tin,  which  were 
very  strong  indeed.     . 

Did  he  say  what  those  things  would  do  ? — 
He  said,  the  strength  of  them  is  such,  that  if 
they  were  set  fire  to,  and  put  under  the  walls 
of  the  houses  in  the  street  where  we  were 
walking,  they  would  lift  them  up. 

Mr.  Boron  Garrow. — Did  he  state  how  they 
were  to  be  used?-<-That  they  were  to  be 
lighted  with  a  fuse,  and  put  into  the  room  where 
die  gentlemen  were  at  dinner;  and  all  that  es* 
caped  the  explosion,  were  to  die  by  the  edge 
of  the  sword,  or  some  other  weapon. 

Did  he  mention  any  thing  to  be  done  with 
any.  persons'  houses? — ^He  told  me  after 
that,  that  they  were  going  to  light  up  lights  to 
set  fire  to  some  houses. 

Whose  houses  did  he  mention  ?— He  said, 
they  were  to  bum  down  lord  Harrowby's, 
lord  Castlereagh's,  the  duke  of  .Wellington's, 
and  lord  Sidmouth's  and  the  bishop « of  Lon- 
don's, and  one  other  that  I  do  not  recollect^ 
and  by  that  means  it  would  keep  the  town  in 
a  state  of  confusion  for  a  fi^  days,  and  it  would 
become  general. 

What  answer  did  you  give  hin^  to  this 


proposition? — ^I  asked  him  how  in&ytbK 
were  to  be ;  he  said,  I  had  no  ooeasioa  tobe 
alarmed,  there  was  a  geiiileman*8  serfantvb 
had  given  them  money,  and  if  they  would  Kt 
upon  the  subject,  he  would  give  them  a  o(tt> 
siderable  sum  more. 

Did  yoQ  tell  him  you  woakl  be  oneM 
did;  I  told  him  I  would  be  one;  I  badi 
reason  in  so  doing. 

After  yoo  had  toki  him  that,  did  yoa  trite 
any  letter  to  lord  Castlereagh?— I  did. 

Did  you  go  to  lord  Castlereash's  booaeM 
did. 

Did  you  get  access  to  his  loidshii^?— I  ^ 
not ;  I  went  tvro  or  three  times. 

After  that,  to  whom  did  yoo  getacMsM 
fcaw  lord  Harrowby. 

Did  you  follow  him  f— I  did,  to  the  prt; 
and  there  I  spoke  to  him. 

Did  you  give  him  the  letter  yoa  wioteto 
lord  Castlereagh  ? — ^I  did. 

Is  that  the  letter  [Aemg  s  }dter  t»  ^ 
wUneu]  which  you  gave  to  Im  Hanowbjl* 
It  is  the  veiy  letter. 

Did  you  the  next  day  see  his  lordship  tgu 
in  Hyde-park  ?— Yes,  I  did,  by  appointoie^ 

On  the  next  day,  Wednesday,  did  yw «» 
Wilson  again  ?^I  again  saw  him  oa  the  SSii 

That  was  the  day  of  the  Cato-itnet  tasr 
neas  P — ^Yes. 

At  what  time  of  the  day?— Ibetierelfr 
tween  four  and  five  o'clock  in  the  aftenwB- 

What  did  he  then  say  to  you  ?-He  net-w 
as  I  was  walking  up  Manchester-street  ^ 
one  of  my  little  girls;  he  said,  "Hjdei,J» 
are  the  very  man  I  want  to  see ;"  I  ««*,  **»» 
is  there  going  to  be ;"  he  said,  « thcreistote 
a  cabinet  dinner  at  lord  Harrowby's,  ia  Oni' 
venor  square."  I  asked  him  where  I  »*^ 
meet  them ;  he  said,  I  was  to  come  up  WW 
Horse  and  Groom,  in  John-street,  the  conff 
of  Cato-street,  and  there  I  was  to  ge  ioto  oe 
public-house,  or  to  stop  at  the  corBertiflI«"J 
shoved  into  a  stable  close  by.  I  WM  w"* 
them  at  a  quarter  before  six,  or  Bxo'dfick.  i 
asked  him,  if  that  was  all  that  was  goiBf  " 
be ;  he  told  me  that  there  were  to  be  fowf*' 
ties,  one  in  Cato-street,  another  in  Guy »*• 
lane,  one  in  the  City,  or  in  Oee's-couit,  I  "* 
not  certain  which. 

Where  was  the  fourth  to  be?— Theft  *» 

to  be  one  in  the  Boroueh.  , 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more  aboottjeei- 

court  ?— He  said,  I  bad  no  occasiwi  »  ». 

alarmed,  for  all  Gee's-court  was  in  it 
By  whom  is  Gee's-court  inhabited  f-jiw* 

Heve  it  to  be  generally  inhabited  Bioiily'>y 

Irishmen.  ^^jl^) 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more  about  In*»»- 
—He  told  me  that  the  Iriahmea  ""^^^ 
but  they  would  not  act  till  the  EbT**^ 
began  first,  as  the  EngliA  had  so  iDaBy«>^ 
deceived  them.  ^.  gv 

Did  he/aay  any  thing  about  3««"^^ 
told  me  that  there  were  two  pieces  <>JJT^! 
in  Oray's-inn-lane,  that  wereeaalyl*"'? 
breaking  in  a  small  door.^  - 


139d3 


kk^ard  Tiddjbr  Hi^  Treamf. 


A.D.  18S0. 


[1394 


Mr.  Boron  Chrrow. — ^Did  he  say  what  par- 
Scalar  business  was  to  be  done  by  your  party? 
—He  told  me,  that  our  particular  party  was  to 
go  to  lord  Harrowby'Sy  in  Gros^enor-square; 
and  that  they  there  were  to  do  the  grand  things 
to  destroy  idl  his  majesty's  ministers. 

Mr.  Gftmuy.— Yon  say,  that  he  told  yoa 
there  were  some  caniioa  in  Gray*s-inn4ana, 
4hat  eould  be  got  by  knocking  in  a  small  door  ? 
— ^Yes  ;  and  that  there  were  four  more  pieces 
•of  cannon  in  an  ArtiUery-groimd  somewhere, 
tet  I  do  not  know  where;  and  that  they  could 
easily  be  got,  by  killing  a  sentinel. 

Did  he  say  where  they  were  to  go,  after  they 
had  done  that  which  they  intended  in  Gros- 
Tenor-square  ? — ^He  said|  after  the  grand  thing 
was  done,  all  parties  were  to  meet  somewhere 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Mansion-house. 

Did  he  say  any  thing  more  to  you? — He 
told  me  I  was  to  be  sure  to  come,  or  the  grand 
thing  would  be  over  before  I  came. 

Did  you  go  to  J<An-fltreet  that  evening? — ^I 
did. 

At  what  time? — Between  six  and  seven 
o'clock ;  but  I  believe-it  to  be  near  seven  when 
I  ffot  there. 

When  you  got  there,  whom  did  you  see  ? — 
When  I  came  into  John-etreet,  by  the  comer 
of  the  post  by  Cato-street|  I  saw  Mr.  Wilson 
and  Mr.  Davidson. 

By  Davidson,  do  you  mean  the  man  at  the 
•bar  f— Yes,  I  do ;  the  coloured  man. 

Had  you  known  Davidson  before  f —• Yes,  a 
long  wiule  before. 

What  did  either  of  them  say  when  you 
came  ?— Mr.  Davidson  «aid,  **  yon  are  come ;" 
I  said,  T  was  come,  but  I  am  behind  my  time ; 
lie  asked  me  then  if  I  was  going  in ;  he  said, 
Mr.  Thistlewood  was  there;  I  told  him  I  could 
not  go  in,  as  I  had  some  cream  to  get,  and 
must  go  and  get  it,  if  possible. 

You  left  them,  and  did  not  go  again?— I 
left  them,  and  did  not  go  again. 

Did  you  ask  him  what  time  they  should  go 
away? — ^Yes ;  and  be  told  me  they  should  go 
^i^ut  eight  o'clock,  and  if  they  were  gone,  I 
was  to  follow  them  down  to  Grosvenor-squavs, 
the  fourth  house  from  the  comer,  on  the  lower 
itide. 

.  Do  you  remember  Davidson  saying  any 
thing  to  you? — ^Yes ;  the  last  woids  he  said  to 
me  were,  *^  come  you  dog,  come,  it  will  be  the 
best  thing  you  were  ever  in. in  your  life." 

•Mr.  Gttrnfy. — We  do  not  offer  the  letter  in 
'Ovidenee^  iqy  lord  not  conceiving  it  to  be  com« 
petent  to  us  to  offer  it ; .  if  my  learned  friends 
call  for  it,  it  is  at  their  service.  . 

Mr«  Bsrsit  €kaTO».>^Yca  nadMStaad  by 
lA^9.gentleiMn,  the.piioe«cator  cannot  read  that 
letter,  because  it  is  a  conaHuiiflation  with 
mhvcik  none  of  the  prisooeie'cbaigad,  had  any 
thing  to  do ;  I  mention  that,  becMfe  you  might 
loader  that  it  is  not  read. 

A  Juryman  (Mr.  FoHnjg).— It  strack  me  quite 
forcibly,  my  lord. 
VOL.  XXXUI. 


Thomm  Biden  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Cunoood. 


His  last  words  were,  ^  come,  you  dog,  come, 
it  will  be  the  best  thing  you  were  ever  in  in 
your  life  V — ^Yes,  they  were. 

And  you  expected  a  great  deal  of  plunder, 
I  dare  say  ?— >No,  I  did  not  expect  any  thing 
of  the  kind,  for  I  never  intended  to  go. 

How  long  had  you  known  Wilson  ? — I  had 
known  him  a  good  while. 

Had  you  often  seen  him? — I  had  seen  him 
at  Mr.  Clark's  the  tailor. 

You  mean  to  represent  yourself  as  an  honest 
man  ? — I  do,  in  that  respect. 

Did  not  you  think  it  a  very  odd  address  to 
you,  an  honest  man,  that  a  man  should  come 
up  to  you,  without  any  introduction,  *^  we  are 
in  a  plot  to  assassinate  his  majesty's  ministers, 
will  you  join  us  ?" — No,  I  did  not  think  it  at  all 
surprising,  for  I  had  seen  Mr.  Davidson,  the 
black,  before  that,  at  my  friend  Clark's,  and  he 
said  to  mcj  as  he  went  out,  '*  Hiden,  you  do 
not  come  forward  like  the  rest  of  us,  to  support 
the  meetings.''  I  said,  no,  I  could  not ;  and 
J  had  been  denied  to  him  by  my  family*  be« 
cause  I  did  not  wish  to  see  him. 

There  is  a  great  deal  in  that ;  but  I  do  not 
understand  it  ? 

Mr.  Boron  Giotow.— I  must  take  it  down  as 
he  has  stated  it ;  it  will  peifaaps  be  found  to 
bear  upon  this ;  state  it  slowly  ?— 

WUnm^^ynal%  I  was  at  Mr.  Clark's,  the 
prisoner  at  the  bar,  Davidson,  came  in,  and  he 
said  as  he  went  out,  **  Hiden,  you  do  not  come 
forward  as  the  rest  of  us  do,  to  support  the 
meetings ;"  I  told  him  I  did  not,  my  business  . 
would. not  let  me;  he  told  me,  that  the  people 
that  had  come  forward,  and  promised,to  suppoit 
the  cause,  them  thatdid  not  come  forward  would 
be  the  first  that  they  should  murder ;  by  so  do- 
ing, when  Wilson  met  me,  haviuff  seen  him  there 
at  the  same  place,  I  told  him  X  would  come, 
for  my  own  safety,  to  the  meeting,  because 
Davidson  told  me  that  the  men  that  did  not 
come  forward,  would  be  the  men  that. they 
should  first  murder. 

Mr.  CunoocN/.— You  kept  away  firom  them 
asinuch  as  you  could? — Yes;  I  never  went 
among  them,  but  at  a  shoemakers'  club  twice. 

Then,  of  course,  you  did  not  know  what  their 
objects  were? — ^No,  I  did  not,  except  what 
Wilson  told  me. 

Except  what  Wilson  told  you  on  this  day  ? 
— On  the  days  I  have  mentioned. 

Wilson  told  you  they  had  a  plot  to  murder 
his  majesty's  ministers  ? — That  they  were  going 
to  murder  his  majesty*^  miinsters. 

That  was  all  he  told  you  ?— He  told  me  they 
had  got  hand-grenades,  and  things  of  that 
kind. 

But  he  did  not  tdl  you  of  any  other  plots 
they  had  in  hand  ? — ^He  did  not  tell  me,  unless 
it  was  the  cannon,  and  what  I  have  stated. 

It  was  part  of  the  plan  to  murder  his  ms^es* 

4U 


1395]        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  William  Daridmrn  and 


[1396 


ty's  ministers,  and  set  the  town  on  fire  ? — He 
Slated  that  which  I  have  told  yon. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow.  —  By  those  means  it 
ivould  keep  the  town  in  a  state  of  confusion 
for  a  few  days,  and  then  it  would  become 
general. 

Mr.  Cunoom/.— You  were  too  many  for  me 
the  last  time ;  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Bennett  F^Yes. 

I  asked  you  whether  you  had  not  invited 
him  to  attend  any  private  radical  meeting  ?— 
I  never  did  ask  him  to  attend  a  private  radical 
meeting,  and  I  will  be  on  my  oath  to  it. 

Did  you  or  did  you  not  tell  him  that  when 
he  was  there  he  might  speak  or  not  speak,  just 
as  he  liked  ? — I  do  believe  I  did  say  so. 

Had  you  never  asked  him  to  attend  ? 

Mr.  Oumey, — A  radical  meeting  you  asked 
him  the  first  time  ? — I  never  said  the  word  ra- 
dical meetings  of  any  form  whatever. 

Mr.  Cunoood, — Did  you  tell  him  he  might 
be  called  upon  to  take  up  arms,  and  if  he  was 
called  upon,  he  must  take  up  arms?— I  never 
said  so  to  the  best  of  my  recollection. 

Will  you  or  not  swear  you  did  not?  —  I 
never  will  swear  what  I  do  not  know,  for  no 
man  living;  I  never  recollect  saying  so  to  him 
in  my  life ;  I  never  made  use  of  the  words 
radical  meeting  to  him. 

Did  you  or  not  tell  him  that  if  he  were  called 
upon  to  take  up  arms,  he  must  do  it  ?-»I  never 
recollect  saying  such  a  word  to  him. 

You  must  recollect  whether  you  did  or  not  ? 
— I  do  not  know  that  I  did  use  that  word  to 
him. 

Do  you  think  you  could  have  said  that  and 
forgotten  it  P — I  do  not  know  that  ever  I  said 
such  a  thing  to  him  ;  if  I  did  know  that  I  had 
said  so,  I  never  would  have  denied  it. 

Then  all  you  mean  to  say  is,  that  you  might 
have  said  it,  but  forgotten  it  f — No,  I  do  not 
think  it  possible  that  I  did ;  for  I  did  not  know 
of  it  being  in  contemplation  at  the  time. 

Then  you  have  not  recollection  enough  to 
tay  you  did  not? — ^I  have  not. 

Thomoi  Hitlen  re-examined  by 
Mr.  Gvmey, 

You  have  been  at  a  meeting  called  a  shoe- 
maker's club  ? — Yes. 

How  many  times  ?— I  went  twice. 

With  whom  did  you  go?-^Mr.  Clark,  a 
tailor. 

Did  he  live  near  yoo^  or  in  the  same  house 
with  you?— He  has  done,  but  did  not  at  that 
time. 

Whom  did  yon  tee  at  those  meetings  P— 
Davidson  the  prisoner,  and  one  more  of  the 
prisoners  who  is  now  at  the  bar. 
.  Who  is  that  ?— Harrison. 

Where  was  that  club,  called  a  shoemaker^s 
club,  held  ?— I  believe  the  sign  of  the  publio- 
honse  was  the  Scotch  Arms,  in  some  court 
near  the  Strand,  but  I  do  not  know  any  other 


direction  than  that;  it  was  on  a  Soodif 
evening  when  I  was  there,  but  1  nerer  vm 
there  but  twice. 

Did  you  at  any  time  propose  to  Bennett  to 
go  with  you  and  Claik?— Yes,  I  did;  nj 
friend  Clark  called  upon  me,  sod  induced  m 
to  ffo,  and  I  said,  I  dare  say  Bennett  will  go 
with  my  fnend  Clatk  and  another  person ;  aid 
the  other  person  said,  **  No,  give  the  other  a 
Newgate  calendar,  it  will  suit  him  mochbettv 
than  going.** 

But  Bennett  went  with  yon  and  Gufc  ?— To; 
that  was  as  long  aco,  I  may  safely  say,  is  fbtf 
or  five  or  six  months. 

John  Baker  swom.--Eiaiiiined  hj 
Mr.  Aticni^  GtHavL 

I  believe  you  are  butler  to  the  eari  of  Hv' 
rowby  ? — ^I  am. 

Do  you  recollect,  in  the  month  of  Febraaj 
last,  by  his  directions,  issuing  cards  of  iavitatioa 
to  Uie  Cabinet  ministeia  to  dine  at  hishooef 
—I  do. 

On  what  day  in  Febmaiy  was  it  yoo  isMd 
those  cards  ?— On  the  18th  or  19th;  I  ntkr 
think  the  19th. 

For  what  day  ?— The  Wednesday  foDowi^; 
the  23rd. 

The  cards  of  invitation  were  issued  eitiier 
on  the  Friday  or  Saturday  preceding  !—Tkf 
were. 

Do  you  know  whether  before  that  time,  ii 
consequence  of  the  king's  death,  theeabinet 
dinners'  were  suspended? — ^That  was  the  &* 
after  the  king's  death. 
'  Was  the  dinner  prepared  for  the  23id^'U 
was. 

I  believe  the  preparations  went  oo  tUl  ik 
dinner  hour  ? — ^Yes,  till  after  the  dinner  kfl«r. 

At  what  time,  on  the  evening  of  tbeiH 
was  the  dinner  countermanded  by  loid  Hat* 
rowby? — ^About  eight,  or  it  might  beteDa*« 
nutes  after  eight. 

Up  to  that  time  had  you  and  the  otber  mi^ 
vante  of  my  lord  Harrowby  expected  thcnm* 
ters  to  dine  at  lord  Harrowby's  boose  M<ir 
y[e  expected  them  momentarily. 

At  what  hour  did  you  expect  thcffl  ?-«'*' 
o^clock  was  the  regular  dinner  hour,  andle^ 
peeled  them  from  that  time.  ^ 

I  believe  one  of  tlie  houses  adjacent  to  ion 
Harrowby's  is  the  Archbishop  of  Yo**-^ 
Yes,  it  is. 

Do  you  remember,  between  six  """J^ 
o'clock  on  that  evening,  obsenring  cin^ 
setting  down  or  taking  up?— Yss,  ^*2 
carriages^  I  believe,  taking  up  bcftweestf  •» 
seven  o'dock. 

Mr.  BortmOomno.— €entleneD,theo0iM^ 
would  nataratly  call  lord  Harrowby  v(A  "• 
hie  lordship  is  probably  ensagdd  in  sosie  pow 
business,  which  prevents  his  hehqpherev"' 
moment.  His  lordship  will  be  v^^^^^f^ 
arrives,  to  prove  the  comim»i«w*j 
Hiden,  and  that  the  preparations  for  !»•■■" 
went  on  as  you  have  jast  beard. 


i 


13971 


Richard  Tiid'far  High  Treaton. 


A.  D.  1890. 


[1393 


Bichard  Munday  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  LUtUdak. 

Where  do  you  lire  ? — At  No.  3,  Cato-street 
Do  you  remember  on  the  afternoon  of  the 
23rd  of  February  last,  seeing  any  person  in 
Cato-street  ? — Yes ;  when  I  came  from  work 
in  the  afternoon,  I  saw  Davidson  walking 
to  and  fro  in  the  gateway. 

Did  yon  see  him  again? — ^Yes,  I  saw  him 
running  away  after  the  transaction  took  place ; 
but  I  had  seen  him  between  that  lighting 
a  candle,  with  another  candle  in  his  hand. 

Did  you  see  him  go  into  the  stable  ? — Yes, 
I  saw  him  push  the  stable  door  open,  and  go 
into  it ;  ana  I  saw  Harrison  at  the  door  at  the 
time. 

Did  you  obsenre,  whether  the  coat  of  either 
of  those  men  flew  open? — Yes,  Davidson's 
eoat  flew  open,  as  he  stooped  with  his  hat  over 
the  candle ;  and  I  observed  a  cross-belt  round 
him,  and  a  belt  down  here;  and  I  saw  two 
pistols  and  a  sword,  I  suppose,  sticking  out 
here ;  I  thought  it  to  be  a  sword  that  stuck 
out  in  that  way. 

In  the  course  of  the  afternoon  had  you  seen 
any  sacking,  or  any  thing  put  against  the 
door? — I  heard  a  nailing  up  at  watering 
time,  and  I  looked  up  and  saw  them  nailing 
some  sacking  over  the  railing  of  the  door,  a  kind 
of  bread-bagging  or  something  of  that  sort. 

Would  that  prevent  any  person  looking  into 
tfae  room  ?— I  thought  it  was  to  keep  the  place 
warm,  to  bring  some  cows  back  being  cold 
"weather;  but  it  would  keep  any  persons  from 
looking  in. 

Had  the  stable  been  empty  for  some  time  ? 
—Yes,  the  cows  were  taken  away  before 
Christmas;  I  had  not  seen  the  door  open  from 
that  time  till  this. 

~  Had  you  seen  persons  go  in  and  ontf — 
When  I  passed  by,  I  saw  two  go  in  and  three 
eome  out. 

Later  in  the  evening  did  you  observe  per- 
sons ? — ^No ;  after  half-past  six  o'clock  I  was 
never  out  of  my  door. 

George  Caylock  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  IMtledak. 

Do  you  live  in  Cato-street?— Yes. 

Did  vott  see  any  person  in  the  street  on  the 
33rd  or  February  ? — ^Yes,  Mr.  Harrison. 

Had  you  known  him  before  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  you  see  him  go  into  the  stable  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  he  tell  you  any  thing  about  it? — He 
told  me  he  had. taken  two  chambers  there,  and 
<^vras  going  to  clean  them  up. 

Did  you  see  any  other  persons  go  in  and 
oat  of  that  stable  that  evening  ?— Yes. 

How  many? — ^From  twenty  to  five^nd* 
twenty. 

George  Thomoi  Joteph  BxUhven  sworn.— Ex- 
amined by  Mr.  Bottand. 

You  are  one  of  the  constables  of  Bow- 
reet  ? — ^Yes. 
Did  you,  in  consequence  of  information,  go 


on  the  23rd  of  February  to  Cato-street  t— I 
did. 

At  what  time  did  you  first  get  there  ?-~I 
did  go  dp  in  the  afternoon,  and  at  six  o'clock 
I  went  there  again. 

Did  you  go  into  the  Horse  and  Groom  ? — 
Yes. 

Did  you  see  either  of  the  prisoners  at  the 
bar,  or  the  persons  charged  with  this  indict-' 
ment,  there  ? — Yes,  I  saw  Cooper  and  Gilchrist 
there. 

Had  Cooper  any  thing  with  him  ? — ^Yes,  he 
had  a  mop-stick  or  broom-stick. 

Did  he  leave  it  or  take  it  away  ? — He  left  it 
there. 

Did  either  of  them  come  back  for  the  stick  '^ 
— Gilchrist  did. 
Did  he  get  the  stick  ? — He  did  not,  I  have  it. 
What  sort  of  a  stick  was  it  ? — Like  a  hair-< 
broom-stick,  a  mop-stick;  and  there  was  a  place 
round  it,  as  if  to  receive  a  socket. 
Did  you  go  into  tlie  stable  ? — I  did. 
At  what  hour? — ^About  half-past  eight,  as 
nearly  as  I  can  tell. 

Who  was  with  you  when  you  went?  were 
Ellis  and  Smithers  and  others  with  you  ?^* 
They  were. 

What  did  you  observe  ? — ^I  observed  a  man 
with  a  gun  on  his  shoulder,  and  a  sword  by 
his  side,  with  cross-belts. 

Do  you  know  who  that  man  was?— I  do 
not. 

What  did  you  then  do? — ^I  went  up  th^ 
ladder. 

What  did  the  ladder  lead  you  to  ? — ^To  a 
loft. 

What  did  you  observe? — A  bench,  with 
arms  upon  it ;  and  I  heard  a  clattering  of  arms. 
How  many  men  ? — I  suppose  about  four  or 
five  and  twenty. 

What  did  you  say  ? — I  said,  **  We  are  ofii- 
cers,  seize  their  arms." 

What,  did  they  do  ?— Thistlewood,  whom  I 
immediately  saw,  seized  a  sword,  and  retired 
to  the  inner  room. 

What  did  he  do  with  that  sword? — He 
stood  fencing  with  it,  endeavouring  to  keep 
any  body  away  that  approached  him. 

Did  any  body  approach  him? — ^Yes,  Smi- 
thers. 

What  did  Thistlewood  do  on  his  approach- 
ing ? — He  stabbed  him. 

Did  Smithen  fedl?— Yes,  he  died  imme- 
diately. 

What  happened  after  this? — A  pistol  was 
fired,  and  the  lights  were  put  out  instan;- 
aneously. 

By  whom  was  that  pistol  fired? — I  have 
heard  since,  but  do  not  know  of  my  owu 
knowledge. 

What  was  done  then?— I  heard  a  voic-. 
from  the  corner  where  Thistlewood  Was,  cat, 
"  Kill  the  b  ■  rs ;  throw  them  down  suirs : 
I  joined  in  the  cry,  and  got  down  with  them. 
Where  did  you  go? — I  got  into  John-slree^. 
and  met  the  soldiers,  and  returned  with  cap- 
tain Fitzclarence. 


1900]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


In  whtt  state  was  the  loft  when  yoo 
turned  ? — I  did  not  get  into  the  loft  for  some 
time  after  that 

Upon  your  coming  back  to  the  stable  door, 
did  you  observe  any  body  ? — ^I  observed  Tidd« 

What  was  he  doing? — Hewasendeavonrinff 
to  get  away  from  the  stable-door^  as  it  appealed 
to  roe. 

Did  yon  lay  hold  of  him  ?•— I  did.  I  said  to 
some  body,  ^  Lay  hold  of  him  f  and,  as  I  spoke, 
he  lifled  up  his  arm,  and  then  I  saw  a  pistol : 
I  hud  hold  of  his  riffht  arm,  I  turned  him  round, 
and  fell  upon  the  dunghill,  and  he.  upenme ; 
the  soldiers  cam^  up  soon  alterwards.  The 
pistol,  I  shoufd  mention,  went  off. 

Mr.  Baron  Ganvw, — ^Did  it  go  off  whilst  it 
remained  in  his  hand? — ^That  I  am  not  aware 
of. 


Trial  ^WiOumDavUsm  mid  [UflQ 

self,  ^  damn  me^  here  is  nothing  ben  W  t 
tobacco-box  f 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — ^Was  that  so  ?  that  job 
expressed  yourself  on  searching  him, '  there  s 
nothing  here  but  a  tobacco-box  ?— No. 

The  Earl  of  Barrowbjf  sworn.— ExaBiaed 
by  Mr.  AUomof  GenereL 

I  believe  you  are  one  of  his  nja^*i  forf 
council?— *I  am. 

And  one  of  his  Hnnisters  ?— I  am. 

We  understand,  my  laid,  from  yoBrbnthr, 
that  cards  of  invitation  were  issasd  faj  ynr 
lordship's  direction,  lor  a  cabinet. 


Mr.  ArffawL— Was  he  secured  ?— He 
and  I  conducted  him  into  the  pubKe^ionse. 
On  taking  him  in,  was  he  searched  ?— ^He 


What  was  found  on  him  ? — A  leathern  belt 
round  his  waist,  and  two  ball-cartridges  in  his 
pocket. 

Did  you  remain  in  the  pnblio-bonse  ? — 
Befbre  t  had  finished  searehin|r  him,  a  man, 
named  Bradbum,  was  brought  in. 

Did  you  search  Bradbum  f — I  did. 

What  did  you  find  T — I  found  a  string  twists 
ed  five  or  six  tines  round  his  waist,  and  six 
ball-cartridges  and  three  balls  loose  in  his 
pocket. 

Were  dkfer^  Kny  others  brought  in?— Wil- 
ton, and  the  black,  Davidson. 

You  did  not  search  either  of  them  ?— No* 

Did  Davidson  say  any  thing  on  hik  beipg 
brought  in? — ^Yes;  lie  damned  and  swore 
•gainst  any  roan  that  would  not  die  in  liberty's 
cause;  that  be  gloried  in  it;  and  he  sung 
part  of  the  song,  ^  Scots,  wha'  hae  wi'  Wal- 
lace bled.''  , 

Did  Wilson  say  any  thing? — Yes^  he  said  it 
was  all  up;  he  did  not  care  a  damn;  they 
might  knock  him  on  the  head  now. 

You  returned  to  the  loft,  I  believe  ?— Yes. 

Who  were  there? — There  were  some  sol- 
diers, and  some  of  the  prisoners,  and  one  who 
is  an  evidence* 

Monument  ?— Yes. 

Did  you  find  any  arms  there?— Yes. 

Who  were  the  other  three,  t>e8ides  Monu- 
ment ? —Strange,  Cooper,  and  Gilchrist. 

What  description  of  arms  did  you  find?— I 
found  two  swords  myself,  and  i  saw  some 
pistols  found,  and  a  gun  or  two ;  I  found  ten 
grenades  in  a  bag,  and  one  laige  one  was 
found  in  my  presence,  by  Nixon,  ml  given  to 
me,  and  two  fire-balls. 

Have  you  the  custody  of  all  these  P— lliey 
are  here,  Taunton  has  the  key. 

Tidd, — My  lord,  I  wish  to  ask  him  a  ques- 
tion ;  if  you  recollect,  I  was  the  first  man  you 
took  into  custody  ? — ^You  were. 

TuM.— .On  searching  me,  he  expressed  hte- 


tbe  33id  of  Febrmiiy  last?— Thev ' 
at  the  cloee  of  the  precediBg  wsaL 

I  must  trouble  your  lordship  to  repeat  (hi 
names  of  the  members  of  the  canoet,  aad  thdr 
respective  offices  ? — The  lord  chsDeellor;  kd 
Westaaoreland,  the  lord  privy  sesl ;  the  eulof 
Liverpool,  first  lord  of  the  T^eararj;  Mr. 
Vansittart,  chancellor  of  the  Bxdiemier;  lorf 
Castlereagh,  secretary  of  state  for  toe  foiei|i 
department ;  eait  Bathurst,  ttenM^^^ 
for  the  colonial  department;  lord  aidsMilii) 
secretaiy  of  stata  ror  the  home  dtmitaat; 
mr  lord  Melville,  first  lord  of  Ae  adai. 
ralty ;  the  duke  of  WelUngtou,  master  geaim 
of  the  ordnance  Mr.  Canong,  praiW  « 
the  India  board;  Mr.  Robiasoa,  (nsBdeata 
the  board  of  trade;  Mr.BraggeBatoit)^ 
cellor  of  the  duchy  of  Luicaster;  Mr.  W«- 
lesl^  Pole^  master  of  the  Mint;  and  the  en 
of  Mulgrave. 
Aad  yourself? — Yes.  __ji 

Your  lordship  is  president  of  the  csodbIH 
I  am. 

Mr.  BoroR  Garrowi — Fifteen  in  oombcr?- 
Yes. 

Mr.  Attorn^  GenerW.— In  coawqneiMjl 
his  late  majesty's  deatii,  I  belief e  the  a^ 
dinners  had  not  been  held  as  usual,  ftrsoae 
time  ?— They  had  not  - 

I  omitted  to  ask  your  lordship  ^'^'^^''^ 
those  noblemen  and  gentlemen  iriiobafeiK'* 
mentioned  are  privy  councillors  ^—T^  J*! 
privy  councillors,  and  compose  wliit'*'*'^ 
the  cabinet  council.  . 

Does  yeur  lordship  remember, oo  voj 
preceding  the  Wednesday  on  which  the  ci^ 
binet  dinner  was  to  be  had,  ridiogin  the  p»' 

Does  your  lordship  remember  ii«»f  j^ 
person  ['Hiden]  near  Owfrenor-gate?-!  w» 
accosted  by  him  near  Gvosvenopfite' 

Did  he  give  you  any  letter  l-Ht  did. 

I«  that  the  tetter?  hkemigakt»^^ 
io»Wp.V- That  ia  die  letter.  ^  _. , 

A  letter  addmsed  to  my  lord  Ctfie"^ 

Did  .he  desire  year  lordship  tohave^ 
communicated  to  my  lord  Castlereag-  . 
told  me  it  contained  intelKgeace  of  V^Ji 
portance-to  his  lordrfiip  and  ^'J^'/zul 
sired  I  would  have  it  oottBumcatid  f»^ 

Castlereagh, 


14^11 


Rbikard  "Hid fir  H^  Trtmon. 


A.D.  18a(K 


[i4ee 


Did  you  upon  that  inquire  his  naiiie?^-He 
expressed  a  wish  to  have  some  further  conveiw 
sation  with  me;  lassked  him  whether  he  had 
pat  his  name  and  address  in  the  letter,  he^aid 
he -bad  not.  I  told  him,  if  I  was  to  eommu- 
nicate  with  him  it  would  he  necessary  I  should 
know  Ids  name  and  address,  and  upon  that  he 
gave  me  a  card  containing  his  nan»e  and 
aMress. 

Did  you  make  any  appointment  to  meet 
him  again? — When  I  knew  what  were  the 
ooBlents  of  that  lettev,  I  made  an  appointment 
to  meet  him  again  in  the  park,  at  eleven 
o'clock  the  neact  morning. 

Did  your  lordship  ascertain  the  contents 
of  that  letter  ^i)e  yon  were  with  him? — ^I  did 
not;  the  letter  was  produced  by  lord  Castle- 
reagh  at  the  counciL 

Did  your  lordship  meet  him  again  the  ibl* 
lowing  meriting  T — ^I  did  the  next  morniM,  in 
the  young  plantations  near  the  Ring ;  I  ap- 
pointed that  spot,  because  he  appeared  to  be 
extremely  apprehensive  of  being  seen  in  my 
eompany  when  I  met  him  the  day  before  near 
Grosvenor-gate. 

Having  seen  this  person  in  the  manner  you 
stated,  did  the  dinner  take  place  at  your  lord* 
ship's  ?— The  dinner  did  not  take  place. 

The  preparations  went  on  ? — They  went  on 
until  the  communication  of  a  note  which  I 
wrote  from  lord  Liverpool's  house,  between 
seven  and  eight  o'clock ;  that  must  have  reach- 
ed my  house  about  eight. 

That  was  the  first  communication  that  your 
lordship  gave  to  your  ^rvants,  that  it  was  not 
CO  take  place  ? — ^It  was  the  first. 

Jama  EUu  sworn. — Ezapoined  by 
Mr.  Atiornejf  General. 

I  believe  you  are  one  of  the  conductors  of 
the  patrole  at  Bow*street? — I  am. 

Did  you  go  to  Cato-street  on  the  evening 
of  the  23rd  of  Februaiy  last  ?— Ye^  I  did. 

Did  you  go  with  Ruthven  ?-<-I  did. 

Did  you  go  into  the  stable  in  Cato-street  ? 
—Yes,  I  did. 

About  what  time  did  you  arrive  at 'the  sta* 
bleP — ^As  near  as  I  can  state,  abpnt  hal£.past 
oight  o'clock. 

On  your  entering  the  stable,  did  you  observe 
any  man  in  the  stable  ? — I  did ;  I  saw  David- 
aan ;  1  believe  it  was  Davidson. 

Where  did  you  see  that  man  whom  you  be- 
lieve to  be  Davidson  ? — Between  the  foot  of 
the  ladder  and  the  door  of  the  stable,  about 
half  way  between. 

The  ladder  is  opposite  to  the  door  of  the 
stable,  at  the  further  end  ? — Yes. 

What  did  he  appear  to  be  doing  ? — He  bad 
flot  a  caibine,  or  something  of  that  kind,  in 
his  right  hand,  and  a  sword  at  his  left  side, 
and'f^  appeared  as  if  he  was  walking  sentry. 

Did  you  observe  whether  he  had  any  belts 
on  ?«— He  had  v^ite  belts. 

Did  you  observe  any  other  person  in  the 
stable? — ^There  was  another  person  in  the  fur- 
ther stall  of  the  stable. 


Thai  was  tike  stall  nearest  the  ladder  ?•— -Yes. 

Do  you  know  who  that  person  was? — I 
cannot  tell ;  I  should  not  know  him  again ;  I 
only  saw  that  he  was  a  shorter  man,  in  a  dark 
coat. 

When  yott  say,  you  believe  the  man  yon 
saw  on  first  entering  to  be  Davidson,  did  you 
observe  him  ?— Yes ;  I  took  him  by.  the  collar, 
turned  him  round,  and  looked  in  his  foce,  and  • 
saw  it  was  a  man  of  colour. 

How  soon  afterwaids  did  yon  see  him  in 
custody  ?— I  took  him  into  custody  withqn  five 
minutes  afterwards. 

Mr.  Baron  Gorrtno.-^When  you  took  hin^ 
into  custody,  did  he  appear  to  be  dressed  in 
exactly  the  same  way  as  you  had  observed,  hiiOi 
before  ?— Yes,  exacUy  the  sao^e. 

Mr.  AUamey  General.— Had  he  the  beh? — 
Yes,  he  had  the  white  cross-belts. 

At  the  time  you  apprehended  him,  had 
he  a  carbine  and  a  sword  N— Yes,  he  bad. 

Did  you  go  up  the  ladder  to  the  loft  above  ? 
—I  followed  Ruthven  up  the  ladder. 

What  did  you  observe  when  you  got  into 
the  loft  ?-r-Wben  I  got  into  the  lof^  I  observed 
a  number  of  people  f&lli^g  back  to  the  back 
part  of  the  room. 

How  many  persons  did  there  appear  to  be 
in  the  room  ? — I  judged  there  mignt  be  about 
four  or  five-and-twenty  altogether;  I  cannot 
speak  positively. 

Did  you  see  any  of  them  retire  into  a  small  • 
room  adjoining  the  loftT — ^There  yiest  three 
apparenUy  attemptinff  to  enter  Uie  small  room, 
and  as  I  went  up,  Arthur  Thistlewood  bran- 
dished his  sword  at  me,  and  was  advancing 
rather  towards  me ;  I  desired  him  to  desist,  or 
I  would  fire,  at  the  same  time  holding  up  a 
pistol  with  one  hand,  and  my  staff  with  the 
other. 

What  did  he  do  upon  that? — ^Upon  that  he 
retreated  back  just  within  the  door  of  the  little 
room. 

What  happened  then? — Smithers,  who  im- 
mediately followed  me,  on  gaining  the  top  of 
the  ladder  attempted  to  enter  the  little  room  ; 
at  that  moment  Thistlewood  made  a  stab  and 
stabbed  him  on  or  near  his  riffht  breast;  upon 
that  his  hands  went  up  in  that  way,  and  he 
fell  back,  and  exclaimed  ''  Oh  my  €k)d  Y*  on 
that  I  immediately  fired  at  Thistlewood,  but 
vnthout  effect ;  Smithers  staggered  against  me, 
and  fell  past  me,  a  general  rush  and  confusion 
took  place ;  I  was  pushed  on  to  the  ladder,  and 
pushed  down  the  ladder. 

Into  the  stable? — ^Yes;  upon  that  I  at* 
tempted  to  get  into  the  door  way  into  Cato- 
street;  I  remained  in  the  door*way  a  few 
seconds,  when  two  or  three  shots  were  fired 
in  Uie  stable,  one  or  two  of  which  passed  me 
in  the  door-way ;  another  was  fired  by  a  ti^i 
man,  in  a  dark-coloured  coat,  by  some  person 
up  in  the  comer  of  the  stable;  the  man  firing 
stood  under  the  ladder ;  I  then  attempted  to 

to  outside  the  door,  when  some  shots  were 
red  from  the  window  of  the  little  room* 


1403]       1  GEORGfi  IV; 


TrialofWimaM 


and 


[1404 


The  window  of  the  little  room  looked  into 
Cato-street  ? — Yes. 

In  what  direction  were  those  iihots  fired  from 
the  window  ? — ^Towards  the  door. 

That  window  is  not  directly  over  the  door } 
— >Noy  it  is  over  the  ouvhouse,  three  or  four 
yards  out  of  the  line ;  I  then  heard  a  cry  of 
^<stop  him;''  and  saw  Davidson  mn  in  the 
dkectioB  from  the  stable  towards  Qoeen-street; 
I  pursued  him,  and  came  up  with  him  I  think 
about  serenty  yards  off,  and  took  him  into 
custody. 

What  happened  on  your  getting  «p  to  him  ? 
—I  catchM  him  by  the  collar,  and  he  at- 
tempted to  cut  at  me,  but  I  was  too  close  to 
him,  and  Gill,  another  officer,  came  up  and 
assisted  me  in  disarming  him;  he  maae  no 
resistance  after  I  had  once  got  hold  of  him. 

Had  he  a  carbine  when  you  took  him  ?— He 
had,  and  the  cross-bdts. 
'  I  believe  you  afterwards  assisted  in  securing 
tome  of  the  other  prisoners } — ^As  soon  as  I 
bad  left  him  in  the  custody  of  others,  I  re- 
turned to  the  stable,  and  assisted  in  securing 
three  or  four  more  in  the  stable. 

Jame$  Ellis  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Curwood, 

.  When  you  took  Davidson,  did  you  take  him 
into  the  public-house  ? — I  took  him  into  a  shop 
first,  not  a  public-house  at  that  time* 

It  was  a  chandler's  shop,  I  believe  ? — Yes ; 
he  was  afterwards  in  the  public-house. 

Robert  Chmman  sworn.— Examined  by 
Mr.  SolicUor  GeneraL 

You  are  also  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole  ? 
—Yes. 

Were  yon  appointed  to  go  to  Cato-street  on 
the  23rd  of  February  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  being  at  the  Horse  and 
Groom  in  that  street  ? — Yes. 

Who  was  with  you  ? — William  Lee,  the  con- 
stable. 

Do  yon  remember  seeing  any  persons 
come  into  that  house? — Yes;  Davidson  and 
Cooper. 

Who  was  the  third? — I  cannot  identify 
him ;  I  believe  it  to  be  Gilchrist. 

Tell  us  what  they  did,  when  they  first  ob- 
served you? — ^They  stood  observing  us  for 
some  time  through  the  rails. 

They  were  outside  ? — No,  under  the  door  by 
the  lamp. 

In  consequence  of  their  observing  you,  did 
you  go  on  ? — We  went  away ;  but  previous  to 
that  Cooper  went  past ;  Gilchrist,  1  believe  it 
was,  passed  me  so  quickly  that  I  could  not 
identify  him  at  that  time;  Davidson  had  a 
drab  great  coat  on,  that  covered  him  entirely 
over,  a  very  large  one,  a  servant's  coat. 

You  passed  on  to  Molineux-street  7 — ^Yes. 

Where  did  you  go  then  ? — We  turned  roimd 
one  of  the  streets  to  Queen-street. 

Did  you  ob«erve  them  again  ?— Backwards 
and  forwards,  I  saw  persons  go  in ;  Cooper  as 
he  passed  in  said  he  should  go  in  and  have 


some  beer,  and  as  they  passed  diey  looked  a 
in  the  face. 

As  if  observing  who  yonjrere  ?— Yes. 

DM  you  afterwards  go  round  into  Qvees- 
street?— Yes. 

Did  you,  when  yon  got  to  the  QneeiHtKtl 
end  of  Cato-street,  hear  the  report  of  apinolf 
—I  did. 

In  consequence  of  that  did  you  ran  up  Calih 
street?— I  did. 

What  did  you  observe  ?— The  persom  were 
then  running  Teiy  hat  out  of  the  stable,  iid 
there  was  a  firing ;  two  armed  men  ran  don 
the  street,  and  as  I  had  just  overtaken  then,! 
heard  a  pie6e  go  off ;  I  turned  roond  sod 
heard  somebody  say,  ^  Stop  him  T  I  tniud 
round,  and  I  observed  a  man  with  his  haoi 
up,  I  thought  to  strike  any  person;  I  weot^ 
to  him,  and  he  struck  at  me,  and  I  then  avit 
was  a  sword.  Ellis  recovered,  and  laid  hold 
of  him  by  the  collar,  and  Ellis  and  I  tookUa 
against  the  wall ;  he  had  also  a  carhiiie. 

Who  was  that  ?—DaTidson.  Hewasdreeed 
quite  differently  then ;  we  took  him  into  the 
chandler's  shop. 

Was  there  any  thing  else  in  bis  podLet?—A 
couple  of  pistol  flints  in  his  pocket. 

Davidson.'^yLy  lord,  I  would  beg  to  ak 
this  witness  a  question. 

Mr.  Adolfha. — Send  it  over  to  me,  ndl 
will  ask  it  it  I  think  it  proper. 
[The  pritoner  wrote  mum  kisqwatim,^^ 
was  handed  to  his  counsel]. 

Robert  Chapman  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Adolpkm. 

Did  you  go  into  any  public-hoosei  at  aO 
with  the  prisoner  F-^No. 

Did  you  remain  with  him  ?  was  he  in  yosr 
custody  from  the  time  when  he  was  takes?- 
Yes ;  till  I  went  with  him  into  the  stable. 

And  he  never  was  taken  into  any  paW*" 
house  at  all  ?— No,  not  then. 

Where  was  the  carbine  F  —Benjamin  uiB 
took  it,  and  loaded  it  in  the  shop ;  he  «^ 
and  bought  some  powder.  Gill  came  ap  vb 
struck  him  on  the  sword  hand,  and  took  it  &«* 
him. 

You  saw  that  done  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  not  the  carbine  in  the  road,  at  iobi 
distance  from  him,  when  you  took  him?— *^^ 
I  think  not. 

Robert  Chapman  re-examined  by 
Mr.  Solicitor  GeneraL 

You  conducted  him  to  the  chandler's  sM^ 
and  afterwards  to  the  suble  ?— Yes,  witkawt 
of  soldiers.  - 

And  afterwards  yon  gave  him  ^V^'T.^^^ 

Whether  he  was  taken  into  the  pnW*wK*r 
or  not,  you  cannot  tell  F— No;  but  I  do  »» 
think  he  v#&s.  »^ 

You  do  not  know,  one  way  or  the  c^^ 
No,  I  do  not. 


1405] 


Richard  Tiddfor  Jtigh  Treann. 


A.  D.  1820. 


C140)5 


WiUiam  Lee  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Gttmey, 

Are  yon  a  Bow-street  patrole  ? — ^Yes. 

On  the  evening  of  Wedn^ay  the  23rd  of 
February,  did  you  go  in  company  with  Chap- 
man ? — ^Yes. 

At  about  what  timeP — Somewhere  about 
hal^past  six. 

Near  the  sign  of  the  Horse  and  Groom  did 
you  obserre  any  persons? — ^I  observed  Da- 
vidson. 

The  prisoner  Davidson? — ^Yes;  and  Gil- 
cbrist.  Cooper,  and  Harrison,  as  well. 

After  you  had  stood  there  some  little  time, 
did  you  walk  away  ? — ^Yes. 

Did  any  person  follow  you  ? — Thistlewood 
followed  us,  and  spoke  to  us. 

In  what  way? — At  least  I  spoke  to  him 
first ;  he  came  and  stared  us  in  the  face,  and  I 
said  it  was  very  rude  to  stare  us  in  Uie  face ; 
Chapman  said,  ^'I  suppose  the  gentleman 
thinks  he  knows  ns.''  Thistlewood  returned 
for  answer,  **  Oh,  it  is  a  mistake;"  and  turned 
on  his  heel  towards  Cato-street. 

You  and  Chapman  had  been  sent  first  I 
believe,  as  officers  less  known  ? — ^Yes. 

After  walking  away  some  little  time,  did 
you  return  and  look  at  tlie  stable?*- 1  went 
round  and  came  into  Cato-street,  and  then  I 
saw  Davidson  leave  the  stable,  and  come  to 
the  comer ;  at  that  time  Gilchrist  and  Cooper 
were  under  the  gateway.  I  will  not  be  sure 
of  Harrison  being  there  at  that  moment,  but 
he  was  there  soon  afterwards ;  they  were  talk- 
ing to  a  man  dressed  like  a  baker. 

At  half-past  eight,  did  you  enter  the  stable 
with  the  party  which  accompanied  Ruthven 
and  Ellis  ?-Yes. 

Did  Ruthven  and  Ellis  and  one  or  two  more 
go  up  the  ladder  ?•— They  did. 

You  heard  a  firing  and  confusion  there  ?— - 
Yes. 

And  they  were  hustled  down  again  ?— Yes ; 
and  the  lights  appeared  to  be  put  out. 

Was  there  any  firing  down  the  ladder  ? — 
There  were  several  shots  fired  down  the  lad- 
der. 

Did  you  quit  the  stable  ?— Ruthven  desired 
me  to  stop  under  the  gateway,  the  people 
were  crowding  in  shortly  after  the  military 
came. 

Before  the  military  came,  were  there  any  shots 
fired  from  the  window  of  the  loft,  or  the  room 
up  stairs?— There  were. 

When  the  military  came,  they  entered  the 
itobleF^Yes.  . 

Ba^mam  Gtorge  Gill  sworn.— Examined  by 

Mr.  Boliand. 

Arer  yon  one  of  the  dismounted  horse  patiole 
mt  Bow-street  ? — ^Yes.  . 

Did  you  form  one  of  Westeoatt's  party  to 
go  to  (W4treet?-^Yes. 

At  what  time  did  you  arrive?— I  cannot 
state  exactly* 

Did  you  go  into  the  stable  ?— Yes. 


Were  Ruthven  and  Ellis  there  ?^Ye8,  they 
were  before  me. 

What  did  you  see  ? — ^There  was  a  light  there ; 
I  saw  a  man  standing  at  the  bottom  of  the 
ladder. 

Was  that  man  armed  ?— He  had  something, 
but  I  cannot  say  what  it  was. 

What  sort  of  a  man  was  he  ? — A  short,  thick, 
stout  man,  of  a  dark  complexion. 

Did  Ruthven  and  Ellis  and  Smithers,  go 
up  ? — ^They  went  up,  and  I  followed  Nixon ; 
he  was  on  the  ladder,  he  was  near  the  top,  and 
I  was  as  close  to  him  as  I  could  possibly  get. 

Did  anything  happen  to  you,  before  yoa 
could  get  into  the  lottr — I  heard  a  report  of  a 
pistol,  or  something  in  the  loft;  Ellis  came 
tumbling  through  the  place,  as  if  he  had  been 
knocked  down ;  he  ki^ocked  down  Nixon,  and 
Nixon  fell  upon  me  in  the  comer. 

Was  there  a  rush  from  the  loft  ? — ^There  was. 

When  you  got  up,  where  did  you  go  ?— I 
do  not  say  I  did  get  up,  but  I  got  near  the 
door,  and  by  a  sudden  rush,  I  was  pushed  into 
Cato-street. 

When  you  got  into  Cato-street,  did  you  see 
either  of  the  prisoners  at  the  bar  there  ? — ^Yes,* 
Davidson. 

Where  was  he  when  you  observed  him  first  f 
— I  observed  him  come  out  of  the  door  with  a 
carbine. 

How  was  be  coming  outP — Running  out; 
he  discharged  the  carbine  right  at  me. 

Did  he  pass  you  ?— He  did ;  after  he  had 
passed  me,  I  saw  he  was  a  man  of  colour. 

Did  he  pass  away  from  you  or  stop  ? — He 
ran. 

Did  he  do  any  thing,  more  than  fire  the  car- 
bine, before  he  ran  away  ? — No ;  I  was  about 
three  or  four  yards  from  him. 

Had  he  any  thing  else  than  the  carbine  ?— 
Yes,  he  had  a  large  sword ;  I  ran  after  him, 
and  cried  out,  ''stop  him,  stop  him  1"  and  had 
very  nearly  reached  him,  when  he  made  a 
back  cut  at  me  with  a  sword,  and  then  he  ad- 
vanced forwards  again. 

Was  he  stopped  by  any  person  P — ^He  was 
stopped  by  Ellis. 

What  passed  on  Ellis  stopping  him?-— I 
cannot  say ;  I  got  up  as  soon  as  I  possibly 
could,  and  pulled  out  my  truncheon,  and 
struck  him  on  the  under  wrist,  and  he  cried 
out  ''  oh ;  I  am  lame,  I  am  lame  I''  I  said, 
''damn  your  eyes,  I  vrill  cut  your  han4  off;'' 
I  made  a  grasp  at  the  blade  of  the  sword  with 
my  left  hand,  I  found  it  very  sharp,  and  let  go 
of  it;  it  cut  my  fingers. 

Did  you  strike  him  again  f — I  cannot  say. 

Did  he  reUin  the  sword?  I  think  it  was 
twirled  round  his  wrist,  by  a  strioa  on  the  top 
of  the  sword ;  I  think  it  must  have  been  ftuten- 
ed  to  his  hand,  or  he  would  have  dropped  it 
before,  when  I  struck  him;  but  on  this  the 
sword  fell,  and  I  picked  it  up. 

Did  von  take  the  carbine  nromhin?— I  took 
the  caraine  ool  of  the  open  hand. 

* 

Mr.  Boron  Garrow^^In  what  position  wtt 


140^1       1  GfiOttCE  tV. 


TriiU  of  WiUmm  Dffokb^n  md 


[1408 


lib  idien  y<m  picked  tip  ibb  YWord;  Ellis  bad 
got  hold  of  him  and  another  man. 

Yon  never  loft  ridit  of  Urn  after  yoa  ww 
him  widi  the  swbrd  T-^No. 

Mr.  JBbtoiA— Where  was  he  taken  to?— 
Over  to  a  little  shop  in  Qaeen-streeL 

Did  yon  take  the  carbine  with  Toa  ? — ^I  did. 

What  became  of  the  swoid?— 4  left  it  with 
£Uis. 

Are  the  sword  md  the  oarbiiie  both  forth- 
coming now  f — Yes. 

Shall  you  know  them  ?— Yes,  I  shalL 

Jokn  Muddock  sworn. — ^Exammed  by 
Mr.  LUtiedak. 

Are  you  a  soldier  in  the  Coldstream  regi- 
ment of  guards  T-^Yes,  * 

Were  you  one  of  the  party  that  went  to 
CatO'Street  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  when  yoa  got  into  the 
yard,  seeing  any  one  standing  near  the  stable- 
door? — Yes ;  1  did  not  know  his  name  at  the 
present,  ))Qt  I  know  the  person. 

Did  you  see  him  the  next  day  at  Whitehall  ? 
,  ^Yes ;  I  found  his  name  was  Tidd. 

Look  round  and  see  whether  be  is  there  ? — 
/Ibat  is  the  gentleman  [pointing  him  ouf]. 

Did  he  do  any  thing  r— Yes;  he  presented  a 
pbtbl  to  Mr.  Fitzclarence. 

Did  he  fire  it  off  f — ^Yes ;  and  I  saw  serjeant 
Xegg  take  him  afterwards. 

Did  you  after  this  go  into  the  lower  room  ? 
-*I  went  towards  the  stable-door,  and  I  saw  a 
prisoner  cut  with  a  sword  at  captain  Fitz- 
clarence,  and  he  immediately  tumea  the  sWord 
again  to  cut. 

Which  prisoner? — I  do  not  know ;  he  went 
in  again  and  I  did  not  see  who  he  was,  and 
afterwards  Mr.  Fitzclarence  made  an  attack  at 
ihtm,  and  went  in  at  the  door,  and  I  followed 
him  in. 

After  you  got  in,  did  anjr  of  them  do  any 
^ing? — ^Ves;  after  I  got  into  the  centre  of 
the  room,  the  prisoner,  Wilson,  presented  a 
nistol  to  my  breast,  and  it  flashed  in  the  pan, 
out  did  not  dischai^^ ;  'I  afterwards  maae  a 
^•tabat  him  with  my  bayonet. 

I  believe  you  afterwards  secured  him  ? — 
Yes. 

You  saw  him  slfterwards,  and  knew  him  to 
\%  Wilson  ?— I  took  him  to  the  public-house 
«and  lookM  at  him  by  the  light. 

Is  that  the  same  person  you  see  at  the  bar  T 
•^Yes,  it  is. 

William  Legg  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  JHomsy  Ot$WNd, 

I  beliere  Ton  are  a  serjeant  m  the  Coldstream 
guards  ? — T  es. 

Were  you  one  of  the  party  that  went  under 
the  eomnkand  of  Keutenant  Fitzclarence,  on 
the  night  of  the  D3rd  of  February  ?— Yes. 
.   Upon  your  comfng  into  Cato-street,  you 
'know  the  stable  there  ?-^Yes. 

When  you  came  to  the  'MttMe,  did  you 
obserre  any  man  standing  near  the  stabler— 
*Yes.  • 


How  was  he  standing?— He  wai  fUndiog 
with  his  back  against  the  wall,  betweeD  the 
gateway  and  the  stable  door. 

Between  the  gateway  leading  out  of  Jda- 
street  and  the  stable  door?— Yes. 

Had  he  amr  thing  in  his  hand  ^—YeiyheM 
a  pistol  in  his  hand,  and  he  levelled  it  t 
-lietttenant  Fitsclarence. 

Was  lieutenant  Fitidarence  at  tbeliadrf 
yoor  picquet?— About  a  yard  and  &  bilf  it 
"Uie  head  of  me. 

Upon  your  observing  this  man  lefd  In 
pistcH  at  uentensnt  Fitsclarence,  what  didTn 
do?— I  knocked  the  pistol  aside  by  mjpne, 
and  seised  d»e  munle  end  ef  the  pistol  wiih 
my  right  hand;  a  scuffle  ensued  between fte 
man  and  me  which  should  have  the  piitoly  td 
the  pistol  went  off  in  the  souffle. 

Did  yon  puU  the  trigger  ?-Vo,  I  had  boU 
of  the  musste  of  it. 

Ibe  man  who  had  the  pistol  bsd  bold « 
the  other  end  ?— Yes. 

What  was  the  effect  of  die  pistel  goiof  «[ 
—It  tore  my  jacket  into  ribbons;  I  hwtw 
jacket  here,  if  you  wish  it ;  whatew  the  ptow 
was  loaded  with,  tore  the  sleeve  of  the  jid^ 
off  the  right  arm. 

Did  you  secure  that  man?— As  soon  if  w 
pistol  went  off,  he  let  it  go  easily ;  he  ana 

struggled  any  more  for  it. 
Did  you  secure  bim  ?— I  did ;  I  seesred  hBr 

and  debrered  him  over  to  the  potioe  oAeoi 

Who  was  that  person  whom  yousecBwdf- 
Tidd.  . 

You  saw  him  afterwards?— I  «w  hiaiw- 
wards  and  hare  aeen  him  mee.  . 

I  believe  you  then  went  into  die  lUMe  «> 
up  hito  the  loft  ?— I  went  mto  thesuUe. 

You  assisted  in  securing  some  of  the  pei*** 
iHio  were  taken  in  the  loft?— They  k»  «J 
rendered  when  I  got  there  to  part  «  «* 
picquet. 

Yon  assisted  in  securing  some  of  the  ana 
that  ^were  taken  in  the  Idft?— I  di^* 

Eatamined  by  Mi.AHmn^Gf^ 

I  believe  you  are  a  lieutenant  of  the  Ci*' 

stream-guards  N— I  am.  ^ 

Do  you' remember  being  applied  to  «r 

evening  of  Ae  «3rd  of  P«*>""yJ?it 
picguet  to  John-etreet,  or  Cato-^treetM^ 

1  believe  you  commanded  that  pJcqw^^f 
did.  ij 

What  attracted  your  notice  after  yoo  p  " 
John^treet  ?— the  report  of  fiie-sntf.       . 

In  consequence  of  that  report,  d»  f*J 
with  your  punnet  to  Cato^reetT-^JJJ'V* 
the  picquet  forwards  towaids  Cato-streW' 

On  your  getting  to  the  archway, leadjW" 
Cato^treet,  -what  passed  ?— I  »«J*  Ku 
officer,  crying  out,  **soldieM,  •*•««]*:: 
Stable  4ioorl'»  I  made  towards  it, Jf  J 
moment  I  got  to  the  door  I  mctt«o  ■Jj^ 
of  whom  Dresentfld  a  pistol,  and  tbesv''^ 


at  me  by  a  sword ;  we  ezcbasged  •**'^-/ 
he,  seeing  the1>ody«ftfirpteqaet«»^  ^ 


14091 


Richard  Tidd/or  High  Treaton. 


A.  D.  182a 


[1410 


ran  into  the  stable,  and  I  followed  him  into 
the  stable.  I  came  up  to  one  man,  who  said, 
**  do  not  kill  me,  and  I  will  tell  you  all."  I 
gave  him  in  charge,  and  then  returned  and 
took  another  man  out  of  one  of  the  stalls ;  the 
soldiers  took  him  away.  I  then  led  the  men 
up  into  the  loft,  where  I  found  three,  foui^  or 
live  men,  with  a  large  quantity  of  arms  upon 
the  bench,  and  on  the  floor. 
.  What  sort  of  arms  ? — Blunderbusses,  pistols, 
and  pikes. 

You  assisted  in  securing  the  persons  in  the 
loft,  and  the  arms?— I  did. 

Serjeant  Legg  was  of  your  party,  I  believe  ? 
—He  was. 

Did  you  observe  seijeant  Legg  contending 
with  a  man  ? — I  did  not  attend  to  him ;  my 
attention  was  called  to  the  man  with  whom  I 
had  a  scuffle. 

Lieutenant  Frederick  Fitzclarence  cross- 
examined  by  Mr.  Adolpkus. 

Did  you  take  Davidson  into  your  custody  ? 
— ^Yes. 

Where  was  he  taken  ? — ^To  Bow-street. 

During  tliat  time  was  he  taken  to  any  other 
place? — He  was  brought  into  the  stable  in 
Cato-street. 

Proceeding  from  the  stable,  was  he  taken 
into  any  public-house  or  other  house  to  your 
memory  ? — No. 

Mr.  Attorney  General, — You  do  not  re- 
member his  being  taken  into  a  public-house  } 
— ^No,  I  do  not ;  I  will  not  be  sure  whether  he 
was  taken  into  the  Horse  and  Groom ;  there 
were  two  or  three  prisoners  there ;  there  were 
Tidd  and  Wilson,  I  am  not  sure  whether  he 
was  or  not,  I  rather  think  not. 

William  Watcoatt  ^wom, — Examined  by 
Mr.  Solicitor  General. 

You  are  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole? — 
I  am. 

You  went  to  Cato-street  on  Wednesday  the 
23rd  of  February  ? — ^Yes. 

On  going  up  did  you  see  Ings,  one  of  the 
prisoners  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder? — ^Yes. 

He  was  in  that  stall  at  the  foot  of  the  lad- 
der?— Yes,  he  was. 

John  Wright  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Solicitor  General, 

You  are  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole  ?— I 
am. 

Did  you  go  up  to  the  foot  of  the  ladder  in 
the  suble  in  Cato-street?-— I  did. 

Did  you  see  a  stout  man  standing  near  the 
foot  of  the  ladder?— -A  stoutisii  man. 

Did  yon  take  any  thing  iirom  that  man  ?^A 
knife. 

What  sort  of  a  knife  ?— A  butcher's  knife 
and  a  sword. 

Was  there  any  thing  twisted  round  the 
handle  of  that  knife  ?~-Wax<^nd. 

That  knife  is  in  the  possession  of  the  officer  ? 
—It  is. 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


I  believe  you  were  knocked  down? — ^Yes; 
immediately,  after  I  took  the 'knife,  I  was 
knocked  down,  and  received  a  stab  in  my 
right  side . 

And  that  man  escaped  from  you  ?->  Yes,  he 
did. 

Ings  was  immediately  afterwards  brought 
back  in  custody  ? — Yes. 

Joteph  Champion  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  SolicUor  General. 

You  are  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole  ? — 
Yes. 

You  were  at  the  stable  in  Cato*street  on  the 
night  of  the  23rd  ?— Yes. 

Do  you  remember  seeing  the  man  who  was 
tried  here  the  other  day,  Ings,  at  the  foot  of  the 
ladder  ? — Yes. 

Did  he  sing  out  any  thing  on  the  ofiicers 
appearing  ? — Yes ;  "  look  out  above  there ! " 

He  afterwards,  I  believe,  made  his  escape  ? 
—Yes. 

Was  he  brought  in  custody? — Yes;  Brooks 
came  up  bringing  him  in  custody,  in  the 
Edgware-ro&d. 

Did  you  search  him  ? — ^We  took  him  to 
Mary-le-bone  watch-house,  and  searched  him 
there. 

What  did  you  find  on  him?— Two  haver- 
sacks slung  across  his  shoulders,  under  his 
great  coat,  one  under  each  arm;  a  tin  case 
nearly  full  of  powder;  three  pistol  balls;  a 
knife-case,  and  a  belt  round  his  waist. 

What  kind  of  knife-case  was  it  ? — Made  of 
i  cloth. 

For  a  large  or  a  small  knife  ?-— For  a  large 
knife;  there  is  a  knife  wrapped  round  with 
wax-end,  which  fits  it ;  and  which  is  in  it  now. 

William  Charles  Brooks  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  SdicUor  General. 

You  are  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole  ?— 
Yes. 

Do  you  remember  seeing  a  man  run  in 
John*street,  on  the  night  of  the  23rd  of  Fe- 
bruary ? — Yes. 

Did  you  pursue  him  ? — I  met  him. 

When  you  met  him,  what  did  he  do? — He 
presented  a  pistol  at  me,  and  fired  it. 

Was  the  pistol  loaded  ? — Yes. 

How  do  you  know  ? — ^Tlie  ball  went  through 
my  clothes,  bruized  my  shoulder,  and  grazed 
my  neck. 

On  this  pistol  being  fired  at  you,  you  stag-i 
gered  into  the  street  ? — ^Yes. 

And  the  man  ran  on  ? — Yes. 

Was  he  afterwards  taken  by  Moay  the 
watchman  ? — Moay  laid  hold  of  him. 

Was  he  afterwards  searched  in  your  pre- 
sence?— I  searched  him  in  the  watch-housCi 
and  took  two  haversacks  from  him,  slung  one 
on  each  shoulder,  and  albeit  round  his  body, 
and  a  tin  case  nearly  full  of  powder. 

And  a  knife-ease? — No;  Cbampt<in  took 
that. 

In  your  presence  ? — Yes,  and  tlie  balL 

When  he  was  taken,  what  did  you  say  to 


1411] 


I  GEORGE  IV. 


TridqfWMamDamdttmmi 


C14H 


lum?— I  aikod  htm  how  heouac  to  iie  «l  ne, 
a  BUD  he  had  never  leen  hefora ;  he  daomed 
vie,  end  said  he  wished  he  ha4  killed  me,  as 
he  meant  to  do. 

Samud  Harcuks  TmuUan  sworn. — ^Examined  hy 

Mr.  Own^. 

Yon  are  an  officer  at  Bow-etreet?— I  am. 

On  the  morning  of  Thursday  the  24th  of 
February,  did  you  go  to  Brunt's  lodgings  to 
apprehend  him ? — ^Yes,  I  did. 

la  what  room  did  you  take  him  ? — ^In  the 
front  two  pair  of  stairs  room. 

Did  you  search  the  back  room  two  pair  of 
stairs? — ^I  did. 

Did  you  find  there  any  things  in  two  rush 
baskets  f— I  did. 

Besides  the  rush  baskets,  there  were  an 
iron  pot,  and  a  pike-staff? — There  were. 

yTe  will  not  trouble  your  lordship  with  an 
enumeration  of  the  things  now,  as  they  will  be 
produced  hereafter.  Did  you  ask  him  a  ques* 
tion  about  that  back  room  ? — I  did ;  he  denied 
their  being  his  apartments. 

Did  you  then  call  up  the  landl^y,  and  ask 
her  whose  it  was  7 — Yes. 

What  did  she  say? — She  said  the  lodgings 
were  let  in  his  presence  to  a  man,  she  did  not 
know  his  name ;  I  then  inquired  of  Brunt  who 
this  man  was ;  be  said  he  had  only  seen  him 
once  at  a  publio-honse,  and  he  did  not  know 
who  he  was. 

Did  he  mention  how  he  came  to  recommend 
him? — Only  that  he  met  him  at  a  pnUic- 
house, 

Was  that  all  ?— Yes. 

Any  thing  about  his  wanting  a  lodging? — 
No,  not  to  me. 

Did  you  then  go  to  Tidd's  lodgings  in  Ilole- 
in-the-wall  passage? — I  did. 

Did  you  find  any  articles  of  ammunition 
there  ?~I  did. 

We  will  not  take  the  detail  of  that  now. 
At  what  time  did  yon  go  to  Brunt's  ?— About 
eight  o'clock ;  and  to  Tidd's  at  nearly  nine. 

Did  you  ask  Brunt  about  these  baskets  ?-^ 
He  denied  knowing  any  thing  about  them. 

Dankl  BMop  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Gvmey, 

You  are  a  Bow-street  officer  ?— Yes. 

On  the  n^orning  of  the  24th  of  February, 
did  you  apprehend  Arthur  Thistlewood? — I 
did. 

At  about  what  hour  ?— sBetween  ten  and 
eleven  o'clock  in  the  morning. 

Where  did  yon  find  him? — At  the  house  of 
a  Mrs.  Harris,  No.  8,  White-street,  Moorfielda. 

Up,  or  in  bed  1 — ^He  was  then  in  bed. 

How  were  hia  clothes?— He  had  hit 
bceeohes  and  stockings  on. 

And  his  coat  and  waiatooat  by  the  bed  side  I 
— ^They  were. 

Did  yon  find  any  thing  in  his  coat  or  waist- 
coat ? — In  his  coat  and  waistcoat  I  found  tl&re^ 
leaden  balls,  a  ball  cartridge,  and  a  bl^nk 
«artridge» and  two tou^  and  iiimaU  silk  aash. 


Yon  took  him  to  Bow-street,  and  Acn  to 
the  Secretary  of  State's  ?— I  did. 

Dankl  Buhop  croas-eiamined  hj 
Mr.  Ciarwood. 

Do  yon  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Siimwi  \ 
— Thwe  is  an  officer  belonging  to  BofWHitied 
of  that  name. 

Did  any  man  of  the  name  of  SaloaoB  gn 
with  yon  to  appreheod  Thistlewood  ? — Salmon, 
one  of  onr  officers,  was  present,  and  likewise 
Larender  and  Ruthven,  and  sereral  patrein 
at  the  back  and  front  of  the  lionea  for  inr  of 
miachiel^ 

Mr.  SoUcUor  Genenrf.— Yon  snmmnded  tte 
honse  before  you  entered  it  ?— Yes. 

Bfr.  Sofiat&r  GcncnaL-^I  am  afraid,  my  lesd, 
the  case  cannot  be  cloeed  to-nighc  I  wonU 
beg  to  submit,  at  what  time  your  lordship 
would  think  it  proper  to  leave  oC 

Mr.  Bortm  Garram, — Gentlemen  of  the 
juiy,  the  solicttor-general  intimateey  that  thqr 
hare  now,  on  the  part  of  the  proeeontioB,  get 
through  probably  all  their  caae^  except  the 
production  of  the  arms  andanunnnitionfinmd  at 
the  Tarions  places.  If  we  oooM  hope,  that  fay 
sitting  lor  some  few  hours  longer,  and  in- 
cveaamg  your  fiitigne  only  to  that  extent,  we 
eottld  £inh  the  trial  this  erening,  I  would  take 
your  opinion,  whether  we  should  proceed  to 
Its  dose ;  but  it  is  quite  dear  we  should  only 
aet  on  to  a  late  honr  of  the  night,  and  nn>r 
bably  not  accomplish  it  at  last.  If,  tfaercmre, 
we  must  adjourn,  I  hare  no  doubt  yon  will 
concur  with  the  Court  in  thinking,  this  is  dw 
most  convenient  time;  therefore,  to-monow 
morning  the  counsel  for  the  proeecetion  will 
close  their  case,  by  the  production  of  the  aress, 
and  then  the  case  for  the  prieoDen  wiU  be  gene 
into. 

Foremm  qftks  iiirsr.-^We  all  coiwnde  with 
your  lordship. 


\. — My  lord,  haying  been  taken  bf 
surprise,  and  not  having  my  witnessee,  wonld 
your  lordship  permit  me  to  be  visited  fay  my 
wife  to-night,  that  I  may  send  for  tfiea  f 

Mr.  Gnmey.— Yov  altoracy« 

Mr.  Beron  Gorroio,— The  ConrI  hm  polking 
to  do  with  these  arrangements,  but  diose  to 
whqm  your  application  will  be  made  throngh 
your  solidtor,  will,  I  am  sure,  take  care  tlmt 
you  shall  not  snfihr  by  any  want  of  access  of 
necessary  persona  to  you  ftir  diat  perpose. 
Then,  gentlemen,  we  wm  have  the  honour  of 
meeting  you  predsdy  at  aiae  o'dock  to-mor* 
row  morning. 


SESilONS  HOUSB,  OUDI  BAIUnf, 

Thubsdat,  Ami.  STfh,  10SO. 

William  Davidson  and  BHtetd  Tidd 
set  |q  thf  bar;  and  Jam«i  WiUiam  Wil- 
son,  John  Hahiaon,  Ridiaid  Brndtaro, 


14181 


Tliehard  TitUJmr  J^k  2Vwn>n, 


A.  D.  I8S0. 


[1414 


John  Shaw  Strange,  James  Gilchrist,  and 
Charles  Cooper,  were  placed  hehind. 

Mr.  Gttmey. — ^We  shall  not  require  the  at* 
tendance  of  the  other  prisoners. 

Mr.  Banm  Gatrow, — Is  it  wished,  by  the 
eounse)  for  the  prisoners,  that  they  should  be 
present.  ^ 

Mr.  Cunoood, — ^No,  my  lord. 

Mr.  Banm  Garrow, — The  other  prisoners 
may  retire. 

\J%ey  were  removedfrom  the  &r.] 

George  Thoma»  Jotak  BMnen  called  again  — 
Eauuninea  by  Mr.  Gunney. 

Are  there  now  upon  the  table  the  arms  and 
ammunition  found  in  Cato-streetf — ^There 
are ;  there  are  three  sticks  which  have  got  on 
by  mistake. 

[Th^vme  ran&vedjrom  ike  toUs.] 

MHthdrawng  ihem,  the  articles  on  the  table 
were  all  found  in  Cato>street? — ^They  were. 

Were  there  more  hand-grenades  than  there 
are  here  F — Yes,  six  more. 

The  others,  I  believe,  have  been  opiened  in 
the  course  of  the  investigation  ? — ^They  have. 

At  the  time  these  pikes  were  found,  were 
they  ferruled,  as  I  observe  some  of  them  are 
now  T— They  were. 

Rave  the  ferrules  of  the  others  dropped  off 
in  consequence  of  the  greenness  of  the  wood  ? 
•»I  pfeauole  it'  is  in  conseonence  of  thai. 

I  obterre  that  tome  of  the  pikeJieads  are 
files  sharpened,  and  others  are  bayonets?— « 
Yes. 

All  these  holes  are  bored  for  the  reception 
of  these  pike-heads  to  8(irew  on  ?— Yes,  they 
will  receive  them. 

Mr.  OurHey. — ^We  will  hand  you,  gentle- 
men^ one  parcel  of  the  sharpened  files,  and 
one  parcel  of  the  bayonet^  and  a  pike-staff. 

[They  were  handed  to  the  jmy^  and  one  of  the 
bt^fonett  tcretoed  in.] 

The  hand-grenades,  I  observe,  are  all  fitted 
with  fuses?— Yes. 

Mr.  Gvrn^* — The  several  persons  who  found 
each  are  in  attendance,  but  my  learned  friends 
have  not  desired  the  personal  identification  of 
each. 

Mr.  Boron  Garrow. — With  a  view  to  have 
that  distinetly  understood,  you  may  ask* him, 
whether  they  were  either  found  by  him,  or 
deliveied  into  his  possession  by  persons  who 
were  there  before  tney  quitted  the  spot ;  then 
if  the  gentlemen  wish  you  to  call  any  person 
who  found  any  particular  article  they  may  haive 
that  done. 

Mr.  Cunoood, — ^We  do  not  desire  it,  my  lord. 

Ml-.  Baron  Gomno.-— THen^  1  take*  it  for 
Sninted,  without  calling  A.  who  found  this 
Particular  blunderbuss,  and  B.  who  found  this 


sword,  and  so  on,  that  it  is  to  be  taken  they 
were  all  found  in  the  stable  at  Cato-strcet,  and 
put  into  the  possession  of  the  witness  Ruthven ; 
the  gentlemen  on  the  part  of  the  prisoner  do 
not  require  it  to  be  carried  forther. 

Mr.  Gfirwy.— Whom  was  the  carbine  taken 
from  ?  Davidson  ? — I  cannot  state  that  myself. 

Where  are  the  haversacks  ?— That  is  one  on 
the  table. 

They  were  taken  off  the  person  of  Ings  ?— 
Yes. 

£Th^  were  handed  to  thejwy,] 

Mr.  Baron  0«rr«p.— You  will  have  the  good- 
ness, gentlemen,  tO'  attend  to  the  dimensions 
of  those  haversacks. 

Mr.  Gts-ney.— Is  this  the  belt,  this  the  knila- 
case,  and  that  the  knife,  taken  from  Ings  ?— 
As  I  understand. 

Mr.  Gfttrmey.— You  observe,  gentlemen,  the 
belt  and  the  knifoiksase  are  made  of  the  same 
materials,  and  you  will  observe  the  fitting  of  the 
knife  and  the  knife-case,  you  will  observe  the 
wax  ends  round  the  handle. 

[They  were  handed  to  the  jury,} 

This  list  is  your  making  out  ? — ^Yes. 

In  the  loft,  thirty-eight  ball-cartridges,  fire- 
lock and  bayonet,  one  powder  flask,  three  pis- 
tols and  one  sword,  with  six  bayonet  spikes 
and  cloth  belt,  one  blunderbuss,  pistol,  four- 
teen bayonet  ^ikes  and  thsee  pointed  files,  one 
Imyonety  one  oayonet  spike  and  one  sword 
seabbaird,  onecavbine  and  bayonet,  two  swords, 
OM  boUet,  ten  hand-grenades,  two  fire-balls^ 
one  large  grenade  and  bayonet,  a  rope  ladder, 
one  sworS  sticky  forty  ball-cartridges,  one 
bayonet  and  three  loose  balls,  these  were  all 
found  in  the  loft :  in  the  steble,  in  the  pocket 
of  Bradbum,  six  ball-cartridges,  three  balls, 
and  some  string  put  round  him  to  act  as  a  belt ; 
the  pistol  which  it  is  alleged  Tidd  fired,  the 
pistol  which  it  is  alleged  Wilson  attempted 
to  fife,  a  blunderbuss,  sword  belt  and  scabbard, 
two  pistols,  one  sword,  twelve  sticks  with  fer- 
rules: in  thepocketofTidd,  two  ball-cartridges, 
and  round  him  a  leathern  belt :  two  ball-car- 
tridges fsioing  the  stable,  and  ten  ditto  in  Newn- 
ham-street :  one  musquet  cut  down  and  one 
sword  from  Davidson;  one  haversack,  cross 
belts,  one  pricker,  bayonet,  scabbard,  cartouche 
box  and  a  belt  round  hvA  body :  two  haver- 
sacks one  belt  and  tin  powder  case,  four  pistolr 
balls  one  pistol  key  and  a  knife-case,  from 
Ings:  one  haversack  containing  seventeen  ball- 
cartridges,  three  balls,  one  pistol  flint,  one 
pricker,  one  worm  for  drawing  cartridges,  one 
anife  and  a  turn-screw,  one  stick  cut  to  recdve 
a  bayonet,  left  in  the  public-house;  that  was  left 
by  Cooper  or  Gilchrist  ?— By  Cooper. 

Is  that  also  made  to  rcK>eive  a  ferrule  at  the 
top  ?— Yes ;  it  is. 

Mr.  Baron  Gomw.— That    was    left    by 
Cooper,  and  afterwards  asked  for  by  Gilchrist  ? 
—Yes. 


I415J        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qfWUUam  Damdson  and 


[1416 


JoJm  Hector  Morison  called  again. — 
ExamiDed  by  Mr.  Gumej/, 

You  mentioDed,  yesterday,  that  the  prisoner 
Ings  had  brought  you  a  sword  to  sharpen,  on 
Christmas  eve  ? — Yes. 

Look  at  that,  and  tell  me  whether  that  is  ihe 
sword  he  brought  to  you  to  grind  ?  [shewing  a 
iword  to  the  wUness.l — Yes. 

What  were  the  directions? — To  grind  it 
sharp  from  the  heel  to  the  point,  and  to  make 
the  point  as  sharp  as  a  needle. 

Is  it  particularly  sharp  ? — Yes. 

[It  icas  handed  to  the  jury  J] 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — Is  that  the  one  you 
call  a  scimitar  F — They  are  both  of  the  scimitar 
shape. 

Mr.  Curney. — Has  the  edge  been  sharpened 
since  it  left  you  ? — The  edge  has  been  made 
much  keener,  by  sharpening  it  with  a  steel  or 
a  stone,  I  cannot  say  exactly  which. 

Benjamin  George  Gill  called  again.— 
Examined  by  Mr.  Gttmey, 

You  mentioned  a  carbine  and  a  sword  taken 
from  Davidson,  can  you  select  those  from  the 
arms  which  are  now  on  the  table  ? — Yes. 

Mr.  Attorney  General, — Your  lordship  will 
recollect,  he  said  there  was  a  sling. 

Mr.  Boron  Garrow, — ^Yes ;  you  will  recollect 
gentlemen,  this  witness  stated,  that  he  believed 
there  was  a  sling  attached  to  the  hand  of  the 
prisoner,  whom  he  struck  to  oblige  him  to 
resign  it ;  you  will  observe,  the  one  produced 
has  such  a  sling. 

Was  the  carbine  loaded  when  you  got 
possession  of  it  or  not? — It  must  be  loaded 
oecause  he  had  discharged  it  at  me  before. 

Did  you  observe  any  moisture  upon  it? — 

After  I  took  it  to  Bow-street,  it  was  quite 
damp ;  I  put  my  finger  down  the  barrel  and 
shewed  it  to  several  gentlemen  who  were 
there. 

George  Thomas  Joseph  Ruthven  called  again. — 
Examined  by  Mr.  Gumey, 

Were  tlie  greater  part  of  these  fire-arms  load- 
ed when  you  took  them  ?— They  were ;  we  had 
them  drawn  for  the  purpose  of  being  produced 
here. 

What  were  they  loaded  with  ?— With  ball, 
with  the  exception  of  one  gun  which  had  large 
jihot. 

James  Aldoia  called  again. — ^amined  by 

Mr.  Gumey, 

You  have  mentioned  a  brass-barrelled  blun- 
derbuss taken  out  of  pawn  by  Davidson  on  the 
23rd  of  February;  look  at  that  blunderbuss, 
a«d  state  whether  you  are  able  to  identify  it 
as  the  same  ?— Yes ;  I  believe  it  to  be  the 
same. 

DwirfjoR.— My  lord,  may  I  ask  Mr.  Aldous 
one  question  ? 


Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — ^Yes,  certainly, 

Davidson, — Do  not  you  recollect,  when  I 
pledged  it,  my  saying  it  was  not  mine,  and 
that  you  said  you  would  lend  me  seven  shUIings 
upon  it,  as  yo«  knew  me,  otherwise  you  wwki 
not  have  taken  it  in  at  all ;  that  it  wis  ool 
worth  that  ? — I  do  not  exactly  recollect  thu; 
the  prisoner  might  make  that  observation,  but 
I  do  not  recollect  it. 

Samud  Herculet  Taunton  called  again.— 
Examined  by  Mr.  Gtrnty, 

You  mentioned  to  us  yesterday,  that  pn 
had  gone  to  the  lodgings  of  Brant,  aad  ibtii 
the  l^ck  room  two  pair  of  stairs,  you  foood 
two  rush  baskets,  with  a  number  of  thiogs?- 
Yes,  they  are  here. 

Give  us  the  contents  of  those  rash  baskets! 
— Here  are  nine  papers  with  rope-yam  and 
tar. 

Are  these  what  you  call  the  fire-balls  ^—'^ 
are  [One  was  handed  to  the  jury].— Then  ue 
also  some  steel  filii^. 

llie  other  basket  is  what  was  wrapped  op 
in  a  blue  apron  ? — It  is. 

What  did  you  find  in  that  basket  f-Fw 
grenades,  three  papers  of  rope-yarn,  tar,  and 
other  ingredients,  that  is  fire-balls,  tvo  bagso^ 
powder,  one  pound  each. 

These  bags  are  made  of  flannel,  and  yn 
have  weighed  them,  and  found  theycostaiooDe 
pound  each? — Yes. 

[They  were  opened,  and  fmdtotv^ 

Have  you  any  of  the  same  kind  of  fiaaa*^ 
bags  empty  i — Five. 

Is  gunpowder  ever  sold  packed  up  in  M 
form?— I  do  not  know;  I  never  bought anj 
in  such  a  |tate. 

Did  you  ever  see  any  exposed  to  sale  a 
such  a  state  ?— No,  never :  a  paper  of  g»- 
powder  a  leather  bag :  containing  sixty^bee 
bullets. 

That  cartouc'^e  box  ? — ^Yes. 

These  were  the  contents  of  the  baskeii- 
Yes.  .  .  . 

You  mentioned  an  iron  pot?— This  «  » 
[jprodudng  it\  , 

Does  it  appear  that  tar,  or  some  such  w^ 
stance,  has  oeen  heated  in  it?— T^«*"* 
been ;  there  are  the  remains  of  it  now. 

And  a  pike  handle  ?— Yes ;  there  is  »  F«- 
handle. 

Are  the  hand-grenades  which  haw  o^ 
produced  from  Cato^txeet,  and  ^T^ 
found  there,  of  the  same  description  .-i«^ 

You  mentioned  that  you  Preceded  fe«"* 
ines  of  Brunt  to  the  lodgings  <tf  Tidtf  - 


lodgings 
did. 


Give  us  the  things  which  you  fouodat  Tide's 
lodgings ;  have  you  a  haversack  here  '^*ji 

What  does  Uiat  contain  F-Fourtai^ 
and    thirty-four    bulleU,    one-hundrw 
seventy-one  bflOlpcartridgjBs,  sixty-B"*  "^ 


\ 


1417] 


Itidtard  Tiidjmr  High  Tmuon. 


A.  D.  ItM. 


[1418 


cartridges  without  powder;  and  a  brown  paper 
parcel  with  three  pounds  of  gunpowder. 

Did  you  find  a  coarse  canvass  cloth  ? — Yes. 

What  did  you  find  in  it  ? — ^Ten  grenades, 
«le?en  bags  of  powder^  one  pound  each. 

Do  you  mean  flannel  bags,  of  the  same 
description  with  the  others? — Yes;  and  ten 
empty  bags ;  a  small  bag,  witli  a  tin  powder^ 
flask ;  sixty-eight  bullets^  four  flints^  and  twenty- 
seven  pike-handles. 

Are  those  the  pike^handles  you  have  by  yon  ? 
—Yes, 

Are  they  of  the  same  description  with  those 
found  in  Cato-street  ? — Yes. 

Were  they  all  ferruled  ^ — They  were  when  I 
found  them,  but  being  green,  some  of  them 
have  dropped  off. 

Were  they  all  bored  to  receive  pike-heads  ? 
—Yes. 

Did  jou  also  find  a  trunk  ? — ^Yes. 

What  are  the  contents  of  that  trunk  ?— Nine 
hundred  and  sixty-five  ball-cartridges. 

Made  up  in  parcels  of  how  many  each  7— 
Five  each. 

A  Juryman  (Mr.  Toung.) — ^Would  that  box 
be  strong  enough  to  remove  those  from  place 
to  place? — It  was  tied  up  strongly  when  I 
found  it  under  the  bed, 

Mr.  Giamey. — ^In  that  case  would  it  be 
strong  enough  to  be  removed  ? — Oh  yes,  cer- 
tainly; it  is  now  ready  to  break  with  being 
carried  about  so  often,  and  brought  down  here. 

Serjeant  Edward  Hamon  sworn.— Examined 
by  Mr.  Gwmey, 

You  are  a  seijeant  in  the  royal  artillery  ?— I 
am. 

And  acquainted  therefore  with  such  things 
as  you  see  before  you  ? — ^Yes. 

In  the  first  place  look  at  these  flannel  bags 
of  gunpowder,  containing  one  pound  each ; 
what  purpose  were  they  intended  for?' — I 
suppose  they  were  meant  for  cartridges  for  a 
six-pound  gun. 

Made  up  in  a  proper  and  convenient  shape 
for  that  purpose? — Only  too  small,  they  should 
have  been  rounder. 

Would  they  answer  that  purpose  ? — Yes. 

They  are  made  up  differently  from  what  you, 
as  a  military  man  of  experience,  would  make 
them  ? — ^Yes. 

Mr.  Bartm  Garrow.^-^You  would  make  them 
in  a  mould  fitted  to  the  gun  ? — Yes. 

A  person  who  had  no  opportunity  of  model- 
ing from  a  gun  would  make  them  so  ?— Yes. 

Mr.  Gurney.-^What  appear  to  you  to  bQ 
the  ingredients  of  these  fire*baUs? — ^They  are 
Bearly  all  alike ;  this  is  exactly  like  the  other, 
except  that  one  is  without  brimstone ;  this  has 
oakum,  ttr,  rosin  and  brimstone. 

One  of  them  you  found  without  the  brim- 
stone ? — ^Yes ;  that  is  all  the  difference  I  have 
seen  in  them.  * 

Would  they  be  effectual  means  of  setting  a 


building  on  fire,  if  they  were  thrown  itato  a 
window  on  the  floor  ? — Certainly. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — Do  you  apprehend 
that  the  one  without  brimstone  was  so  from 
accident  or  design  ? — I  do  not  know ;  I  should 
rather  think  it  was  meant  for  the  bottom  of 
one  of  these  grenades. 

The  composition  of  which  the  brimstone 
would  not  enter? — No. 

Mr.  Gumey, — If  one  of  these  were  throws 
into  the  windows  of  a  hay-loft,  with  two  or 
three  loads  of  hay  and  straw,  would  they  burn 
it  down  ? — Most  assuredly. 

Or  thrown  into  any  building  and  lighting 
on  wood,  they  would  set  it  on  fire?— Yes. 

How  long  would  Ihey  bum  ?— -That  is  a 
good  large  one,  that  would  bum  four  minutes^ 

Amply  sufficient  to  set  it  on  fire?-*-Yes, 
there  would  be  a  body  of  red  fire  left  after  ii 
had  done  blazing. 

Look  at  one  of  those  hand-grenades,  and 
open  it ;  with  respect  to  those  you  have  opened, 
what  do  you  find  to  be  in  the  interior?— -A 
small  box  of  tin. 

Containing  what  ?— About  three  ounces  and 
a  half  of  gunpowder. 

Is  there  a  fuse  brazed  into  this  box  ?— Yet* 

Mr.  Gttmey. — As  the  counsel  for  the  prisoner 
do  not  object  to  our  leading  on  these  points  ; 
do  YOU  find  first  the  rope-yara  the  exterior  I 
— Yes. 

Then  a  sheet  of  paper  ? — ^Yes ;  there  was  a 
piece  of  stocking  on  one. 

Then  more  rope-yarn  ? — Yes. 

Then  a  number  of  pieces  of  iron  tied  together 
round  it  ?— Yes. 

You  then  come  to  a  tin  box,  with  a  fuse 
brazed  in  it  ? — ^Yes. 

And  filled  with  gunpowder? — ^Yes. 

You  have  found  that  three  ounces  and  a 
half  of  gunpowder  had  been  the  contents  of 
the  box  ? — Yes ;  I  weighed  one,  and  they  all 
appeared  to  be  the  same. 

Is  that  more  than  sufficient  for  a  nine-inch 
shell  i* — ^Yes. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow^ — Have  you  found  as 
many  as  twenty-five  pieces  of  iron  ?— Yes. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow^ — I  ask  this,  from  his 
examination  on  the  last  occasion ;  the  counsel 
do  not  object  to  it  ? 

Mr.  Curwood — No,  my  lord. 

Mr.  Bflftwi  Oarrow. — If  that  were  thrown 
into  a  room  with  persons  in  it,  would  it  be 
discharged  in  about  half  a  minute,  and  pro- 
bably be  attended  with  death  and  destruction 
to  the  persons  in  that  room  ?  ^Most  assuredly 
it  would  ;  [the  wUneu proceeded  to  open  one  m 
the  pretence  of  the  jury],  there  is  some  brown 
stuff  here. 

Mr.  Gttmey. —Is  that  cemented  on  ?— Yes, 
it  is ;  here  are  under  that  four  great  naila 
fastened  on ;  then  there  is  another  piece  of  this 
brown  stuff. 


1419]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  WtlUam  Bmidtmaad 


ru3o 


Now  TOQ  have  come  to  the  fin  carcase  %^^ 
Yes. 

Force  out  that  fuse  which  is  brazed  in^  aod 
empty  the  gunpowder ;  that  fuse  has  a  priming 
in  it  r — Yes ;  it  has  a  composition  in  it. 

lliat  is  full  of  gunpowder  the  same  as  the 
other  ? — Yes  it  is ;  tlie  Tery  same. 

Is  the  powder  good  ? — ^Very  good. 

These  nand-grenades  are  not  made,  I  be- 
lieve, in  the  manner  in  which  a  military  man 
would  make  them  ? — ^They  ara  not. 

Are  thev  so  construeted  as  to  b«  very  ef* 
fectaal  and  destructiTe  ? — ^Tliey  are  so. 

The  regular  hand-'gtenade  is  a  shell  ? — ^It  iSb 

That  could  be  obtained  only  by  resorting  to 
founders  ? — ^No. 

Then  are  only  four  pieces  of  iron  there,  but 
yoa  foosid  ia  another  twenty-five  ? — ^Yes. 

They  vaiy  acooeding  to  the  size  of  the  pieces  ? 
—Yes. 

Mr.  Attorn^  Gfenersf.— My  loTdy  that  is  the 
case  on  the  part  of  the  Crown. 

BSFBKCE. 

Mr.  GMnowdi^-OendemeB  of  the  jury,  it 
has  now  for  the  fourth  time  btoome  my  rnekn- 
choly  talk  to  address  yon  and  other  jnriee  on 
theae  occasions.  I  say  my  'melancholy  task, 
because  it  is  known  to  all  the  world,  that  not- 
withstanding all  that  my  learned  friend  and 
myself  could  urge  on  behalf  of  the  prisoners, 
three  former  verdicts  of  guilty  have  been  pro- 
nounced. Irksome  as  me  task  was  to  me  in 
the  first  instance,  I  need  not  tell  you  that  its 
weight  is  much  increased  in  consequence  of 
those  verdicts.  I  should  very  ill  have  executed 
my  duty  on  the  former  occasions,  if  I  could 
have  any  thing  new  to  offer  to  you  on  the  pre- 
sent, because  I  must  have  given  the  case  very 
little  attention  indeed,  even  for  the  short  time 
that  I  bad  to  consider  it,  if,  at  least,  during  the 

Srogress  of  the  three  former  trials,  almost  every 
ling  that  could  present  itself  to  my  mind  had 
not  already  presented  itself.  But,  never- 
theless, I  should  be  deserting  my  duty  to 
these  unfortunate  men  at  the  bar,  if  I  were 
»ot,  upon  the  present  occasion^  to  address 
to  you  some  at  least  of  those  observations 
which,  according  to  my  view  of  the  case,  ought 
tb  be  attended  with  some  consideration. 

I  told  you,  or  at  least  some  of  you  who  were 
on  the  former  jury  heard  me  say,  that  the  first 
time  I  rose  to  address  you  (and  I  said  it  sin- 
cerely) I  gave  more  weight  to  the  evidence 
then  brought  forward  on  the  part  of  the  Crown, 
than,  upon  a  re-consideration,  I  thought  it  de- 
served. And  the  more  I  come  to  look  at  the 
evidence  which  has  been  given — I  mean  the 
important  and  material  parts  of  it,  that  is, 
those  pa.rts  which  are  to  sustain  the  issue  you 
Have  to  try — I  still  consider  it  is  of  so  sus- 
picious a  nature,  that  every  time  it  is  presented 
tO'you-anew  it  deserves,  at  your  hands,  a  new 
and  further  consideration.  What  I  mean  is, 
that  the  charge  of  treason  is  >  mainly,  and  F  be- 
lieve I  may  almost  venture  to  say  wholly,  sup- 


ported by  the  evideaee  of  aa  aoconpilieey  ari 
such  an  accomplice,  that  a  more  complete  man 
of  infomy  I  do  not  think  caa  be  nked  oot  ef 
tiie  siak  of  human  crime,  of  any  age  or  of  uy 
country.  He  stands  tainted  ia  no  costom 
degree,  he  is  devoid  of  alonat  every  aQiii 
and  social  duty ;  he  has  violated  tfaeconfidcBK 
of  pmata  life  equally  vrith  his  piifaAic  dolia: 
—hit  duty  to  God»  his  duty  to  his  kii;,  hit 
duty  to  the  public,  he  has  equally  dimpnM ; 
there  ia  no  daty,  public  or  private,  nhkk  he 
seems  not  to  have  violated;  he  admits,  tfail he 
has  been  an  apoatate  from  his  religioa,  nd  of 
course  a  denier  of  that  God  to  whomhtippab 
for  the  truth  of  the  testimony  he  is  to  give;  be 
adhnits,,  to-day,  tiMi  he  has  been  an  inlddad 
a  traitor,  a  meditated  murderer  and  an  sHon 
Now,  can  you  haw  a  wofse  man  befoR  yei? 
The  deeper  a  man  is  steeped  in  mhmjt  tk 
less  he  deservea  credit  at  your  hands  v<^ri^^ 
tells  astety,  it  oaght  to  be  a  stoiy  probibkiB 
itself  and  cottflniMd  by  wstaesses  of  tnih  aid 
varaoty. 

The  misfortune  of  this  case  is,  that  liieit  a 
mixed  up  vrith  the  charge  you  have  to  trf, » 
much  of^undeniable  guut,  that  I  am  dimii 
is  almost  beyond  the  human  power  to  seppitie 
thai  part  of  the  case  which  is  proved,  (h»that 
wfalcn  is  only  charged,  and,  as  I  boDbly  cos- 
tend  befose  youy  not  distinedy  pfond.  It  s 
not  ia  the  nature  of  the  hnman  niad  M 
where  folsahood  is  mixed  up  with  troth,  a  jay 
should  bo  able  easily  to  thmw  aside  the  U» 
hood,  and  discriminate  between  that  and  the 
tsath>  mA.  which  it  ia  blended.   It  w?» 
patient  inquiry  and:  nice  diserimioatioB,  m 
therefore  I  pray  you  distinctly  to  see  vhat  a 
the  charge  upon*  which  you  are  to  pronooatt; 
and  to  consider  not,  how  much  guilt  is  ^xoj» 
against  these  men,  but  whether  there  is  dis&oet 
evidence  to  prove  that  precise  charge  'ipw 
which  you  are  to  found'  your  verdict.   » J^ 
come  to  examine  and  separate  (he  enoe«* 
minutely,  I  think  you  will  find  that  aU  that 
fixes  the  guilt  of  high  treason  upon  »^ 
men,  depends  solely  upon  the  lestimooM 
that  infamous  witness  Adams;  because  it  d^ 
pends  entirely  upon  what  took  place  at  tboK 
consultations,  at  which,  he  says,  he  ^  P 
sent.    Neither  Hiden  nor  Monument  (^bo  a« 
two  vritnesses  implicated  to  a  certain  ^^^rV 
the  same  transaction)  was  present  at  w» 
consulutions,  and  therefore  neither  can  p^ 
you  an  account  of  what  passed  ****•*;,.  "?- 
you  are  inclined-to  give  them  full  ^^^^ 
both  distincUy  admitted  that,  althoosh  m 
knew  (and  one  participated  in)  the  homd  pwa 
of  assassinating  his  majesty's  ministers,  P 
they  knew  of  no  ulterior  plan  of  levying  ^ 
against  his  majesty,  or  oonspiau^  *^.^-- 
against  his  majesty,  which  m  the  msm  cwip' 
which  you  have  to  try.  ».  w  i^ 

Always  bear  in  mind  that  such  is  tie  c»T^ 
or  rather  those  are  the  charges  you  are  to 
cideupon.    Whether  there  was  any  oonffl^ 

to  levy  war  (for  that  is  the  l*ofi^*«^T"\^ 
diclmen^  agaiMt  hift  mi96sC|>  whediv 


14211 


Richard  Tidd/w  H^  Treaitm. 


A.D.  I8t0i 


tl48t 


vras  actually  levied,  or  wlieUier  (here  wu  aoy 
conspiracy  to  depose  or  put  the  king  to  death. 
Now  let  me  recall  to  jo«r  recollection,  what 
maM  admitted  by  my  learned  friend,  the  conniel 
for  the  Crown,  in  opening  this  case  to  you 
(and  he  did  not  admit  it  without  good  consi- 
deration, for  he  is  too  good  a  lawyer  to  admit 
it  if  not  well  founded)  that,  whatever  may  be 
your  opinion  of  the  nefarious  and  wicked  d^ 
sign  to  assassinate  all  his  majesty's  ministers, 
yet,  in  point  of  fact,  such  assassination,  or  a 
conspiracy  to  do  it,  does  not  in  itself  amount 
to  high  treason.    Take   this  admission  and 
apply  the  evidence  to  it ;  see  whether  you  can 
find  in  the  evidence,  as  it  is   confirmed,  any 
thing  beyond  that  plan.    Do  not  suppose  me 
lo  speak  with  levity  of  that  matter,  but  see 
whether  you  have  consistent   and  confirmed 
evidence,  beyond  that  fiict,  of  any  design  of 
what  may  be  called  levying  war.    The  design 
of  a  conspiracy  may  be  gathered  from  the  con* 
aoltations  and  overt  acts  of  the  conspirators ; 
here  are  certain  overt  acts,  I  admit,  proved, 
which  go  in  confirmation  of  some  part  of  the 
testimonv  of  Adams ;  the  finding  of  arms,  and 
the  meeting  in  Cato-street,  for  instance.    But 
that  only  goes  to  confirm  the  one  part  of  the 
alleged  conspiracy.  It  goes,  I  admi^  to  confirm 
him  most  mainly  in  this,  that  they  entertained 
a  design  of  assassinating  the  ministers;   and 
if  the  prisoners  were  here  now,  answering  for 
that  charge,  I  could  not  and  should  not  nave 
a  single  word  to  say  to  you ;  I  could  not  urge 
that  Uie  witness,  infamous  as  he  is,  is  not  fiiUy 
confirmed  up  to  that  extent ;  but  bevond  that 
I  contend  there  is  not  a  sln|^e  particle  of  evi- 
dence to  support  the  charge  of  treason.    Con- 
sider first  the  probabilities  in  such  a  plot  to 
overturn  the  government;  you  must   admit 
(since  the  ingenuity  of  my  lesuned  friends  can- 
not deny  it)  that  as  a  scheme  for  that  purpose 
•it  it  so  wholly  absurd  and  ridiculous,  that  it 
never  could  enter  into  the  bead  of  a  man  who 
had  one  particle  of  reason  left    No  man  who 
is  walking  about  without  a  keeper  at  his  heels, 
and  in  a  straight  waistcoat,  ever  could  set 
about  a  plan  of  ovenettinff  the  government  of 
luch  a  mighty  empire  as  this  with  means  such 
as.  they  appear  to  have  had. 

My  learned  friend  has  said  very  truly,  that 
when  men  enter  into  great  schemee,  their 
imi^nation  deceives  them,  and  they  are  so 
anxious  for  their  ultimate  obfect,  that  they 
overlodc  all  difficulties  which  lie  between  them 
and  the  wished-for  end.  That  is  true  to  a  oer* 
tain  extent;  men  do  not  properly  appreciate 
difficulties  which  are  in  the  way  of  their  ardent 
wishes ;  but  there  is  a  limit  to  that  error ;  men 
do  not  contemplate  impossibilities  although 
thev  underrate  dilBtoultiei.  If  you  should  be 
told,  it  was  a  part  of  their  scheme  to  anest  the 
•uu  in  its  course,  or  to  roll  bade  the  tide  of 
^  Thames,-— if  a  witness  were  to  cone  and 
assert  boldly  that  such  waa  part  of  tiieir  schema, 
you  would  not  and  could  not  believe  it ;  then 
I  will  put  it  to  you,  are  even  those  impoesibiU 
ities  which  I   have  staM,  moi#  abfud  than 


the  plan  these  men  are  said  to  have  contem* 
plated,  for  the  purpose  (A  oversetting  this  great 
and  mighty  government  with  the  means  they 
proposed  ?  Now,  if  this  is  given  you  upon,  the 
eviaence  of  an  infamous  witness,  and  is  not 
corroborated  by  any  witness  of  character,  euk 
you,  will  you,  or  ought  you,  to  believe  it,  when 
the  lives  of  eleven  men,  aye,  when  the  lives 
even  of  eleven  in&mous  men,  depend  upon 
it  ?  For  however  infamous  you  may  consider 
the  persons  charged  in  this  indictment  to  be^ 
thank  God  there  ^re  specific  laws  for  every 
ofience ;  and  whenever  a  jury  may  find  tb^ 
guilty,  of  those  charges  of  wmch  £ey  ma^  be 
guilty  they  must  pay  the  penalty  annexjed  by 
Sie  laws  to  such  ofllnces.  But  it  is  your  duty, 
not  to  convict  them  in  one  form  of  indictment, 
merely  because  you  think  they  have  been 
guilty  of  an^yther  ofi'ence  of  which  thev  might 
have  been  convicted  in  another  form  of  indict- 
ment. 

Before  I  proceed  to  the  comments  I  waa 
about  to  make  on  the  evidence,  let  me  make 
this  observation  to  you,  that  tn  accomplice^ 
when  he  comes  before  vou  as  a  witness,  should 
at  least  appear  with  aU  the  mariu  of  sincere 
contrition ;  you  should  be  well  satisfied,  that 
however  iniquitous  his  former  conduct  has  been, 
at  least  at  the  moment  he  presents  himself  to 
you,  to  detail  the  circumstances  he  is  about  to 
disclose  in  evidence,  he  appears  with  a  mind 
thoroughly  convinced  of  tne  iniquity  of  that 
former  conduct,  and  that  he  is  then  determined 
to  speak  truth  even  to  the  last  letter.    If  yoo 
should  see  by  his  manner  and  conduct,  that 
even  in  that  box  he  was  inclined  to  shuffle,  to 
prevaricate  or  speak  that  which  was  folse^ 
would  you  give  him  credit  for  a  single  mo- 
ment?   Now  let  me  bring  this  to  your  rec<4- 
lection ;  when  I  cross-examined  him  as  to  h&i 
motives,  in  joining  and  confederating  with 
these  people,  what  did  he  sayP  it  was  fear 
kept  him  to  the  last  with  this  band  of  conspi* 
rators  1  that  this  was  an  idle  excuse  I  am  sura 
I  need  not  sav  one  word  to  convince  you; 
what  fear  could  restrain  him  from  going  to  the 
proper  authorities   and   disclosing  what  he 
Knew?  what  more  did  he  sav  to  account  for 
his  having  entered  into  this  plot  7    Remember 
it  was  first  told  him  on  the  2nd  of  January; 
he  paused  over  it  ten  days,  and  on  the  13th  of 
January  he  was  introduced  to  Thistlewood;  hf 
heard  all  that  Thistlewood  had  to  tell  him  ;  ho 
attended  every  committee  from  that  time  to 
the  22nd  of  February  daily,  and  twice  a  day  ; 
it  is  true,  as  my  learned  friend  reminds  me^ 
that  he  was  fifwen  days  in  prison,  where  he 
might  safely  have  inade  a  disclosure;  bat 
down  to  the  very  night  when  they  were  all 
taken  prisoners,  he  continued  with  them,  aad 
to  iJI  appearance^  one  as  full^  bent  upon  ei^ 
fecting  the  sdieme  a»  any  amongst  them; 
and  it  was  not  until  that  he  got  bac^  lo  the 
Christian  idi^n,  that  is  to  say,  when  the 
halter  stared  bun  in  the  foee,  that  his  oonseienco 
informed  him  he  was  in  the  wrong;  and  yo« 
vemembec  jafaeo  I  asked  hia  if  ht  did  aot  eo^ 


I4d3l       1  GfiORGB  IV. 


Trial  ^WUUam  Damdton  and 


iim 


tertian  the  design  of  the  others,  what  was  his 
motive  for  thus  apparently  acting  with  them  ? 
he  tells  you,  with  an  unblushing  front,  that  he 
had  some  suspicion,  of  the  character  of  his 
companion  Brunt,  and  in  order  to  ascertain 
the  truth  of  that  suspicion,  he  joined  in  this 
most  horrid  plot !  there  is  a  man  joining  in  as 
murderous  a  scheme  as  ever  was  devised  or 
imagined,  and  all  for  the  purpose  of  ascertain- 
ing a  doubt  as  to  the  character  of  his  conw 
panion  I  Do  yon  believe  him  when  he  tells 
you  thisP  if  you  do  not  believe  him,  then 
down  to  the  very  moment  in  which  he  stands 
in  that  box,  you  see  him  still  persisUng  in 
crime.  If  he  is  still  persisting  in  crime  and 
uttering  falsehood,  how  is  It  possible  to  believe 
«ny  part  of  his  statement  ?  how  can  you  rely 
upon  any  thing  that  be  says  ? 

•  With  respect  to  the  crime  itself,  it  is  of  the 
greatest  importance  to  the  safety  of  the  lives 
and  liberties  of  us  all,  that  the  bounds  of  law 
should  be  fiuthftilly  preserved ;  crime  when 
defined,  no  donbt,  ought  to  meet  due  punish- 
ment, not  abstractedly,  but  in  that  mode  the 
law  has  pointed  out.  If  you  conftise  the 
bounds  of  offences  you  take  away  the  best 
safe-guard  of  the  subject.  But,  above  all,  this 
maxim  applies  to  the  law  of  treason.  As 
it  is  accurately  defined,  so  ought  those  defini- 
tions to  be  most  religiously  observed ;  and  un- 
less you  are  convinced  that  the  parties  here 
charged  are  guilty  of  the  actual  and  specific 
fkcts  charged  upon  them,  you  ought  not  to  find 
them  guilty.  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  this  be- 
fore gentlemen  who  have  pronounced  former 
verdicts  of  guilty,  and,  I  must  admit,  upon  the 
same  evidence ;  because  from  the  manner  in 
which  you  conducted  yourselves  upon  former 
occasions,  [  saw  that  you  gave  great  attention 
to  the  cases  beforo  you,  and  I  know  those 
verdicts  were  the  result  of  your  clearest  con- 
viction ;  and  knowing  that  fact,  it  is  with  con- 
fidence I  feel,  that  if  upon  another  review  of 
die  evidence  you  should  see  occasion  to  chance 
your  former  con<^lu9iotts,  you  will  have  manly 
boldness  enough  to  do  it ;  and,  therefore,  I  do 
not  hesitate  to  urge  again  before  you  for  further 
consideration,  arguments,  although  from  the 
past  events  I  must  feel  they  have  been  un- 
^ccessfol  upon  the  former  occasions. 

•  I  was  stating,  that  in  all  cases  it-would  be 
necessary  to  preserve  the  bounds  of  crime, 
more  particularly,  in  cases  of  high  treason. 
Laying  aside,  for  a  moment,  the  consideration 
of  the  suspicious  nature  of  this  testimony,  I 
will  suppose  you  to  give  full  credit  to  the 
evidence.  Then,  I  say,  a  very  material  con« 
sideration  arises,  whether,  under  this  sup- 
position of  giving  tall  credit  to  Adams,  the 
prisoners  were  conspiring  to  levy  war,  or  to 
make  a  great  and  enormous  riot  for  the  pur- 
poses of  plunder,  or  any  other  illegal  object ; 
for  although  the  guilt  of  that  intent  would  be 
very  great,  yet,  if  it  amounts  only  to  a  riot, 
you  ought  not  to  find  them  guilty  of  high 
tteas^^n.  I  took  an  opportunity  on  a  former 
oocastoD,  and  must  again  nkt  you  to  a  very 


eminent  law  writer  as  to  this  point ;  he  stalls 
that  there  ought  to  be  an  accunte  distioctiaB 
between  riot  and  levying  of  war,  which  btta 
would  amount  to  hi^  treason ;  and  he  stalest 
number  of  acts  of  pariiament,  and  says,  that 
all  those  acts  would  be  useless  if  every  great 
riot  is  to  be  construed  a  levying  of  war;  hot 
then  he  goes  on  to  state  other  cases  where 
what  in  common  understanding  would  he  con- 
sidered a  riot  had  been  held  to  be  treason,  nd 
he  says,  "  These  things  being  decided,  we  mat 
now  acquiesce  in  them,  and  consider  them  as 
law."  Now  when  a  great  and  considents 
writer  uses  a  particular  phrase,  it  is  not  used 
without  intention;  and,  therefore,  IcoDteod 
that  when  that  learned  judge  uses  this  singoht 
phrase  **  we  must  acguietce  m  it,''  thathe  mens, 
if  I  had  this  for  the  first  time  aoder  ny  con- 
sideration, I  should  say  it  does  not  amoant  tv 
levying  of  war ;  but,  inasmuch  as  former  jodga 
have  so  decided,  I  must  give  a  reluctaot  coi- 
sent.  The  inference  I  draw^from  this  pas- 
sage is  this,  I  would  call  on  the  learned  att» 
ney-general  (and  if  the  case  exists  there  is  m 
man  more  competent  to  give  it  you),  to  shev 
you  a  case  precisely  similar  to  the  present, 
that  is,  where  a  case  of  this  sort  has  been  belli 
to  be  a  levying  of  war.  If  he  does  not  she* 
you  an  instance  precisely  similar,  then  bear 
what  the  learned  judge  says;  ''itismuchsaftf 
to  apply  to  pariiament  for  their  understaDdiog 
of  the  matter.'*  Do  not  you  extend  the  law  rf 
treason  by  construction  or  implicatioo,  beoia^ 
says  he,  **  no  man  knows  where  it  nay  tsi 
Most  truly  he  said  so ;  for  if  you  ealaigeco^ 
structive  treasons,  if  you  make  that  a  €«»■ 
structive  levying  of  war,  which,  accordinjtfl 
common  sense  is  not  a  levying  of  war,  flomai 
can  tell  where  it  may  end.  Eveiyrew*"* 
to  the  civil  power,  perhaps  every  Tcsisttiw*^ 
a  play-house  guai^  in  a  play-house  riot,  8X7 
be  considered,  in  the  event,  a  levying  of  vaj 
in  opposing  the  military  and  civil  power  ff 
the  king,  and  therefore  high  treason. 
.  Look  at  the  evidence  which  Adams  gj^ 
He  states  that  he  was  at  most,  and,  I  beiicv^ 
pretty  nearly  all  their  consultations.  At"* 
first  consultation  which  he  stata  to  be  ofu? 
importance,  which  passed  a  few  days  ww 
the  funeral  of  his  late  majesty,  he  says,hesi* 
Thistlewood,  Harrison,  and  one  or  mw^ 


told  him  it  was  extremely  probable  agr^ 
part  of  the  military  would  be  out  of  to*n» 
the  funeral  of  the  king ;  and  it  struck  M»twj 
would  be  a  most  favourable  opportunity,  w«J 
what  ?  to  raise  an  insurrection  and  ^^^V^ 
No  I  he  uses  a  forcible  though  a  ▼«l«««f^ 
non,  to  kkkvp  a  nwf  to  «»«e*J*^Jl^ 
purpose  of  plunder ;  and  yeu  will  '•^"^^^ 
a  subsequent  meeting,  they  m^^^^JST 
wait  no  longer  than  the  following  ^*^!r2 
why  ?  because  they  were  aU  so  poor.  l**7 
or  fourteen  men  of  the  hmnWesi  a^^ 
Bfe,  were  aboat  to  •feitnm  the  ttip»» "" 


1435] 


lUehmrd  Tidd/ar  H^  Traunn. 


A.  D.  1890. 


[i4fie 


they  were  all  to  poor,  they  could  wait  no  longer 
than  the  following  Wednesday  1  Now  apply 
jrour  common  tense  to  the  transactions  stated } 
IS  it  not  more  consistent  that  these  poor  men 
were  only  waiting  to  begin  a  system  of  riot 
and  plttinier,  rather  than  a  system  of  rebellion 
and  war  against  the  goYemment  of  the  coun* 
Hyp 

I  stated  to  you  before,  that  as  a  system  of 
levying  war,  the  sdieme  was  so  absurd  it  was 
wholly  inciedible;  that  it  did  not  become 
credible  because  it  was  sworn  to ;  and  more 
purticolarly  that  it  did  not  become  credible 
Decause  it  was  sworn  to  by  a  witness  of  such 
infamous  character. 

On  former  occasions^  ray  learned  friend  and 

I  went  through  with  more  particularity  the 

evidence  in  detail ;  but  I  will  now  merely  give 

you  the  outlines  of  it.    The  first  was  their 

scheme  of  aesaasioation,  which  I  do  not  mean 

lo  deny  has  so  much  oonfirmatory  evidence 

•s  to  raise  a  fair  inference  in  your  minds, 

thai  tJMy  contemplated  that  fact ;  but  you  have 

also  ^e  admiision  of  the  learned  counsel  for 

the  Cfown,  that  that  foot  does  not  amount  to 

high  treason ;  that  the  crime  of  high  treason 

flonsiats  in  the  levying  or  conspiring  to  levy 

war,  and  not  in  killing  or  conspiring  to  kiU 

the  mintsteia.    Let  ns  now,  therefore,  look  to 

their  preparations  and  means  for  levying  war. 

They  talked  of  having  forty  men,  and  with 

these  they  were  to  possess  themselves  of  the 

oannon  in  Gfay'd-inn^lane ;  how  many  men 

it  might  re^re  for  that  I  do  not  precisely 

know,  but  without  horse  and  vrithout  appars^ 

tns  I  should  think  the  parish  watch  would  have 

prevented  their  performing  that  service.    They 

were  frirther  lo  detach  another  part  of  these 

forty  to  take  the  six  pieces  of  cannon  in  the 

ArtiUery-ground ;  how  many  men  it  would  re-* 

quire  for  that  object  a  rough  guess  would 

enable  ns  to  judge  of.    They  were  to  send 

■notber  detachment  to  prevent  a  single  orderly 

going  to  Windsor;  a  single  man  could  not 

perform  that  task,  but  they  must  send  a  auffi- 

cieot  detachment  to  take  posi?ession,  not  only 

of  the  usual  road,  but  they  must  have  a  sufficient 

force  to  prevent  the  men  passing  out  over  any 

of  the  bridgee,  or  by  any  other  road ;  they 

BHiet  therefore  take  possession  of  every  outlet 

from  London ;  they  were  to  take  the  telegraph, 

to  prevent  a  communication  with  Woolwich ; 

they  were  to  dig  trenches,  to  prevent  the  ap^ 

pnoncfa  of  cavalry ;  Apd  aU  this  with  a  force  of 

fbrty  men  I    Now,  I  aak,  whether  the  abanrdity 

or  madnefls  of  this  supposed  plan  does  not 

Make  it  wholly  inoedibto;  even  after  giving 

foU  osedit  to  the  assertion  of  my  learned  friend, 

tbe  Scrficitor-general,  that  men  in  their  eager* 

sese  to  obtaki  an  inmate  object  overlook  iui* 

termediate  difficoltire  ?    Are  these  dtffiealties 

^^  have  overlooked,  or  are  they  net  the 

iwiugB  of  insane  minds  ?    Who  has  told  you 

these  deaigne  esdsled  ?    The  witness  Adams 

■-i^ou  are  to  believe  him ;  why  ?  because,  say 

fte  leaned  gentlemen  en  4fae  other  eide»  he  is 

4Wifiraied.     He  is  confimed  aa.  to  oetlain 

voh.  xxxm.  I 


things,  I  admit ;  but  because  he  is  eonfiimed 
in  certain  things,  are  you  to  believe  every  ah* 
surdity  that  so  iniamous  a  witness  chooses  to 
state  ?  I  told  you  before,  and  I  beg  leave  to 
call  your  recollection  to  it  again,  that  he  is  not 
confirmed  as  to  those  points  which  involve 
the  crime  of  treeson.  He  is  confirmed  as  to 
the  procttring  of  the  arms,  and  so  far  he  may 
be  confirmed  as  to  the  point  relating  to  the 
assassination ;  but  he  is  not  confirmed  as  to 
those  plans  which  he  says  pawed  at  their  de- 
liberations, and  which  alone  make  the  treason. 
Monument  was  not  there ;  he  cannot  and  does 
not  confirm  him ;  and  as  far  aa  be  knows  and 
States,  he  does  not  certainly  confirm  the  plan 
for  levying  of  war.  Uidenwasnot  there;  he 
does  not  attempt  to  confirm  him ;  and  I  think 
in  cross-examination,  he  told  you  expressly  in 
words,  that  he  had  no  knowledge  of  any  con- 
spiracy or  plan  for  levying  of  war ;  therefore^ 
all  he  confirms,  is  the  plan  of  assassination,  not 
the  plan  of  levying  war ;  and  do  not,  I  pray 
yon,  forget  for  a  single  moment,  that  the  plan 
of  levying  war  is  the  only  thing  which  con<* 
stitutes  treason  in  this  count  of  the  indictment; 

There  was  one  piece  of  evidence  indeed, 
which,  from  reading  die  notice  given  to  the 
prisoners,  I  was  taught  to  expect  would  have 
been  produced,  which  would  have  been  mainly 
eonfirmalory  of  their  supposed  intention  to 
excite  vrar  in  the  state.  The  prisoners  had 
notice  to  produce  a  proclamation,  which  was 
said  to  have  existed,  and  which  would  have 
cleariy  manifested  their  intention,  namely^ 
a  proclamation,  **  that  their  tyrants  were  de« 
stroyed ;  that  the  fiiends  of  liberty  were  called 
upon  to  come  forward  as  the  provisional  go- 
vernment was  then  sitting.''  Signed,  ''James 
lugs,  secretary.''  Now,  if  that  proclamation 
were  in  evid^ice  before  you ;  if  it  had  been 
produced ;  if  it  could  have  been  produced ;  or 
even  if  its  existence  could  have  been  proved 
by  testimonv  such  as  you  could  believe,  I 
most  here  admit  at  once,  however  visionary, 
however  absurd  all  their  schemes  were,  yet  if 
you  had  unquestionable  evidence  that  such 
were  their  schemes,  that  such  had  beeo 
their  deliberations  and  consultations,  however 
absurd  they  were,  I  must  have  admitted 
the  case  was  made  out  against  these  men. 
But  is  that  &ct  confirmra  at  all?  neithet 
Monument  nor  Hiden,  the  confirmatory 
witnesses,  say  a  word  about  it;  they  know 
nothing  about  it.  Does  any  other  witness 
confirm  it  ?  I  will  tell  yon  what  the  supposed 
confirmation  of  this  proclamation  is,  the  wit* 
ness  Adams  has  told  you  that  such  a  proda^ 
mation  was  written,  and  that  six  sheets  of 
cartridge  paper  were  sent  for,  upon  two  or 
three  <n  wbich  sheets  of  cartridge  paper  thesd 
proclamations  were  vnitteu.  Hale  proves  he 
was  sent  to  fetch  cartridge  paper ;  is  the  send- 
ing for  a  sheet  of  paper  any  proof  what  was 
af&rwards  written  upon  that  paper?  the 
wieked  ingenuity  of  this  fellow,  feeling  that 
he  had  here  to  make  out  a  case  of  high  treason,^ 
has  amled  himself  of  a  fiKt  in  .the  eanse, 

4Y 


1437]       1  GEORGB  IV. 


Trial  of  WiUiam  DawUon  and 


[143« 


whieb  could  Be  proted,  to  introduce  a  iact 
into  the  cause  which  I  am  bound  to  lay  did 
not  exist,  because  there  is  not  a  shadow  of 
proof  of  its  existence ;  he  does  not  eren  tell 
Tou,  that  those  proclamations  were  destroyed. 
The  witness  who  confirms  the  fact  of  sending 
for  the  paper,  afterwards  states  what  I  con- 
sider another  important  fact,  namely,  that 
among  the  things  id  the  cupboard  was  found 
part  of  the  cartridge  paper :  now,  if  any  thing 
bad  been  written  upon  that  cartridge  paper, 
if  even  a  fragment  of  it  had  been  left,  if  you 
could  only  have  found  the  words,  ^  provisional 
government*'  upon  that  paper,  I  would  have 
said  that  was  a  fair  inference  for  you  to  say, 
that  having  found  a  part,  you  might  ftiirly 
believe  the  rest  which  was  spoken  to,  though 
not  found  there.  But  there  is  not  a  single 
fragment  of  writing,  nor  a  single  witness  wbo 
affects  to  have  seen  it ;  but  you  see  a  part  of 
the  paper  is  found  afterwards  in  the  cupboard 
without  a  blot  upon  it«  The  men  had  no  sus- 
picion when  they  set  out  on  this  plan,  that 
they  should  be  taken  ;  but  when  they  are  taken, 
not  one  word  of  this  proclamation  is  found 
upon  them,  and  the  whole  proof  of  this  most 
important  piece  of  evidence  which  is  to  give  a 
colour  to  all  the  rest,  remains  on  the  unsup- 
ported testimony  of  a  witness  such  as  Adams, 
who  has  described  such  facts  of  himself  that  I 
can  hardly  find  terms  to  say  what  the  man  is; 
but  I  must  sapr,  and  do  and  must  ever  feel, 
that  he  isoneof  thebasestof  mankind;  and  even 
in  the  witnCM  box  shows  that  he  is  not  worthy 
of  credit.  Now,  can  you  believe  this  piece  oif 
evidence  upon  the  testimony  of  such  a  man  ? 

If,  then,  it  be  material  and  necessary  to 
confirm  this  man,  are  there  other  sources  from 
which  he  might  have  been  confirmed  ?  because 
if  there  be  any  one  man  in  existence,  who 
could  have  given  confirmation  to  this  man,  but 
who  is  not  called,  you  will  mainly  suspect,  that 
if  that  man  was  called,  so  far  from  confirming 
him,  he  must  have  destroyed  the  whole  of  his 
testimony.  There  is  a  man  in  existence,  we 
know,  who  could  have  confirmed  him ;  there 
is  a  man  in  existence,  who  has  been  called  to 
confirm  him,  but  that  man  is  not  called  again ; 
I  mean  a  man  of  the  name  of  Dwyer.  There 
was  an  attempt  made,  when  that  man  was 
called,  to  impeach  his  testimony,  and  I  sup- 
pose you  did  not  think  his  testimony  upon 
that  occasion  was  impeached,  because  I  am 
bound  to  assume,  you  gave  credit  to  him.  My 
learned  friend,  the  attorney-general,  seems  to 
think  I  am  irregular  in  what  I  am  stating, 
that  I  ought  not  to  allude  to  the  former  trial. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow.^li  is  not  strictly  cor- 
rect, but  one  is  reluctant  to  interrupt  a  gentle- 
man in  ^onr  situation  ;  but  even  if  your  con- 
clusion IS  right,  that  ^e  jury  did  not  believe 
bis  evidence,  it  would  be  the  more  proper  for 
the  Crown  to  pause  as  to  calling  him  again. 

Mr.  CunoQod. — ^My  argument  is,  that  the 
jury  did  believe  him  then. 

But  theie  if  a  maa  off  th«  namt  of  Edwaidt, 


who  is  not  indnded  in  the  indictmeat,  thoafk 
throughout  the  evidence  in  the  cause  he  ip- 
pears  to  be  a  most  active  conspirator;  he  iia 
every  meeting;  yon  find  him  inaoaftctnnii 
Uie  hand-grenades;  he  is  the  maa  who  if 
charging  tite  fusees ;  why  is  he  not  called?  vhf 
is  he  not  here  P  My  learned  friends  niat 
pardon  me  for  saying,  that  I  think  ere^  wit- 
ness, who  by  any  possibility  could  gire  coo> 
firmation  to  such  a  man  as  Adams,  ought  at 
least  to  appear  in  that  box  to  be  enmioed, 
and  to  sund  the  test  of  cross-exaninatin; 
and  you  must  suspect  there  is  something  mm 
behind,  when  that  witness  is  not  called  bcfae 
you. 

It  may  be  said,  that  though  JBdwiidi  m 
there,  and  is  not  ^led,  there  were  other  €» 
apirators  present,  who  are  not  in  the  indirt- 
ment,  and  whom  the  prisonen  might  biif 
called,  and  who  are  competent  witneaei  ff 
this  had  been  a  case  of  mere  guilt  orinooeeMe 
there  might  have  been  a  great  deal  moie  ii 
that  argument ;  but,  inasmuch  as  those  wit* 
nesses  cannot  be  called  to  say  that  tbqrae 
innocent  men,  for  if  they  come  here  they  Ml 
admit  that  they  have  been  guilty  of  grntoi 
atrocious  crimes,  though  they  might  coeiQ* 
entiously  and  truly  swear,  that  th^  had  art 
been  guilty  of  this  specific  crime,  thejwooU 
come  into  this  court  with  halteis  ahoot  ther 
necks,  and  would  not  be  suffered  to  leanthit 
witness  box,  but  most  probably  would  beieot 
from  thence  to  Newgate.  Is  it  likely,  ihn, 
that  they  should  be  brought  here  by  the  pn- 
sonersf  Let  not  that  argument,  thciefo^ 
press  too  heavily  against  the  pnsooen.  U 
there  was  any  truth  in  this  story,  there  ^ 
have  been  matter,  as  I  apprehend,  of  eooira- 
ation  from  other  quarters;  becanse,  ca  the 
night  when  these  parties  met  ia  Cato-8tiMl| 
to  carry  into  execution  that  plan,  «i)ia ' 
perhaps  must  admit  they  had  in  cootemphtioi; 
if  there  was  any  truth  in  the  testimooy « 
Adams,  as  to  their  ulterior  plan,  at  that  mT 
moment  other  parties  ought  to  have  ^^^ 
eeeding  towards  the  Artilleiy-groow  i» 
Gray*s-inn-lane.  Now,  however,  ^1^^ 
Cato-street  failed ;  it  did  not  fail  time  eooogt 
to  prevent  the  operation  of  the  other  p«J» 
If  there  were  any  truth  in  the  idea  of  thB  pj 
there  would  have  been  some  attempts  n  w 
other  parts  of  the  town.  Now  it  »PP*"VJ: 
every  thing  was  quiet  there,  and  that  therew^ 
as  far  as  it  operates  at  all,  operate  iacoBin^ 
dicrion  to  the  case  of  the  Crown.  ^^ 

There  is,  I  admit,  connected  with  iwpw 
of  assassination  a  great  deal  of  ^"*^''**!2: 
about  public  dissatisfaction.  Can  that,  «o» 
it  not  be  explained  according  to  ^^f!^ 
events  ?  That  this  lower  order  of  poliuaw 
had  taken  a  scheme  of  arming  ^'^^^'^^^S 
haps  it  is  impossible  to  deny ;  bat  whaU  W 
is,  the  inference  that  my  learned  |n«°r' JT 
counsel  for  the  Crown,  drew  from  it,  tt«T 
cause  they  took  to  arming  theroselvgii'^ 
fore  they  must  of  necesrity  have  coo«3hW 
niaiDg  febdlioa  against  the  constitBl^  ^ 


14291 


BMAard  Tidd/or  High  TrtatOH. 


A.D.  18S0. 


C1430 


thorities  of  the  country.  In  other  times,  (uid 
under  other  circumstances,  peihaps,  it  might 
have  been  a  strong  argument  that  it  was  so 
intended ;  but  look  only  to  recent  eyents,  and 
see  whether  in  those  recent  events  you  do  not 
fiod  a  key  to  the  whole  transaction.  I  have 
alluded  before,  and  must  of  necessity  allude 
again  to  a  late  public  transaction  (for  where 
the  course  pursued  by  the  counsel  for  the 
Crown  is  the  same,  mv  track  to  follow  them 
must  be  the  same  also),  though  it  might  be 
tedious  to  the  same  persons  to  hear  the  same 
things  repeated  again  and  again,  yet  it  be- 
comes a  duty,  and  some  of  you  have  not  heard 
what  others  have.  Then  let  me  call  your  at^ 
tention  to  the  event  at  Manchester;  where  an 
immense  population,  as  it  now  appears,  un- 
armed, were  attacked  by  an  armed  force.  In 
speaking  of  this  event,  I  am  most  anxious  to 
say  nothing  that  should  intimate  an  opinion 
from  myself  either  on  the  one  side  or  the  other ; 
here  I  wish  to  discard,  and  I  hope  you  will  do  the 
same,  any  political  feeling  I  may  have  respect- 
ing men  wno  are  entitled  to  be  defendea  and 
judged  of  according  to  the  strict  letter  of  the 
law,  without  any  resard  to  their  actual  or  sop- 
posed  political  conduct.  But  most  certain  it 
IS,  that  by  one  set  of  men  that  attack  was  con- 
sidered a  necessary  act  of  duty ;  another  set 
of  men,  who  were  favourers  of  government  in 
the  main  too,  thought  it  an  act  of  oppression 
on  the  people;  while  another  party  did  not 
hesitate  to  call  it  the  massacre  at  Manchester; 
and  as  they  considered  it  an  attempt,  on  tlie 
part  of  government,  to  prevent  the  exercise  of 
the  legal  right  of  Englishmen  to  assemble  and 
discuss  their  grievances,  and  to  put  a  stop  to 
that  which  we  consider  as  one  of  the  best  con- 
stitutional safe-guards  (I  say  nothing,  gentle- 
men, who  are  right,  or  who  are  wrong),  but 
this  I  know,  it  was  felt  or  said  by  many,  that, 
inasmuch  as  people  could  not  assemble  un- 
armed with  safety,  many  of  the  demagogues 
took  advantage  of  that  feeling,  and  held  out  to 
the  people  that  it  was  necessary  they  should 
arm  themselves  to  attend  those  meetings  which 
they  considered  as  legal  assemblies ;  and  that 
explains  what  Thistlewood  said  to  Monument, 
^  All  my  people  are  arming  themselves ;''  he 
does  not  go  on  to  tell  him  we  are  all  arming 
ourselves  for  the  purpose  of  raising  rebellion 
against  the  government;  but  taking  the  cur- 
rent feeling  of  the  day  among  certain  people 
of  the  country,  it  is  this ;  <*  notwithstanding 
the  attempts  to  prevent  our  public  meetings, 
we  will  continue  to  meet,  to  discuss  our  griev- 
ances ;  and  as  we  may  be  attacked  by  an  armed 
force,  we  will  arm  to  repel  force  by  force.''  I 
do  not  say  that  it  was  not  a  desperate  resist- 
ance of  the  law,  but  be  it  so.  If  any  of  you 
think  it  was,  still  that  will  not  warrant  you  in 
coming  to  the  conclusion,  that  the  men  who  so 
acted  are  guilty  of  high  treason  in  levying  war 
against  the  government.  This  transaction  will 
furnish  you  with  a  clue  to  a  great  deal  of  the 
eonduct  of  these  persons ;  it  will  furnish  you 
with  the  reason  why  these  men  were  arming 


themselves,  without  resorting  to  the  supposi** 
tion  adopted  on  the  other  side,  that  because 
they  armed  themselves  they  were  of  necessity 
contemplating  war  and  rebellion. 

What  fortifies  me  in  this  conjecture,  and 
what  produces  the  little  pleasure  that  could 
affect  one's  mind  in  the  contemplation  of  the 
transaction,  as  it  is  detailed  to  us,  is  this ;  I 
do  not  find  that  the  witness  Adams,  on  any 
one  occasion,  has  stated  expressions  hostile  to- 
wards the  person  of  the  king ;  this,  at  least,  is 
a  feature  of  the  case  very  distinguishable  from 
the  cases  which  happened  in  Uie  year  1794* 
I  dare  say  many  of  you  recollect  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  reforming  societies  of  that  day, 
when  not  only  our  sacred  sovereign,  but  the 
very  kingly  office  itself  were  spoken  of  in  terms 
which  made  one  shudder.  And  I  am  most 
happy  to  lay  my  finger  on  any  thing  which  caa 
relieve  the  general  gloom  of  this  case.  In  no 
part  of  this  transaction,  as  it  is  stated  to  us,  is 
there  evidence  that  a  malignant  expression  was 
used  against  the  king's  person ;  and  if  I  might 
here  deviate  to  state  a  private  feeling  of  my 
own,  I  feel  it  with  particular  satisfaction,  for  I 
am  one  of  those  who  think  we  ought  never  to 
name  our  king  and  our  sovereign,  either  pub* 
licly  or  privately,  without  respect  and  venera- 
tion. I  do  not  deal  in  the  language  of  adula- 
tion, gentlemen ;  I  am  one  of  those  who  think 
the  name  of  the  king  ought  never  to  be  men* 
tioned  without  respect;  and  I  do  not  say  so 
firom  motives  of  flattery,  but  from  what  I  con- 
sider sound  constitutional  principles.  Because 
that  does  not  restrain  me  or  any  man  from 
boldly  and  fearlessly  canvassing  the  acts  of 
any  administration,  and  expressing  freely  my 
opinion  of  their  results ;  for  the  acts  of  an  acU 
ministration  are  to  be  condemned  if  bad,  not  as 
being  the  personal  acts  of  the  king,  but  as  the  acts 
of  men  who,  by  bad  advice,  mislead  their  so* 
vereign ;  and  I  nave  therefore  a  right  to  oppose, 
the  acts  of  any  administration  boldly  and  treelyi 
so  it  be  done  with  decent  language  and  tempe- 
rate conduct,  and  I  do  not,  in  so  doing,  fail  in 
the  least  in  that  reverence  and  respect  due 
from  every  subject  to  the  royal  person  and 
authority. 

In  the  variety  of  evidence  which  has  been 
given  to  you  on  this  occasion,  perhaps  you  will 
pardon  me  if  I  pause  for  a  moment  to  see  what 
further  observation  may  present  itself  on  dif* 
ferent  parts  of  it.  One  observation  strikes  me 
at  this  moment,  that  a  witness,  such  as  Adams^ 
at  least,  should  be  consistent  in  his  testimony. 
But  I  cannot  finil  of  observing, — and  it  appears 
upon  his  cross-examination,  therefore  I  may 
observe  upon  it  here,  that  on  every  trial  he  has 
varied  something,  and  added  something  new ; 
now  a  man  who  came  in  the  first  instance  to 
tell  you  a  story  so  much  in  detail,  ought  not 
to  have  added  other  material  facts.  But  I 
cannot  fail  to  observe  that  as  the  case  of  every 
separate  prisoner  has  come  forward,  he  has 
found  out  some  new  fact  pressing  proportion- 
ably  harder  upon  that  particular  prisoner.  This 
at  ieast  is  a  suspicious  feature  in  his  evidence^ 


14311       i  GEOBGB  IV. 


DM  ^if  tVOiam  Zkmiuit  »ii 


iim 


and  will  not  render  it  more  worthy  of  cradic 
at  your  hands. 

With  respect  to  the  confirmation  he  has  ra« 
ceived  at  the  hands  of  witnesses  whom  you 
cannot  suspect,  that  confirmation  does  not  go 
to  the  point  of  treason :  recollect,  the  treason  is 
the  motire  of  their  assemblies,  and  is  to  be  in- 
ferred from  what  passed  in  their  deliberations ; 
that  rests  wholly  upon  himself;  no  other  wit- 
ness speaks  to  that  matter.  The  first  head  of 
eonfinnation  which  is  given  is,  that  they  took 
a  room  (two  or  three  witnesses  are  called  who 
concur  in  that  respect)  at  the  back  of  Brunt's, 
and  had  frequent  assemblies  there ;  that  is  a 
&ct  not  denied ;  but  it  is  not  their  meeting  in 
that  room,  it  is  what  were  their  ddiberationt 
when  they  were  so  met,  which  you  are  to  con* 
lider.  To  illustrate  this ;  suppose  in  any  one 
of  tiie  clubs  (the  shoemaker's  club  for  instance, 
which  has  been  talked  of)  Mr.  Monument  had 
come  forward,  and  stated,  that  in  this  shoe- 
maker's club  there  were  treasonable  convetva* 
tions  carried  on,  and  that  some  person  had 
eome  and  proved  that  all  those  parties  met  in 
this  room ;  he  is  confirmed  as  to  their  being 
there ;  but  are  you  therefore  to  believe  a  most 
wick^  witness,  when  he  invents  all  sorts  of 
stories  as  to  the  conversations  in  that  room  ? 
-  Then  there  is  another  piece  of  ooofinnation, 
Aat  certain  persons  were  watching  about  lord 
Hanowb/s  ooor;  that  is,  I  admit,  a  eonfirraa* 
lion  of  part  of  his  story,  but  to  what  eitent  ?  it 
is  a  confirmation  of  the  ttovy,  that  they  had  in 
design  this  desperate  assassination  plot,  but  it 
is  not  a  confirmation  that  they  meant  to  levy 
war  against  his  majesty;  that  does  not  stand 
eonfirmed ;  so  that  ail  the  confirmation  coming 
from  unsuspected  sources  goes  to  the  extent  of 
an  assassination  plot,  but  not  a  conspiracy 
to  levy  war  against  the  constituted  authorities 
of  the  country. 

It  has  struck  me  in  re-considering  this  very 
important  case,  that  I  may  have  overlooked 
(what  if  I  have  overlooked  must  be  ever  matter 
of  deep  regret  to  me)  a  very  important  consi* 
deration  of  the  evidence,  which,  if  I  am  right 
in  my  present  view  of  it,  ought  not  only  to 
serve  the  present  prisoners,  but  ought  to  have 
served  those  who  have  gone  before  them ;  the 
English  law  in  its  great  regard  to  the  sulject*s 
safety,  with  respect  to  the  crime  of  treason,  has 
said,  no  man  snail  be  held  guilty  of  trsason, 
without  being  convicted  by  the  testimony  of 
two  witnesses ;  and  here,  for  a  moment,  I 
would  beg  his  lordship's  attention :  there  must 
be  two  witnesses  to  a  substantive  treason.  I 
do  not  mean  to  contend  there  must  be  two 
vritnesses  to  each  overt  act,  but  there  may  be 
one  witness  to  one  overt  act,  and  another  wit- 
ness to  another  overt  act,  of  the  same  species 
of  treason.  Then  let  us  look  at  the  substan* 
live  treasons  stated  in  this  indictment,  and  at 
the  overt  acts  there  charged  in  support  of  diem, 
and  see*  if  there  be  two  witnesses  to  a  sub- 
stantive treason,  or  if  any  two  of  the  overt  acts 
be  proved  by  any  witness,  except  Adams, 
'ilie  indflctmeot  (nad  you  will  considef  it 


with  great  attention)  states  slevm  oieit  asa; 
^bey  are  differently  stated  in  three  of  the  csuli 
of  the  indictment ;  but  I  believe  thcj  m 
in  substance  all  the  same.  WheD  1  bm 
gone  through  the  overt  acts  in  the  fint  oaat 
of  the  indictment,  you  will  consider  vbetba 
you  find  two  witnesses  speaking  distinctly  lo 
the  same  thing.  The  first  count,  at  jw  bov, 
turns  upon  whether  they  intended  tolsfywr 
or  not;  and  the  first  overt  act  stated  is,  tbt 
they  met,  and  assembled,  and  eoaspiied  asd 
consulted,  to  devise,  arrange  and  matore  plas 
and  means  to  subvert  and  destroy  the  goiva- 
ment  and  constitution  of  the  realm.  Nov,  the 
fact  of  their  meeting  is  proved  by  seven!  wit* 
nesses.  That  I  admit;  but  it  is  not  aapif 
the  foet  of  their  meeting,  upon  which  ihii  sti 
depend,  it  is  with  what  nUaU  they  met  «ks 
proves  that  they  met  with  an  tnfcitf  toovntm 
the  oonstitntion  7  Adams.  Who  elis  mm 
it  ?  who  says  any  thing  more  of  the  desbm- 
tions  than  Adams ?  no  one:  theiefoic it  ion 
solely  on  the  testimony  of  Adams— dutii  the 
first  overt  act.  The  second  overt  act  ii  M 
nearly  the  same  in  substance;  that  tiny  m 
meet  and  conspiiv  to  stir  up,  taise^  oste 
and  levy  insurrection,  rebellioa  and  «tf<^ 
Mind,  it  is  not  the  fact  of  tbeir  meeti^  «h^ 
is  the  overt  act,  but  it  is  die  •"''"'"■jjj 
which  they  met  which  is  lo  be  proved.  Whs 
proves  the  intention  with  whidi  th^m(li<l 
one  witness?  Look  through  the seciei of  ^ 
nesses  called,  and  see  whmer  7!'^^^ 
Aer  witness  who  proves  the  istoitow* 
which  they  met.  llie  third  overt  Ml  ii»  *' 
they  met  with  a  dei^  to  assassiaate  div«« 
iSbe  privy  council  of  our  lord  the  l^DgjAflll 
admit  is  proved  by  more  than  oie  ^^^e*-- 
distinctly  proved;  bat  you  are  neit  10  w 
yourselves,  whether  the  overt  aet,  eheaiti 
proved,  furnishes  an  inference  ss  a  ■C'*^ 
consequence,  that  the  overt  act  F^*^]]^ 
levying  of  war  and  rebeUion.  I  havea  »• 
mission  of  the  learned  counsel,  that  ^^^^ 
nate  die  whole  privy  council  doss  not  01  iMi 
amount  to  high  treason. 

Mr.  Baron  Gorroia— I  undeistood  Mr^ 
ney  to  admit,  that  a  conspiracy  to  aoroffs 
pnvy  councillor  is  not  high  treason;  w^ 
never  heard  him  admit,  that  *i^  ^  j^ 
(proved  over  and  over  again)  to  mwdff  » 
majesty's  ministers,  is  not  to  go  to  tbe  joiy  w 
them  to  infer,  whether  that  waswihtt")"* 
mate  design  of  deposing  the  king  and  icyyn>l 
war  against  the  king,  I  do  not  wish  l»  ^' 
fere  with  your  argument,  but  I  think  J***^ 
misunderstood  the  admission* 

Mr.  Cunoood.-^TAT.  Gumey  admitted,  «*« 
law  is,  that  to  conspire  to  morder,  or  em 
actuaMy  to  murder,  Ae  whole  privy  ownff»" 
not  of  Itself  a  substantive  treason. 

Mr.  Bmm  Gontao.— Ifo  m»  ^^fJU 
stand,  and  esnedaUv  when  itisiatfaebii** 


the  counsel  for  the  prisoners,  that  tli«*'f![ 
least  impatiefiaa  on  Om  pact  of  I'M  ^"'^' 


14331 


mOard  TUd/TT  Higk  Treaum. 


A.  D.  1890. 


£1484 


when  yOQ  stated  broadly*  that  yon  had  anr 
admission,  I  thought  it  right  to  call  your  atteo* 
lion  to  ity  for  the  purpose  of  seeing  whether 
there  was  such  an  admission.  I  hope  you  will 
not  consider  my  interruption  as  inconyenient 
or  improper. 

Mr.  Curwood^ — On  no  occasion  would  I 
insider  the  interruption  of  his  lordship  as 
unkind ;  I  haTe  on  too  many  occasions  to 
thank  him  for  great  ucbanity.  I  did  not  state, 
(hat  it  was  not  evidence  from  which  you  miaht 
infer  another  object,  but  I  contend,  that  that 
being  proved,  you  were  not  precluded  from 
exercising  your  own  judgment ;  that  you  were 
not  bound  up  from  considering,  whether  they 
bad  or  not  another  object  in  view.  The  learn- 
ed counsel  for  the  Crown  admitted,  that  of 
itself  it  was  not  high  treason ;  and  my  argu- 
ment is,  that  it  not  being  high  treason  of  itself 
you  were  not  of  necessity  to  suppose  it  was  to 
be  followed  by  high  treason;  you  may,  in 
your  judgment,  think  it  is  sood  evidence — that 
there  is  something  else  to  follow ;  or  you  may 
say,  on  the  other  hand,  that  there  is  no  evi- 
dence that  any  thing  was  to  follow.  I  put  it 
merely  as  an  argument  to  your  understanaings, 
and  not  as  conclusive  evidence. 

The  neat  overt  act  is  varying  only  the  terms 
of  it ;  that  they  did  procure  divers  arms  and 
treapons  to  assassinate  divers  of  the  privy 
council ;  to  which  the  same  argument  applies. 
I  admit  the  fact ;  but  I  say,  that  having  admit- 
ted the  feet,  it  does  not  of  necessity  follow,  that 
they  had  any  other  object  in  view.  Then,  the 
seventh  is,  that  they  conspired  to  seise  cannon 
with  an  nUenUon  to  arm  tLemselves,  and  other 
i^lse  traitors,  to  levy  and  make  war.  You 
must  take  the  whole  of  it  together,  not  merely 
the  conspiring  to  seize  cannon,  but  for  that 
particular  purpose  of  levying  war  against  the 
king.  Why,  perhaps  they  had  no  such  pur- 
pose to  levy  war  against  the  king;  stiu  it 
reverts  back  to  the  testimony  of  Adams  the 
onl^  vritness  who  speaks  to  the  purpose  of 
their  minds. 

The  next  overt  act  is,  that  of  consniring  to 
set  fire  to  certain  buildings ;  that  I  acimit  has 
been  proved,  but  I  deny  the  consequence. 
I  say,  they  might  conspire  to  set  fire  to  build- 
ings, but  whether  for  the  purpose  of  plunder, 
or  for  the  purposes  of  levying  war,  is  a  matter 
for  you  to  decide  upon ;  and  that  does  not  yet 
appear  in  evidence,  except  on  the  testimony  of 
Adams.  Then  comes  the  overt  act,  that  they 
published  divei^  proclamations ;  but  there  is 
not  a  tittle  of  evidence  except  that  they  pub- 
lished one,  and  that  from  the  mouth  of  Adams. 
Then  the  next  is,  that  they  published  a  spe- 
cific proclamation. 

,  Mr.  fisntNi  Gorrov.^s  it  publishiDg,  or 

pr^aring  7 

Mr.  Cunvood^ — I  beg  your  lordship's  pardon, 
k  is  preparing.  Then  comes  this  specific 
proclamation.  Kow,  I  iuive  argued  beibre, 
that  that  proclamation  isviot  aft  all  in  exbtenee ; 
It  is  a  mere  invention  of  vMani;  but  eves 


supposing. that  he  speaks  truth  upon  this  ooca. 
sion,  what  else  is  there  to  confirm  him  ?  it  rests 
solely  upon  the  testimony  of  Adams.  Then 
comes  the  rest— an  insurrection  actually  to  levy 
war,  that  is,  in  fact,  if  I  may  so  call  it,  a  sweep* 
ing  overt  act ;  and  the  argument  I  have  had  the 
honour  to  address  to  you  before,  equally  ap- 
plies to  this.  That  is  the  whole  question^ 
whether  there  was,  or  not,  any  design  to  levy 
war  against  his  majesty. 

Now,  I  believe  I  have  submitted  at  least  the 
leading  points  of  the  evidence  to  your  oonsid^ 
oration.  I  have  not  attempted  to  dilate  much 
upon  it,  because  in  the  exercise  of  the  duty 
that  I  have  to  perform  to  these  unfortunate 
inen,  I  have  thought  it  best  to  convey  mv 
meaning  in  as  few  vrords  as  I  possibly  could. 
I  have  not  attempted  any  thing  like  declama- 
tion ;  I  have  confined  myself  to  such  arguments 
as  have  presented  themselves  to  my  mind, 
praying  yon  to  take  into  your  consideratiett 
many  others  that  must  present  themselves  to 
your  own;  but,  as  I  said  before,  I  trust  by  my 
brevity  I  have  not  confused  what  I  meant  to  say* 
If  I  have  had  the  good  fortune  to  state  inteU 
ligibly  those  arguments  I  have  presented,  I  can 
only  conclude  by  imploring  you  to  lay  out  of 
your  minds  all  which  has  passed  on  former 
occasions,  weigh  deliberately  and  seriously 
before  yon  condemn  men  to  death  upon  the 
testimony  of  such  an  infamous  vritness  as  this 
man  appears  to  be.  At  least  be  satisfied  that 
be  is  confirmed  by  unsuspected  testimony ;  and 
what  I  was  going  to  pray,  I  know  you  wiH 
grant — Those  amongst  you  who  have  pro- 
nounced verdicts  on  former  juries,  if  you 
should,  on  a  calm  and  dbpassionate  review  of 
the  testimony  of  this  man,  see  reason  to  alter 
your  former  opinions,  have  the  manly  fortitude 
to  do  it;  and  do  not,  because  without  impeach* 
ment  to  yourselves  in  another  view  of  the  evi- 
dence you  have  come  to  another  conclusion^ 
think  that  conclusion  binding  upon  you  now. 
This  is  all  I  ask,  and  this  I  know  yon  will 
readily  grant. 

ZVIDEKOB  FOE  TBS  PRISOVIRS. 

Mary  Barker  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Adolfhut* 

.  You  are  the  daughter  of  Tidd,  who  now 
stands  at  the  bar  ? — ^I  am. 

Do  vou  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Ed- 
wards f— Yes. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Adams? 
—Yes. 

Did  Edwards  ever  leave  any  thing  at  your 
iiidier's  lodgings,  or  house  T*— Yes,  he  did. 

How  long  before  this  dreadful  affair  in  Cato* 
street  ^— About  a  fortnight,  I  think. 

What  did  he  leave  there  ?— He  left  things, 
that  I  since  have  heard  were  grenades,  and 
likewise  powder. 

Do  yott  lemeaaber  the  grenades  by  Uieir 
shape  ?— They  were  in  a  kind  of  caonister. 

Was  one  of  them  eonsideraUy  larger  than 
iie4ilheis9-^Yes. 


143A]       1  GEORGE  IV.  Trial  cf  WtUiam  DniitM  and 


ri436 


Who  left  that  rery  large  one?— Adams. 

For  what  purpose  did  they  profess  to  leave 
them  f  were  they  to  remain  there,  or  not  ?■— 
Edwards  asked,  if  he  might  leave  them  for  a 
little  while. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — ^Do  you  propose  this 
as  a  contradiction  of  Adams,  or  as  a  substan- 
tive fact?  I  do  not  remember  that  you  ex- 
amined Adams  to  this. 

Mr.  Adolfhu, — ^No ;  I  do  not  offer  it  as  a 
contradiction. 

Mr.  Barxm  Garrow. — ^I  thought  it  might 
liave  escaped  my  recollection. 

Mr.  Jd0/jpfett.*-No ;  there  is  rery  small 
chance  of  its  escaping  your  lordship's  recol- 
lection :  were  they  to  remain  there  i — ^No ;  they 
were  to  be  called  for  again. 

Were  any  of  them  taken  away  ? — Edwards 
took  them  once  away,  and  said  he  would  take 
them  to  finish  them^-and  he  brought  them  back 
again. 

How  long  was  that  before  the  Cato-etreet 
affair  ? — It  might  be  about  a  week. 

Were  they  ever  taken  away  again  ? — ^They 
were  taken  away  on  the  23rd. 

By  whom  were  they  then  taken  away  ? — By 
Edwards. 

Were  they  ever  brought  back  again  ? — ^There 
were  some  brought  back  on  the  morning  of  the 
S4th. 

How  long  was  that  before  the  officers  came  ? 
•—About  a  quarter  of  an  hour. 

Do  yoa  know  who  brought  them  back  ?— 
No. 

Did  you  see  the  person  ? — Yet. 

Was  he  a  stranger  to  you  entirely  ?— Yes* 

In  about  a  quarter  of  an  hour  afterwards 
he  brought  them  agtin  ? — ^Yes. 

Was  there  a  box,  among  other  things,  left  in 
your  house  ? — Yes. 

In  what  state  was  that  ? — Corded. 

Was  that  ever,  to  your  knowledge,  uncorded 
at  any  time  ? — No. 

Was  it  taken  away  on  the  23rd,  or  did  it 
remain  where  it  had  been } — ^It  remained  ex- 
actly where  it  had  been  till  the  morning  of  the 
24th,  when  the  officers  took  it  away. 

What  it  contained  you  did  not  know  till 
the  officers  came  ?— I  do  not  know  till  this  day. 

Thomas  Chamhert  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Cunoood, 

Is  your  name  Thomas  Chambers  ?--Ye8. 

Where  do  you  live?— At  No,  3,  Heathcock- 
eourt  in  the  Strand. 

Do  you  know  the  witness  Adams,  who  has 
been  examined  here  ? — ^Yes. 

Do  you  remember  the  day  when  the  people 
were  taken  up  in  Cato-street  t«— Yes. 

Did  he,  in  company  with  any  body,  call 
upon  you  at  any  time  before  thatf — ^Twice. 

How  long  before?— 'About  a  month  before, 
in  company  with  Edwards. 

What  conversation  had  you  with  him?— 
They  asked  me  (Edwards  first),  whether  I 


would  go  along  with  them;  I  ssked  tlm 
where. 

Was  Adams  by  ?— Yes.  He  said,  Why  I 
was  not  such  a  fool  as  not  to  know  Uiere  w 
something  on  foot ;  I  said,  no,  I  did  not  knot 
there  was  sometliing  on  foot  ^  Well,  we  are 
going  to  kill  his  majesty's  mimsten,'^  ajs 
Adams,  **  and  we  will  have  blood  and  vine 
for  supper." 

Are  you  sure  of  the  expressions  ?— Yes. 

What  else  did  he  say  ? — Edwards  replied, 
''By  God,  Adams,  you  are  right;  it  shall  be 
so." 

Do  you  remember  the  evening  when  Adaai 
was  taken  up  ? — No,  I  do  not  know  iboit 
that. 

The  evening  that  the  people  in  Cat04ti«{ 
were  taken  up,  I  mean  ? — Yes ;  I  remember 
that  nothing  occurred  to  me  that  night 

Did  Adams  call  upon  you  that  eTeniog!- 
No ;  he  called  upon  me  the  Monday  belbn 
that  took  place,  and  Edwazds  with  him;  witk 
a  bag  with  him. 

What  did  that  bag  contain?— He  asked  w 
to  let  him  leave  it  with  me;  laskedvhitit 
contained,  and  he  said,  only  a  few  pistols  «ad 
such  like ;  and  a  man  named  William  TqB' 
bridffe  was  in  my  room  at  the  time. 

Did  you  let  him  leave  it  ?— I  told  tbeo,  I 
would  not  let  them  leave  it,  or  any  sach  things, 
and  I  never  saw  them  afterwards. 

You  are  sure  they  made  use  of  thoic  a- 

fressions  about  blood  and  wine  for  sopper!" 
am  certain  of  it. 

Zilomat  CAoaiiers  cross-examined  by 
Mr.  Guney. 

What  book  were  you  sworn  upon  ?— I  ^o  w* 
know  what  book  it  is ;  there  it  is. 

Nor  care?— I  never  took  an  oath  hoi «"« 
before  I  came  here  the  other  day ;  this  b  tbe 
third  time  -,  it  is  the  prayer-book,  I  MA 
suppose.  * 

Do  you  believe  in  Christianity?— I  wJ* 
am  a  churchman.  ^ 

And  you  always  said  so  ?— Yes,  I  ^^^^ 
to  the  contrary ;  I  always  believed  in «» 
Bible,  and  was  brought  up  to  the  chorch. 

And  Paine's  works  perhaps  you  hare  i«m- 
—■No,  I  never  saw  them.  j^ 

Do  you  know  the  two  prisoners  ?— Y«^ '"" 
of  them.  -^ 

How  long  have  you  known  ^^^^t",** 
known  Davidson  since,  I  bcUeve,  about  w 
time  of  Mr.  Hunt's  procession. 

How  long  have  you  known  riddM»" 
not  known  him  except  in  the  trade. 

You  and  he  are  brother  s^oemakeis  •^»^ 

How  long  have  you  known  himt— I  **• 
say. 

Oh  yes,  you  can ;  half  a  year  ?-I  cw»?|5i 

Will  you  swear  you  have  not  known  w» 
twelve-monUi?  — ^x  es,  I  wilL  ,^ 

Will  you  swear  you  have  not  ijom  ^ 
nine  months?— I  cannot  say  pointedly. 

WiU  you  swear  you  have  not  to«  "" 
six  ? — ^I  caDnot  say* 


1437] 


Siehard  Tidd/or  High  TreatOH. 


A.  D.  182a 


i:i438 


Did  70U  not  know  him  at  the  time  of  Mr. 
Hunt's  procession  ? — ^Know  him  ? 

That  is  all  I  ask  you? — I  did  not,  par- 
ticularly. 

Did  not  you  know  him  ? — I  cannot  say,  not 
to  swear  to  him,  not  particularly. 

Do  you  mean  to  say,  you  did  not  know  him 
as  early  as  Mr.  Hunt's  procession  into  Lon- 
don ? — I  cannot  say. 

How  soon  after?— It  might  be  at  some  of 
the  meetings. 

Meetings  where  ?**In  Sroithfield. 

Did  you  attend  them  all? — ^I  did;  every 
meeting  that  was  held  openly  in  the  air. 

You  acorn  secret  meetings  ?-p-Yes ;  and 
there  is  not  a  man  in  England  who  can  say  I 
attended  one,  whose  word  is  worth  a  farthing. 

Did  you  carry  banners  ? — ^Yes. 

Whom  did  you  go  with? — With  scores  of 
people. 

I  know  that ;  any  of  the  prisoners  who  are 
indicted? — I  cannot  say  but  I  might  have 
walked  with  them  in  the  procession. 

I  dare  say  you  can  give  me  their  names 
without  any  difficulty  ?— There  are  some  of  the 
prisoners  whom  I  do  not  know. 

But  there  are  some  of  them  you  do  know; 
you  told  me  before,  you  knew  Ings  f — Yes. 

And  Brunt  ?— And  Brunt. 

And  Wilson? — By  person. 

And  Harrison? — ^And  Harrison  veiy  well. 

And  Bradbum? — I  do  not  know  Bradburn 
80  well. 

But  you  know  him  ? — ^Yes. 

Strange? — No;  I  do  not  think  I  know 
Stranse  at  all. 

.  Did  you  go  to  any  of  the  Smithfield  meet- 
ings in  company  with  any  of  the  persons  that 
have  been  mentioned? — ^I  cannot  say:  they 
might  be  there. 

Did  not  you  and  Wilson  go  together?— No, 
not  to  my  knowledge ;  he  might  be  there. 

What  weapon  did  you  carry  to  the  Smith- 
field  meeting? — None  but  the  flag  which  I 
carried  openly. 

What  in  your  pocket  ? — ^None. 

Had  you  no  pistol  in  your  pocket  ? — ^I  car- 
ried none,  nor  I  knowed  of  nobody  Uiat  carried 
none. 

You  told  me  you  carried  a  flag  at  each  of  the 
meetings ;  how  long  haye  you  known  Tbis- 
tlewood  ? — Ever  since  Mr.  Hunt's  procession. 

Where  have  you  seen  him  since  ? — He  has 
been  in  my  house  repeatedly  since,  for  I  took 
bome  the  flags  afterwards;  for  he  has  been 
tUere  to  fetch  them  and  distribute  them  to 
those  who  were  to  take  them  in  the  open  air 
in  the  meetings. 

Have  you  seen  him  at  any  other  place  since? 
•*-Yes;  one  Sunday  evening,  at  the  Black 
iDog,  in  Gray's-inn-lane. 
•  •  Do  you  know  the  White  Lion,  in  Wych- 
street  ? — Very  well. 

Do  you  frequent  it  ?-rI  have  not  done  it  of 
late ;  I  used  to  do. 

'  What  is  your  number  and  section  ? — I  have 
fot  Ao  such  thing. 


You  do  npt  knovr  of  any  such  things  ? — I 
know  of  nothing  of  the  kind. 

What  was  the  name  of  your  society? — It 
was  no  specific  name ;  they  called  themselves 
reformers,  that  was  all. 

Were  Harrison,  and  Wilson,  and  Davidson, 
and  Palin,  and  Thistlewood,  all  with  you  at 
the  Smithfield  meeting?-— I  cannot  say  that. 

Was  Thistlewood  there? — I  saw  Thistlewood 
there  when  Mr.  Hunt  was  in  the  waggon,  and 
I  was  in  the  waggon;  I  was  always  in  the 
waggon. 

Was  Davidson  there  ? — ^I  cannot  say ;  there 
were  thousands  of  people. 

Will  you  swear  you  did  not  see  Davidson 
there;  he  is  remarkable  in  his  person  ? — I  can 
swear  he  was  not  there ;  that  I  did  not  seehiniy 
at  least,  when  Mr.  Hunt  took  the  chair. 

You  were  always  in  the  waggon  ?— I  do  not 
think  I  ever  saw  him  in  the  waggon. 

I  did  not  ask  whether  you  saw  him  in  the 
waggon? — There  might  be  other  people  of 
colour  there  besides  him. 

Will  you  swear  he  was  not  there  ? — ^I  do  not 
think  I  saw  him  there. 

At  this  time,  when  Adams  and  Edwards 
called  upon  you,  about  a  week  before  the 
Cato-street  affair,  and  told  you  there  was  a  plan 
to  assassinate  his  majesty's  ministers,  and 
Adams  said,  you  must  be  a  fool  not  to  know 
what  was  going  on ^No,  Edwards  said  that, 

**  Edwards  asked  me.  and  Adams  being  by, 
asked  me  too,  if  I  would  go  along  with  theniy 

that  I  was  not  such  a  fool'' 1  said,  '*  go 

along  where,''  and  he  said, "  why  I  was  not  suck 
a  fool  as  not  to  know  there  was  something  on 
foot  ;*'  J  said  '*  No  I  did  not  know  there  waa 
something  on  foot.'^  ''  Well,  we  are  going  to 
kill  his  majesty's  ministers,"  says  Adams. 

Adams  said,  ''We  will  have  blood  and 
wine  for  supper ?'' — Yes;  and  then  Edwards 
replied,  *'  By  God,  Adams,  you  are  rieht.'^ 

And  you  thought  they  were  such  ferocious 
monsters,  they  were  going  to  commit  assas- 
sination ? — Yes ;  but  I  did  not  consider  they 
would  get  fools  enough  to  do  it;  I  considerea 
myself  a  fool,  but  not  so  big  a  fool  as  that. 

But  lest  they  should,  did  not  you  go  and 
give  information  ? — It  never  struck  me ;  but 
the  reason  was,  I  never  thought  they  would 
get  any  body  to  do  such  a  foolish  thing. 

Keeping  such  company  as  you  did,  I  should 
have  thought  you  might  have  expected  it  ?— I 
never  heard  a  man  say  a  word  against  his  ma- 
jesty's ministers,  except  those  men  Edwards 
and  Adams,  in  my  room,  and  a  drunken  man 
in  an  ale-house. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — ^Whatwas  the  ridiculous 
thing  that  you  thought  so  very  preposterous^ 
that  thinVing  yourself  pretty  much  of  a  fool, 
(I  do  not  say  that)  you  thought  they  could  not 
get  a  fool  big  enough  to  do? — ^To  go  with 
Edwaids  and  'Adams ;  foolish  enough  to  go 
and  kill  them. 

You  thought  that  so  monstrous  and  absurd^ 
no  man  would  be  found  monster  enough  to  do 
that  ?— Not  to  do  that. 


14391 


1  6B0R6B  IV. 


TiM  eT ''VUm  AraUim  «< 


[tMO 


Mr.  Gmmey.^^Yovi  ntf«r  tlicwght  of  the 
wickedness  of  it,  only  liie  follj? — ^I  thought 
they  would  not  he  ahle  to  get  any  one  lo  do  it. 

lott  nerer  heard  any  bhui  say  any  thine 
against  the  ministers,  except  a  dranken  man  r 
—Except  in  a  newspaper. 

And  yet  you  attended  the  Smithfield  mad- 
ings  T«--That  was  in  the  open  air. 

Will  you  now  swear  again,  having  attended 
aH  those  meetings,  that  you  did  not  otiierwiie 
than  from  these  men  and  a  dmnkeft  man  in 
an  ale-house,  hear  persons  speak  violently 
•gainst  his  m^eaty*8  ministers  F^Never,  aa  lo 
killine  them. 

I  do  not  suppose  they  mention  sudi  things 
in  Smithfield  r-^I  never  beard  them  say  things 
harder  than  1  have  read  in  the  public  papers. 

You  told  me,  I  think,  before,  that  you  ftnt 
mat  with  Ings  at  a  shop  near  you,  where  pub- 
lic papers  were  sold  ? — ^Tea. 

The  Black  Dwarf  and  Medusa  and  Republi- 
•an  shop  f — You  siir  so^  not  I. 

You  said  so  ? — That  that  was  where  they 
were  sold,  but  not  I,  I  said,  yes. 

The  little  shop  where  they  are  stuck  round 
doee  to  your  court  f — ^Yes,  and  I  will  tell  you 
•n  the  books  I  read,  and  those  are  Gobbett's. 

You  cannot  read  worse?— -I  cannot  think  I 
can  read  better,  for  they  have  kept  me  out  of 
nU  kinds  of  hobbles. 

Mr.  fiwwi  Gmrow, — You  only  read  the 
works  you  have  mentioned,  and  you  apprehend 

?>u  have  been  sworn  upon  the  prayer-boQ%t — 
es;  I  never  read  any  thing  but  Cobbett,  I 
huA  got  plenty  of  them  before. 

And  you  apprehend  you  have  been  sworn 
tA  day  upon  the  prajer-book  ? — ^Yes ;  so  I  ap- 
prdiend* 

John  BenneU  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Cmnoood, 

Where  do  you  Hve  ?— At  No.  4,  little  Ftab- 
lane,  New-street,  Mary-4e«bone. 

What  are  you  by  trsde  ? — A  bricklaver. 

Do  you  know  a  man  of  the  name  of  Hiden? 
—Yes. 

Did  he  at  any  time  caU  upon  yon»  and  ask 
you  to  accompany  him  at  any  private  radical 
meetings  ? — ^Y«s,  he  has. 

Did  he  use  diose  expressions,  a  private 
radical  meeting  F—Yes,  ae  has,  in  my  own 


Has  he  endeavoured  to  persuade  you  to 
oompaoy  him  onoe,  or  more  than  once  ?— More 
than  once  or  twice,  or  ten  times. 

Many  times  ?---Yes. 

What  did  he  tell  you  was  to  be  done  there  t 
•—He  did  not  tell  me  any  thing  was  to  be 
done ;  he  only  requested  me  to  go  with  him, 
that  I  might  sit  and  see  and  hear,  and  say 
nothing  without  I  chose. 

Did  you  ever  accompany  him  1 — ^No,  I  never 
did ;  I  never  moved  to  any  meeting,  either 
public  or  private,  in  my  life. 

Of  course  we  do  not  bind  you  down  to  other 
meetings,  but  private  or  public  radical  meet- 
ings ?— 'No,  I  never  did  to  no  meetings. 


Mr,  AdoMm.'^l  am  now  going  to  ofi 
evidence  to  Dandsoa's  chaneler,  mj  loii  : 

lutae  Cook  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Uv.AMphu. 

Where  do  yon  UveT— 24,  Chailottt^lRf^ 
Blackfriars'-road. 

How  long  have  yon  known  ths  primer 
Davidson  ? — ^About  six  years. 

In  what  situation  has  he  been  ia  thit  tine? 
— ^About  six  ^ears  ago,  he  worked  ss  tjnnef* 
man  for  me  m  the  cabinet  line. 

Has  he  continued  in  that  employ  rm  or 
not? — ^I  believe  he  has,  but  not  for  ne.       i 

Have  vou  continued  acquainted  m'th  Ua? 
^-OocaaionaUy  he  has  called  at  aqr  hoo^ 
when  he  has  wanted  any  wood. 

In  the  way  of  business?— Yes. 

What  character  are  you  able  to  give  to  hie? 
— At  the  time  he  worked  for  me,  he  wuaroj 
honest  hard-woiking  indnstrknis  nian)  nd  be 
conducted  himmlf  m  a  jouneyoaD  oigk  n 
do. 

Have  yon  known  sufiiciently  of  km  toipeak 
of  his  charaoter  since  ? — ^No. 

That  character  goes  only  to  six  yem  9^1^ 
Ym. 

Do  you  know  of  what  tine  gf  life  ^  ^ 
been  in  before  he  came  to  youM  tluBk  I 
have  heard  him  siqr— 

Bfr.  Jio^pJko.— I  cannot  ask  to  thai 

Robert  J&P  WUliam  swora.^ExanuDed  Vf 
Mr.JaoNJpte. 

What  are  you  by  prolhssioa  ?— AawdiW' 

living  where  P — in  Lion's-ino. 

How  long  have  you  known  Ibe  primB 
Davidson  ?— I  knew  him  in  the  ysiislSOOnd 
leoi,  80  far  as  from  readmg  mathemtts*^ 
him  at  Aberdeen. 

Have  you  had  anr  aconaiotaooe  vitt  ■> 
since  ?— 1  have  met  him  three  or  fo^'^S! 
the  streets  of  London  since;  the  hit  « «^ 
I  think  wm  in  June  1610. 

Mr.  Adolpkm^l  am  afinid  he  Im  <iitrj» 
dmnkyou for  your  good  intentieDs:  ^^^^^^ 

?ou  as  to  his  cbancter  eighteea  J^'^J^ 
should  think  not;  I  was  rather  nsrpnm  # 

his  sending  to  me;  H  is  so  kH^'^^ 
have  known  much  of  him. 

Stahtn  Bak$  sworn.— £iaimned^ 
yix.Adt^lm. 

What  are  you?— I  keepafnwi'sifc«f"* 
No.  17,  BeU-conrt,  Gray's4nn4ase. 

You  appear  on  behalf  of  Tidd  ?-^  ^ 

How  long  have  you  been  swR**f*J'l!.  \ 
him?— Fifteen  montlv;  duriog  ^^^ 
never  mw  anv  thing  in  hiseooia«tof  «i«*' 
now  brought  before  the  Court.  ,^  ^ 

You  never  mw  any  thing  trewfl*"^ 
which  looked  like  conspiracy?— ™.^^,^ 

He  B^er  invited  you  to  my  ••««<' 


No. 


«jH«1 


Did  he  appear  an  mdrntnoef      .. 
man?— Yes,  be  wm  always  tt  k«  •* 


1441] 


Richard  Tiddjbr  High  Tmuon, 


A.  D.  18^. 


1:1443 


when  he  hid  nothing  to  do,  took  a  walk  with 

his  family,  or  reading. 

-   He  seemed  a  quiet  well-disposed  man  ? — 

Yes. 


French  sworn. — Examined  hy 
Mr.  Adolpkut, 

What  are  you? — A  carpenter  and  nnder- 
taker^No.  18,  Union-court,  Holbom. 

How  long  have  you  known  Tidd? — Nearly 
three  years;  he  was  a  lodger  and  tenant  of 
mine. 

What  character  has  he  borne  in  that  time? — 
The  best  of  characters ;  I  never  saw  any  thing 
wrong ;  I  called  every  week  for  my  rent ;  he 
appeared  a  very  industrious  and  honest  man ; 
I  never  wished  for  a  better  tenant,  and  par- 
ticularly punctual  to  his  word. 

Samuel  Lands  sworn. — ^Examined  by 
Mr.  Adolpkut. 

Where  do  you  lire  ? — ^No.  1 1 ,  Charles-street, 
Hatton-garden. 

What  are  you  by  business  ?— A  boot  maker. 

How  long  have  you  known  Tidd  ? — ^Turned 
of  three  years. 

What  character  has  he  borne? — A  very 
good  one  to  the  best  of  my  knowledge. 

As  an  honest  and  industrious  man? — He 
alwajTS  appeared  so;  Mr.  Tidd  has  woriLed  for 
me  the  whole  of  that  time. 

Tlierefore  you  have  a  good  opportunity  of 
knowing  his  character? — Yes. 

He  Imis  deserved  your  good  opinion  ? — Yes, 
he  has. 

BfObert  Wood  sworn. — Examined  by 
Mr.  Adoiphm. 

What  are  you  ? — ^A  tinman  and  brazier. 

Where  do  you  live  ?— At  No.  5,  ElliotVrow, 
near  Lord's  cricket-ground. 

How  long  have  you  known  Tidd  ? — I  have 
DO  knowledge  of  Tidd;  I  know  Davidson, 
and  have  known  him  upwards  of  three  years. 
^  What  has  been  his  character  during  that 
time  ? — He  was  a  cabinet-maker ;  he  has  ap- 
peared a  very  sober  industrious  man. 

Mr.  AdoliplmL — ^There  are  other  witnesses  to 
character  but  I  will  not  call  them,  my  lord. 
•    Mr.  Adohhm. — Gentlemen  of  the  jury,  the 
coarse  of  tne  arduous  duty  which  I  have  un- 
dertaken on  behalf  of  the  unfortunate  prisoners 
"who  are  named  in  this  indictment,  or  at  least 
•ix  of  them,  brings  me  now  for  the  fourth  time 
to  address  a  jury  on  a  case  which  has  been  laid 
before  them,   vrith  the  same  circumstances 
(and  except  a  few  variations,  such  as  particu- 
lar incidents  have  required),  almost  verbally 
with  the  same  proof;  and,  gentlemen,  it  is  not 
cmly  the  distaste  which  arises  from  frequent 
repetition,  but  certainly  in  some  degree  it  is 
that  enervation  of  the  mind  which  must  result 
Irom  frequent  ill  success,  whidi  makes  me 
declare  that  I  rise  to  address  you  under  cip- 
cnoMtances,  peculiarly  painftd.    That  I  have 
Iberetofore  very  much  at  length,  and  with  great 
VOL.  XXXIIL 


minuteness  investigated  these  circumstances, 
that  I  have  done  so  unsuccessfully,  presents 
no  topics  to  my  mind  either  of  consolation  or 
of  dismay,  because  I  know  that  I  have  per- 
formed my  duty  according  to  the  best  of  my 
ability,  and  I  know,  too,  Uiat  if  the  particular 
facts  of  to-day  should  present  to  your  minds 
reasons  which  have  not  occurred  to  the  minds 
of  any  juries  before,  or  to  any  of  you  who  may 
have  been  on  juries  before,  yon  would  notf- 
withstanding  what  others  have  done,  or  what 
you  yourselves  might  have  concurred  in,  give 
your  verdict  this  day  as  if  the  matter  were  en- 
tirely new,  and  come  to  such  a  conclusion  as 
the  evidence  shall  require,  without  regard  to 
what  has  been  done  before.    But  the  enervar 
tion  and  prostration  of  mind  I  have  described 
arises  from  this,  that  it  is  nearly  impossible  to 
tread  the  same  ground  again  with  the  same 
confidence  and  vigour  as  at  first ;  and  it  is  im- 
possible not  to  believe  that  that  which  has 
before  failed  in  convincing  must  fail  again,  and 
not  to  feel  that  which  is  inseparably  connected 
with  ill  success,  a  degree  of  dispiritedness 
which  enfeebles  the  mind  even  where  it  feels 
deeply,  unaffectedly,  and  sincerely. 

My  learned  friend  has  stated,  that  he  feels 
sensible  that  all  has  been  said  which  could  be 
said  on  the  subject  before  us.  I  confess,  re- 
taining the  opinions  I  entertained  at  first,  I 
feel  a  perpetual  jealousy  of  my  own  efforts,  a 
perpetual  distrust  of  the  powers  of  my  own 
mind,  which  makes  me  believe  I  must  have 
omitted  something,  because  I  failed  to  con- 
vince. I  fear,  however,  that  I  shall  not  be 
more  vigorous  than  I  have  been  in  the  intro- 
duction of  my  opinions,  but  must  labour  undet 
all  the  inconveniences  arising  from  lassitude 
and  distrust  of  myself. 

This  case  is  laid  before  yon  for  the  fourth 
time,  without  any  variation  of  facts,  though 
with  some  novelty  in  respect  to  the  manner  of 
introducing  it,  and  that  is  not  to  be  wondered 
at,  because  a  number  of  gentlemen  highly  po- 
lidied  and  instructed,  will  each  take  a  some- 
what different  view  of  any  subject.  My  learn- 
ed friend  and  myself  had  no  opportunity  of 
shifting  our  ground ; — when  I  say  shifting  our 
ground,  I  do  not  mean  to  use  that  as  a  phrase 
of  any  levity  with  respect  to  my  learned  friends ; 
but  they  have  some  advantage  in  presenting 
the  aspect  of  this  case,  which  is  denied  to  my 
learned  friend,  Mr.  Curwood,  and  myself,  for 
we  have  had  to  labour  up  tlie  same  track  with* 
out  relief  from  each  outer.  We  have  never 
varied  the  mode  of  statement  of  our  argument ; 
if  we  had,  it  would  have  been  charged  upoa 
us  in  reply  as  evidence  of  the  fidlacy  of  our 
former  arguments,  and  that  we  had  taken  to 
others  stiU  more  fataL  I  can  only  therefore 
repeat  to  you  part  of  that  which  I  have  stated 
before,  with. suchlittle  novelty  as  the  occasion 
may  suffgest.  I  can  only  resort  to  the  same 
topics  I  have  already  used  within  your  hearing, 
or  at  least  within  your  knowledge ;  for  you 
cannot  be  ignorant  of  that  which  all  the  town 
has  learned. 
4Z 


1443]       1  GEOBGe  IV. 


Trial  of  WiOiam  DmdMom  ad  [I444 


lihu  beeBmlreadjstaMd  to  yoa,  by  my  learn- 
ed Ciiend,  that  the  ooospiraoy  which  eonstitiitas 
the  treason  on  the  piesent  indiclnent  ia  proved 
nainly  if  not  entirely,  by  the  witnesa  Adama, 
who  ia,  as  a  witness,  too  infamous  to  demand 
implicit  credit  from  a  jury.  The  law  with 
respect  to  acoompltces  and  their  confirmation  ^ 
has  been  discussed  so  often  at  the  bar,  has  ' 
been  so  often,  so  clearly,  and  so  forcibly  laid  . 
down  by  tlte  judges,  that  it  is  neat  to  irapossi*  1 
We  to  hope  that  any  obsenration  at  this  time 
ean  acquire  much  of  your  attention ;  but  I  take 
the  liberty  of  remarluDg  that  it  stands  clearly 
as  a  mle  of  law,  not  to  be  departed  from  in 
practice,  that  an  accomplice  must  be  so  con- 
armed  that  his  tale  must  beoome  credible — not 
merely  credible  in  aome  parts,  but  ^t  he  shaU 
gain  credit  while  he  is  detailing  the  whole — by 
the  credit  you  are  induced  to  give  to  his  verap 
eity  in  those  parts  where  he  is  confirmed  by 
•ther  witnesses ;  but  the  confirmation  depends 
mainly  on  the  manner  in  which  he  appears  be- 
fore the  jury.  With  respect  to  some  witnesses, 
a  slight  confinnation  wiU  produce  credit ;  with 
lespect  to  others,  very  strong  ooafirmation  will 
be  required  before  they  are  belicTed.  I  am 
not  saying  in  point  of  law  (for  it  would  be  ab- 
surd and  no  man  who  had  OTer  read  a  hook  of 
law  would  be  able  to  say)  that  an  accomplice 
is  expected  to  be  confirmed  in  every  point  of 
his  narrative ;  for  it  must  inevitably  occur  to 
every  man's  observation,  that  if  he  were  ex- 
pected to  be  so  confirmed  in  every  point,  he 
might  have  been  disi>ensed  with,  tor  die  case 
•ould  do  as  well  without  his  evidence.  As^ 
auredlv  no  man,  from  the  attorney-general  to 
myself,  would  ever,  in  such  a  case,  bring  an 
accomplice  at  all,  and  we  would  exempt  the 
accomplice  from  cross-examination  by  bring- 
ing  at  once  the  man  who  would  make  bis  evi- 
dence unnecessary ;  but  without  going  to  that 
extent,  I  do  humbly  insist,  that  it  is  necesmry 
&at  an  accomplice,  who  comes  to  prove  a  crime, 
should  be  confirmed  in  something  that  is  ma- 
terial to  that  very  crime,  and  that  it  is  nc<t 
suficient  to  bring  confirmation  merely  to  cer« 
tain  matters  of  fact  drawing  towaid  the  same 
focus. 

i  will  put  a  familiar  illustration ;  1^  will 
suppose,  that  in  any  part  of  the  country  there 
existed  any  set  of  men,  who  bad  been  the  bane 
of  the  communitv,  who  had  plundered  and 
sobbed  roosta  and  orchards,  till  they  had  ba- 
eome  marked  by  every  one ;  supposing  on  any 
occasion  one  of  the  party  were  detecud*  and 
he  turned  witnem  against  the  rest;  supposing 
the  plans  and  circumstances  were  so  laid  that 
be  was  seen  at  this  public-house  with  that  per- 
son, at  another  situation  with  other  persons ; 
and  sopposing  this  accomplice  had  pointed 
•ut  the  place  where  oartaia  implesMnts,  usefol 
h€  some  part  of  their  pniieet,  could  be  fonnd, 
md  that  they  were  nmnd  accordingly;  but 
aopposiag  he  added  to  dial,  that  the  intention 
was  not  to  commit  those  depredations  wUdi 
were  ponitedat  by  other. witnesses,  hot  IhaS 
he  fixed  upon  them  a  charge  of  burglary,  an  la- 


tent to  murder  the  master  cf  the  booGi:  Ike 
witness  being  proved  to  be  so  bad  a  cbnel^ 
it  would  go  very  seriously  to  the  jsry  to  cm. 
sider  wheQier  the  certainty  of  being  coofirmt 
in  slight,  general,  or  unimportant  particolaii, 
had  Qot  encouraged  him  to  the  iovntioi  of  a 
charge  more  atrocious,  snd  to  suggest  criaci 
of  a  deeper  dye  than  those  which  htd  laBj 
been  contem^iated.    Suppose  too,  that  tliet 
were  a  reward  for  one  conviction,  and  not  for 
another,  when  it  was  quite  clear  that  thenbai 
been  a  plan  to  plunder  orchards  or  hen  lonls, 
to  take  away  poultrv  or  fruit,  or  to  do  oikr 
things  which  would  be  a  subject  of  smpkbp 
ceny,  would  it  on  the  evidence  of  such  ivi|> 
ness  be  believed,  that  the  plan  went  to  tknii 
heard-of  extent  of  robbing  the  honae  and  av- 
dering  the  family,  more  particularlj  if  tbaf 
was  proof  that  that  house  was  so  well  dssed, 
and  that  family  so  well  guarded,  thtt  ihie 
persons  had  no  force  or  means  to  efleci  it,  ad 
must  have  run  on  amured  sod  obfiooi  di- 
struction  if  they  made  the  attempt?  Gestl^ 
men,  I  say,  if  that  evidence,  uanipporttd 
where  it  was  capable  of  being  supported,  i^ 
unconfirmed  except  by  particulars whidivai 
applicable  to  one  case  as  well  as  another,  vet 
presented  to  you,  would  you  not  besittie  a 
pronounce  the  prisoners  guilty  of  the  bighf 
offence  ?    By  this  sort  of  parallel  I  wish  tin 
present  case  to  be  tried.    Here  is  an  obiioi^ 
known,  avowed  intention ;  it  is  that  of  vrtik' 
ing  vengeance,  which  some  of  those  rm  verf 
rash  enough  to  believe  had  been  merited  If 
his  majesty's  ministers,  on  tlie  heads  of  tlM| 
ministers ;  vengeance  repugnant  to  eTeryieai 
of  propriety  from  whic^  a  British  nisd  noils 
but  which  does  not  amount  (m  I  sate  fioB  tki 
admission  of  my  learned  friend)  to  bightsi* 
son,  unless  it  is  taken  as  the  overt  act  oT  1 
further  intention;  that  is  to  say,  to  speak  1* 
technically,  if  the  beginning  and  end  of  ^ 
plot  of  these  men  were  to  murder  his  loajestf  s 
ministers,  to  fire  the  town,  to  plander  the  0* 
fortunate  objects  of  their  vengeance,  to  do  vj 
other  thing  which  were  within  that  scop^^ 
are  not  to  be  tried  for  it  under  thepreN><>' 
dictment.     Ihese  crimes  are  ia  thenstfvo 
sufficient  to  subject  the  persons  goobb^^ 
them  to  the  highest  and  severest  punflhao*} 
and  if  in  the  prosecution  of  their  real  iiuxit^ 
they  have  committed* other  crimes,  Ib^**^ 
leached  by  the  law,  without  sanpoas|[  tw 
those  acU  form  part  of  the  plot  ehsigediDm 
present  case;  but  unless  they  intesU  aaa| 
or  all  those  things  which  Adams  has  aw" 
to  them,  namely,  to  depose  Ike  kisf^  v^J* 
prevent  his  fiuoaiiy  i;om  reigning,  to  "^^ 
public  munitions  of  the  countfy,'to  sstsnUB  t 
provisional  govemmeni,  which  wss  ta«tio«i^ 
where  or  o&er— unlem  they  imeaded  H  tjl 
the  king's  fortreases  or  palaoes,  *i^J^ 
was  against  the  kiag,  they  are  asc  fm^ 
hightraaaon.    That  they  did  inteadssjF  or" 
of  these  thinga,  you  have  from  the  tsmj*" 
Adams  alone;  and  it  wittbe  fery»*g 
ata^whaameqcMM-to  talk  othimt^^^ 


1444] 


Rtdard  TuUJor  High  Treatan. 


A.D.  18fa 


11446 


bow  far  such  a  nuui,  uDsapporttd  m  these  te^ 
spects,  is  to  be  believed  l)«cause  he  is  sup* 
ported  in  that  which  is  avowed,  because  he  is 
Qonflrmed  in  circumstances  which  apply  more 
to  the  meeting  in  Cato-sireet  the  objects  of 
which  were  precisely  defined,  but  without  the 
aid  of  any  witness  to  confirm  him  in  those 
other  more  material  circumstances  to  which  I 
hate  adverted. 
It  is  said  by  my  learned  friend  who  addressed 

Sou  upon  this  case,  after  going  through  the 
St  of  confirmations  which  he  intended  to  pro« 
duce,  that  if  all  other  confirmations  were  ab* 
sent,  Cato- street  itself  is  a  confirmation.  It  is 
a  confirmation  if  the  assassination  of  his  ma- 
jesty*s  nunisters  is  the  end  intended ; — it  is  a 
refutation,  if  it  is  supposed  that  the  seiiure  of 
the  town,  the  subjugation  of  the  million  who 
inhabit  it,  and  the  capture  of  his  majesty's  sub- 
jects who  should  present  themselves  in  its  de« 
fence,  were  the  objects ;  I  say  it  is  a  refutatioa 
0f  that^  even  if  it  should  be  granted  that  plans 
of  an  ulterior  nature  were  at  one  time  enter* 
tained,  of  which,  give  me  leave  to  say,  I  see  no 
distinct  evidence.  Cato-street,  so  du  from 
confirming,  distinctly  repels  that  inference; 
for  the  large  number  of  ball-cartridges  fonnd 
ifi  a  boi:  never  was  carried  to  Cato-street|  bnt 
remained  corded  up,  as  it  had  been  for  w^eks 
beibre«  ia  the  lodgings  of  Tidd,  and  there  it 
was  found  on  the  following  morning  by  tha 
officers ;  so  that  these  twelve  hundred  rounds 
of  ball-cartridges,  which  were  to  produce  thoie 
Aighty  effects,  were  all  locked  up  in  the  ar<» 
•enal,  except  a  dozen  or  two  which  were  (bund 
in  Csto<^reet;  so  far,  then,  from  this  being 
any  evidence  of  an  ulterior  intention,  it  shews 
that  the  whole  quantity,  even  if  these  men 
knew  what  that  quantity  was  which  was  in 
diat  corded  box,  was  in  perfect  quietness;  and 
no  man  over  seems  to  have  thought  of  taking 
Ihem  to  Cato-street,  or  of  meddling  with  thent 
at  all  on  tbat  fatal  and  miserable  night. 

Then  Cato-street,  so  much  relied  npoo, 
confirms  that  which  is  not  denied,  but  remits 
that  which  is  to  be  raised  as  a  superstruo* 
ture  upon  it«  It  is  said  of  Adams,  that  he 
has  no  interest  to  come  here  and  to  falsify 
the  troth,  by  over-stating  tbat  which  he  pre« 
tends  to  know,  or  that  which  he  may  fairly 
be  conceived  to  know;  that  consideration 
depends  mainly  upon  the  character  of  the 
man,  and  upon  the  circumstances  under  which 
he  comes  forward,  and  to  these  I  beg  nartico« 
larly  to  direct  your  attention ;  he  is  tne  only 
witness  to  prove  the  ulterior  intentions  of  these 
parties ;  their  plot,  whatever  it  was,  had  been 
detected,  and  had  failed;  the  persons  of 
many  of  them  were  in  prison  so  early  ae 
Wednesday  night,  and  the  rest,  I  believe,  of 
those  now  in  custody,  as  eariy  as  Thursday 
morning ;  examinations  of  them,  and  respect- 
ing them,  had  undoubtedly  taken  place  in  tbe 
meantime,  and  ail  they  had  disclosed  was  re« 
lated,  so  that  We  may  take  it,  from  what  ap- 
pears in  tho  cause,  that  those  transactions  in* 
mediately  iimad  at  by  the  meeting  in  Cslto« 


street,  namely,  tbe  attack  of  lord  Harrowb/t 
house  (to  which  it  is  said  Cato-street  was  par* 
ticularly  convenient,  Cato*street  being  near  to 
Grosvenor-square)  were  well  known  on  Friday  j 
then  Mn  Adams  is  taken  into  custody,  and  on 
Saturday,  after  other  eiaminations  have  failed^ 
comes  his  deposition,  evtedding  the  matter, 
which  went  only  to  murder  and  to  conspiracy, 
to  the  full  charge  of  hi^  treason ;  wbich  being 
in  its  nature  a  conspiracy,  includes  in  one  ia-t 
dictment  all  the  parties,  and  makes  the  sa3ringa 
of  one  in  the  absence  of  another  evidence 
against  him  who  is  absent,  and  die  distinct 
acts  of  each  overt  act  applicable  to  tha 
whole ;  therefore  it  is,  that  Mr.  Adams  on 
Saturday  comes  forward,  and  becomes  a  wis* 
nem  of  great  importance;  whether  he  had 
contcjmplated  that  before  or  not,  we  cannol 
obtain  a  disclosure  frdm  him;  we  may  fbrra 
oonjectures,  in  me  they  may  be  called  mistakes 
suggestions,  but  if  they  enter  into  your  minds^ 
th^  may  be  effectual  in  giving  a  right  cha* 
racter  to  the  evidence,  and  a  proper  determl^ 
nation  to  the  case. 

Then  let  us  see  what  Adams  is,  and  what 
he  comes  to  disclose ;  he  has  been  described 
by  mv  learned  friend.  And  of  all  the  mea 
who  hate  been  characterised  in  court,  Mr. 
Adams  is  the  last  person  to  complain.  Is  ha 
a  traitor  to  his  king  ?  my  learned  friend  tells 
you  so,  and  why?  because  Adams  tells  yon 
so.  Is  be  a  traitor  to  the  friends  whom  it  ap« 
peam  by  other  evidence  be  had  attempted  td 
seduce,  and  who  had  intrusted  him?  nis  ap* 
pearance  before  you  shews  it.  Is  he  a  rena* 
gado  to  the  blessed  faith,  in  which  he  had  been 
instructed  in  bis  infancy,  and  on  which  hd 
ought  to  have  formed  his  conduct  in  life?  he 
himself  tells  you  so.  But  it  has  been  said,  and 
may  be  said  Main,  he  repents,  and  become! 
converted  and  reformed;  and  nothing  is  so 
reasonable  as  that  convenion  which  the  mo* 
ment  of  distress  brings  upot  us,  which  thd 
view  of  death  forces  upon  us,  and  which  the 
near  approach  of  eternity  compels  us  to  em- 
brace. It  is  observed  by  perhaps  the  best 
epic  poet  the  world  has  produced,  that  the 
detection  of  hypocrisy  does  not  belong  to  man* 
nor  even  toangels^-^hat  it  is  a  privilege  reserved 
by  God  to  himself;  most  true  is  that  observe 
ation ;  and  therefoie  I  shall  be  most  careful  in 
calling  any  man  a  hypocrite;  but  in  tha 
analysis  of  the  human  mind,  I  can  only  have 
recourse  to  human  acts  to  determine  What  it 
real,  and  what  a  fallacious  pretence ;  and  thi& 
with  as  much  confidence  as  becomes  me,  I 
would  press  upon  yon  ;  to  my  understanding^ 
without  attempting  definitely  to  pronounce 
upon  it,  all  tha  evidences  of  fraud,  of  guil^ 
and  of  hypocrisy,  are  upon  this  man,  and  not 
one  of  the  marks  of  true  repentance.  Does  t 
man,  in  truth,  repent  of  a  crime  ?  he  endear 
TOUTS  to  mMie  amends  far  it  in  the  best  way  i* 
bis  power;  does  he  repent  of  deserting  his 
God,  aiid  committing  the  sia  against  the  Hdy 
GhosI?  ho  then,  ky  contritien  and  humilitjf^ 
by  seifHoamination  and  self-abasement,  el^ 


1447]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


TruitfWUUam  Drndum  and 


[144S 


deavours  to  make  aUmement  lor  it,  but  not  by 
the  accusation  of  others,  whom  bis  example 
may  have  misled — not  by  making  a  sacrince 
of  Uie  lives  of  others  to  sare  his  own— not  by 
tendering  himself  to  kiss  that  gospel  to  which 
he  has  never  been  united—by  receiving  the 
sacrament  again,  by  renewing  his  homage  to 
his  repudiated  Redeemer,  and  soliciting  peace 
with  his  offended  Maker;  bat  he  woald 
rather,  if  his  profession  of  penitence  were 
sincere,  submit  himself  to  the  law  he  hat 
incensed,  than  take  the  measure  of  betraying 
others;  a  measure  suspicious  in  any  hands^ 
but  which  cannot  pouibly  be  pure  in  his. 

I  would  not  say  this,  were  he  a  party  with- 
out any  apparent  bias  to  the  convtctioii  of  the 
individuals  against  whom  he  hu  appeared  to 
give  evidence,  were  he  a  party  whose  testimony 
had  been  consistent  and  uniform  on  all  occa- 
sions ;  and,  above  all,  were  he  a  party  whose 
evidence  was  in  itself  probable ;  but  wanting 
all  these  circumstances,  and  standing  self-con- 
demned, then  I  do  humbly  insist,  on  behalf  of 
these  unfortunate  men  whose  lives  are  assailed 
by' his  most  corrupt  and  incredible  testimony, 
that  credit  cannot  be  given  to  him  unless  he 
were  better  supported. 

A  man  has  been  produced  for  the  defendants, 
upon  an  answer  of  whom  I  have  no  doubt  an 
observation  will  be  made  to  you.  On  being 
asked, "  On  what  book  have  you  been  sworn  r 
he  says,  **  I  believe  on  the  common  prayer* 
book.'^  That  such  a  mistake  may  have  been 
made  in  the  mind  of  a  man  who  never  was  be- 
fore examined  in  a  court  of  justice  cannot  be 
unnatural,  when  it  is  one  of  the  propositions 
laid  down  in  our  books  on  the  law  of  evidence, 
that  a  swearing  on  the  common  prayer-book 
is  just  as  binding  on  a  deponent  as  if  he  bad 
been  sworn  on  the  gospels,  and  just  as  open  to 
punishment ;  there  may  have  been  theremre  in 
his  mind  an  idea  of  that  kind.  He  is  asked« 
*'  Have  you  read  Patne's  works,  and  suffered 
your  mind  to  be  corrupted  by  them  f  *  "  No, 
I  never  did  read  any  of  those  books,  and  I 
sever  have  renounced  my  fiuth."  He  is  asked 
(I  suppose  it  is  a  question  of  importance  in  this 
cause  or  it  would  not  have  been  asked),  When 
you  knew  of  these  infamous  plots  going  on, 
when  Adams,  whom  you  have  been  called  to 
contradict,  and  Edwards,  who  has  never  been 
called,  told  you  this,  did  you  go  and  give  in- 
formation before  a  justice  of  the  peace  ?  No, 
he  did  not.  If  there  be  any  thing  against  this 
man  from  these  circumstances  (and  I  suppose 
there  was  by  the  way  in  which  it  has  been 
pressed  in  cross-examination,  and  by  the  way 
in  which  some  such  matter  has  been  most  im- 
properiy  mentioned  elsewhere),  it  goes  as  much 
to  the  disadvantage  of  one  as  of  the  other. 
But  the  man  is  asked  as  to  his  private  conduct, 
as  it  relates  to  parts  of  his  private  opinions ; 
he  tells  you  he  has  a  drawer  full  of  Cobbett's 
works ;  I  wish  his  drawer  were  better  filled. 
He  tells  you,  he  has  known  several  of  the 
prisoners,  and  that  he  has  seen  them  at  public 
veetingSy  but  never  at  private.    Does  Adams 


tell  yon  the  saine,  or  has  he  been  tbe  chief 
mover  in  all  their  private  meetiDp?  and  doa 
he  now  come  forward,  at  last,  to  be  their  M 
accuser  vrhen  he  can  make  any  thing  bji^ 
when  he  could  have  done  so  on  the  fint  ooei> 
sion  ?  Chambers  carried  flags  where  all  ik 
world  could  see  them ;  Adams  compiled  ii 
private,  where  none  could  see  him;  bit  he 
has  this  advantage,  that  all  his  victiflisbeiBf  » 
duded  in  one  sweeping  indictment,  heeen  cone 
forward  to  give  evidence  against  then,  vitbMl 
a  by-stander  to  confront,  or  an  obsemr  to 
contradict  him.  Chambers  is  asked,  'Did 
you  in  any  meetings  you  attended  hen  m 
thing  against  his  majesty's  ministen  ?^  **  N^ 
he  says,  "I  did  not;"  evidentlv  iMniil 
by  that  noe,  ^  I  did  not  hear  their jdAc 
measures  and  their  conduct  amigned  vd 
criticised  very  severely ;  but  1  nerer  bed, 
except  from  the  mouth  of  Edwards  vd 
Adams,  any  thing  like  a  propositioD  touw* 
sinate  tliem ;  when  I  did  near  it  fron  Adm 
and  Edwards,  it  appeared  to  me,  nomafla 
earth  could  be  found  fools  oiough  to  bdievt 
such  a  thing;''  and  indeed,  gentlemen, thoi^ 
there  were  twenty  men  found  fbolf  esoil^ 
it  would  require  a  credulity  which  so  mi 
can  possess,  to  believe  that  there  vm  » 
forther  design  of  surprising  ^e  town,  » 
trendiing  the  roads,  seixing  artillery,  b^ 
sieging  the  Mansion-ho«se,  over-tviar  » 
military,  and  causing  a  great  Dumber  otpM* 
pie  to  assemble  togetlier  to  assist  in  en^ 
ing  all  this  by  the  single  eflbrts  of  t  «* 
miserable  men,  without  wealth,  without  ooo* 
nectionsy  without  talents,  without  all  or  aqr* 
tiie  means  of  influence. 

It  is  said,  this  proposition  is  wm^^ 
ported  by  the  evidence  of  Monament,  wli 
sUtes  that  at  a  certain  period  arms wkJ 
be  prepared,  and  that  Tliisdewood  had  »> 
that  all  his  friends  were  to  be  aimed,  w 
when  was  this  said?  before  the  neeUBg« 


Finsbury ;  before  those  meetings  in  f^***^ 
parties  mosdy  shewed  themselves,  '^^^ 
that  they  must  go  armed;  whyf  becsesey 
going  armed  they  would  overturn  the  p^ 
ment?  No,  that  never  appeared  to»J» 
been  the  intention  of  any  <rf  them;  aw  r* 
are  left  to  infer  that  from  such  isoWw  g 
positions  as  Adams  has  given  yon.  '^*'JJ 
they  went  armed,  and  no  doubt  thiy  """Tju 
time  of*  the  meetings,  in  <»osequwcefl« 
transaction  at  the  meeting  at  MaacJ^J 
which  they,  and  others  who  ^^\^r!fJZ 
them,  denominated  the  ™««*<^'*  •^  ^JlJTf 
ter ;  they  thought  that  by  going  «"?*rj 
might  prevent  their  beina  pnt  down  uy  "^ 
who  would  wish  to  interfere  with  their  "^ 
ings ;  it  arose  out  of  the  feeUngof  the»o"«^ 
and  no  otherwise.  .   iwtif 

If  there  was  at  that  Ume  a  thoogM  mm 
considerable  number  of  the  P<>I»7*.'S 
join  them  for  the  purposes  of  external  oa^JJ 
the  meetings  at  Finsbuiy  and  ^^^rTTZ, 
took  place  towards  the  ckwe  of  the  »»r|J 
and  the  events  which  \wk^MKtW»i^ 


14491 


Riehari  Tiddjor  High  Treaton, 


A.  D.  182a 


fl45d 


have  conviDced  them  how  impossible  it  was 
for  them  to  succeed^  unless  they  were  too 
dull  to  uoderstaody  and  too  incapable  even  of 
mischief  to  be  the  subjects  of  a  verdict ;  for  it 
is  known  to  all  mankind,  that  in  those  meet- 
ings they  were  derided  and  pelted,  their 
speeches  treated  with  scorn,  and  their  persons 
with  insult ;  that  it  was  apparent  they  could 
gain  neither  hearing  nor  favour.  Then  is  it 
to  be  said,  an  insurrection  is  to  be  produced 
by  the  heads  of  the  ministers  being  shewn  on 
poles,  the  sight  of  burning  houses,  and  the 
proceedings  of  a  night  such  as  never  has 
been  seen  in  London  since  the  days  of 
Richard  the  2nd,  when  Wat  Tyler  paraded 
the  streets  with  heads  on  poles  ?  far  from  cxnx^ 
sing  any  thing  like  an  insurrection,  a  violent 
resistance  and  the  trampling  to  pieces  of  those 
atrocious  men  must  have  been  the  consequen- 
ces; and  those  few  who  had  not  the  courage 
or  spirit  to  assist  in  trampling  them  down 
would  have  retired  to  their  own  houses,  weep- 
ing and  dejected,  deploring  the  fote  of  those 
who  had  been  murdered,  and  the  state  of  their 
country,  in  the  metropolis  of  which  such  a 
crime  could  have  been  transacted. 

What  confirmation  have  you  that  there  was 
such  an  absurd  plot,  does  the  evidence  of  what 
was  found  in  Cato-street  confirm  such  a  plot  ? 
Let  the  absurdity  of  the  plot  be  eviaence 
against  that ;  and  if  it  be  said  that  a  dozen  of 
pikes  could  be  of  no  use  in  the  assassination 
of  ministers,  let  it  stand  as  parallel  with  that 
in  the  argument,  that  a  dozen  pike-staves  and 
ten  hand-grenades  would  have  been  of  in- 
finitely less  importance  in  a  general  attack 
upon  the  town,  and  in  the  general  subjugation 
or  his  miyest/s  loyal  subjects,  than  they  would 
have  been  in  their  supeAuity  in  an  attack  on 
the  minister's  house,  and  on  the  persons  of 
fifteen  unarmed  men.  In  wading  between 
two  dangerous  masses  of  absurdity  and  con- 
tradiction to  all  the  rules  of  probability  and 
common  sense,  I  should  humbly  submit  to 
you,  that  that  which  leads  to  mercy  and  ac- 
quittal is  the  better  courte  to  take;  and  unless, 
on  laying  your  hands  upon  your  hearts  you  can 
say,  we  are  convinced  by  other  circumstances 
independently  of  the  evidence  of  the  infamous 
Adams,  that  there  was  a  plot  to  the  extent  he 
has  described;  you  will  say,  being  able  to 
make  nothing  of  it,  we  have  adopted  the  safer 
course,  and  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
4be  murder  of  his  majesty's  ministers  was  in 
the  thought  of  these  men,  and  perhaps  plunder 
beyond  it ;  but  there  is  nothing  that  leads  us 
Jto  believe,  that  there  was  any  further  intention 
.to  the  extent  this  indictment  charges,  and 
which  we  must  believe  before  we  can  find 
these  men  guilty  of  high  treason. 

It  is  said  that  the  proclamation,  or  the 
supposed  proclamation  is  also  confirmatory  of 
the  original  intention :  that  which  you  have 
heard  respecting  the  proclamation,  has  come 
from  the  witness  Adams,  but  it  is  supposed  he  is 
confirmed  by  the  apprentice  Hale ;  my  learned 
Aiend  has  made  many  observations  upon  the 


improbability  and  absurdity  of  that  procla* 
mation ;  I  wish  it  could  have  been  possible 
for  my  learned  friend  to  have  producea  such  a 
paper,  or  that  an  attempt  had  been  made  to 
produce  it,  because  you  would  then  have  seen 
from  the  scholarship  of  Ings,  the  butcher, 
about  which  I  cannot  give  you  evidence 
amounting  to  any  thing  like  the  writing  of 
such  a  proclamation,  how  likely  it  was  he  was 
to  be  the  secretary  to  any  thing. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — ^There  is  nothing  im- 
porting that  Ings  had  written  it ;  the  evidence 
IS,  tliat  he  was  not  even  called  upon  to  do  the 
official  act  of  putting  his  official  name  to  it^ 
but  that  it  was  done  by  the  author  of  the 
proclamation. 

Mr.  Adolphm, — It  was  so,  gentlemen ;  not 
that  he  wrote  the  proclamation,  which  he  might 
have  done  in  a  very  good  fur  hand,  and  yet 
that  would  have  argued  nothing  as  to  his 
scholarship,  but  that  he  was  put  forward  as 
the  secretary  of  a  provisional  government ;  but 
it  is  supposed  this  proclamation  was  written 
three  times  over,  and  that  the  copies  were 
to  be  posted  near  burning  buildings,  in  order 
to  excite  insurrection  throughout  ue  town  by 
telling  the  people  that  their  tyrants  wer^ 
destroyed,  and  that  a  provisional  government 
was  assembled;  no  man  knowing  who  or  where 
they  were  assembled.  Mr.  Ings  is  named  as 
secretary  of  this  provisional  government,  and 
this  is  confirmed  oy  whom  ?  by  the  apprentice^ 
who  says,  that  on  a  particular  day  he  was  sent 
out  to  purchase  six  sheets  of  cartridge  paper* 
Let  me  suppose  there  is  a  meeting  of  men  for 
a  dangerous  purpose,  and  that  there  are  men 
who,  upon  the  very  eve  of  the  explosion  of  the 
matter,  are  disposed  to  make  that  of  it  which 
does  not  belong  to  it,  or  that  any  one  of  them 
wants  half  a  dozen  sheets  of  cartridge  paper, 
and  that  one  of  them  sends  out  to  buy  it ;  who 
can  prove  what  }m%  it  was  put  to  except  the 
witness  Adams  himself  and  he  gives  an  ac- 
count of  it  which  is  altogether  incredible  ; 
cartridge  paper  is  the  very  worst  material  for 
such  a  purpose ;  one  part  of  a  sheet  of  cartridge 
paper  has  been  found  during  the  search,  in  the 
very  apartment  in  which  this  proclamation  is 
supposed  to  have  been  written,  a  plain  proof 
that  the  sheets  were  not  put  to  that  purpose, 
because  if  there  was  any  intention  to  write 
the  six  proclamations,  they  would  have  been 
all  used ;  that  evidence  therefore,  either  rebuts 
the  proposition  that  there  was  such  a  procla- 
mation, or  proves  nothing  respecting  it. 

But  let  us  recollect  this;  all  the  proclama- 
tions in  the  world,  to  be  of  any  use,  would  not 
have  been  in  the  pocket  or  possession  of  one 
man,  because  that  one  man  could  not  have 
been  at  many  places  at  the  same  time,  affixing 
those  proclamations,  so  that  they  might  be 
read  by  different  detachments;  all  the  persons 
supposed  to  concur  in  this  proclamation,  ex« 
cept  Thistlewood  himself,  were  taken  on  the 
spot  at  Cato-street,'  and  yet  not  one  of  those 
proclamations  was  found  in  the  possession  of 


1451]        1  GEORGE  IV. 

wny  one  6f  tbem.  Thisdewood  was  taken  the 
next  morning.  It  may  be  said  he  had  destroy- 
ed that  proclamation,  but  does  his  conduct 
exhibit  any  of  that  foresight  which  you  would 
have  anticipated  }  No,  he  is  found  with  arms 
about  him,  and  with  cartridges  in  his  pockets. 
Then  is  he  to  be  supposed,  nevertheless,  to 
hayd  had  the  precaution  to  tear  the  piece  of 
Aaper  which  remained  in  his  possession? 
when  you  examine  into  conduct,  you  can- 
not examine  it  with  the  supposition  of  such 
incrediblie  iuconsistency ;  yon  must  suppose 
that  a  man  wbo  tore  the  proclamation  would 
have  thrown  away  the  bullets^  and  that  where 
the  one  remained  the  other  would  have  been 
found,  if  it  ever  existed  ;  but,  I  think)  you  will 
come  to  the  conclusion,  that  this  was  one  of 
die  additions  of  the  unbeliever  Adams,  who 
comes  forward  to  save  his  own  life,  by  fixing 
guilt  upon  othets.  The  account  which  he 
gives  ot  these  prodamations,  in  order  to  give 
Ukem  in  evidence  in  their  absence  is,  "  the  last 
time  f  saw  the  proclamations''  that  applies  to 
the  three,  whicn  are  given  in  evidence,  the 
other  I  will  not  allude  to  ^  one  was  in  the 
possession  of  Thistlewood,  one  in  the  posses- 
sfon  of  Ings,  I  know  not  what  became  of  the 
third;"  Ings  then  was  the  last  possessor  of 
one  proclamation ;  he  was  taken  without  the 
power  of  making  away  with  it,  at  the  very  spot 
iti  Cato-street,  and  yet  no  such  proclamation, 
thoogh  they  were  immediately  searched,  was 
foundy  and,  as  I  believe,  no  such  proclamation 
so  absurd  and  foolish  ever  had  existence. 

M^  Bofvn  G^rrew* — It  is  net  of  much  im- 
portance, but  probably  the  gentleman  who 
suggested  that  to  you,  had  his  mind  filled  with 
t)n  former  trial ;  I  have  not  on  this  occasion, 
any  ^^idence  in  whose  possession  they  were ; 
probably  your  own  mind  was  going  with  my 
reooUection,  till  it  was  suggested,  certainly 
very  properly,  by  the  pevsou  who  conceived  it 
to  be  evidence  in  ihis  cttttse. 

Mr.  Adoiphus. — Gentlemen,  I  am  obliged  to 
his  lordship  for  the  correction ;  but  you  ob- 
serve, as  tnese  trials  advance  we  save  time  by 
not  taking  down  the  evidence  each  time,  as 
considering  the  same  facts  as  proved. 

Mr.  Baron  Gorrow.— Let  it  be  considered 
as  in  the  cause,  it  has  been  stated  in  one  of 
the  cases. 

Mr.  ildo^Mtt.-*Oentlemen,  I  have  finished 
my  observation ;  I  said  to  my  learned  friend 
when  he  was  examining  to  this  matter,  you 
have  proved  enough  to  put  the  verbal  evi- 
dence of  its  contents  before  the  jury,  and  you 
may  proceed  to  that ;  that  is  bteraily  how  it 
happened.  If  I  have  said  it  appeared  in  this 
cause,  that  Ings  was  in  the  possession  of  any 
one  of  them,  I  have  over-stated ;  but  if  This^ 
tlewood  was  in  possession  of  only  one,  the 
other  parties,  and  probably  those  taken  at 
Cato-Btreet,  would  have  been  in  possession  of 
the  others,  and  then  if  they -were  so  in  posses- 
sion they  would  have  been  found  upon  their 


Trial  of  William  Davidson  and  [14j] 

persons ;  but  there  is  not  prodaced  a  tmc^ 
not  only  of  those  three,  but  of  any  one  of  dN 
six ;  the  three  existing  in  the  mtmorj  of 
Adams ;  that  three  others  were  written  gtaA 
on  his  recollection ;  but  there  is  not  a  ser^rf 
those,  or  any  circumstance  shewing  tbeir  a* 
istence,  produced  in  proof. 

I  think  I  have  stated  already,  thatitsfipeiB 
from  Monument's  evidence,  that  tbeplaof 
arming  took  place  before  the  meeting  in  Fns- 
bury ;  that  evidence  will  come  to  yonr  m^ 
as  evidence  founded  on  some  degree  of  iMpe^ 
though  not  founded  on  any  pron^ise  |  and  wfaM 
I  say  that,  Crod  forbid  I  should  taint  asj  Mi 
with  a  supposition  which  does  not  beloDf  to 
him ;  but  we  all  know  how  much  a  Utile  «• 
pectation  will  warp  our  minds;  wbenlsaf 
his  majesty's  ministers  did  not  make  a  pre- 
mise to  Hiden,  I  treat  them  not  u  minisiali 
but  merely  as  English  gentlemen,  tovliidtifi 
every  situation  of  their  lives  they  most  be  on 
titled,  even  from  their  most  violent  oppoMBS; 
I  concede  to  them  only  that  which  has  alvij) 
been  conceded  to  them,  in  saying,  that  thff 
are  noblemen  and  gentlemen  of  tfie  gieiM 
personal  virtues  and  individual  merits;  to  nf 
that  individuals  in  such  situations  vooU  not 
give  a  man  a  promise  before  be  htd  pveshil 
evidence,  is  to  say  no  more  than  that  they  wtft 
not  the  most  infamous  of  mankind,  m 
God  knows  I  would  not  suppose  of  then;  it  it 
the  furthest  fW>m  my  heart;  bat  tosiyttet 
the  witness  expects  something,  is  sot  to  iti^ 
matite  him;  but  I  say,  he  takes  oiy  rm« 
with  him,  when  he  says  that  be  has  a  rigj^t  M 
expect  that  the  serried  be  renden  to  theiad^ 
viduals  composing  his  majesiyli  gofe««^ 
to  fourteen  persons  whom  he  has  {nt  Bpji 
their  guard  so  as  to  »te  their  lives,  MA 
entitle  him  to  their  individnal  gratitode,  m 
that  I  hope  be  will  i^eivej  that  I  ttke  |» 
my  consideration,  not  as  makni|  Utt  cow 
here  as  a  decided  witness  of  fiiteehood,  «■ 
most  of  all,  eertainly  not  with  the  cenWHW^ 
or  even  the  connivance  or  any  tbisg  Jj* 
may  amountto  knowledge  of  those  ahoetn* 
I  haye  been  speaking,  namely,  his  wj^ 
ministers;  bnt  that  it  will  haveaniaw«JJ 
upon  the  evidence  he  is  to  give,  and  nskeaj 
more  positire  on  points  on  which  he  WT" 
doubtful,  and  to  vrhich  he  proHWy  *<»»  ■» 
strain  his  mind,  were  it  not  forth*  hopew"* 
previously  conceived.  ^ 

Although  it  has  been  denied  by  ffideSj^ 
have  attempted  to  prove  that  he  *>w*^^J*: 
so  much  a  novice  m  those  "***^  "frrtT 
presented,  that  he  was  not  desiitnte  tnoff^ 
ledge  of  radical  meeUngs,  nor  qaitc  gtfj^ 
of  attempts  to  induce  persons  ^  P  rZ 
Bennett,  who  states  he  has  never  bees »"" 
habit  of  attending  those  meedogs,  te»^P 


Aat  Hiden  did  come,  not  only  <^_rr2 
times,  to  adc  him  to  attend  those  ^^^ 
ings;  but  I  will  not  disguise  or coocetfwj 
the  whole  of  the  invitation  went  to  th^  JJ 
may  see  and  hear  what  is  going  ^^J^y^ 
need  not  join  in  saying  any  thing. ^  1^ 


14SS1 


Biehmrd  Tiddjur  MigA  Trtatan. 


A.  D.  18SD. 


ri4«4 


sIkwi  that  Hides  in^ted  him  to  ro,  thou^ 
he  had  denied  it  in  his  evidence ;  but  it  does 
not  go  to  the  extent  of  his  having  endeavoured 
to  seduce  another  man  into  disloyalty ;  it  goee 
to  the  extent  of  his  having  tempted  him  to  a 
knowledge  of  that  which  he  ought  never  him- 
self to  have  known,  that  is  the  extent  to  which 
Hiden  is  cootradieted,  that  is  the  state  under 
which  yon  9!te  to  consider  bis  testimony,  cer- 
tainly in  other  respects  uncontradicted,  except 
from  the  improbability  of  his  story,  and  except  as 
to  those  circumstances,  meritorious  enough,  to 
which  I  have  referred.  After  all  we  fall  back  on 
iiat  which  has  been  so  much  treated  of,  the 
pcohability  or  improbability  of  this  plot,  in  alt 
Its  extent  and  bearings.    On  that  sabject  I 
despair  of  saying  any  thing  new,  and  when  I 
mention  one  vmid  upon  the  subject,  I  know 
ky  anticipation  from  the  experience  of  three 
^mes  what-answer  is  given,  and  what  answer 
I  may  expect  in  reply,  when  I  say  that  I  aa 
not  convinced  by  the  answers  I  have  yet  heard, 
and  probably  sbiaU  not  be  by  any  I  may  here* 
efterbear.    In  private  Hfe,  I  do  not  profess  to 
he  more  obstinate  or  incapable  of  conviction 
than  another  man ;  but  in  a  caus^  i  do  not  feel 
that  the  improbability  of  conspiracy  is  at  aU 
apologized  for  ot  removed  by  evidence  such  at 
we  have  just  heard,  nor  do  t  feel  that  it  re- 
ceives credit  from  the  arguments  which  have 
heen  applied  to  it  from  any  quarter.    I  do  not 
fay,  nor  did  I  mean  to  say,  that  because  the 
accomplishment  of  tbe  thiDg  is  impracticable, 
therefore  the  formation  o£the  plan  is  not  true; 
hut  when  a  witness  stands  forward  to  teli  a 
most  incredible  story,  it  becomes  every  jury 
seriously  to  consider  wheUier  it  is  not  the 
fiction  of  a  man  who  has  screwed  his  mind  up 
to  the  purpose  of  making  good  a  very  extensive 
ehtrge  against  others,  in  order  lo  saM^e  his  own 
Ijfe.    I  sAy  that  is  the  single  purpose  for  which 
Mr.  Adasns  must  h%v^  invented  aome  parts  of 
this  story,  and  for  wftiich  he  vaiies  it  foom  time 
to  time,  because  if  these  men  are  to  be  charged 
with  a  dangerous  conspiracy  to  assassinate  his 
majesty's  ministers,  that  ie  proved  from  other 
fourcee;  if  they  are  charged  as  principals  in  the 
mttrder  of  SmithesB  the  Bov^sftseet  officer,  thalae 
proved  from  sources,  when  compared  to  this 
evsdence,  of  purity  in  itself;  is  there  any  doubt 
of  the  attack  upon  tbe  military  who  surrounded 
them  ?  That  is  proved  by  that  brave  young  officer, 
fieutenamt  Fitzclarence ;  but  when  we  come  to 
^  matter  of  this  indictment,  it  is  necessary  to 
bring  him  forward  s^in  and  again,  because 
without  him  those  circumstances  could  never 
haif«  been  brought  before  yon ;  he  could  have 
been  confirmed  at  least  by  a  man  of  the  name 
cif  Edwards,  but  he  is  not  confirmed  by  him ; 
he  could  have  been  confirmed  by  others  whom 
we  havebeea  asked  to  call  for  oonfiirmation^  hut 
ist  Chambem  be  an  example,  whq  is  not  taint* 
ed  with  treason,  and  let  «s  see  whethec^  mu* 
eroising  a  common  d^serction,  we  *^8^»  ^  ^ 
were  counsel  in  a  case  of  forty  shjjl\aga,  to 
svbieot  to  cvosa-^amination  the  persons  who 
have  been  preaeQl,  or  ^re  stated  to  hav^  been 


present  at  those  meetings ;  had  they  ever  been 
present,  their  cross-examination  would  have 
been  snch  that  I  should  not  have  chosen  to 
have  placed  them  before  you ;  if  they  could 
slate  that  they  were  never  present,  they  might 
have  been  presented  before  you  in  a  more 
fovourable  light  than  the  witness  Adams,  hmt 
they  conld  not  have  contradicted  him  in  any 
particular  material  to  this  inquiry. 
After  the  observations  which  have   been 

Eressed  upon  yon  by  my  learned  friend,  Mr. 
rurwood,  I  am  really  tired  of  going  over  these 
topics ;  that  a  plot  of  sach  extent  vnd  of  such 
fearful  importance  should  have  been  nursed  iti 
the  minds,  and  carried  ahnost  toits  completion 
by  such  men  as  these,  is  among  the  most  hk» 
credible  circumstances  that  have  ever  existed,, 
even  in  these  wonder-making  times.  I  am  told 
that  similar  cases  have  occurred  in  former  days^ 
I  have  been  a^ed  hy  the  learned  counsel  for 
the  Crown,  is  it  credible  that  Mr.  Thistlewood,. 
a  gentleman  by  education,  and  a  gentleman  in 
some  of  the  movements  of  his  life,  could  have 
oonsorted  with  perM>ns  in  the  low  situation  of 
the  other  iNrisoners,  for  purpofl|es  of  plundei^ 
or  of  the  kind  described  in  this  indictment? 
From  the  grave  solemnity  with  which  the  quea- 
tion  was  put  I  feared  that  I  was  misled  by 
iroagiaation,  when  I  foncied  that  I  was  refoa- 
xiag  to  the  experience  of  the  past.  I  thought 
my  memory  had  foiled,  and  therefore  I  took 
to  my  books,  and  there  I  found,  as  I  haid 
thought,  that,  in  the  year  1794,  and  for  three  or 
four  yean  preceding,  men  of  education  and 
rank  in  life  infinitely  superior  to  Mr.  Thistle- 
wood  had  attached  themselves  to,  and  associa- 
ted  with  men  quite  as  low  in  situation  as  thi^ 
lowest  of  those  who  have  been  brought  before 
you  on  this  occasion ;  and  yet  that  juries  were 
reooramended  to  bdieve,  and  did  find  en  their 
oaths,  that  other  motives  than  those  charged 
against  these  pri^oneiv,  had  induced  that  oob»- 
cuirence  of  them  together,  and  the  accused 
vrere  acquitted,  upon  those  arguments  and 
those  gnounds,  of  such  treasons  as  were  then 
Imd  against  them.  There  ie  nothing  so  ime 
peobahle  or  impossible,  that  the  changes  and 
chances  of  human  aihirs  do  not  bring  to  o«r 
knowledge  and  to  our  experience ;  let  me  sup»i 
pose  (for  I  am  not  at  liberty  to  enter  into  the 
private^'istory  of  any  man)  that  a  man  of  good 
fortune  at  bis  outset  in  life  had  ruined  himself 
by  abandoned  courses ;  that  an  estate  on  which 
a  virtuous  man  might  Vve  contented,  had 
been  destroyed  by  gaming  or  other  improper 
pursuits,  that  that  man  so  reduced,  finding 
oimself  under  the  necessity  of  associating  with 
some  .peHoos,  goes  Co  those  most  ready  to  i»(- 
eeiee  him,  namely,  the  lower  dass,  who-  will 
fold  tbemseives  honoured  by  hisassociatioa^ 
and  thai  out  of  his  resentment  there  should 
arise  a  plan  for  satiag  his  vengeance,  and  for 
eeeruiling  their  meanaof  sidMistenoe;  is  it  to  be 
bf^heved  that  a  gsi^eman  ao  reduced  wouki 
rexoli-fooai  such  a  plan  as  that,  ot  wonld  join 
in  it  ?  Or  is  it  (move  easily  to  be  suppceed^ 
that  1^  man  whoiiid4)om9ion  saoie^  wim  ]|ad 


1455]       1  GEORGE  IV.  TrialOj 

Been  foreign  coontries,   who  knew  of  what 
British  society  was  oomponnded^  should  think 
by  one  band  of  twenty-nve  men,  which  it  was 
hoped  would  be  increased  to  forty,  to  take  the 
metropolis,  to  change  the  government,  to  de- 
pose the  king>  and  to  establish  a  rule  quite 
opposite  to  the  feelings  of  the  nation  ?    This  is 
80  improbable,  that  all  arguments  sink  before 
it  into  annihilation,  I  do  not  want,  nor  has  it 
«Ter  been  my  aim  or  my  effort  to  add  one  cir- 
cumstance of  disgrace  to  the  witness  against 
me,  certainly  not  to  the  client  whose  cause  t 
have  suppoited ;  but  let  me  not  be  restrained 
by  that  reeling  from  giring  the  rational  con- 
struction to  that  which  is  at  present  irrational. 
It  is  asked  by  my  learned  friend,  is  the  reseut- 
jnent  of  these  conspirators  against  Dudley  eari 
of  Harrowby,  as  such,  or  against  the  president 
of  the  council  ?    It  is  asked,  is  their  malice 
against  lord  viscount  Sidmoutb,  or  against  the 
secretary  of  state  for  the  Home  Department  P 
Is  it  against  lord  viscount  Castlereai^,  or 
against  the  secretary  of  state  for  the  Foreign 
Department  P    Is  it  against  John  lord  Eldon, 
or  against  the  lord  high  chancellor  of  Great 
Britain  ?    To  all  these  Questions,  I  return  tiie 
answer  which  my  learned  friend  who  put  them 
must  naturally  expect.    It  is  against  not  Uie 
office,  but  the  official  man  that  the  malice  is 
directed ;  it  is  a  misconceived  rancour  against 
those  who  have  concurred  in  thanking  the 
yeomanry  who  did  that  execution  at  Manches- 
ter,  which  they  denominated  a  massacre,  wluch 
made  them  think  that  they  shewed  their  sympa* 
thy  to  the  sufferers  in  that  transaction,  by 
bringing  to  signal,  summary,  and  vindictive 
judgment,  those  whom  they  were  wrought 
upon  to  consider  as  abettors  in  the  supposed 
massacre.    This  appears  to  me  a  rational  and 
tenable  view  of  the  subject,  and  toward  this  all 
the  parts  of  the  case  naturally  tend.    A  retreat 
into  another  country,  would,  no  doubt,  have 
been  sought  for  immediately ;  and  that  towards 
that  property  might  be  secured,  and  that  there 
might  be  a  great  preparation  of  means  for  the 
procuring  that,  I  can  easily  conceive ;  but  that 
this  wretched  band  of  feebly-armed  ruffians 
should  attempt  to  overturn  the  government,  to 
hold  the  metropolis  against  any  force,  to  take 
the  Bank,  and  all  the  rest  of  the  nonsense  which 
has  appeared  in  the  testimony  of  Adams,  I 
cannot  believe;  my  mind  is  incapable  of  em- 
bracing it  as  the  proposition  of  truth,  and  my 
reason  rejects  it  as  a  foul  and  baseless  fabrica- 
tion. 

I  have  now  done  with  these  subjects;  I 
have  done,  I  believe,  the  last  duty  of  diis  kind 
that  I  shall  be  called  upon  to  perform ;  I  have 
done  it,  God  knows,  honestly  and  laboriously 
in  proportion  to  the  time  that  was  allowed  to 
me,  with  every  wish  in  the  worid  to  do  a  real 
aervice  to  those  who  have  confided  their  case 
to  me ;  I  have  not  attempted  nor  has  it  ever  been 
m^  wish  to  assail  the  persons  of  his  majesty's 
ministers  or  advisers,  or  the  honourable  per- 
sons engaged  in  the  conduct  of  this  cause,  with 
•ay  thing  approachingtoa  reflectioB ;  if  aoy  such 


Daitndunai^ 


[14S8 


thing  has  escaped  me,  I  ahonld  be  m^  Id 
apologise  for  it,  for  no  such  intentioD  was  enr 
entertained  by  me,  however  iU-choseo  vbj  a* 
pressions  roa^  have  been.    I  am  sony  fortfaei» 
portance  which  has  been  given  to  tbbcaR; 
this  is  not  like  those  cases  to  which  I  han  i^ 
forred,  when  affiliated  sodeties,  wppvted  hf 
men  of  rank  in  literature,  in  the  state,  and  is 
the  country,  were  formed,  not  onij  all  orcr  de 
metropolis  but  all  over  tbekingdosi,  andwde 
themselves  petitioners  for  foreign  aid,bf  sod^ 
ing  to  implore  the  asststanoe  of  ths  legida 
of  France,  who  united  with  those  vbo  Isd 
said  to  G<xl,  depart  from  us,  we  win  none  «f 
thy  ways.    It  is  not  pretended  that  these  poor 
creatures  have  ever  sent  out  a  letter  or  a  sii- 
sionary ;  it  is  not  in  mv  knowletoj  that  m 
of  them,  unless  indeed  it  was  ThiitlewH 
could  speak  a  foreign  language;  there iiaott 
belief  uiat  any  thing  short  of  utter  diignce 
and  contempt  could  attach  to  Aem  at  hose; 
if,  nevertheless,  you  believe  they  did  fon  ib 
project,  and  that  the  ultimate  end  or  aiaflf  it 
was  to  depose  the  king,  or  to  compel  Ua  ^T 
force  to  cnange  his  measures,  joa  win  p(^ 
nounce  them  guilty  of  high  treason;  and  it  s 
not  for  me  to  deprecate  that  which  yoo  ooa* 
sider  to  be  justice;  you  are  acting  npoajw 
oaths,  and  must  find  that  verdict  if  the  evidaKe 
makes  out  the  case;  I  am  sore yoa will  do^ 
wkb  regret,  seeing  that  a  weapon  to  anttw 
to  be  exerted  against  those  who  woold  ^ 
throw    aU    our    national   estaUishoo^  » 
brought  to  bear  on  persons  so  feeble  aad  o- 
siffuificant ;  but  the  greatness  of  the  texxtm 
will  not  peirvert  your  understandings,  hoveiff 
it  may  aflect  your  hearts ;  but  yw  ^^ 
making  up  your  minds  to  find  that  w«^ 
weigh  and  measure  and  siftefery  circuBStnoe 
which  has  been  laid  before  yon,  in  older  ton- 
form  your  judgment  and  gi? e  it  aU  the  leao^ 
you  can  (consistently  with  your  conscieooei) « 
fovour  of  the  prisoners.    I  shall  ever  Iflow 
Uiat  part  of  the  history  of  my  own  tinrei,  w» 
records  that  such  a  conspiracy  as  this  haiw* 
made  the  subject  of  so  much  inrestiga|M>> 
but  it  will  not  I  trust  be  without  its  adwntijj 
the  convictions  which  have  taken  piMCt  •" 
the  conviction  or  acquittal  at  the  V^^^f^ 
ment,  will  not  be  without  their  use,  inj>Jr 
pecially  if  they  destroy  aU  the  reHcs  «  «» 
combination  of  which  the  seeds  wereg^n 
from  the  year  1790  to  17H  m*?^'*^^ 
am  sorry  to  say  we  had  something **^!jj 
losion  in  the  cross-examination  of  the  witp» 
Chambers.    He  is  asked  to  what  *«*»«» 
number  he  belongs,  though  the  ^^^tZ 
that  he  knew  of  stK^h  a  thing;  I  see  nv   ^ 
Crown  have  some  information  of  the  n«»» 
am  sorry  that  that  arrangement  of  formtftiiBP 

is  still  in  use,  and  I  hope  that  sayp*'**'  ^ 
may  be  ready  to  engage  in  the  wbwP'"' 
the  government,  will  see  firom  theeii«Fg 
before  us,  that  if  it  were  possible  tbcy^ 
succeed,  they  would,  like  aU  inferior  coB|fjJ 
tors.be  soon  thrownasideas  those  whoWfT 
tMr  part;  but  if  they fcilA «P«^"*^ 


1457] 


l^ehard  Tiddjbr  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[1456 


selves,  or  were  betrayed,  that  they  would  be 
left  without  support  and  without  protection, 
without  companions,  and  without  commisera* 
tion,  to  suffer  the  miserable  fate  their  conduct 
had  brought  upon  them ;  it  is  fit  they  should 
know^  and  this  trial  will  prove  it,  that  men 
more  depraved  than  themselves  are  only  luring 
them  to  their  destruction ;  that  the  more  timid 
are  only  waiting  to  inform  against  them ;  and 
that  he  who  will  conspire  against  his  king,  will 
not  hesitate  to  betray  his  brother  conspirator 
whenever  fear  points  out  that  as  the  road  of 
safety;  this  important  lesson,  read  through 
these  miserable  persons,  will  not  be  in  that 
respect  read  in  vain,  and  when  they  see  how 
crippled  and  beggared  it  is  possible  for  men 
under  these  circumstances  to  stand,  they  must 
hereafter  remain.at  a  fearful  distance,  if  they  have 
common  sense,  from  all  enterprises  which  in- 
▼olve  such  immediate  danger,  and  drive  them 
out  of  the  possibility  of  receiving  any  thing 
like  countenance  or  support.  Above  all,  let 
them  learn  from  the  specimen  of  the  witness 
Adams,  that  he  who  substitutes  the  writings  of 
Paine,  or  of  superior  authors,  in  the  place  of 
the  bible,  will  in  the  end  shew  himself  as  faith- 
less  toward  man  as  he  has  shown  himself  faithless 
toward  his  Maker ;  that  he  who  rejects  the  book 
of  life,  will  be  moved  by  nothing  but  the  sordid 
hope  of  worldly  advantage ;  and  that  where  it 
becomes  his  interest  he  will  betray  even  his 
brother ;  that  he  who  renounces  his  fidelity  in 
that  book,  shews  himself  so  prodigal  of  his 
soul's  health,  that  there  is  no  belieTing  in  his 
political  faith,  or  any  other  which  can  be  sub- 
stituted for  it ;  and  if  there  be  among  those 
who  hear  me,  and  who  are  wavering  in  their 
laith^  or  doubtful  in  their  belief,  by  what  such 
persons  have  been,  let  them  take  caution  from 
the  evident  treachery  of  the  man  who  re- 
nounced his  religion  for  notions  inimical 
to  all  good ;  from  that  excellent  manual  our 
church  catechism  let  them  learn  to  honour  and 
obey  the  king,  and  all  that  are  put  in  authority 
under  him,  and  never  forget  the  injunction 
to  learn  and  labour  truly  to  get  their  own 
living,  and  to  do  their  duty  in  that  state  of  life 
into  which  it  has  pleased  God  to  call  them. 
It  is  not  the  sacrifice  of  such  a  number  of  ob- 
scure individuals  as  may  be  found  guilty,  or  as 
qther juries  may  pronounce  guilty;  it  is  not 
tiie  sacrifice  of  such  men  that  can  strengthen 
government,  or  do  that  which  is  alone  the  aim 
of  our  laws ;  the  punishment  is  intended  to 
operate  not  vindictively  upon  the  offender,  but 
beneficially  upon  survivors ;  and  there  is  great 
danger  when  feeling  is  excited,  of  its  being 

gushed  too  far  in  order  to  punish  those  who 
ave  been  unquestionably  guilty ;  but  I  trust 
you  will  not  pronounce  the  prisoners  guilty  of 
high  treason,  unless  you  are  convinced  they 
have'  been>  guilty  of  it,  because  they  have 
sought,  through  the  road  of  crime,  to  effect 
that  which  they  falsely  considered  as  the  dic- 
tate of  patriotism.  - 

.  I  have  nearly  coocloded  my  address  :to  you ; 
you  wiUbethe  fourth-jqrywhbhav&'pioDOUDC^d 
VOL.  XXXIII. 


upon  tliis  indictment  against  wretched  men;  • 
having  no  means  of  defence  except  those  which 
charity  and  a  proper  sense  of  professional  duty 
have  procured  for  them;  what  shall  be  the 
further  vieWs  of  government,  it  is  not  for  me 
to  divine,  but  I  hope,  if  there  be  a  road  to 
mercy  in  any  degree,  that  will  not  be  left  out 
of  their  consideration  ;  I  am  sure  enough  will 
have  been  done  for  example ;  the  further  multi- 
plication of  widows  and  orphans  will  not  be  ne- 
cessary, and  as  judgment  has  been  conspicuous 
in  the  prosecution  of  those  who  are  now  before 
you  and  those  already  convicted,  so  will  mercy, 
extended  toothers,  contribute  to  the  firmness  of 
that  government  which  can  shew  it.  While  I 
am  pleading  for  mercy,  let  me  not  forget  to 
entreat  of  you  so  much  as  can  possibly  enter 
your  bosoms  consistently  with  your  oaths.  I 
do  not  ask  twelve  firm-minded  British  men  to 
adopt  those  sentiments  of  puerile  pity,  which 
might  make  you  falsify  your  oaths  and  forget 
your  God ;  but  I  entreat  you  most  seriously, 
if  you  are  not  so  satisfied  as  to  rely  upon  the 
witness,  Adams,  to  give  the  prisoners  the  be- 
nefit of  the  doubts  to  which  his  testimony  is  so 
abundantly  subject.  I  know  you  will  act  ho- 
nestly ;  I  am  sure  you  will  act  firmly ;  to  all 
the  juries  who  have  preceded  you  the  country 
is  infinitely  indebted,  and  the  prisoners  too, 
for  the  minute  attention  they  have  paid  to 
every  part  of  the  subject.  I  have  observed  the 
same  in  you  ;  I  do  not  ask  you  to  forget  your 
oaths,  but  I  implore  you  not  to  forget  any  cir- 
cumstance which  may  strengthen  the  claims  of 
mercy. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — William  Davidson,  the 
law  of  England,  in  its  extraordinary  tenderness 
for  persons  charged  with  the  crime  of  high 
treason,  allows  to  the  person  accused  an  op- 
portunity of  making  full  defence  by  counsel, 
and  you  received  the  great  benefit  the  law  has 
extended  to  you  in  that  respect ;  but  if,  in  ad- 
dition to  that  which  has  been  urged  to  the  jury 
through  your  learned  counsel,  you  wish  to 
make  any  observations  yourself,  it  is  allowed 
to  you  to  do  so,  and  this  is  the  proper  and  the 
only  opportunity. 

Davkkan,^!  am  extremely  obliged  to  your 
lordship  for  the  opportunity  you  have  given 
me ;  I  would  call  your  attention  to  two  parti- 
cular instances. — 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow* — I  wish  you  would  do 
it  so  that  I  may  hear  every  word ;  if  you  wish 
it,  pause  for  a  moment. 

Davidson. — ^From  ray  life  up,  it  wais  always 
mv  study  to  earn  iny  bread  by  honest  industry. 
I  had  no  friends  in  England;  but  I  always  la- 
boured for  my  family;  I  have  an  extensive 
family,  which  is  my  only  grief.  As  to  tha 
crime  I  am  charged  with,  I  lay  my  hand  on 
my  heart,  and  say  that  I  am  not  guilty  of  it. 
With  regard  to  the  blunderbuss — I;  met  with 
Mr.  Williams,  who  is  now  gone  to  the  Cape  of 
Good  Hope,  aiid  he  had  this  blunderbuss  very 
rusty ;  he  asked  roe  where  I  was  going  to,  I 

5  A 


1459]        1  GEORGE  IV* 


Trial  of  WUiam  Davidstm  and 


[im 


said  after  a  job ;  I  have  been  working  for  my. 
self  for  five  years,  which  is  the  reason  I  have 
had  no  master  to  come  before  you.  I  used  to 
sell  my  goods  at  aaction  rooms,  and  when  I 
saw  the  name  of  Welford  pot  down  in  the  list 
of  witnesses,  I  meant  to  appeal  to  him  as  be- 
ing the  cashier  for  Mr.  Deopw,  who  sold 
my  goods ;  he  said,  he  had  bought  this  blun- 
derbuss to  take  to  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope, 
but  that  he  bad  taken  it  to  a  gunsmith,  and 
foimd  he  would  charge  him  more  than  it  was 
worth  for  repairing  it,  and  if  I  could  get  part 
of  bis  money  back,  be  would  be  obliged  to  me; 
I  took  the  blunderbuss  home,  and  kept  it ;  it 
is  not  worth  much ;  I  cleaned  it,  and  scraped 
the  stock,  and  proposed  to  raffle  it ;  I  met  with 
Mr.  Edwards,  whom  I  nerer  knew  till  I  dined 
at  the  Crown  and  Anchor,  at  Mr.  Hunt's  pro- 
cession ;  that  is  the  first  time  I  ever  went  to  a 
public  dinner  in  my  life ;  Mr.  Edwards  pro- 
mised to  be  one  of  the  members,  and  promised 
to  get  me  a  considerable  number  ot  persons 
more ;  there  were  to  be  twenty  members,  at 
one  shillinff  each,  and  it  was  to  take  place  the 
Best  Monday.  I  saw  Mr.  Tbistlewood  there 
the  following  Monday  fpr  the  second  time;  I 
saw  Mr.  Adants  and  sevecal  others,  but  I  did 
not  know  them  again,  except  Mr.  Adams  and 
Mr.  Tbistlewood ;  they  wished  to  commence 
raffling  for  the  blunderbuss ;  I  got  up  and  said 
it  should  not  be  done  without  the  money  was 
tendered,  for  it  was  not  my  property,  and  it 
was  my  duty  tq  be  accountable  for  it ;  I  re- 
ceived bad  language;  I  found  the  company 
inconsistent  with  that  I  expected ;  I  took  the 
blunderbuss  and  went  away;  Mt.  Williams 
called  the  next  morning  to  know  the  result; 
he  was  disappointed,  as  he  wished  to  lay  out 
five  or  six  shillings  in  the  west  end  of  the 
town ;  I  said  he  might  pledge  it  if  he  wished  ; 
he  said  he  did  not  know  any  person  in  that 
end  of  the  town ;  I  said  I  knew  Mr.  Aldous,  I 
had  known  him  for  years ;  he  said,  well,  you 
pledge  it ;  I  said  I  would ;  I  then  told  Mr. 
Aldous  it  was  not  my  property;  he  said  he 
would  not  have  lent  me  more  than  Rre  shil- 
lings but  for  knovring  me.  The  vessel  in  which 
Mr.  Williams  is  gone,  is  called  the  Belle  Al- 
liance. Mr.  Williams  told  me,  that  he  could 
not  sell  the  ticket  to  his  fellow  passengers,  tJ^ey 
were  so  very  poor,  but  would  I  accept  it. 

On  the  22nd  of  February,  Mr.  Edwards  said, 
he  had  been  to  me  Mr.  Williams,  and  that  he  had 
told  him,  that  by  giving  me  a  trifle,  he  roigh 
get  the  ticket  from  me.  I  said,  **  he  gave  me 
the  ticket ;  but  if  you  wish  it,  you  may  have 
it ;''  he  said,  5<  Well,  I  am  going  to  sell  it,  %nd 
shall  get  ten  shillings  more,  but  J  should  not 
have  called  for  it,  but  for  having  a  customer 
ready;"  the  same  evening  he  called  at  my 
house  again  at  eieht  o'clock ;  he  said  *'  Mr. 
Davidson,  if  you  have  no  objection  to  going 
for  this  blunderbuss,  you  had  better  go  as  yon 
pledged  it,  lest  the  man  should  object  to  my 
navitigit."  I  did  not  think  he  intended  to 
forfeit  my  life ;  he  told  me  where  to  meet  him 
tiie  next  morning  in  Oxford-street,  and  I  took 


the  blunderbuss  mider  a  gateway  in  OiM* 
street  to  him ;  he  said,  "  will  not  yoa  vift 
in,  and  have  a  glass  with  a  ooantiymu  tf 
your's?**  I  said,  **  what  do  you  mean  by  a 
countrvman  ?*'  I  was  not  much  tcoBaiiMd 
with  him ;  he  says,  ''a  man  of  oobor.*'  IM 
an  objection  to  going  in,  for  though  I  am  « mi 
of  colour,  I  have  never  associated  witb  vf 
of  them.  I  was  very  well  brought  up.  liW 
them  all  very  ignorant ;  who  this  laan  of  ooba 
was  I  do  not  know.  Mr.  Edwaidt  ^nami 
to  meet  me  the  next  day,  but  that  aigbt  I  m 
apprehended. 

Kow^  my  lord,  we  will  pass  to  the  moouI 
of  the  sword.  Goine  about  my  own  coocm, 
I  met  with  a  person  I  knew  at  Liverpool,  i 
the  name  of  James  Goldsworthy ;  he  expmni 
his  surprise  at  meeting  with  me  ip  UniM, 
and  after  inqnirinc  «bo«t  my  ianilyi  I  toU 
him  I  was  very  badlj  off,  and  that  it  was  vojr 
bad  to  be  a  master,  unless  he  has  fiiU  *«k» 
for  that  other  masters  do  not  like  tocapiof 
him ;  he  told  me  he  had  set  up  a  Vuiociii 
few  miles  out  of  town ;  it  was  a  plessul  «4» 
and  he  would  employ  me  if  I  liked;  I nU 
him,  with  the  greatest  pleasure;  I  asked  ha 
what  wages  I  should  have ;  he  said,  wkitdii 
I  expect;  I  said,  thirty-two  shillioss  a  week; 
he  said,  he  would  give  me  thirty  ehilliop;  k 
sj^id,  call  at  the  Horse  and  Groov-  I  did  Ml 
at  that  time  know  that  Mr.  GoldswoniifM 
Mr.  Edwards  were  acquainted.  I  sowkia* 
they  lodged  in  one  house.  As  theoffiecrM 
I  stopped  at  the  comer,  but  as  to  the  hm 
ments  I  was  in,  I  never  had  cross  beksoa;  n 
it  possible,  that  if  they  had  been  so  tce^ 
ous,  Adams  would  not  have  sees  the«  »iki 
suble  ?  however  I  went  into  the  pohliO'^KM^ 
and  did  not  see  Mr.  Goldswordiy;  I  v«t* 
bit  of  a  walk,  and  when  I  oame  ^'J— 
an  hour,  I  saw  several  persons  pa^i'V^ 
wards  and  forwards;  I  saw  several  •cylaos' 
ing  at  me,  but  I  did  not  see  the  peisee  I  Ml 
looking  for ;  I  went  again  and  stoMl  ^  ^ 
comer ;  at  a  little  after  eight  e*cloek  1  .*** 
going  down  the  £dgware*road ;  bat  pi^^ 
to  that,  the  landlord  asked  me,  whether  I  f* 
looking  for  any  particular  peraan  I  "j^  ^ 
I,  '<  a  gentleman  I  appointed  (Q  n><^  '"*'J 
h#  has  not  kept  his  word ;"  I  fm  g«y|*g 
the  Edgware^road,  and  I  saw  Mr.  Omi'^^ 
near  Queen-street;  he  said,  ''I'VPV^J? 
are  tired  of  waiting  r  ••  Yes,"  sap  1,  ^ 
was  not  for  an  anxiety  to  get  weik,  I  ^^ 
not  have  storaed  eo  long  ;'^  he  Mirs,*'|^*!J^ 
get  a  pint  of  beer,  I  hav<e  Ip  ahaki  ^^ 
a  friend  ;**  and  he  gave  me  a  swefdssdeM*' 
die ;  I  said,  «•  what  do  you  want  «5«»'jf*2 
are  you  going  to  cut  my  head  oir7'**-|^f^^ 
wc  have  many  thieves  in  oiar  part,  »w|^/7 
my  own  proteetion.^  As  I  ap  to  ^^'^lyL 
fore  God,  I  never  me^nt  any  had.  l^P*": 
ing  the  stable, I  wtf  penbns  vu/^'^^JZ 
fbolishlT  vent  in,  ^d  I  was  >«t*^^!g 
away ;  1  never  cut  at  any  one^.I  *^^}f;^ 
belt  on ;  I  would  netcr  plead  for  ^b^^V! 
IbrI  have  wentiued  my  life  w^  '^ 


t 


1461] 


ttuAard  Tiddfor  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


L1403 


my  coontrv  and  my  kin^,  and  how  can  it  be 
supposed  I  would  join  wicked  men,  who  would 
attempt  to  overthrow  so  well-founded  a  con- 
stitution as  the  British  constitntion,  and  from 
the  little  acquaintance  I  have  had  with  any 
men,  save  those  directly  in  my  business,  it  is 
not  likely  that  I  should  be  in  any  plot.    I  do 
ikot  mean  to  say  that  I  was  not  apprehended 
in  Cato-street;  bat  I  still  contend,  my  lord, 
that  the  carbine  was  not  in  my  possession  di- 
rectly nor  indirectly;  it  was  picked  up  at  a 
distance,  and  brought  to  me,  and  I  was  asked 
whether  it  was  not  mine ;  I  denied  it,  but  ano- 
ther person  said,  •*  oh,  it  is  surely  his,  why  do 
you  ask  him  V  I  was  carried  into  a  chandler's 
shop ;  I  never  vras  in  a  public-house ;  and 
Captain  Fitzclarence  cleared  up  that  point, 
though  one  of  the  officers  swore  that  I  even 
addressed  the  people ;  and  said,  that  the  man 
who  would  not  die  in  liberty's  cause,  ought  to 
be  damned.    I  was  left  in  the  custody  of  the 
officer  who  took  me;   and  I  asked  captain 
Fitzclarence,  whether  he  did  not  take  me  di- 
rectly to  Bow-street ;  what  time  had  I  then  to 
address  any  persons,  or  to  go  into  any  public- 
house  when  I  was  a  prisoner;  even  the  land- 
lord of  the  public-house  I  would  appeal  to,  to 
know  whether  I  was  a  prisoner  in  his  house. 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  an  existing  plot 
might  not  have  been,  but  I  pretend  to  say  I 
knew  of  no  existing  plot;  I  was  accidently 
brought  into  Cato-street  as  I  have  laid  my 
Btory ;  but  I  knew  nothing  of  a  plot  for  plun- 
der or  massacre. 

If  my  colour  should  be  against,  me  which  per- 
haps, gentlemen  of  the  jury,  you  may  suppose 
it  to  be,  and  think  that  because  I  am  a  man  of 
colour    I   am   without  an  understanding  or 
ft  feeltnff,  and  would  act  the  brute ;  I  am  not 
one  of  that  sort;  I  would  wish  to  wipe  off  those 
impressions    from  those    learned    gentlemen 
whohave  so  prosecuted  me.    When  not  em- 
ployed in  my  business,  I  have  employed  myself 
as  a  teacher  of  a  Sunday-school,  and  in  that 
capacity  have  rengiained;  and  I  would  draw 
your  attention  to  a  simple  mistake — ^there  was 
a  person,  a  man  of  colour,  nearly  my  stature, 
insulted  one  of  our  female  teachers  in  the 
Walworih-road ;  I  then  lived  at  Walworth ; 
and  though  this  young  lady  was  a  teacher  in 
the  same  school  I  was,  she  so  far  mistook  the 
person  as  to  make  a  complaint  of  me ;  I  found 
some  of  them  looked  cool  upon  me,  and  I  sent  in 
a  letter  of  resignation,  consequently  the  whole 
committee  waited  upon  me,  and  called  me 
from  my  wife  into  the  front  parlour,  and  ex- 
postulated with  me  upon  the  impropriety  of 
any  conduct^  and  persisted  in  it;  it  struck  me 
with  such  horror,  that  I  had  nothing  to  answer, 
but  I  determined  to  investigate  it,  and  I  sent 
my  wife  to  the  youngs  woman  to  ask  a  little 
information ;  J  traced  out  the  person  that  had 
insulted  her,  brought  him  to  the  committee^ 
and  he  acknowledged  his  fault,  and  she  came 
ashamed  to  look  me  in  the  face,  and  hid  her 
face,  and  offered  me  her  hand.    If  anything 
I  could  say  would  do  away  these  impressions 


t  would  proceed,  but  I  would  as  lief  be  put  to 
death,  if  I  thought  your  lordship  or  the  learned 
gentlemen  for  the  Crown,  believed  I  was  that 
monster  that  for  a  moment  I  could  harbour  a 
thought  to  murder  any  human  being  directly 
or  indirectly ;  if  you  believe  that,  I  hope  your 
lordship  will  not  shew  me  the  least  mercy,  for 
my  conscience  acquits  me ;  I  can  stand  before 
my  God,  and  I  will  stand  at  his  tribunal  to 
assert,  my  lord,  that  I  am  not  guilty  of  doing 
such  a  thing,  nor  deserving  it.  If  your  lord- 
ship will  permit  me  to  have  a  drink  of  water. 

Mr.  Baran  Oivroio.— Oh,  certainly,  take  your 
lefreshment,  sit  down  and  compose  yourself, 
and  address  the  jury  again,  if  you  desire  it, 
when  yOQ  are  composed,  there  is  no  impatienco 
on  the  part  of  the  Court,  take  your  own  time. 
I  woulo  observe  to  yon,  upon  that  which  you 
have  said,  that  you  may  rest  most  perfectly 
assured  that  with  respect  to  the  colour  of  your 
countenance,  no  prejudice  either  has  or  will 
exist  in  any  part  of  this  Court  against  you ;  a 
man  of  colour  is  entitled  to  British  justice  as 
much  as  the  fairest  British  subject  that  ever 
came  into  a  court  of  justice,  a^d  will  always 
be  sure  to  obtain  it,  and  this  case  vrill  be  de- 
cided upon  the  facts  given  in  evidence ;  God 
€9vbid  that  the  complexion  of  the  accused 
should  enter,  for  a  single  aioment,  into  th« 
consideration  of  the  jury. 

DavidKm. — My  lord,  it  is  but  very  few 
words  I  have  got  further  to  say,  for  as  to  po- 
litics I  never  troubled  my  head  with  it.  I  have 
a  family  of  very  little  children,  and  a  wife  that 
never  earned  a  penny  for  me  since  I  have  had 
her ;  it  is  only  the  distress  of  my  family  I  feel ; 
were  it  not  for  that,  I  should  quote  a  passage 
in  Isaiah,  '*  He  was  oppressed  and  he  was  af- 
flicted, yet  he  opened  not  his  mouth;*'  but 
when  I  think  of  the  case  of  my  family,  for  the 
love  I  bear  my  children,  I  should  use  the  ut- 
termost of  my  power  to  prevail  upon  a  British 
jury,  if  it  were  possible,  to  dear  up  those  black 
charges  which  are  laid  against  me.  First  of 
all,  here  is  Mr.  Adams,  he  can  positively  swear 
that  he  has  not  seen  me  in  any  warlike  appear- 
ance whatever.  I  was  down  stairs  when  Mr. 
Thistlewood  numbered  his  men;  he  said 
eighteen  and  two  below ;  when  he  was  asked 
whether  I  was  by,  he  said  no,  I  was  down 
stairs,  but  my  name  wasput  down  immediately 
the  officer  came  up.  The  next  witness,  Mr. 
Monument,  comes  forward  and  says,  that  I 
addressed  the  congregation,  and  told  them  that 
any  man  that  was  afraid  of  his  life  might  vralk 
off,  and  that  in  a  few  minutes  afterwards  the 
officers  came  up ;  now  your  lordship  and*  the 
jury  must  see  there  is  some  exaggeration  of 
these  things.  I  do  admit  I  was  in  Cato-street, 
by  passing  through  the  street,  but  as  to  admit- 
ting any  thing  else,  it  would  be  against  my 
conscience,  it  would  be  wrong  in  me  to  say 
that;  I  knew  nothing  of  their  plans;  I  now 
know  that  Mr.  Goldsworthy  was  an  accomplice 
of  Mr.  Edwards,  ther  might  be  the  plotters ; 
but  I  did  not  expect  that  he  would  be  that  base 


1463]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  William  Damdson  and 


[1464 


character,  that  having  been  a  journeyman  in  a 
shop  in  "which  I  was  an  apprentice  be  would 
have  entrapped  me.  I  have  served  my  country, 
I  have  done  all  which  an  honest  man  can  do ; 
I  have  supported  my  family  by  honest  industry, 
and  I  can  appeal  to  fifty  gentlemen  I  have 
dealt  with  since  I  have  been  master,  that  they 
never  have  known  me  to  go  to  public  meetings, 
except  one  meeting  in  Smithfield,  as  a  common 
spectator.  I  knew  nothing  at  all  of  these  men 
till  I  found  myself  a  prisoner  along  with  them. 
I  had  seen  Mr.  Thistle  wood,  but  I  never  saw 
him  the  night  I  was  apprehended,  till  I  was 
apprehended ;  if  I  had  seen  Mr.  Thistlewood, 
and  Mr.  £d wards,  it  might  have  led  me  to 
suspect,  but  none  spoke  to  me  nor  I  to  them ; 
if  I  was  one  in  their  concern,  being  such  a  con- 
spicuous character  as  I  know  I  am  from  my 
colour,  can  it  be  supposed  that  I  would  stand 
in  a  gateway  to  be  seen  and  identified  above 
all  others  ?  It  is  not  for  me  to  say  any  thing 
further  on  my  own  behalf,  my  learned  counsel, 
on  the  points  of  law  have  done  me  justice ;  and 
as  for  tnose  learned  gentlemen,  the  counsel  for 
t:ie  Crown,  I  have  nothing  to  lay  to  their 
charge;  I  admjre  the  way  in  which  they  have 
done  their  duly,  according  to  their  judgment 
upon  the  evidences;  if  those  gentlemen  knew  me 
better,  or  it  was  possible  I  could  have  shewn 
them  my  former  conduct,  they  would  not  have 
pointed  me  out  the  character  they  have  done. 
X  never,  my  lord,  have  done  any  m<in  an  in- 
jury, but  I  have  supported  an  honest  character, 
for  by  an  honest  character  I  intended  to  live, 
and  nothing  but  that ;  my  family  was  all  my 
society  that  I  kept,  neither  politics  nor  laws 
ever  troubled  me ;  as  for  any  thing  further  that 
I  have  got  to  say,  it  would  be  useless. 

I  would  only  call  the  minds  of  the  jury  to  a 
few  passages  I  have  selected  out  for  that  pur- 

fose,  if  it^  would  not  be  insulting  to  the  Court; 
would  select  this  passage  in  the  indictment, 
in  which  it  is  said  that  I  had  not  the  fear  of 
God  before  my  eyes,  but  was  moved  and  seduced 
by  the  instigation  of  the  Devil ;  now,  my  lord,  I 
always  had  the  fear  of  God  before  my  eyes, 
and  it  was  my  constant  prayer,  and  I  always 
used  those  passages  which  I  have  read  in  some 
of  Mr.  Pope's  writings  : 

**  If  I  am  right  thy  grace  impart, 
Still  in  the  right  to  stay  ; 
If  I  am  wrong,  oh  I  teach  my  heart 
To  find  that  better  way  I 

''Teach  me  to  feel  another's  woe, 

To  hide  the  faults  I  see ; 
That  mercy  I  to  others  shew. 

That  mercy  shew  to  me.'' 

These  were  always  my  constant  impressions, 
ipy  lord,  and  those  passages  in  the  indictment 
may  better  be  applied  to  those  gentlemen  who 
stand  there  to  swear  my  life  away,  to  the  de- 
struction of  myself  and  my  family ;  but  here, 
in  the  Bible,  it  is  said,  "  One  witness  shall 
pot  rise  up  against  a  roan  for  any  iniquity,  or 
for  any  s)n  in  any  sin  that  he  sinnetb,  but  at 


the  mouth  of  two  or  three  witnesses  shall  ilie 
matter  be  established . "  It  goes  on  to  the  void 
which  is  above  your  lordship's  head,  ^  if  i 
false  witness  rise  up  against  any  man  to  testi^ 
against  him  that  which  is  wrong,  then  both  tlie 
men  between  whom  the  controversy  is  sball 
stand  before  the  Lord,  before  the  priests  lod 
the  judges  which  shall  be  in  those  days,  aad 
the  judges  shall  make  diligent  inquisition;  nd 
behold,  if  the  witness  be  a  false  witness,  and 
hath  testified  falsely  against  his  brother,  tha 
shall  ye  do  unto  him  as  he  had  thought  to  hate 
done  unto  his  brother ;  so  shalt  thoa  put  tbe 
evil  away  from  among  you,  that  innocent  bkod 
be  not  shed  in  the  land  which  the  Lord  % 
God  giveth  thee  for  an  inheritance."  Tbese 
things  I  would  wish  to  impress  on  the  juy's 
mind ;  I  am  a  stranger  to  England  by  biitfa, 
but  I  was  educated  and  brou{;bt  np  in  Eng- 
land ;  mf  father  was  an  Englishman  and  m; 
grandfather  a  Scotchman;  I  certainly  hart  a 
little  prerogative  for  claiming  to  be  an  Eng- 
lishman, being  here  from  fourteen  yean  of 
age  ;  but  I  have  not  a  friend  in  England,  aod 
it  is  hard  that  my  life  should  be  taken  avif, 
not  knowing  any  thing  of  the  plot  made  oat 
against  his  majesty's  ministers;  the  eail  of 
Harrowby  I  knew  for  years,  when  I  worked  A 
Rugely,  in  Staffordshire,  for  Mr.  BoUocL  I 
have  worked  at  his  lordship's  house,  and  fcc 
the  regard  I  have  for  his  lordship,  &n 
knowing  him  personally^  I  should  haie 
shuddered  at  the  thought  of  taking  his  m; 
and  if  any  man  would  have  mentioned  ss«» 

flan  to  me,  it  would  bave  turned  upoomher 
should  have  turned  a  public  infonna,  * 
have  privately  informed  his  lordship;  botvy 
conscience  does  not  accuse  me  of  any  thtns 
improper,  for  if  I  am  to  die,  I  can  die  wth  a 
clear  conscience,  that  I  know  nothing  of  my 
assassination  plot,  nothing  of  any  plunder  or 
burning  of  the  city,  for  those  things  I  det^j 
I  would  get  my  living  by  honest  industiyi  wt 
I  never  was  a  man  known  to  associate  « 
keep  any  bad  company.  ^. 

1  would  have  called  your  attention  to  ie»^ 
other  witnesses,  but  they  did  not  attend  at  w 
time  they  were  called  upon.  All  I  haw f* 
to  say  is  this ;  I  hope  the  gentlemen  ««* 
jury  will  weigh  the  matter  well  in  ^^^. 
seeing  it  stands  only  between  life  and  d«Wi 
and  should  they  harbour  an  opinion,  ^jj^ 
guilty  of  treason,  though  not  guilty  of  mo^ 
though  that  has  been  a  crime  charged--if  Wj 
think  I  am  a  culprit  that  would  stand  h««tt 
acquit  myself  against  the  force  of  conscieo«. 
I  am  very  willing  to  abide  by  their  jodgo®'' 

Mr.  Boron  Gflmw.— ftichaid  Tidd,  if «_» 
your  wish  to  add  any  thing  to  what  ^«*  °?r 
urged  to  the  jury  by  your  learned  counsel, 
is  the  proper  time  for  you  to  address  them. 

rirf(i.— Thank  you, my  loid.    ^c  &nim 
I  have  got  to  say  is,  that  I  had  the  mwwrtoae 
to  become   acquainted  witli  Brunt  aoo" 
month  before  Christmas,   by  his  f«QW 
going  to  see  Adams,  who  Und  iiwft  dw 


14651  Richard  Tidd/or  High  Treason.  A.  D.  1820.  L1466 

me ;  our  windows  nearly  join  each  other,  and  together,  we  can  always  get  arms/'  lie  pulled 
by  that  means  we  became  acquainted  ;  he  out  a  pistol  from  his  pocket,  and  said,  '*  I  am 
frequently  came  up  to  my  house,  and  during  not  without  arms,  for  I  have  a  stick  sword,'' 
the  Christmas  holidays,  he  and  I  kept  the  shewing  it  me ;  he  left  that,  saying,  *<  I  will 
holidays  together ;  after  the  holidays,  he  intro-  see  you  again  ;*'  in  the  course  of  that  afternoon, 
daced  me  to  a  man  of  the  name  of  Edwards,  he  came  up  again,  and  says,  **  do  you  know 
whom  1  did  not  know  before,  though  he  chal-  where  the  meeting  is  to  be  held  r  I  said, 
lenged  knowing  me  before.  I  went  out  with  ,  **  No  ;'*  he  said,  "  here  is  a  direction,**  and  he 
them  at  different  times  on  the  Sunday ;  it  is  gave  me  a  direction,  which  I  have  in  my  pocket 
well  known  that  I  every  other  day  in  the  week  now ;  but  I  suppose  the  direction  is  not  ma- 
worked  fourteen,  sixteen  or  eighteen  hours  in  terial.  [The prisoner  handed  in  a  small poperJ]  ) 
the  day,  and  that  I  never  went  out  but  on  a  ',      ■»*«  u        /^ t\  •  u  .l 

Saoday  Mr.  Edwanls  and  Brunt  together,  ^^J'JlT^  ^^''^--^ly'^^^'^^^'^S' 
told  me  there  were  certain  meetings,  Xh  I  '*"^  "^  "^  P*P«'  '^""^^  ^  »»»»«»  ^7  ">«  <>«- 
knew  of  before,  but  I  never  attended  any 

meetings.  .After  this,  acts  of  parliament  pass-  Ttdd. — ^No,  my  lord,  it  is  only  the  direction 
ed  which  signified  that  these  meetings  were  that  £dwards  gave  to  me  where  the  meeting 
illegal,  and  that  persons  who  went  to  them  ■  was  to  be  held. 

were  liable  to  be  prosecuted ;  but  Mr.  Ed-  j^  ^^  Carrmo.-Do  you  wish  it  should 
wards  told  me,  he  had  got  some  connexions  in    .  ,  j  j  i*-« 

a  higher  scale  of  life,  that  were  determined  , 

that  meetings  of  a  similar  description  should  ■      Tidd. — ^Yes,  my  lord, 
be  held  privately ;  that  he  himself  had  got  ]      ^     ^ortm  G«m«r.-«  Horse  and  Groom, 
full  aulljonty  to  signify  that  to  all  those  who   j„h„.,treet,  Edewaro-road." 
were  wilhng  to  meet  to  procure  redress  in  par-  .  *      - 

liament ;  I  was  satisfied  ;  I  thought  there  could  {      Tidd. — During  Wednesday,  my  lord,  while 
be  no  particular  harm  in  such  meetings  as    I   was  out,  1   went   to  shops  for  work,  and 
those,  and  1  went  to  the  room  taken  by  Ings,    Brunt  came  up ;  and  while  they  were  tiiere,  I 
in  Brunt's  house.    I  did  not  see  or  hear  any    came  home,  and  Edwards  brought  up  a  brown 
thing  particular  that  day,  but  I  was  solicited    paper  saying,  you  must  bring  this  paper  up  to 
to  go  another  day,  on  a  Sunday,  the  day  spoken    the  meeting,  for  all  those  things  that  we  have 
of  here ;  and  in  the  course  of  some  appoint-    will  be  wanted,  in  case  of  a  revolution  taking 
nient  between  Adams  and  some  other  persons    place  in  this  country,  which  is  very  likely  in 
in  the  room,  I  was  nominated  as  a  stranger  to    the  course  of  a  very  little  while,  for  the  people 
take   the  chair.    There  were  certain  propo-    are  very  dissatisfied,  and  very  numerously  dis- 
sitions  made  on  that  Sunday,  on  which  I  de-    affected  in  the  country ;  you  must  bring  this  to 
clared  positively,  if  that  was  their  intention  I    the  club  in  the  evening ;  and  Brunt  observed, 
would  never  attend  such  kind  of  meetings ;  I    that  he  had  several  different  acquaintances  that 
was  fully  determined  not  to  keep  company  !  were  coming  to  the  same  club  in  the  evening, 
with  them  afterwards ;  but  prior  to  this,  Mr. ;  and  as  I  should  be  at  work  late,  be  would  give 
£d%vards  comes  up  to  me,  and  he  says,  ''We  ,  them  notice  that  they  should  come  along  with 
have  got  certain  materials,  and  Mr.  Thistle-    me ;  my  lord,  about  seven  in  the  evening,  I 
wood's  compliments,  and  he  would  be  obliged  j  left  off  work,  and  no  other  came  than  that  young 
to  you,  if  you  would  let  them  remain  here  a ;  man  Monument ;  I  went  up,  according  to  their 
day  or  two,  till  we  can  remove  them."    I  told    directions,  to  the  Horse  and  Groom,  and  I  do 
them  I  would  not  permit  things  of  that  kind  ,  declare  before  you,  that  I  never  specified  nor 
to  come  into  my  place ;  with  that  answer  he  ^  ever  knew  any  thing  about  any  cabinet  dinner, 
went   away;  on  the  evening  of  that  day  he-  orany  thing  of  the  kind;  it  was  never  mention- 
brought  that  trunk,  which  you  have  there,  and    ed  to  me ;  I  hope,  my  lord,  you  wiliexcuse my 


afterwards,  when  I  saw  him  again,  says  I, 
''  why  did  you  bring  that,  when  I  positively 
said  it  should  not  come  into  my  place  ?"  he 


vulgar  ignorant  way  of  expressing  myself. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow, — You  have  no  apology 

^^  .^  .        .       ...  ,    -      ^  .^  ^      to  make  upon  that  scale :  whatever  you  say, 

says,  "It  IS  not  material,  we  only  want  it  to  ,  ^^  -^  ^^^^^^^  language  and  mannef,  will  6e 
stop  a  day  or  two ;'  then  on  the  Sunday,  as  I    attended  to. 
before  observed,  1  went  to  this  meeting,  where. 


as  I  hsLve  said,  these  propositions  were  stated ; 
I  never  went  again,  but  on  the  Tuesday,  £d- 


Tidd.-'l  went  with  Monument  up  to  the 
place,  expecting  to  go  to  the  Horse  and  Groom ; 


yrards  and  Brunt  came  up  to  me,  and  asked  j  I  met  a  man,  whom  I  did  not  know,  and  he 
me,  whether  I  still  kept  in  that  determination ;  introduced  roe  into  this  sUble ;  I  had  not  been 
I  said,  **  yes,  I  did ;"  he  said,  "  well,  all  those  ;  there  for  ten  minutes,  before  I  was  taken  by 
proceedings  are  entirely  frustrated,— there  is  a  the  officers ;  that  is  the  matter,  my  lord,  I 
^nion  in  Mary-Ie-bone,  but  for  self-preservation  assure  you,  as  nearly  as  I  can  recollect  it. 
^▼ery  man  is  reouested  to  go  there  with  some  reply. 

mplement  of  defence  ;'*  I  told  him  I  had  no 

■    _  ,      _^J_r 1.  _x £e  .v. f» 


;npleine«t  of  defence  whatever;  *'  then,"  says 


Mr.  Attorney  General, — Gentlemen  of  the 


le    "  I  have  plenty, — ^for  through  those  gentle-   jury,  painful  and  irksome  as  is  the  task  I  have 
aen  who  support  roe  in  calling  such  meetings  .  now  to  perform,  and  tiresoroci  at  least  to  many 


1467]       1  GEORGE  lY. 


Trial  tfWilSam  Dnidton  and 


[t4« 


of  you,  as  must  he  the  repetition  of  a  narratiTe 
already  told,  of  arguments  already  stated,  and 
of  observations  already  made,  yet  I  am  sure 
you  will  feel  with  me,  however  irksome  that 
task  may  be  both  to  myself  and  to  you,  that  in  a 
natter  of  so  much  importance,  not  only  to  the 
prisoners  at  the  bar,  but  to  the  public  at  large, 
BO  time  devoted  to  the  fair  investigation  of  the 
oaae  is  mis-employed ;  and  in  the  few  remarks 
I  shall  feel  it  my  duty  to  address  to  you,  my 
only  endeavoor  will  be  to  bring  back  your 
recollection  to  the  real  state  of  the  evidence  as 
it  now  stands,  and  to  direct  you  to  those  points 
upon  which,  as  it  appears  to  me,  the  verdict 
you  are  to  pronounce  must  ultimately  depend. 
It  would  be  an  idle  waste,  indeed,  of  your 
time,  if  I  were  ^  delay  you  by  any  laboured 
observations  with  respect  to  tfie  law  of  this 
case.  Little  discussion  has  taken  place  upon 
that  subject  by  the  learned  counsel  who  have 
addressed  you  on  the  part  of  the  prisoners ;  and 
I  may  state  to  you,  without  hazard,  that  if  the 
acts  charged  upon  this  indictment,  as  estab- 
lishing the  treason  imputed  to  the  prisoners  al 
the  bar,  are  substantiated  to  your  satisfaction, 
the  crime  as  alleged  in  the  difierent  counts  of  this 
indictment,  at  least  in  some  of  them,  has  been 
completely  proved.  The  charge,  divested  of 
all  technicalities,  is  simply  this, — that  the  pri- 
soners at  the  bar,  in  conjunction  with  others, 
bad  formed  a  plan  to  overthrow  the  constitu- 
tion of  this  country ;  that,  in  furtherance  of  that 
glan,  they  had  held  those  consultations,  and 
ad  provided  those  means,  and  had  con- 
templated that  assassination,  about  which  you 
have  heard  so  much ;  and  the  only  question 
for  you  will  be,  whether  these  acts  have  been 
made  out,  or  not ;  because,  if  they  have,  they 
at  once  prove  that  these  men  have  been  guilty 
4>f  ooropassing  to  depose  his  majesty  from  his 
imperial  dignity,  and  of  conspiring  to  levy 
war  against  him  to  compel  him  to  alter  his 
measures  and  councils. 

My  learned  friend  who  sits  by  me,  in  intro- 
ducing this  case  to  you,  told  you  (and  I  must 
beg  leave  to  repeat  the  observation),  that  in  a 
oharge  of  this  nature  it  is  impossible  to  prove 
to  the  full  extent  the  nature  of  secret  deliber- 
ations and  conspiracies,  but  by  the  testimony 
of  one  who  has  engaged  in  them.  He  stated 
to  you,  that  in  the  examination  of  the  testimony  < 
of  such  a  person,  you  should  exercise  consider- 
able jealousy  and  caution,  and  that  unless  jovk 
find  him  confirmed  by  other  testimony,  against 
which  no  imputation  can  be  raised,  you  will 
not  be  advised  by  the  Court  to  find  a  verdict  of 
guilty.  Almost  the  whole  of  the  able  address- 
es which  have  been  made  to  you  by  the  learned 
counsel  for  the  prisoners  has  therefore  been 
directed  to  the  examination  of  the  testimony  of 
the  first  witness  Adams.  They  have  submitted 
to  you  (but  I  beg  leave  wholly  to  differ  from 
them)  that  the  case,  as  far  as  it  relates  to  the 
charge  of  high  treason,  rests  solely  upon  his 
evidence ;  that  it  does  not  so  rest,  I  am  sure  I 
shall  be  able  to  satisfy  you,  if  at  present  you 
entertain  any  doubt  upon  the  subject,  when  I 


come  to  examine  t!ie  other  parts  of  the  cm; 
but,  fbr  the  present  moment,  I  will  codiK 
your  attention  to  the  testimony  which  h«  bit 
given,  and  to  the  confirmation  which  it  has  re- 
ceived. In  the  discharge  of  the  painfel  ud 
anxious  duty  which  my  Teamed  fnends  hid  lo 
perform  in  the  defence  of  the  prisonen  at  the 
oar,  thev  have  of  course  kept  all  drcamiUooei 
of  corroboration  out  of  sight,  feeling  tiat  vim 
once  brought  under  your  review,  they  nat 
satisfy  the  most  sceptical  mind  of  the  tntkof 
the  testimony  of  Adams. 

Before  I  come  to  the  confiimadons,  let  m 
consider  for  a  moment  some  of  the  ck^jMrn 
which  have  been  urged  against  his  teftimoajf. 
That  he  is  an  accomplice,  that  he  has  paitid- 
pated  in  the  guilt  of  the  prisoners  at  the  bar,  I 
mlly  admit;  but  it  is  said  he  is  onwortbjrf 
all  credit,  because,  on  his  cross-exsmiDatioB, 
he  has  confessed  to  you,  that  fbr  a  time  be  had 
been  led  astray  by  those  pemicioos  pvhliea- 
tions  which  have  been  too  succeasfuliy  ditx- 
lated,  and  that  he  had  withdrawn  his  belief 
from  the  Christian  religion.  Gentlemen,  ta 
what  cause  does  he  ascribe  that  unfoitnaik 
lapse  of  faith  ?  Sorry  am  I  to  sUte,  that,  bf 
the  evidence,  it  appears  that  he  owes  it  totk 
conduct  of  one  of  the  unfortunate  men  oov 
standing  before  you ;  for  Adams  telb  yXt 
that  it  was  tldd  who  furnished  him  with  tboff 
publications  which,  fbr  a  time,  sapped  and 
undermined  it.  Do  not  let  that  dreunsonce 
operate  more  than  it  ought  against  the  prisooer; 
but  you  cannot  forget  that  the  fact  has  been 
proved  to  you ;  and  if  Adams  has  ened  fm 
the  path  of  the  true  faith,  I  am  aftaid  ihalyja 
will  be  obliged  to  attribute  his  oftnce  to  ihe 

unfortunate  man  at  the  bar. 

It  is  said  by  my  learned  friend,  that  its 
ouite  incredible  that  one  who  has  so  sww 
ftom  the  belief  tvhich  he  professed  shooW^ 
the  moment  of  calamity  and  distress,  ha»e  da- 
covered  his  error,  and  have  returned  again  » 
the  Christian  faith. 

I  see  nothing  improbable  In  it ;  on  the  «•• 
trary,  it  h  our  daily  wpcricnce  that  it «« 
the  hour  of  afflictioti  that  the  mind  b  «* 
strongly  impressed  with  the  sacred  tratWM 
religion;  and  I  for  one,  can  '«»*)/ °**J: 
that  after  his  escape  from  the  appalling  «?* 
in  Cato-street,  during  the  days  of  sectafloo, 
when  confining  himself  to  his  house  be  »- 
deavoured  to  elude  the  vigilance  of  thepoW^ 
this  man  reflected  seriously  on  his  P^^ 
duct,  and  on  his  providential  escape,  and  Mjg 
again  to  feel  the  force  of  those  doctnnes  wni» 
folly  had,  for  a  moment,  obUtcratcd,  »»  ^ 
turned  to  that  fiiith  in  whidi  he  ^^J^^ 
mfancy  been  educated ;  but  whether  ttoioew 
or  not,  he  tells  you  that  at  presOTj  wjsai^ 
impressed  with  the  belief  ohhe  Christian  ^^ 
gion,  and  that  he  acknowledges  ttc  SJH^ 
sanction  of  that  holy  book  on  which  ne »» 
been  sworn  to  give  his  testimony.         ^^ 

Let  me  ask  you  what  contradidionlWPg 
given  to  his  evidence ;  one  has  been  atWW^ 
by  putting  Chambers  into  the  bof,  W  ^ "" 


14991 


Bieh4ird  Tiddjbr  Higk  Trtatm. 


A.  D.  18S0. 


[1470 


not  find  that  his  evidence  is  brought  Qnder 
your  consideration  bv  my  learned  friends,  for 
they  felt,  that  after  bis  cro6S*examination»  it 
would  be  a  vain  attempt  to  impose  on  the  cre- 
dulity of  twelve  honest  and  intelligent  jurors, 
by  endearouring  to  persuade  you  to  think 
that  that  man  told  one  syllable  of  the  truth. 

I  pass  over  Chambers's  acquaintance  with 
many  of  the  prisoners,  his  attendance  at  the 
Smithfield  meetings,  and  other  circumstances 
of  Uiat  nature ;  you  recollect  that  (but  I  must 
call  your  attention  to  apart  of  his  examination) 
he  was  asked  on  what  boqk  he  was  sworn ;  he 
told  you  that,  instead  of  that  sacred  volume  on 
which  alone  a  person  in  a  court  of  justice  in 
this  country  is  to  be  sworn,  he  belicTes  it  was 
the  Prayer-book.  My  learned  friend  who  last 
addressed  you,  feeling  the  effect  this  disclosure 
was  likely  to  produce  on  your  minds,  has 
vainly  attempted  to  get  rid  of  it  by  sayings 
that  in  some  work  which  he  has  read,  but 
which  I  was  never  fortunate  enough  to  meet 
with,  it  is  laid  down  that  an  oath  taken  on 
th^  PrayeNbook  is  as  valid  in  a  court  of  jus* 
tice,  as  one  taken  upon  the  New-testament. 

Undoubtedly  if  a  Prayer-book  contains  the 
four  Gospels,  such  an  oath  is  binding  and 
valid ;  hot  it  did  not  appear  tliat  such  was 
the  conception  of  the  witness;  he  thought  that 
b^  was  sworn  upon  the  Prayer-book  alone;  but 
pass  that  by— what  19  the  acoount  Chemben 
gave  of  the  conversation  he  stated  to  have 
passed  between  himself  and  the  witness  Adams, 
and  a  person  of  the  name  of  Edwards  ?    He 
says,  tnat  a  few  days  before  the  affair  in  Cato- 
street,  they  came  to  him,  on  a  very  slight  ac- 
quaintance, and  at  once  asked  him  to  engage 
in  a  plan  to  assassinate  all  his  m^esty's  mi- 
nisters, using  language  which  I  will  not  repeat 
to  you,  expressive  of  the  exultation  and  triumph 
they   should    feel   after  that  act   had   been 
completed ;  and  yet  that  man.  Chambers,  with 
all  this  information  imparted  to  him,  buries  it 
in  bis  own  bosom — lays  it  before  no  magi»- 
tTtit^ — makes  it  known  to  no  individual,  and  it 
is  nfil  till  this  day  that  any  communication 
upon  the  sul^ect  has  ever  escaped  his  lips. 
Can  ^ou  believe  such  testimony?     He  un- 
blushingly  tells  vou  that  he  felt  no  horror  at 
th?  project.    If  he  had  felt  as  he  ought  upon 
such  a  scheme  being  communicated  to  him,  I 
«^  you  whether  it  is  credible  that  he  should 
hftire  kept  such  a  secret  in  his  own  breast,  and 
not  have  imparted  it  to  a  magistrate,  or  to  soma 
of  those  noolemen  and  gentlemen  who  were 
to  be  the  objects  of  the  assassination  which 
Adams  and  his  companion  meditated.     He 
do^  no  such  thing,  and  therefore,  without  de- 
laying you  longer  on  his  testimony,  I  confi- 
dently expect,  as  the  conyersation  is  altogether 
denied  by  Adams,  that  you  will  have  no  hesi- 
tation in  dismissing  from  your  minds  the  whole 
of  the  evidence  of  Chambers. 

I  do  not  find  in  the  course  of  the  addresses 
of  .00^  learned  friends,  that  they  made  any  other 
obsisrvati^n  on  the  manner  in  which  Adams 
hea  jsiven  his  tAstimonyi  or  pointed  out.  any 


other  supposed  contradiction  in  the  case.  That 
being  so,  let  me  shortly  call  your  attention  to 
the  story  which  he  narrates,  aod  to  the  manner 
in  which  he  is  confirmed  in  every  part  of  it.  It 
has  been  said  by  my  learned  fnends  on  the 
other  side,  and  they  have  argued  upon  it  at 
considerable  length,  that  though  they  admit 
Adams  to  be  confirmed  in  some  facts,  nay  even 
to  the  extent  of  the  plan  of  assassinating  all 
his  msgesty's  ministers,  they  contend,  that  be- 
yond that  point  there  is  no  confirmation  what- 
ever, and  that  all  he  has  told  you  of  any  ulte- 
rior views  is  fiction  and  invention.  Now  let 
me  ask  you  in  the  outset,  what  possible  mo- 
tive, what  interest  has  Adams  to  add  to  the 
guilt  of  intended  murders  the  crime  of  hig)i 
treason?  It  is  said  he  is  an  accomplice— an 
accomplice  in  what  ?  Would  it  not  nave  been 
sufficient  for  him,  when  he  was  apprehended, 
and  when  he  declared  the  whole  which  he 
knew,  to  have  said,  it  is  true  I  am  an  accom- 

flice,  it  is  true  I  was  in  Cato-street,  and  thai 
was  embarked  in  a  conspiracy  with  Thistle- 
wood  and  Ings;  but  criminal  as  we  are, 
though  our  plan  was  to  assassinate  his  majes* 
ty's  ministers,  it  was  there  to  end.  According 
to  my  learned  friend  Mr.  Adolphus,  the  only 
motive  he  could  have  would  be  to  destroy  hie 
own  credit  altogether.  Let  this  remark,  if  you 
think  it  deserving  of  consideration,  weigh  upop 
your  minds  in  determining  upon  the  credit  of 
Adams.  The  admissions  of  my  learned  friends^ 
adtnissions  not  improvidently  made  but  ex- 
torted by  the  facts  in  the  case,  place  the  plan  . 
for  the  assassination  of  his  majesty *s  ministere 
beyond  the  reach  of  doubt.  But  the  counsel 
for  the  prisoners  say,  that  there  the  confirma- 
tion ends;  give  me  leave  to  inquire,  if  thai 
lugumentis  well  founded  (and  I  put  it  s^ 
riously  to  my  learned  friend)  what  proof  it 
there  even  of  the  plot  of  the  assassination,  ex« 
cept  the  preparations  and  the  meeting  in  Cato- 
streetP  They  have  no  other  evidence  ^haii 
that  of  Adams  on  which  to  found  the  admisr 
sion  they  have  made,  and  shall  not  his  testis 
roony  be  admitted  to  prove  the  ulterior  pur- 
pose these  conspirators  had  in  view ;  if  it  is 
credible  in  one  part,  it  is  to  be  believed  in  all 
its  parts ;  if  it  establishes  the  plot  of  assassina-* 
tion,  it  equally  supports  the  conspiracy  to  overr 
throw  the  government. 

Adams  states  to  you  that  a  room  had  been 
hired  by  these  men,  in  the  house  in  which 
Brunt  resided,  for  the  purpose  of  holding  their 
consultations,  of  devising  their  plans,  and  of 
preparing  the  means  of  executing  them.  Is 
that  (act  true,  os  is  it  false  ?  It  is  proved  to 
be  true  by  £leanor  Walker,  Mary  Rogers,  and 
another  witness,  whose  credit  has  not  been 
attacked,  X  mean  Hale  the  apprentice  of  Brunt* 
You  wiU  recollect  the  pretence  under  which 
it  was  taken ;  it  was,  that  it  was  to  be  a  lodg? 
in^  room  for  Ings,  and  he  said  that  he  would 
bnng  his  furniture  into  it ;  no  furniture  waa 
ever  brought  in,  and  the  only  uses  made  of  it 
were  meeting  there,  and  preparing  the  mis* 
chievoitf  %nd  d«itructiiv«  uMtrwuenU  yQikh%vf 


1471]        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  H^iam  Davidscm  and 


[1472 


seen.  I  may  here  observe,  Ihat  it  has  beeb 
argued  by  my  learned  friends,  that  the  direct 
purpose  for  which  it  was  hired,  is  proved  only 
by  Adams ;  the  three  witnesses  I  have  intro- 
daced  to  you,  shew  that  his  testimony  is  true 
in  that  respect ;  the  facts  in  the  case  corrobo- 
rate him ;  no  one  ever  lodged  there ;  the  only 
persons  who  resorted  to  it  were  the  prisoners 
and  others  implicated  in  this  conspiracy,  and 
the  only  things  found  there  were  such  as  were 
prepared  for,  and  are  well  calculated  to  carry 
It  into  execution. 

'  There  are  other  facts  in  which  he  is  con* 
Urmed  by  Hale,  I  mean  as  to  the  meetings  in 
that  room,  and  the  persons  attending  those 
meetings ;  he  tells  you,  that  on  the  Saturday 
they  had  determined  that  a  blow  should  be 
■struck  on  the  following  Wednesday,  and  that 
4hererore  on  the  Sunday  morning  a  meeting 
was  to  be  held  at  Brunt's  room,  to  elect  a  com^ 
mittee  to  devise  and  organize  the  plan ;  that 
meeting,  Adams  says,  was  larger  than  usual, 
"and  he  is  confirmed  in  that  by  Hale ;  Hale 
has  informed  you  it  was  the  largest  meeting 
he  remembers,  and  was  attended  by  upwards 
of  twenty  persons :  the  confirmation  does  not 
stop  here ;  what  did  they  do  in  that  room  ?  you 
remember  Adams  tells  you,  that  a  number  of 
staves  were  brought  there,  green  sticks  for  the 
purpose  of  being  prepared  to  receive  pike- 
heads  ;  that  Bradbum  had  been  employed  to 
put  on  the  fermles,  and  that  he  did  not  perform 
the  work  properly  at  first,  having  weakened 
the  ends  or  the  poles  so  much,  that  it  was  ne- 
cessary to  saw  them  off,  and  put  on  larger 
ferrules ;  Hale  heard  at  times  noises,  as  if  there 
'Was  sawing  and  hammering  in  the  room,  and 
he  saw  pike-staves  there.  He  is  confirmed  in 
another  singular  fact ;  Adams  must  have  been 
more  than  a  prophet  if  it  did  not  really  take 
place.  Ybu  recollect  that  at  a  meeting  on 
Tuesday  the  22nd  FebruaTy  great  agitation 
was  excited,  in  consequence  of  Adams  having 
communicated  to  them  something  that  had 
occurred  between  Adams  and  Hobbs  of  the 
White  Hart,  from  which  Adams  concluded 
that  their  schemes  were  not  altogether  un- 
known to  the  police ;  Brunt,  to  satisfy  their 
doubts,  and  to  ease  their  minds,  proposed 
that  on  that  evening  a  watch  should  be  set 
in  Grosvenor-square  to  observe  lord  Harrow- 
by's  house,  to  see  whether  any  soldiers  were 
introduced  into  it,  concluding,  that  if  no  such 
thing  took  place,  they  might  be  sure  their  plans 
were' undiscovered,  and  they  might  proceed 
with  security ;  the  watch  was  set,  and  the  first 
men  to  perform  the  duty  were  Davidson  and 
another,  who  were  to  be  relieved  by  Brunt  and 
Tidd.  Davidson,  with  his  companion,  were 
to  take  their  stations  at  six,  and  continue  till 
nine.  The  watchmen  of  the  parish  have  been 
called  to  you,  and  they  proved  that  on  that 
evening  they  saw  a  man-  answering  the  de- 
scription of  the  prisoner  Davidson,  and  ano- 
ther person  with  him,  lurking  about  the  square 
between  six  and  nine  o'clock.  You  remember 
(hat  in  consequence  of  Tidd  having  to  com- 


municate with  some  penon  who  wu  th(ii§|i 
to  be  essential  to  the  success  of  their  pkuis,  k 
#as  on  that  evening  prevented  acoomfMojiif 
Brunt,  and  Adams  was  fixed  upon  to  sopplj 
his  place,  and  that  he  accompanied  Broolit 
nine  o*clock  to  Grosvenor-square.  He  states 
that  he  went  there  with  Brunt;  that,  ate 
watching  for  a  short  time,  wanting  refreahiDcid, 
they  went  to  a  public-bouse  at  the  back  of 
lord  Harrowby's  house,  and  that  there  Bna( 
played  at  dominos  with  a  stranger.  Ym  bm 
the  very  person,  Gillan,  who  played  villi 
Brunt,  produced  to  you.  Then  Adams  is eoi- 
firmed  in  all  be  has  told  yon  as  to  that  put  rf 
the  transaction.  It  is  impossible  he  sImSqU  be 
confirmed  in  any  other  manner.  Bruatisi 
prisoner,  who  has  been  already  tried;  he 
could  not  be  called.  The  only  pencn  vb& 
could  be  brought  to  corroborate  the  ies^imtij 
of  Adams  was  the  young  man  who  met  bia 
and  Brunt  at  the  public-house.  The  vatcb- 
men  confirm  him  as  to  persons  being  see&ii 
Grosvenor-square ;  his  evidence  is  tbetefore 
supported,  in  this  part  of  the  case,  beyond  ihe 
possibility  of  contradiction. 

His  narrative  is  shown  to  be  true  in  aootb? 
particular.  He  informs  you,  that  as  they  p»' 
pared  their  arms  they  thought  it  unsafe  to  ben 
them  all  in  the  room  in  Brunt's  hoese,  ani 
that  the  house  of  the  prisoner  Tidd,  was  cob' 
sidered  to  be  a  fit  d^t  for  them.  If  ^' 
mation  of  this  part  of  Adaiis*s  evidence  ^^ 
wanting,  it  has  been  supplied  to  yw  by  tie 
unfortunate  young  woman,  the  aaogbier  of 
Tidd,  who  has  been  called ;  for  she  bashed 
to  you  that  hand-grenades  and  other  instra- 
ments  were,  from  time  to  time,  deposited  ia 
her  father's  house ;  that  the  box  produced  lo 
you,  containing  the  ball-cartridges,  had  beea 
there  for  a  fortnight  before  the  afihiriaCattK 
street;  that  some  of  those  things  weretakei 
away  upon  the  very  morning. of  the  23idrf 
February,  and  that  some  were  ^™"8*'^Jjj 
on  the  following  morning.  It  was  a  MjffJ 
thing  that  some  of  those  instruments  «vi 
were  lodged  at  Tidd*8  should  be  reisovedoi 
the  morning  of  Wednesday  to  Cato^treetK 
is  an  occurrence  to  which  Adams  did  notspeiif 
but  Mary  Barker  has  proved  it 

The  next  confirmation  (and  a  very  n^ 
able  one)  is  given  of  what  Adams  ^^^ JJ 
have  taken  place  in  the  afternoon  of  the «» 
of  February,  on  his  arrival  at  Brunt's  bo««; 
while  he  was  there.  Strange  and  anodier  pei- 
son,  whose  name  he  does  not  know,  ca»e  »* 
they  were  engaged  in  flinting  their  pistols, «» 
finding  themselves  likely  to  be  obsenredwb** 
they  stood,  they  retired  to  the  room  ^^V 
Ings.  It  was  impossible  for  Adams  alttj 
time  he  told  you  that,  to  know  that  he  sboiw 
be  confirmed ;  it  was  not  a  ^'^""*®*^'f*i?!I 
be  was  likely  to  invent,  inventing  it  rai^«'2 
subjected  him  to  contradiction.  H*{?*I 
you,  that  on  that  very  afternoon  be  saw  SWF 

and  another  person  flint  their  pistols  aWjJ 
room,  and  afterwards  withdraw  into  »•  "J* 
room.    That  is  oot  all,  Adams  inlb»»r** 


Rtdianl  Tiddj(br  High  TreMtm. 


147S1 

that  dfeemrd^ttpMi  theani?al 
md  th»  otlMT  penODS  on  tbat  aftemooD,  and 
befora  thaj  pffoe«eded  to  Cato-fltreet,  Thiatle- 
wood  ifa»  daiiTonsof  writiag  certain  prodama- 
tiODSy  wliich  were  to  be  exhibited  in  different 
parts  of  the  town,  in  oider  to  rouse  the  dis- 
affected to  join  tbe  slandaid  of  revolt;  he 
states  to  youy  that  there  not  being  any  paper 
in  the  rooa  ftt  for  the  purpose,  he  siigtfested 
that  they  should  be  pot  apoo  cartridge  paper, 
and  Brunt  was  fequestea  to  procure  some. 
Hate  was  on  that  afternoon  sent  out  by  Brunt 
to  purchase  sa  sheets  of  cartridge  paper ;  he 
brought  them  to  Brunt,  who  carried  them 
into  the  room  where  Adams  says  the  piodama- 
tfoae  were  prepared.  Recollect  also  what 
Adams  tells  you  occurred  upon  that  occasion ; 
thiee  proclamations  were  written  by  Thistle- 
wood,  when  he  became  agitated  and  conM 
write  no  more.  Hall  was  requested  to  assist 
him,  but  refused.  Thistle^raod  then  desired 
another  to  do  so,  who  at  fint  declined,  but  at 
last  did  write  one,  the  contents  of  which  I  will 
not  stoke  to  you,  because  they  are  not  properly 
iir  evidence.  See  then,  how  far  Adams  is 
confirmed,  and  see  still  further  how  he  might 
be  contradicted,  if  his  account  were  not  true. 
My  learned  friends  admit,  that  the  cartridge 
paper  was  purchased  and  taken  into  that  room, 
out  they  contend  that  the  contents  of  the 

Srodamation  rest  on  the  credit  of  Adams  alone. 
f^w  he  is  not  only  confirmed  as  to  the  fact  of 
the  cartridge  paper  being  sent  for,  but  also  as 
to  a  part  having  been  uMd.  Hale  states  that 
there  was  some  cartridge  paper  left  in  the 
room,  but  not  the  whole  he  haa  brought ;  I  do 
not  recollect  that  he  specified  the  quantity. 
Now  let  us  consider  how  he  might  have  been 
oontradioted.  Hall  was  there.  Hall  is  a  pep- 
son  whom  it  was  in  the  power  of  the  prisoners 
at  the  bar  to  produce  before  you.  It  is  said 
Hall  is  an  accomplice,  and  that  by  bringing 
him  forward  as  a  witness,  he  would  have  been 
exposed  to  destruction.  If  he  be  an  ac- 
complice, and  this  fact  took  place,  undoubtedly 
he  would  have  been  placea  in  jeopardy,  bat 
then  my  learned  friends  must  assume  that 
what  Adams  has  sworn  is  true.  Then  un* 
doabtedly  if  Hall  were  produced,  he  must  con- 
firm him  ;  but  their  supposition  is  either  that 
Hall  was  not  there,  or  that  the  proclamations 
were  not  prepared  ;  if  Hall  were  not  there,  he 
might  have  been  examined  to  prove  so ;  if  he 
were  there,  he  might  hate  been  called  to  shew 
that  what  Adams  has  sworn  is  false,  and  that 
tlie  proclamations  he  spooks  of  were  never 
written.  If  Hall  had  been  made  a  vritness, 
and  any  questions  had  been  put  to  him  ^ 
the  counsel  for  the  Crown,  to  implicate  him  in 
the  conspiracy,  my  learned  friends  know  ex- 
tremely well  that  he  might  have  refused  to 
anvwer,  that  he  might  have  said  I  am  not  come 
here  to  criminate  myself,  but  to  prove  certain 
fiicts ;  I  have  a  right  by  the  law  or  England  to 
protect  myself,  and  not  give  evidence  which 
maf  involve  me  in  crime.  Hall  is  not  called, 
bemiae  being  there,  he  most  have  stated,  as 

VOL.  xxxiir. 


A.  D.  ISdK 


11474 


my  learned  iviends  know,  tbat  the  proclama- 
tions wertf  so  prepared  and  written  by  TfaistlO' 
wood.  His  absence,  therefore,  corroborates 
the  testimony  which  has  been  given  to  yon. 

Another  argument  has  been  used  by  the 
counsel  for  the  prisoners;  they  say,  Hall  should 
have  been  called  by  the  Crown ;  but  see  how 
ill  that  observation  squares  with  the  rest ;  they 
state  that  ten  accomplices  would  not  make 
the  proof  stronger;  that  one  accomplice  un- 
connrmed  cannot  be  believed,  and  that  there- 
fore the  case  would  not  be  advanced  by  calling 
ten  such  witnesses,  unless  their  evidence  was 
corroborated  by  unimpeachable  testimony. 
Without  adverting  to  Palin  and  the  other  perw 
sons,  who  also^  aecording  to  my  learned 
friend's  hypothesis,  are  innocent,  it  is  enough 
for  me  to  have  shewn,  that  there  is  one  witness 
whom  it  was  in  their  power  to  have  produced, 
and  that  they  have  not  called  him;  and  I  re- 
peat, the  absence  of  Hall  eonfirms  (if  further 
confirmation  were  necessary)  the  story  told  by 
Adams. 

What  is  the  next  matter  in  which  he  is  sup- 
ported ?  He  tells  you,  that  when  he  got  to 
Cato-street,  Tidd  had  not>  arrived  r  you  will 
remember  some  alarm  was  expressed  in  con- 
sequence of  his  non-appearance.  It  appears 
that  Tidd,  after  Brunt  was  gone,  and  after  the 
rest  of  the  party  had  set  out  from  the  lodgings 
for  Cato-sireet,  called  at  Brunt's  house,  and 
saw  his  wife,  and  she  told  him  there  was  a 
pike-head  and  a  sword  in  the  cupboard,  and 
asked  him  what  was  to  be  done  with  them. 
Tidd  knew  well  how  to  dispose  of  them ;  he 
received  them  from  her,  took  them  into  the 
back  room,  and  left  the  house.  Yon  have  no 
evidence  of  what  was  done  with  them  after- 
wards; but  Adams  has  informed  you,  that 
TidcT  arrived  at  Cato-street  some  time  after 
the  others^  Hale  gives  you  the  reason  why 
Tidd  was  so  late;  he  Was  at  the  lodgings  as 
before  stated  after  his  companions  were  gone{ 
and  Monument  also  (who  is  called  an  aocom« 

flice  by  my  learned  friend)  accounts  for  \U 
will  not  at  present  detain  you  with  the 
events  in  Cato-street,  because  in  a  future  stage 
of  the  observatione  I  shall  be  under  the  neces" 
sity  of  calling  your  attention  to  them ;  but  as  t 
have  mentioned  them,  permit  me  here  to  ob* 
serve,  that  in  my  humble  opinion  it  was  eor-* 
rectly  said  by  my  learned  friend  who  opened 
the  case,  that  if  there  were  no  confirmation  of 
Adams's  testimony,  but  that  which  the  meet" 
ing  and  preparetions  in  Cato-street  afford,  the 
charge  upon  this  indictment  is  irrefregably 
proved,  and  that  you  can  have  lio  doubt  of 
the  plan  of  these  men,  and  the  design  they  had 
conceived. 

There  is  another  witness  who  I  admit  to 
my  learned  friend  was  an  accomplice  in  the 
crime  of  these  men,  but  undoubteol  v  not  to  the 
extent  to  which  Adams  is  proved  to  be  in- 
volved, I  mean  Monmnent.  He  came  late 
into  the  scheme,  and  se^ros  to  have  been- 
kept  in  ignorance  of  the  full  extenrof  it  until 
his  arrival  in  Cato-slreet.    You  observed  iho 

*9 


14751       I  OBORGC  IV. 


Trial  qf  WUUam  Darmkon  and 


[UN 


tnanner  in  Which  that  jwmg  »ui  gave  his 
evideocA ;  and  I  think  if  any  thing  dtpendv 
upon  deneanonr,  you  cannot  fail  to  agiee 
ifith  me,  that  his  deportment  entitles  him  to 
credit;  he  is  home  out  in  every  pari  of  his 
ntorj  in  which  it  was  possible  for  hia   to 
receife  confinnation ;  he  told  you  the  manner 
in  which  be  was  called  upon  at  two  sereral 
times  by  Thistlewood  and  Brunt^  and  after- 
wards by  Brunt  and  Tidd,  and  in  this  he  is 
confirmed  by  his  brother,  on  whom  there  is  no 
imputation  of  being  concerned  in  the  plot. 
The   cTidence   of  Monument  aifecting   the 
prisoner  Tidd  is  most  important.    He  was 
Tuited  by  Brunt  and  Tidd,  on  the  morning  of 
the  22nd  of  February ;  they  endeavoured  to 
prevail  upon  him  to  become  a  party  in  their 
plans,  ana  as  at  that  time  they  hina  not  procured 
the  room  in  Cato-street,  ii  was  proposed  that 
Monument  diould  come  to  Tyburn-turnpike, 
where  he  was  to  meet  the  other  parties  en- 
gaged in  the  conspiracy.    Brunt  asked  Tidd 
whether  it  would  be  safe  to  give  the  counter- 
sign to  Monument ;  Tidd  thought  it  would, 
and  the  word  was  imparted  to  him;    but 
having  before  the  next  day  procured  this  loft 
in  Cato-street,  Brunt  eame  to  Monument,  and 
required  his  attendance  at  an  earlier  hour  than 
he  was  able  to  give  it,  and  in  consequence  of 
that,  desired  him  to  call  on  Tidd^  and  go  with 
him  to  their  place  of  rendesvous.    The  witness 
called  at  Tidd's;  Tidd  armed  himself  with  a 
pistol,  and  then  accompanied  him  to  Cato-street . 
He  tells  you  what  passed  alter  their  arrival,  and 
completely  confirms  Adams  in  that  part  of  his 
account;  he  mentions  the  alarm  which  some 
of  the  party  felt  at  their  numbers  being  inade- 
quate to  their  olnect;  that  that  alarm  was 
quieted  by  the  address  of  Thistlewood,  who 
told  them  they  were  too  fer  embarked   to 
recede,  that  their  force  was  sufficient,  that 
they  had  twenty-five  men  to  oppose  only 
fourteen  or  sixteen  unarmed  servants  of  lord 
Harrowby. 

There  is  a  third  witness,  moreover,  who  is 
neither  an  accomplice,  nor  one  against  whose 
character  the  least  attack  has  been  attempt- 
ed. I  allude  to  Hiden;  and  if  all  the  evi- 
dence given  by  Adams  were  blotted  out 
from  Uie  notes  of  his  lordship,  I  submit, 
that  Hiden's  testimony,  uncontoadicted  and 
unimpeaehed  as  it  is,  coupled  with  the  fects 
which  afterwards  occurred  in  Cato-street,  proves 
the  treason  charged  upon  this  indictment. 
First  consider  the  previous  character  of  this 
man ;  next  look  to  his  conduct  on  this  occasion ; 
and  lastly,  weigh  the  evidence  he  has  given, 
and  how  it  has  been  borne  out  by  the  subse- 
quent transactions  in  the  case.  Against  his 
previous  character  there  is  not  the  slightest 
imputation;  it  has  been  attempted  indeed  to 
be  proved,  that  he  had  not  only  attended 
radical  meetings,  but  had  invited  Bennett  to 
attend  also.  He  admits,  that  he  was  present 
at  two  meetings  of  a  society  called  the  Shoe- 
maker's club,  but  held  for  political  purposes ; 
and,  unless  he  had  attends  those  meetings. 


Wilson  most  piobably  would  net  hive  tkoQgH 

he  was  a  person  to  be  tnisted.   He  coefcim 

too,  that  he  did  ask  Bennett  to  sceonpay 

him;  and  all  that  Bennett  hu  ststed tint  oi 

by  any  possibility  afleet  Hidea  is,  tfait  k 

asked  him  to  go  to  a  ladieal  mseting,  nd 

Hi^n  does  not  recollect  that  the  aprenuB 

radicsl  was  used  by  him ;  you  hare,  thenfaR, 

every  right  to  believe,  from  his  fomerind 

still   more  so  from  his  subsequent  coodoeii 

that  he  is  an  honest  man,  on  whose  taHOBBtj 

you  can    place  the  utmost  reliance.  Whit 

interest  had  he  to  make  any  disdosme  Is  Ind 

Harrowby  on  the  22nd  of  Febiuaiy  ?  My  km- 

ed  friend  says,  he  cannot  butthiBk  theieiiMne 

expectation  of  remuneration  operatiBgipci 

the  mind  of  Hiden,  some  hope  of  re«sidi»be 

bestowed  on  him  by  those  whose  lives  he  Isi 

saved,  for  the  testimony  he  has  given  vpop  thi 

trial.    Did  any  suck  motive  intoencthiBii 

the  time  when  he  made  dke  commeniiuioi  H 

lord  Harrowby  f  What  possible  ioterestosdi 

he  have  in  telling  that  which  wst  sntne! 

He  must  have  been  a  prophet  indeed  if  Wibn 

never  imparted   to  hm    the  plot  is  agilS' 

tion.    How  was  he  to  know  aaydiinftfi 

conspiracy  to  destroy  the  ministen  of  theki^. 

Of  hand-grenades,    or   fire-balls,  or  puliei 

sutioned  in  different  parts  of  the  tm  i* 

seize  the  cannon  ?     Of  the  inteotioa  ti  kt 

houses,  to  take  the  Mansion-house,  tad  o- 

tablish  a  provisional  govemmeot  theitF  fit 

could  only  know  these  things  fiem  sone  ces* 

spirator  deep  in  the  plot,,  and  he  tells  ywtla| 

conspirator  was  Wilson.    When  it  ii  ufM 

before  you,  that  there  is  no  vlterior  okjcrt 

of  the  plot  proved  but  by  the  lestonooy* 

Adams,  do  my  learned  friends  ihink,  tkA 

Hideo's  evidence  has  been  erased  fn'T'f 

recollection  ?    If  it  be  not,  what  gwMid  » 

there  to  impeach  it  ?    Do  not  the  fcclsika 

occurred  bear  him  out?    In  Hides,  thwjW 

jrou  have  a  vritness    neither  impeadied  m 

impeachable,   and  upon  whose  '^"^ 

submit  to  you,  you  may  safely  rely.  1"^ 

with  his  testimony  before  you,  lei  oeceU]^ 

attention  to  the  occurrences  that  took  pbtt> 

Cato-street,  and  to  the  preparatioos  ii*^ 

there,  which   are  supposed  by  siy  k**^ 

friends,  to  have  been  merely  intended  kr  oc 

assassination  of  his  majesty's  miMSie*J|^ 

this  part  of  the  case,  I  will  take  the  opportj^ 

of  examining  the  reasoning  of  one  of  iiy  1^ 

ed  friends   upon  a  supposed  eonspincy  J^ 

an    inferior    nature,   a  c<>«*'P'"*yJ%^ 

hen-roosts,  and  commit  burglary,  '^v^ 

aocompliee  a|>poasing  as  a  witness  end  m 

upon  nis*  associates  the  whole  ^"""^i^ 

pare  such  a  case  with  the  present.  Vy  P^ 

position  is,  that  the  plan  was,  not  <>^jj^ 

derhb  majesty's  ministers,  hot  »«®?*|*t! 

the  government ;  the  supposition  on  the  mbp 

side  is,  that  the  sole  object  of  the  plot «»  "" 

assassination.  ^ 

To  return  to  my  learned  friend's  ^'^jj^ 
pose,  says  he,  the  accomplice  to  '^  ?Lj 
be  connimed  in   many  fiicts  whidi  *•*" 


i4Tn 


RiiAari  Tidd/mr  High  Trtaton. 


A.  D.  18S0. 


1147'8 


•  4hai  the  Intention  of  the  accated  wn  nndoubt- 
•edly  to  Tob  the  hen-toosts,  bat  that  there  was  no 

.  ^oorroboiatiDg  testimony  to  support  him  in  his 

•  assertion  that  burglary  was  also  meditated ; 
•coald  youy  he  asks,  as  a  jury,  find  the  prisoners 
guilty  of  a  conspiracy  to  commit  a  burglary  ? 
•certainly  not*  1  freely  admit  it  to  my  Imned 
Iriend ;  but  let  me  in  return  put  this  question 
to  him,  and  let  us  see  how  he  will  deal  with 
it ;  if  in  addition  to  preparations  which  were 
necessary  to  accomplish  the  first  purpose  of 
•robbing  hen-roostSy  there  were  found  crow 
bars,  f>icklock  keys,  matches,  phosphorus,  and 
'Other  implements,  applicable  only  to  house- 
breaking,  what  would  my  learned  friend  say 
4o  this  confirmation  of  the  accomplices  account? 

•  Would  he  then  deny  that  there  was  evidence 
to  show  that  the  prisoners  were  guilty  of  the 
^greater  ofience? 

What  were  the  preparations  made  by  these 
conspirators  ?  were  they  such  as  were  adap- 
ted to  the  sole  purpose  of  assassinating  his 

•  majesty's  ministers,  or  were  they  of  a 
nature  calculated  to  effect  more  estensive 
destmetion  ?  were  fire-balls,  were  pikes 
necessary?  but,  above  aH,  were  the  twelve 
hundred  rounds  of  ball  found  at  Tidd*s  and 
<the  /cartridges  for  loading  cannon,  inteoded  to 
•be  used  against  my  lord  Harrowby*s  house,  or 
his  miyesty's  ministers  assembled  there  P  For 
what  then  was  all  this  ammunition  provided 
•by  these  men?  You  find  that  their  preparations 
^were  not  only  equal  to  the  perpetration  of 

,  •the  deed,  which  my  learned  friends  suppose  to 
be  the  whole  plot,  but  fully  adequate  to  the 
^completion  of  those  plans  which  Adams  tells 
you  they  had  in  contemplation. 

What  was  the  object  of  assassinating  his 
'majesty's  ministers?  Had  these  prisoners 
^nd  .their  associates  conceived  any  particular 
feelings  of  revenge  against  the  persons  of  those 
noblemen  and  gentlemen  who  compose  the 
cabinet?  Was  private  enmity  the  motive 
which,  compelled  them  to  the  commission  of 
the  bloody  act  ?  Or  was  not  rather  the  blow 
•aimed  against  these  unoffending  victims  be- 
-cause  they  filled  the  ostensible  characters  of 
ministers  of  the  Crown,  and  directed  the  go- 
vernment of  the  country  ?  It  is  beyond  human 
credulity  to  believe  that  this  plot  was  intended 
to  stop  at  the  assassination  of  the  illustrious 
quests  of  lord  Uarrowby ;  no  reason  can  be 
assigned  which  could  have  operated  upon  the 
minds  of  these  men  to  induce  them  to  destroy 
at  one  moment  fifteen  individuals  personally 
unknown  probably  to  many  of  their  murderers, 
unless  you  believe  they  had  in  view  other  and 
to  them  momentous  objects,  to  the  attainment 
of  which  the  destruction  of  the  advisers  of  the 
king  was,  in  their  wild  and  heated  imaginations, 
considered  a  first  and  necessary  step.  You  re- 
.nsember  they  were  found  armed.  Yes,  say  my 
ieamed  friends,  they  were  armed,  but  the  pro- 
ceedings at  Manchester  had  compelled  them 
40  protect  themselves.  But  were  these  pikes 
procured  in  consequence  of  the  Manchester 
transactions?    Were  the  cartridges  provided 


for  their  pvotection  when  thejr  Held  their 
meetings?  It  is  only  by  the  desperate  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case  that  my  learned  fiiends 
are  obliged  to  have  recourse  to  such  an  hy* 
pothesis;  once  believe  the  testimony  given 
by  Adams,  and  confirmed  by  Hiden,  and 
the  whole  difficulty  must  vanish  from  your 
minds. 

Why  did  they  meet  in  an  obscure  room  in 
Cato-street?  why  was  that  place  chosen?  It 
vras  doubtless  selected  because  it  was  a  con- 
venient spot  to  proceed  (rem  to  lord  Harrow<« 
by's  house.  Were  no  other  parties  assembled 
on  that  night?  My  learned  friends  say  there 
is  no  evidence  of  any  attack  at  Gray's-inn«lane 
or  the  Artillery-ground.  It  is  true  there  is 
not;  and  for  this  plain  reason,  the  parties  in« 
tended  for  the  execution  of  those  duties,  were 
of  course  directed  to  wait  •till  the  blow  was 
first  struck  in  Grosvenor-square :  bnt,  thou^ 
no  movement  was  made,  you  have  it  in  evi- 
dence, from  Hale,  that  persons  did  assemble 
who  were  not  destined  to  go  to  Cato-street ;  I 
allude  to  Potter  and  his  companions,  to  a  man 
of  the  name  of  Palin  who  was  to  head  some 
incendiaries  in  the  Borough,  and  to  another 
band  that  has  been  mentioned,  and  which 
clearly  was  not  meant  for  the  seixure  of  the 
cannon  in  Gray's-inn-lane,  as  that  task  was 
assigned  to  Thisdewood  and  his  followers, 
after  they  had  perpetrated  the  bloody  deed  at 
lord  Harrowby^s.  When  the  meeting  had  left 
Brunt's,  it  was  thought  that  the  room  would  be 
vranted  for  Palin's  men ;  but  it  was  afterwards 
determined  to  send  them  to  the  White  Hart» 
and  directions  were  given  to  Hale  to  do  so* 
Hale  tells  you,  that  three  persons  came  to  his 
master's  house,  who  were  strangers,  and  that 
he  desired  them  in  consequence  of  the  order  he 
had  received,  to  go  to  the  White  Hart,  and 
they  not  knowing  the  way,  he  accompanied 
them.  Potter  afterwards  called  with  others, 
to  whom  Hale  gave  similar  instructions.  Here 
you  have  the  most  direct  evidence  that  many 
others  were  engaged  in  the  plot  of  that  night; 
recollect,  too,  Uie  observation  of  Thistlewood, 
when  fear  was  expressed  of  success ;  he  said 
that  they  need  not  be  apprehensive,  for  that 
there  were  numbers  ready  to  join  them,  who 
waited  only  for  some  decisive  blow  to  be 
struck.  Need  I  refer  you  to  the  language  of 
Thistlewood  to  Monument:  '^ Great  eventf 
are  at  hand ;  people  are  every  where  anxious 
for  a  change ;  I  have  been  promised  support 
by  numbers  who  have  deceived  me ;  but  now 
I  have  got  men  who  vrill  stand  by  me."  The 
only  answer  given  to  this  by  my  learned 
friends  is,  that  the  plot  is  incredible ;  that  it 
was  impossible  it  could  be  carried  into  execii^ 
tion,  and  that  you  are  on  that  account  to  dis- 
miss it  from  your  notice.  You  are  not  to  con- 
sider whether  or  not  it  coald  have  been  effected 
by  the  means  these  conspirators  possessed. 
The  only  question  for  you  to  decioe  is,  did 
they  harbour  in  their  minds  the  desiffn  imputed 
to  them.  If  they  did  harbour  that  design,  and 
acted  in  furthenuu^  of  it,  then  are  they  guilty, 


1470] 


1  QC(»tfiE  IV. 


Trui  of  WUUmn  Dtmdtt*  mid 


[1480 


'however  mi\d  and  ^Monary  it  nuqr  h»re  been 
and  however  inadequate  their  means  to  its 
execution. 

Look  at  their  fiondaet  in  Cato^straet,  when 
they  were  apprehended;  if  they  bad  aasemUed 
for  an  innocent  purpose^  why  was  the  desperate 
resistanee  raade  to  the  officers?  uhI  here  I 
cannot  help  making  an  observation  upon  the 
defence  made  to  yon  by  one  of  the  prisoners 
at  the  Jmx ;  it  is  painful  to  me  4o  do  so,  but 
justice  absolutely  requires  it.  Davidson  has 
^  -SKftempted  to  make  you  believe  that  he  was 
not  in  the  stable  at  Cato-street ;  that  he  was 
accidentally  in  the  street  in  its  neighbourhood 
iipon  that  evening ;  and  that  he  was  by  mere 
•chance  in  possession  of  the  carbine  acnd  swoid 
vrhich  were  found  upon  him.  But  how  does 
the  fact  stand  ?  The  officen  tell  you,  that  on 
4h€ir  entering  the  stable,  they  saw  a  man  of 
colour,  .whom  they  believed  to  have  been 
-Davidson ;  that  he  was  accoutred,  tint  he  had 
'on  crots-b^ts,  and  a  sword  by  his  side,  and 
that  be  was  walking  up  and  down  as  a  sentry. 
It  was  proved  by  Hiden  that  he  saw  him  there ; 
and  Aoams  swears  that  Davidson  was  there, 
ftlthongfa  he  did  not  obseme  his  dress,  David- 
eon  being  engaged  vrith  some  otheni  in  pre- 
^>arinff  the  pikes.  Monday,  on  the  evening  of 
that  day,  noticed  him  gomg  into  the  stable, 
imd  on  bis  stooping  down,  perceived  under  his 
coat  pistols  and  a  long  sword ;  he  saw  him 
light  a  candle  at  an  adjoining  house,  and  carry 
it  into  the  stable ;  but  the  proof  does  not  stop 
there,  be  is  actually  pursued  from  the  stable; 
he  is  observed  to  discharge  the  carbine,  hie 
makes  a  cnt  at  his  ponuer,  and  is  at  last  taken 
with  those  belts  upon  him,  and  with  the  sword 
and  carbine  in  his  band.    It  would  be  sup- 

n'ng  you  did  not  attend  to  the  evidence,  if 
sre  to  enlarge  upon  this  topic.  I  have  felt 
these  remarks  necessary,  because  he  has  in  the 
defence  endeavoured  to  make  you  believe  that 
he  was  no  party  to  this  plot,  and  that  he  was  only 
tliere  by  accident.  ISfly  learned  friend,  finding 
that  Davidson  had  been  clearly  proved  to  have 
been  present  at  other  times,  at  the  meetings 
and  consultations,  and  to  have  been  active 
throughout  the  oonsfHracy,  did  not  think  it 
necessary  to  make  any  observations  to  you  on 
that  part  of  the  case  to  which  the  prisoMt  has 
thus  particularly  addressed  himseli. 

Tidd  too  was  ibond  in  arms,  and  made  a 
desperate  resistance;  he  levelled  lus  pistol  at 
lieutenant  Fitsclarcnce  on  his  aniviJ  at  the 
bead  of  his  soldiers;  a  ifentleman  who  had 
offered  him  no  personal  v^ence;  and  but  for 
the  interposition  of  that  galUpt  man  Legg,  who 
stepped  in  to  the  protection  of  his  officer,  it  is 
not  at  all  unlikely  that  lieutenant  Fitadarenoe 
might  have  lost  his  life,  as  the  unlbitonaie 
Smithers  did  in  an  eaxlii^  part  of  th^  traoaae-* 
tion. 

I  have  not  troubled  you  <with  ikke  {nrticidar 
facts  affecting  each  of  the  prisoners,  for  I  am 
sure,  watching  the  proof  as  you  have,  yga roust 
lia?e  seen  that  they  were  both  active  through- 
jm  Ibe  whole  of  Om  conspiracy.    Tidd  was 


present  at  ^leir  nsetings;  was  chui 
more  than  one  ocoanon ;  he  approved  of  Aor 
aehones ;  smd  though  in  Cato^fltreethsMi' 
ed  whether  they  were  sufficiently  noBeroiB  a 
attack  lord  Harrowby's  house,  sgaimttbepfai 
itself  he  felt  no  abhorrence,  his  only  fs^wtt^ 
their  means-were  not  equl  to  cairying  it  isto 
execution ;  when  his  fears  were  (foioted  bf  ik 
address  of  Thistlewood,  all  he  objeolioBi  voe 
removed.  The  only  real  questioo  is,  te 
which  is  raised  by  my  learned  finend  osAe 
other  side,  as  to  ^e  intention  attiibttid40dK 
prisoners  by  this  indictment.  I  sobniit  te  it 
is  proved  not  only  by  the  testimony  of  Adai^ 
but  by  Monument  and  Hideo,  and  still  aae 
by  the  feces  thems^ves  which  oceoned Mfte 
fetal  evening  of  the  t9td  of  Febmsiy,  bf  Ai 
preparations  in  Cato^ttceet,  and  by  the  wm^ 
nition  found  the  next  morning  at  Tidd^  uA 
at  finint*s. 

If  you  entertain  no  doubt  of  this,  yoor  dal|r 
points  out  cmly  one  fine  of  condoct,  and  fa 
are  bound,  however  painlul  it  may  be,  lopn- 
nounce  a  verdict  of  guilty  against  tiese  mk' 
tunate  men.  It  has  been  siud,  by  ooe^tf  ay 
.learned  friends,  that  he  laments  tbst  Iks  flit 
has  been  made  the  eubject  of  so  anicb  ii^ 
tigation ;  he  thinks,  or  affects  to  thiak,  tbt  i 
was  hardly  worthy  the  attentiea  of twfj 
constituted  as  this  is.  That  it  bsi  otospM 
so  much  of  die  attention  of  voorMlfis  m 
others,  is  owing  to  the  lenity  of  the  la«)  mi 
has  enabled  the  prisoners  to  sever  u  te 
challenges,  each  of  them  having  ikepinhis 
of  objecting  to  a  certain  number  of  jof^ .  j| 
tlttrefoie  bacttne  indispensable,  thsttfawtmi 
should  proceed  separately;  and  to  liii> g| 
eumstance  alone  is  (it  owing,  that  thisff9» 
has  for  so  long  a  tinse  occupied  the  ^^^'^ 
of  the  Court  But  the  time  eooffOMdiB  m 
investigation  ought  not,  and  I  am  ssR  «>» 
not,  operate  upon  your  minds,  or  ^^^ 
verdict  you  are  lo  pronounce.  Xhoogb  m  h 
the  fourth  trial,  yet,  if  the  facts  P»^J51j 
they  have  been  stated  to  be  by  ^Jf^ 
counsel  for  the  accused,  identically  «^*^ 
as  those  proved  on  the  former  ocmsiOB^  *| 
only  question  in  this  and  each  '^^^^^PJ^ 
will  be,  whether  the  prisoners  who  "l^.  ?! 
bar  for  their  ddiverance  are  i>"P^^*^ 
guilt  of  this  conspiracy.  Howsfg  ^^J"^ 
regret  the  repetition  ^  these  iayertig*''^ 
is  absolutely  necessary  for  the  sake  of  f^^ 
Justice  that  they  should  take  place.       ^^ 

With  respect  to  the  conseaueDGCS  Bw** 
follow  these  trials,  and  to  which  •*"^,]l 
been  made,  they  ought  not  to  ha»e,  -Pf* 
satisfied  will  not  have  wiy  »*»«^jl^ 
on  your  verdict.  You  are  now  to  dacw  ^ 
the  fate  of  the  two  individnals  ^|^f?^ 
will  dismiss  from  your  minds  •^\_'f*j5 
that  any  persons  have  been  ^^Jzi^ 
knowledge  that  any  others  reasia  ^t1 
The  only  question  you  have  to  ssk^«»^ 
is,  whether  the  evidence  ^'•■.'■j'j^ 
that  the  prisoners  are  guilty.  ^^^^^ 
sure  yon  will  fed  ao  difficulty  or  hsaW"' 


1481> 


likhard  Tiddjur  High  Tnaun. 


A.  D.  18Sa 


I148!i 


Ike  dotf  yon  owe  to  youndvealtlie  third,  ifhich   cbarges   '^tbat  they  eoin- 


•nd  the  public,  in  immooneiiig  thct  verdict 
whioh  akm  can  eatisfy  the  justice  of  the  case. 

SUMMJNO-UP. 

Mr.  Bmrm  Gamw.---Geatleinen  of  die 
Juty  ;  -The  two  prisonen  at  vour  bar  are 
ttiraif^ed  before  you  for  that  highest  and  most 
eompUcaled  crime  which  the  commumtv  in 
any  country  can  possibly  tiave  to  animadvert 
vpOD,  the  crime  of  High  Treason,  involving  in 
its  probable  consequences  the  crimes  of  mur- 
der, the  destruction  of  propertv,  and  every 
other  consequence  i^iieh  can  follow  from  the 
'perpetration  of  other  single  crimes  committed 
by  other  oiehders.  Yon  have  been  kept  from 
your  various  abodes  and  occupations  f^r  a 
considerable  time  past,  in  order  to  engage  in 
the  investigation  of  the  tikis  which  have 
arisen  upon  the  present  indictment,  a  task 
•devolving  upon  you  as  members  of  ^e  com- 
munity, painful  in  its  execution,  and  attended 
'probably  with  circumstances  of  a  domestic 
nature  not  agreeable  to  you,  but  which  you 
win  not  have  any  hesitation  in  performing 
according  to  Uie  best  of  your  honest  jud^ent, 
whatever  those  consequences  may  be,  m  the 
persustton,  I  am  satisfied,  that  whatever  may 
DC  the  result  of  the  present  or  any  •o^er  trial 
entered  into  upon  this  occasion,  it  was  indb- 
pensaUy  necessary  that  these  cases  should  be 
brought  before  the  tribunals  of  the  country, 
in  onier  that  the  guilt  or  innocence  of  the 
persons  accused  *might  be  •ascertained,  and  if 
guilty,  up  to  what  extent  the  guilt  had  arisen. 

The  chai*ge  ogainst  the  prisoners  is  that  of 
lii|^  (reason,  stated  in  four  several  counts  of 
4his  indictment.  One  of  those  counts  charges 
the  actual  levying  of  war  against  his  majesty, 
another,  a  conspiracy  for  Jhe  purpose  of  de- 
priving his  majeatv  of  life,  and  if  you  are  satis- 
fied that  the  evidence  which  has  been  laid 
before  you  is  in  its  material  and  substantial 
parts  correct,  if  it  brings  home  a  satisfactory 
conviction  to  your  minds,  so  that  when  you 
retire  to  deliberate  on  your  verdict,  vou  should 
say,  I  cannot  as  an  honest  man  hesitate  or 
doubt  upon  it,  then  it  is  my  duty  to  tell  you, 
that  in  point  of  law  the  crime  of  high  treason 
is  cleariy  and  unquestionably  established.  I 
should  have  been  prepared  on  the  first  trial  to 
have  told  you  so,  in  the  language  and  on  the 
authority  of  the  greatest  names  that  have 
adorned  the  legal  jurisdiction  of  our  country. 
Having  been  prevented  by  circumstances  of  a 
domestic  nature  from  attending  at  the  very 
commencement  of  these  proceedings,  I  was 
deprived  of  the  advantage  of  hearing  the  same 
thing  better  en>re8sed  by  the  tot  md  highest 
authorities  in  Westminstei^htdl. 

I  now  call  your  attention  to  two  other 
counts  to  which,  if  you  believe  the  evidence 
to  be  true,  you  will  probably  be  of  opinion 
that  it  more  particulaity  applies.  I  mean  the 
first,  which  charges  tlutt  *'  the  prisoners  with 
other  persons  did  compass,  imagine,  invent, 
device  and  intend  to  depose  the  king ;"  and 


passed,  imagined,  invented,  devised,  and  in- 
tended to  lei7  war  against  the  king,  in  order 
5  force  and  constraint  to  compel  him  to 
ange  his  measures.''  The  indictment,  as 
the  law  of  high  treason  requires,  states  thA 
the  purposes  charged  in  these  several  counts 
of  tne  indictment  are  established  by  certain 
overt  acts,  eleven  in  number^conspiring  to 
devise  plans  to  subvert  the  constitution ;  con- 
spiring to  lev^  war,  and  subvert  the  constitu- 
tion ;  conspiring  to  murder  divers  of  the  privy 
council ;  providing  arms  to  murder  divers  of 
the  privy  council ;  providing  arms  and  ammu- 
nition to  levy  war,  and  subvert  the  constitn- 
tion ;  conspiring  to  bum  houses  and  barracks, 
and  to  provide  combustibles  for  that  purpose ; 
preparing  addresses  to  the  king's  subjects, 
-oontaining  incitements  t<ythe  king's  subjects 
to  assist  in  levying  war  and  subverting  the 
constitution,  and  containing  particularly  the 
address  stated  in  one  of  those  overt  acts  ad« 
dressed  to  the  people,  stating  that  their  tyrants 
were  destroyed,  and  that  the  friends  of  liberty 
were  invited  to  come  forward,  as  the  pro- 
visional govemment  was  then  sitting — and  if 
these  or  any  of  these  overt  acts  shall  have  been 
provably  made  out  to  your  satisfaction— I  use 
now  Ihe  language  of  m  law — that  is,  in  other 
words,  shall  to  your  plain  common  sense  and 
understanding,  as  you  exercise  it  in  the  ordi- 
nary transactions  of  life,  have  been  brouj(ht 
home  to  your  conviction  by  evidence  on  which 
you  cannot  doubt,  in  that  case  it  is  your  duty 
to  pronounce  the  prisoners  ffuilty ;  but  if  you 
ontertain  any  serious  satisfactory  doubts  of 
the  truth  of  the  evidence,  or  if  it  does  not 
amount  to  proof  of  the  feets  charged  in  the 
indicttnent,  you  will  do  that  which  will  be 
more  agreeable  to  you,  you  will  pronounce 
them  not  guilty. 

Tlie  evidence  has  occupied  a  great  number 
of  hours ;  I  am  prepared  to  state  it  to  you 
vei%atim,  from  the  beginning  to  the  end,  and 
with  your  permission,  knowing  you  will  fe^ 
no  time  can  be  too  much  that  is  occupied  in 
such  a  detail,  I  will  proceed  to  read  it  to  you ; 
it  win  occupy  much  of  your  time,  but  you 
have  given  me  a  pledge  thai  yon  will  not  re- 
gard the  time,  for  your  attention  has  been 
unremitting  from  the  time  you  entered  that 
box. 

In  order  to  make  out  the  facts  of  high 
treason,  the  first  witness  called  before  you  is 
a  witness  of  the  name  of  Robert  Adams.  It 
may  not  be  necessary,  by  way  of  information, 
for  you  have  heard  it  uom  various  quarters, 
but  it  may  be  proper  to  state,  that  he  stands 
in  the  situation  of  an  accomplice.  Severe 
animadversions  liave  been  made  upon  him. 
It  lias  been  said,  that  he  is  not  only  a  traitor 
to  his  kine,  uofkithftd  to  his  friend,  faithless 
to  those  who  have  reposed  .in  him  their  guilty 
secrets,  but  an  apostate  from  his  Ood,  lostus 
sight  of  every  interest  which  can  be  attained 
here  or  liereafler.  For  the  purposes  of  the 
present  inquiry,  it  would  be  enough  to  state 


1483J        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Triai  of  IVilUam^Davidsott  and 


11484 


(not  that;  I  ceosore  those  obsenratioiiSy  those 
who  made  them  did  well  to  impress  your  miod 
with  his  want  of  credit,  hut  it  is  not  necessary 
to  go  higher  to  the  unsupported  testimony  of 
any  man,  than  to  state)  that  he  admits  himself 
to  be  a  party  to  the  treason  which  he  imputes 
to  others ;  so  it  is  in  Ihe  case  of  murder,  and 
yet  the  accomplice  of  the  murderer  is  heard 
every  day,  and  verdicts  are  pronounced  upon 
the  testimony  of  the  accomplice  of  die  mur- 
derer, on  his  sole  confession,  if  the  testimony 
of  an  accomplice  so  deep  in  the  guilt  himself, 
receives  such  confirmatiOB  as  to  induce  the 
jury  to  believe  that  his  story  is  not  the  inven- 
tion of  fiction,  but  the  narration  of  truth;  and 
this  is  to  be  collected  by  the  fact  of  his  being 
confirmed  or  not  confirmed  in  his  narration ; 
it  may  not  be  unfit  to  observe  to  you  here, 
that  the  confirmation  to  be  derived  to  an  ac- 
complice, is  not  a  repetition  by  others  of  the 
whole  story  of  the  accomplice,  and  a  confirm- 
ation of  every  part  of  it,  that  would  be  either 
impossible  or  unnecessary  and  absurd ;  impos- 
sible, as  in  the  case  of  a  murder  committed, 
where  probably  there  are  no  persons  present 
but  the  deceased,  the  murderer,  and  his  asso- 
ciate in  guilt ;  and  therefore  you  are  to  look 
to  the  circumstances,  to  see  whether  there  are 
such  a  number  of  important  &cts  confirmed  as 
to  give  you  reason  to  be  persuaded  that  the 
main  body  of  the  story  is  correct;  I  state  this 
not  on  any  authority  of  mine,  but  on  the 
authority  of  two  of  the  most  humane  and 
learned  and  excellent  judges,  that  have  adorned 
our  bench,  within  the  memory  of  man  now 
living ;  I  allude  to  the  prosecutions  at  York, 
of  Swallow  and  others,  where  the  late  lord 
chief  baron  Thomson  and  that  most  humane 
and  excellent  man  Mr.  Justice  Le  Blanc  pre^ 
sided,  the  first  of  whom  was  called  upon  to 
state  the  law,  which  he  laid  down  most  cor- 
rectly.— ^  I  do  not  mean  then  for  the  first 
time,  it  was  always  the  unquestioned  law,  and 
has  been  acted  upon  in  innumerable  instances. 
Upon  the  occasion  to  which  I  allude  it  was 
explained  to  the  satisfaction  of  every  one ;  you 
are,  each  of  you,  to  ask  yourselves  this  ques- 
tion— ^now  that  I  have  heard  the  accomplice, 
and  have  heard  other  circumstances  whicn  are 
said  to  confirm  the  story  he  has  told,  does  he 
appear  to  me  to  be  so  confirmed  by  unim- 
peachable evidence  as  to  some  of  the  persons 
affected  by  his  testimony,  or  with  respect  to 
some  of  thQ  facts  stated  by  him,  as  to  afford 
me  good  ground  to  believe  that  he  also  speaks 
truly  with  regard  to  other  prisoners  or  other 
facts,  with  regard  to  which  there  may  be  no 
confirmation?  Do  I,  upon  the  whole,  feel 
convinced  in  my  conscience,  that  his  evidence 
is  true,  and  such  as  I  may  safely  act  upon  ? 
With  this  key  and  with  that  view,  you  will 
attend  to  the  testimony  of  Adams,  with  which 
I  will  proceed.  • 

He  states,  that  he  comes  here  in  custody ; 

*  See  the  case  of  Swallow  and  others,  10 
How.  Mod.  St.  Tr.  980. 


that  before  he  was  io  that  custody,  ke  M 
at  No.  4,  Hole-in'the-wall-psssage,  BrookV 
market ;   that  he  was  fonaeriy  in  the  royal 
regiment  of  horse-guards,  aad  left  the  imy 
ab^t  eighteen  years  ago ;  be  nys,  ^  I  fiA 
knew  a  person  of  the  name  of  Bniot,**  nhoii 
one  of  the  prisoners  included  in  this  iiidictiMBt, 
**  in  the  y^  1816,  at  Camhrsrr,  ia  Fiasce;  I 
then  knew  him  by  the  name  of  Thoms  Monos; 
the  head-quarters  of  the  army  wen  it  M 
time  at  Cambray,  and  I  was  with  the  mi 
carrying  on  my  trade  of  a  shoeniaker;''  thii 
occasions  the  acquaintance  and  intimacy  vUck 
led,  as  he  sutes  to  you,  to  the  commsniaiioi 
I  am  now  about  to  state;  he  says,  *<eu1f  ii 
the  present  year,  I  called  at  Bmnt's  lodpp 
in  Fox-court,  Gray  Vinn-lane,  be  wss  at  te 
tim^  carrying  on  his  business  of  a  boot-doiei 
on  the  12th  of  January  he  introduced  ne  tt 
Mr.  Thistlewood,  in   Stanhope^treet;  (iioie 
were  the  lodgings  of  Thistlewood;  logs  in 
with  us ;  on  our  entering,  Bront  said  toTliisd»' 
wood,  this  is  the  man  I  was  speaking  to  yoi 
about ;"  referring  to  some  former  confeaaiioo 
Brunt  had  had  with  him,  about  soDennk 
was  to  bring; "  Thistlewood  said, 'yoobeloDgA 
did  you  not,  to  the  life-guards!'  IioUUb 
no,  I  belonged  formeriy  to  ihe  Oxford  Bha; 
he  said,  *  I  presume  youareasoodsoldiciiad 
can  handle  your  sword  well  r   I  told  binj 
once  was  a  good  soldier,  but  I  had  oot  w 
occasion  to  use  the  swerd  or  any  wewoo  nr 
a  considerable  number  of  yean  past,  t  owid 
use  a  sword  once,  and  should  beablstooe 
my  sword  again  in  my  own  defeaoe.  TtoUe- 
wood  then  turned  the  discourse,  and  begin  to 
speak  on  the  subject  of  the  abop4eepea « 
London,  particularly  sayinsr  they  were  a  tela 
aristocrats  all  together,  and  that  they  veie  w 
working  under  one  system  of  goferoncnt^jw 
he  should  glory  to  see  the  day  when  ill^ 
shops  should  be  shut  up  and  well  phDdoid! 
then  he  says,  "  Thistlewood  turned  w  *»• 
course  upon  Mr.  Hunt,  saying,  Mr.  Hunt  ^ 
a  cowara,  that  he  was  no  friend  to  the  people 
that  he  had  no  doubt,  could  he  get  into  wW 
hall  and  overlook  the  government  book^  * 
should  there  find  the  name  <t  Mr.  Hant,  ait 
spy  to  government;"  he  next  turned  tofl*j 
course  upon  Mr.  Cobbett,  and  said,  ''tteibe 
did  not  consider  Mr.  Cobbett,  with  aj  » 
writings,  as  any  friend  to  the  people, a»™J 
he  had  no  doubt,  if  he  could  getasghi" 
those  books,  he  should  find  Mr.  CobbeUsuse 
inscribed  with  Mr.  Hunt's,  as  one  of  theip* 
to  government;   then  Brunt  alluded  to  two 
men  that  he  had  to  call  upon  in  Caxmj^ 
ket,  and  asked  Thistlewood  if  hewooidttke 
a  walk  to  see  the  men ;  he  refused  ^  8^  ^ 
ing,  he  had  somewhere  to  call ;  ^"^^^  i?! 
the  room,  Brunt  told  Thisdewood  of  a  »w 
for  a  blunderbuss  with  a  brass  barrel,  «* 
have  since  heard  some  conversation  «^J^ 
intention  to  raffle  for  a  brass-barrelled  WniwJ 
buss ;  "  Brunt  asked  Thistlewood  if  he  ^«^ 
be  there ;  to  the  best  of  my  re<»^«*^|!2;u, 
said  he  would,  I  am  not  quite  certain  wW" 


1485] 


Rkhard  Tiddfor  High  Treason. 


A.  O.  1820. 


LI  486 


Mr.  Thisdewood  said  he  woald  or  would  not 
go,  bat  we  all  left  the  room  together ;  Brunt 
told  roe  that  there  was  a  plan  drawn  up,  and 
be  had.  no  doubt,  if  I  would  consent  to  join 
in  it,  it  would  meet  with  my  approbation ;  he 
said  the  plan  was,  to  assassinate  the  ministers, 
the  first  time  they  met  together  to  dine ;  he 
said,  we  have  information  where  they  keep 
their  money ;  the  thieves  have  three  million  in 
hard  money;  after  we  have  done  this,  we 
intend  to  go  to  that  place  and  plunder  it ;''  he 
says,  this  was  before  they  arrived  at  Thistle- 
wood's  lodgings. 

Then  he  says,  "  sometime  after  this  I  was 
conlined  for  debt   in    the  Whitecross-street 
prison,  and  remained  there  until  Sunday  the 
30th  duy  of  January,  that  was  the  day  after 
his  majesty's  death.  On  the  next  dtiy,  Monday, 
I  saw  the  prisoner,  Brunt,  at  his  lodgings  m 
Fox-court ;  Brunt  lived  in  the  two-pair  of  stairs 
front  roomy  and  there  was  a  meeting  in  a  back 
room  on  the  same  floor.    Brunt  told  me  he 
had  hired  that  room  of  the  landlady  for  Ings ;" 
that  was  the  room  taken  by  the  recommenda- 
tion of  Brunt  for  Ings,  and  where  the  people 
we  have  heard  so  much  about  used  to  meet ; 
he  says,  ^  meetings  were  held  there  twice  a-day 
from  that  time  up  to  the  23rd  da^of  February,^ 
which  you  all  know  was  that  important  date 
on  which  this  conspiracy,  such  as  it  was,  was 
detected  in  Cato-street,   ''except  that  there 
were  none  on  Sunday  evenings ,    the  Sunday 
evenings  appear  to  have  been  occupied  in  other 
ways,  in  readings  in  public  houses,  and  con- 
versations not  of  the  most  useful  tendency  to 
keep  men  out  of  scrapes  of  this  sort,  but  for 
some  reason  tlie  meetings  were  not  held  at 
this  room  on  the  Sunday  evenings.    He  de- 
scribes the  room  as  several  other  persons  have 
done,  as  having  no  furniture  in  it  but  a  fixed 
stove ;  then  he  says,  **  the  persons  who  usually 
attended  those  meetings  were  Thistlewood, 
Brunt,  Ings,  Hall,  Davidson  (the  prisoner  now 
It  the  bar),  Harrison,  Wilson,  Bradbum,  Tidd 
>ccasionally,  but   not   so  constantly  as  the 
others,  and  Edwards.    I  do  not  recollect  tlie 
lames  of  any  more  at  tliis  moment ;  I  was  at 
tie  meeting  on  Monday  the  31st  of  January, 
Hit  nothing  particular  passed  then.     I  was 
.here  on  the  followiue  Wednesday ;  when  I 
iveot  to  the  room  I  round  Thistlewood  and 
larrison  there,  and  in  the  course  of  the  even- 
^Zf  Ings,  WiJson,  and  Edwards  came ;  when 
!  went  in  Thistlewood  and  Harrison  had  been 
n  deep  discourse  respecting  some  information 
hey  had   gained,    that  the  life-guards  and 
DOt-guards  were  to  leave  London   for  the 
purpose  of  attending  the  funeral  of  his  late 
oajesty.    Harrison  said,  that  a  life-guards- 
lan  had  told  him,  that  every  man  in  the  life- 
aards  that  could  be  mounted  was  to  attend 
lie  funeral,  as  well  as  the  foot-guards  that 
ould  be    spared,   and  likewise    the   police 
fficers.    -Harrison  said,  he  thought  it  would 
e  an  excellent  opportunity  to  kick  up  a  row 
I  London  that  night ;  Thistlewood  agreed  to 
le  plan,  and  proposed,  that  it  should  be  done 


by  collecting  together  whair  men  they  could 
among  themselves,  and  taking  the  cannon  in 
Oray's*inn*lane,  as  well  as  the  cannon  in  the 
Artillery-ground,  and  likewise  to  make  use  of 
the  fire-balls  in  setting  fire  to  different  build- 
ings/' He  said,  he  thought  it  would  be  a 
favourable  opportunity,  as  the  life-guards  and 
foot-guards,  and  the  police,  and  a  great  many 
other  persons  who  attended  the  funeral  of  his 
late  majesty  would  be  out  of  town.  The  noble 
lords,  constituting  his  majesty's  cabinet,  could 
not  fail  in  the  solemn  duty  of  being  present 
upon  that  melancholv  occasion.  It  has  been 
said,  in  the  course  of  one  of  the  eloquent  ad- 
dresses made  to  you,  that  all  that  was  intended 
here  was,  "  the  kicking  up  a  raiv  in  London ;" 
one  is  disposed  to  ask,  what  sort  of  row  could 
be  intended  to  be  kicked  up  in  London ;  they 
choose  the  opportunity  when  all  the  horse- 
guards,  and  all  the  foot-guards,  and  all  the 
police  were  out  of  London,  and  when,  as  they 
express  it,  there  is  nobody  in  London  to  pro- 
tect it ;  oddly  enough,  during  about  a  fourth 
part  of  the  trial  in  which  we  have  been  en- 
gaged, it  has  been  admitted,  that  to  be  sure 
there  was  a  conspiracy  to  assassinate  all  his 
majesty's  ministers,  but  it  is  said  that  that  was 
all;  these  persons  were  all  very  poor,  and 
wished  to  kick  up  a  row ;  but  it  appears  it 
was  to  be  a  row  of  such  a  size,  that  it  was 
thought  desirable  they  should  avail  themselves 
of  the  absence  of  all  troops,  and  all  police 
officers  from  London.  That  is  the  effect  of 
the  testimony  of  this  witness;  he  communi- 
cated this  to  Mr.  Thistlewood,  and  Mr.  Thistle- 
wood approved  of  it;  but  Mr.  Thistlewood 
immediately  improved  upon  it,  and  proposed, 
that  the  two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray's-inn- 
lane,  and  the  six  pieces  of  cannon  in  the 
Artillery-ground  should  be  taken  all  on  the 
same  night  (this  is  the  row  that  was  to  be 
kicked  up  on  the  night  of  the  king's  funeral) 
and  that  they  should  use  fire-balls  to  set  fire 
to  the  different  buildings.  Thistlewood  then 
said  **  it  would  be  necessary  to  send  a  party 
to  Hyde-park  corner  to  prevent  any  orderly 
man  leaving  London  for  Windsor,  to  commu- 
nicate at  Windsor"  What?  why,  that  there 
had  been  a  row  in  London ;  that  it  was  neces- 
sary to  take  care  that  no  persons  should  come 
bade  to  prevent  the  effects  of  this  idle  row ; 
he  likewise  proposed,  ''that  the  telegraph 
over  the  water  should  be  taken  to  prevent  any 
intelligence  being  communicated  to  Wool- 
wich," which,  we  all  know,  is  the  deposit  of  a 
considerable  proportion  of  the  artillery ;  ''  this 
plan  met  with  the  assent  of  those  persons  in 
the  room ;  after  this  Brunt  and  Ings  came  in, 
and  the  plan  which  had  been  in  agitation  was 
communicated  to  them  by  Thistlewood ;  Brunt 
and  Ings  both  declared,  that  there  was  nothing 
short  of  the  assassination  of  ministers  would 
satisfy  them ;  in  consequence  of  this,  the  pro- 
ject which  had  been  mentioned  was  given  up." 
Now,  gentlemen,  every  thing  I  am  stating  to 
vou,  will  be  subject  to  your  believing  or  not 
believing  this  narrative ;.  but  as  we  pass  along,* 


1487J        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  WiUiam  Davidson  and 


[ua 


I  cannot  kelp  obttnrhif  on  the  diuactar  of 
this  proof  M  it  is  dereloped.  It  wiU  be  for 
ywif  when  you  ha?e  heard  this  evidence  to  its 
end,  to  ask  yourselves,  was  this  a  plan  which 
had  nothing  for  its  object  but  the  destniction 
of  fifteen  men,  however  elevated  by  rank  or 
station,  or  by  their  virtues  }  was  the  thing  in 
project  that  which  no  one  has  the  hardihood 
to  deny,  the  destmctioB  of  some  of  his  maiesty't 
cabinet  ministevs,  and  the  destniction  of  some 
houses,  and  to  end  there,  or  a  more  melancholy 
object,  to  effect  a  revolution  in  the  countiy  ? 
Vol  to  subdue,  as  it  is  said,  the  millions  resi* 
dent  in  this  metropolis,  but  to  endeavour  to 
efliBct  all  those  objects  which  are  stated  upon 
this  indictment,  however  wild  and  imprac- 
ticable such  projects  might  prove. 

Then  the  witness  says,  **  I  recollect  a  meet- 
ing which  took  place  on  Saturday  the  19th  of 
F^ruary;  there  were  present  Thistlewood, 
Harrison,  firunt,  Ings,  and  Hall ;  on  my  going 
in  they  seemed  to  be  in  a  study  between 
themselves ;  they  got  up  and  Thistlewood  said, 
well,  it  is  agreed  on,  that  if  nothing  happens 
between  this  and  next  Wednesday  night,  we 
then  go  to  work  ;  he  said  that  they  were  all  so 

rr,  the^  could  not  wait  any  longer;  and 
gave  instructions  that  there  should  be  a 
meeting  the  next  morning,  to  draw  up  a  plan 
to  see  how  they  should  act.'' 

Then  he  says,  **  a  meeting  took  place  the 
next  morning ;  it  was  a  larger  one  than  usual : 
the  prisoners  at  the  bar  were  of  the  party ;  we 
met  about  eleven  o'clock.  Thistlewood  on 
looking  round  said,  there  are  twelve  of  us,  it 
is  time  to  proceed  to  business.  Tidd  took  the 
chair  with  a  pike  in  his  hand,  and  Thistlewood 
said  he  had  come  to  a  determination,  if  nothing 
transpired  between  that  time  and  Wednesday 
night  to  go  to  work ;  he  said,  we  have  been 
waiting  so  long  expecting  the  ministers  to  dine 
together,  finding  they  do  not,  we  intend,  if 
they  do  not  dine  together  between  this  and 
then,  to  take  them  separately ;  he  then  began 
to  propose  his  plan  about  taking  the  cannon  in 
GrayVinn-lane,  and  the  Artillery-ground,  and 
that  Palin  was  to  take  upon  himself  to  set  fire 
to  different  buildings,  and  he  was  to  have  as- 
sistance from  the  men  that  he  had  collected 
himself,  Adr.  Thistlewood  said  this  was  the 
outline  of  the  plan  at  present,  and  as  Mr* 
Brunt  had  a  plan  to  propose  with  respect  to 
tlie  assassination  of  ministers,  he  shoold  drop  it 
for  the  present*  Brant  then  came  fbrvrard  to 
explain  his  plan,  and  Thistlewood  said,  let  my 
plan  first  be  put  from  the  chair,  and  if  any  one 
has  any  thing  to  say  upon  it,  let  him  speak ; 
it  was  put  from  the  chair,  and  agreed  to  by  all 
present;  Tidd  being  in  the  chair.  Bninlthen 
came  forward  and  said,  as  we  cannot  get  the 
ministers  together  as  it  was  proposed,  I  pro- 
pose to  take  them  separate^,  and  that  the 
men  employed  for  that  pufpoee  shailfbe  sepa- 
rated into  so  many  parts,  and  firom  eanh  allot- 
ment a  man  shall  be  drawn  to  do  the  deed,  a 
man 'for  the  purpose  of  committing  eaehinnn» 
der,  and  if  he  attempted  it  and  did  natsne« 


eeed,  and  there  wat  any  sign  of  covniioe,  hi 
shoald  be  run  through  upon  die  spotdinedj." 
Then  the  witness  says,  ''apoD  this  1  got  vp 
and  asked  him  if  a  man  attempted  it  nd 
failed,  was  he  to  be  run  throo^  npoo  thi 
spot  f  Brant  said  no^  if  there  were  no  9^ 
of  cowardice ;  this  motion  was  pet  fron  the 
chair  as  before,  and  agreed  to.  AAer  dii^ 
Palin,  Potter,  and  Stnuigs,  came  ia;  the  d^ 
enmstances  that  had  passed  were  eoBumnt* 
eated  to  them,  and  they  agieed  to  then. 
After  Thistlewood  had  communieated  tbe  am 
to  them  as  they  had  to  aU  the  otkeis  ia  tk 
room,  PaUn  got  up  and  said,  that  he  bad  paid 
due  attention,  and  that  he  among  tbe  restU 
agreed  to  what  bad  been  pro|K)9ed,  bot  he 
wished  to  know  how  the  pUas  were  to  Is 
executed,  at  they  had  so  many  olgecntobe 
carried  at  the  same  time."  Tbe  pias  of  asm- 
sination  was  called  the  vrest-endjob;  he  aid, 
**  you  talk  of  the  west-end  job  taking  ibrtj  or 
fiihr  men  ?**  which  number  had  been  mentiaHd 
before  by  Thistlewood;  <<you  tali[  of  tahsf 
the  pieces  of  cannon  from  6ray's-ian4iiey 
and  six  pieces  of  cannon  from  tbs  Artiliet}* 

round ;  and  my  setting  fire  to  tbe  baildiit|i) 
wish  to  know  how  this  is  to  be  doae;  ^ 
ought  to  know  whether  you  have  men  to  d^ 
pend  upon  sufficient ;  I  cannot  give  yea  wj 
satisfaction  on  that  point  till  I  see  whitneni 
can  speak  to ;  and  1  wish  for  instniotioasvhfr' 
ther  I  may  communicate  to  them  vbel  ^ 
passed  here  this  morning.''    Thistlevood  lod 
Brant  said,  that  diere  was  no  donbt  tha  Pain 
might  communicate  it,  if  he  was  satisfied  vims 
himself  that  he  had  got  such  menaihecoau 
depend  upon ;  upon  that  he  sat  dewa  sitii- 
fied.   Thistlewood  then  turned  round  to  Bmt 
and  said,  '<0h,  Brant,  as  Pabn  is  here,  |W 
may  as  well  take  him  to  this  spot  dose  by,  tf* 
he  will  be  able  to  judge  forhimsdf  nhetbei^ 
thing  is  practicable  or  not;'*  that  place  ^ 
FurnivalVinn-buildinffs,  which  were  at «» 
time  in*  a  promss  for  being  completed  fcf 
chambers ;  I  believe  not  yet  quite  «^PJ^' 
in  a  commanding  situation  in  the  ^^^^"^ 
and  they  would  make  a  very  great  firer  ^ 
attract  much  attention ;  he  then  says,  "<^"^ 
near  the  back  of  Fox-court ;  Braot  and  ^ 
went  out  and  returned  again,  and  Mr.  1^ 
said  it  was  a  very  good  j&,  and  a  ^J!^ 
one^  and  would  miJce  a  very  good  fiie.  ^ 
tlewood  said  it  would  be  hi^^necesnTi^ 
it  was  possible  to  get  the  men  togeAer^ 
ooaamnnicate  thar  intentions  and  gi^e  ^ 
a  treat,  but  he  did  not  know  howit«»* 
be  done,  they  wiere  all  so  poor.    ^^^ 
said  he  had  a  one  pound  note,  he  b>^'^|)^ 
for  the  purpose,  though  he  had  <i^^|^?l 
no  work  lately,  bot  he  would  he  ^^^^'^rZ 
woold  not  spend  it  upon  his  men.  ^"^ 
wo^  said,  he  did  not  know  «bsK  they  eM» 
take  them  to,  to  give  them  a  titat;  I  >*PP^ 
he  said,  we  can  have  the  bacfc-TOCWn  »v 
White  Hart,  at  Hobbs^  where  d»"^ 
on  'former  occasicma  had  been  held.  ^ 
said  he  did  not  mBch  like<  it'   Yi>n  »^ 


i4m 


Richard  tiddfor  High  Treason.  A.  D.  1820. 


ri46o 


what  that  arose  from ;  that  Adams  had  stated 
that  Hobbs  had  tlirown  out  some  circumstances 
of  the  oflScers  having  called  there,  as  if  they 
had  information  that  there  was  some  radical 
meeting  there ;  and  Adams  had  got  into  some 
disrepute  with  the  party,  for  throwing  cold 
water  upon  their  designs.     Brunt  said  "  he  did 
not  much  like  it,  after  what  had  slipped  from 
my  mouth ;  hut  never  mind  we  can  go  there 
armed,  and  if  any  of  the  traps  should  come 
Into  the  room,  I  do  not  see  what  occasion 
we  have  to  fear  them;  he  said   he   would 
call  on  Hobbs  and  hear  what  he  had  to  say ; 
on  second  recollection,  he  said  he  would  give 
his  boy  a  holiday,  send  his  wife  out,  and  have 
what  men  he  could  collect  together  in  his  own 
room;  after  this  we  separated.'*     Then  he 
says,  '*  I  have  seen  arms  in  that  back-room  at 
different  periods,    and   among  other  things, 
pike-staves  in  the  rough  just  as  they  were  cut 
fiom  the  tree  they  grew  on;  Bradburn  sawed 
the  ends  of  them  off,  and  ferruled  them  in  that 
back-room ;  there  were  boles  made  in  them,  it 
was  then  considered  that  they  were  too  weak, 
that  they  would  not  support  the  pike ;  in  con- 
sequence of  that  the  ferrules  were  cut  off  again, 
and  bigger  ones  got  and  put  on ;  this  was  done 
in  the  same  room;  there  were  some  hand- 
grenades  brought  in  there  ready  made,  and 
some  that  were  made  there ;  I  saw  Davidson 
and  Harrison  there,  making  a  kind  of  thing 
that  was  wound  round  a  tin  case  first,  apa 
some  pitch  that  was  melted  in  an  iron  pot, 
and  aher  this  was  put  in  there  were  some 
nails  bound  round ;  they  were  both  engaged  in 
making  a  number  of  them;  they  were  after- 
wards carried  to  Tidd's  lodgings  in  Hole-in- 
the-wall-passage,  which  was  called  the  d^p6t. 
Thistlewood  assigned  as  a  reason  for  removing 
them,  that  there  should  be  nothing  found  in 
that  room  in  case  any  person  came  there  who 
might  give  information.'' 

''  I  remember  the  meeting  that  was  held  on 
Tuesday  the  22nd  of  February,  in  the  same 
room  at  Brunt's,  about  ten  o'clock ;  there  were 
present  Thistlewood,  Brunt,  Hall,  and  Ings, 
and  soon  after  Edwards  came  in,  and  said  he 
bad  been  looking  into  the  newspaper,  and 
there  was  a  notice  that  the  ministers  were  to 
t>e  at  a  cabinet  dinner  on  the  following  Wed- 
lesday  at  lord  Harrowby's  in  Grosvenor- 
tquare  ;  in  consequence  of  this,  Hall  fetched  a 
lewspaper,  and  it  appeared  by  that,  that  the 
nformation  was  true ;  upon  this  being  com- 
nnnicated.  Brunt  said.  Now,  damn  my  eyes,*^ 
t  is  a  roost  horrid  expression,  I  am  obliged  to 
ead  it  to  you — being  the  manner  in  which 
his  person  treated  a  superintending  Provi- 
lence,  as  a  superintending  power  only  for 
le  purposes  of  mischief  and  oestruction,  and 
ot  as  we  have  this  day  reason  to  believe,  a 
'rovidence  for  the  protection  of  worthy  men 
gainst  the  plots  of  the  wicked — the  horror  of 
le  statement  almost  disqualifies  one  from 
ating  it ;  he  said,  "  Now,  damn  my  eyes,  I 
elieye  there  is  a  God,  I  have  often  prayed  that 
lese  thieves  may  be  called  together,  that  we 

vol..  XXXllt. 


may  have  an  opportunity  of  destroyinjj  them, 
and  now  God  has  heard  my  prayer."    Re- 
joicing in  the  opportunity  which  had  occurred, 
of  offering  the  throats  of  these  illustrious  per- 
sons to  the  daggers  of  the  assassins,  or  tneir 
persons  to  the  effect  of  these  hand-grenades,  at 
the  moment  of  relaxation  from  the  more  active 
cares  of  public  life.    Ings  was  equally  alive 
to  it.    '^Thistlewood  then  proposed  that  a 
committee  should  sit  directly,  to  alter  the  plan 
of  assassination,  which  had  been  agreed  to  on 
the  Sunday  morning;"  the  plan  on  Sunday 
morning,  you  remember,  had  been  the  dividing 
the  men  into  so  many  parties  as  they  knew 
they  could  take  off  ministers  by  individu^ 
assassination,  but  now  the  golden  opportunity 
having  presented  itself  of  ministers  assembling 
at  a  cabinet  dinner,  a  further  mode  was  to  be 
had  resort  to ;  for  which  purpose  he  proposed  a 
meeting  should  be  held,  and  a  meeting  was 
held  aecordingly ;  the  witness  says,  *'  I  took 
the  chair,  and  called  to  order;  Thistlewood 
was  going  to   speak,  but  I  interrupted  him 
saying,  gentlemen,  I  hope  from  what  I  said 
yestenlay  morning,  you  nave  given  it  a  due 
consideration;  that  was  what  had  been  said 
to  me  by  Hobbs,  the  landlord  of  the  White 
Hart,  respecting  the  police  ofHcer  having  in- 
quired at  his  house.    Upon  this.  Brunt  put 
himself  into  a  passion,  and  so  did  all  of  them, 
particularly  Harrison,  who  walked  about  the. 
room  and  tnreatened  the  first  man  that  attempt- 
ed toflingcold  water  upon  the  concern,  he  would 
run  him  through  directly  with  a  sword ;  upon 
this  I  opened  my  breast  and  said,  Harrison  if 
you  think  that  I  am  not  a  friend,  do  it  now. 
Palin  and  Potter  and  Bradburn  were  in  the 
room,  Palin  got  up,  walked  across  the  room, 
and  insisted  on  my  being  heard;  Hall  was 
also  in  the  room  at  that  time.    Brunt  then,  in 
order  to  obviate  any  difficulties  that  might 
arise,  supposing  Hobbs's  information  to  be  cor- 
rect,   proposed  that  lord  Harrowby's  house 
should    be   watched,    to    commence    at    six 
o'clock  that  evening  ;'^  thus  they  proposed  to 
ascertain  whether  there  was  any  truth  in  the 
idea  of  a  suspicion  being  entertained  by  go* 
vemment;    "Davidson,    and    another   man^ 
whose  name  I  do  not  recollect,  were  to  be  the 
first,  and  Brunt  and  Tidd  were  to  relieve  them 
at  nine  o'clock;  Davidson  and  Tidd  were  both 
present  at  the  time ;  the  reason  why  they  were 
to  watch,  was  to  see  whether  any  police  offi- 
cers or  soldiers  entered  the  house,  and  if  so,  it 
was  to  be  communicated  to  the  committee,  and 
if  nothing  of  that  kind  occurred,  Brunt  insisted 
upon  it  that  the  business  should  be  done  the 
following  night.    If  they  saw  any  police  offi- 
cers or  soldiers  enter,  it  would  be  natural  to 
suppose  that  the  suspicions  of  government  were 
raised,  and  they  were  to  give  information  to 
the    committee.     After    this    proposition  of 
Brunt's  was  settled,  Thistlewood  directly  pro- 
posed that  Tidd  should  take  the  chair,  in  con- 
sequence of  my  interrupting  the  business ;  and 
Tidd  took  the  chair  accordingly.    Thistlewood 
then  came  forwards,  and  proposed  a  fresh  plai*. 


:>C 


14911        >■  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  WUiiam  Daiadtm  and 


CUM 


for  the  assassioatioa  of  ministen;  he  proposed 
that  he  himself  should  go  to  lord  Harro why's 
house  with  a  note  in  his  luindy  and  tell  the 
servajit  to  deliirer  it  to  his  lordship,  aod  to 
state  that  he  must  have  an  answer ;  at  the  time 
he  got  io,  the  others  were  to  rush  in  directly 
afler  him,  and  to  secure  the  servants,  present- 
ing  a  pistol  to  their  breast  and  threatening 
them  with  instant  death  if  they  made  any  re- 
sistance ;  others  were  to  take  the  command  of 
the  stair-casesy  one  party  to  take  the  command 
of  the  stairs,  leading  to  the  bottom  part  of  the 
house,  and  another  party  to  take  the  command 
of  the  stairs  leading  to  the  upper  part  of  tha 
house ;  and  two  men  in  tbb  area,  in  order  to 
prevent  an^  relief  being  afforded  to  his  ma- 
jesty's miusters  in  the  dining-room,  they  were 
each  to  be  provided  with  a  hand-grenade,  as 
well  as  pistols  and  blunderbusses,  and  if  any 
servant  attempted  to  retreat  from  the  upper  or 
the  lower  part  of  the  house,  or  the  area,  a 
hand-grenade  was  to  be  thrown  among  them, 
with  a  view  to  their  destruction;  then  the 
others  were  to  rush  into  the  room  at  the  same 
time ;  Ings  proposed  himself  to  take  the  com* 
mand  to  lead  them  into  the  room  in  this  kind 
of  way ;  as  soon  as  he  entered  the  room,  he 
was  to  address  their  lordships  by  saying,  Now 
my  lords,  I  have  as  good  men  here  as  the 
Manchester  yeomanry;  enter  citizens  and  do 
Your  duty.  The  t|ro  swordsmen  were  to  foU 
low  in  after  him ;"  they  were  to  be  the  witness 
Adams,  who  had  formerly  been  a  soldier,  and 
Harrison,  who  had  been  in  the  life-guards; 
**  on  the  swordsmen  entering  the  room,  they 
were  to  be  followed  by  the  pike-men.  Ings, 
who  was  a  butcher  by  business,  declared  he 
would  follow,  and  cut  every  h$ad  off  as  he 
came  to  them.  Ings  had  two  bags  with  him, 
and  he  proposed  to  bring  awav  the  heads  of 
lord  Castlereagh  and  lo^  Sidmouth  in  the 
bags ;  he  said  he  would  have  one  of  lord  Cas- 
tlereagh's  hands,  and  he  would  cure  that;'' 
which  I  understood  from  the  witness,  to  be 
preparing  it  in  some  sort  of  pickle ;  '^  as  it 
would  be  thought  much  of  at  some  future  time. 
At  a  former  meeting,  Ings  had  said  that  he 
would  exhibit  those  heads  on  poles,  aod  carry 
them  through  the  streets ;  after  this  should  be 
done,  Harrison  undertook  to  go  to  the  Kiiag- 
street  barracks,  and  set  fire  to  the  shed  where 
the  straw  and  hav  were  deposited,  and  to  de- 
stroy the  whole  buUding.''  Then  he  is  asked 
whether  any  further  use  is  to  be  made  of  the 
heads  when  thepr  were  brought  away,  and  he 
said  yes ;  that  it  had  often  been  talked  of,  and 
that  diis  discourse  finished  on  the  Wednesday 
afternoon.  "  After  Ings  had  proposed  to  ex- 
hibit them  on  a  pole,  Thistlewood  said,  no,  the 
best  way  of  carrying  them  would  be  to  put 
them  each  on  a  pike,  and  carry  them  behind 
the  cannon  to  terrify  the  people,  and  to  make 
them  belipe  that  tliere  was  somebody  of  more 
consequence  than  was  then  visible,  at  the  head 
of  the  conspiracy.  It  was  proposed  after  this 
by  Bradburo,  that  after  tney  had  been  ex- 
hibited about  the  streets  of  the  metropolis  for 


two  or  three  daff,  he  voqld  stake  a  box,  tf4 
enclose  them  in  it,  and  send  it  to  Irekuid, « 
take  it  over  himseU^  to  be  exhibited  there ;"!» 
said,  *'  then  it  was  proposed  that  after  they 
had  done  at  lord  Harrowby*s,  HarrisoD  urn  to 
go  to  the  horse  barracks,  supported  by  WHm, 
to  set  them  on  fire  by  ^  ball  prepared  £»  tfaat 
purpose;  others  were  to  proceed  to  GmjV 
inn4ane,  to  the  City-lightrhorse  hamcki"  is 
trutli  the  barracks  of  Uie  lighlrhorse  rolu* 
teers ;  "  and  if  they  met  with  any  iBtem^ai 
from  the  people,  it  was  proposed  to  ran  tbepiliei 
through  them,  and  to  fire  upon  them  ocasoe- 
ally ;  and  after  they  met  the  party  in  Gay's- 
inn-lane,  to  assist  them  in  taking  the  tie 
pieces  of  cannon  at  the  light-horse  sribJUes,  ad 
to  proceed  from  thence  to  the  ArtiUeiy-grasaif 
to  take  the  six  pieces  of  cannon  there;  ihii 
pBLrty  was  to  be  beaded  by  Cook,  asd  afta 
Cook  had  got  the  six  pieces  of  cannon,  iie  we 
to  load  them,  and  bring  them  into  the  stncL^ 
Now,  when  you  are  by-and-by  taking  iolo 
your  consideration   whether   the  conspinqf 
had  for  its  object  only  the  taking  offihe  bhs* 
isters,  and  to  end  there,  or  to  endesfov  is 
produce  a  revolution  in  the  country,  by  fiat 
beginning  it  in  this  town;  you  will  recoiled, 
that  there  were  found  among  the  artides  diese 
conspirators  had  provided  for  the  oocasie^ 
cartndges  made  up  in  bags  of  flannel,  appli* 
cable  to  six-pound  cannon,  and  in  foct  lued&f 
no  other  purpose;  not  in  the  state  ii  vivch 
they  were  likely  to  be  in  the  possesses  of  aoy 
deider,  or  other  private  individual  ttliQlefflf 
gunpowder,  **  the  cannon  were  to  be  IwH 
and  brought  into  the  street,  and  if  then  vv 
any  interruption.  Cook  was  to  fire ;  if  be  fow4 
the  people  come  over  to  him  to  enaUsbinto 
advance,  he  was  to  take  them  to  the  Maosioi* 
bouse,  and  when  they  got  to  the  ManwW'boiie 
they  were  to  djivjide  the  cannon  into  two  pvt^ 
place  three  on  each  side  of  the  Mansion-botf^ 
and  demand  an  entrance  ;'*  they  weie  to  m^ 
mon  the  inhabitants  of  the  building  to  $v# 
render,  **  and  if  it  was  refused,  if  they  did  aal 
surrender,  they  were  to  fire  upon  it  on  bw 
sides,  and  when  taken,  it  was  pvoposfiii  ^ 
Thistlewood  for  the  seat  of  the  pit>¥isioBi)|»' 
vemment."     If  this  is  believed,  gentkees, 
what  becomes  of  the  doubt  which  has  bM 
suggested,  as  to  the  extent  of  the  plot  viuffl 
was  in  contemplation  ?   is  this  cobsu«c&« 
treason  ?  is  this  constructive  levying  of  iV 
against  the  king  ?    If  the  testimony  is  lOt  m 
the  prisoner  is  not  guilty  of  Uie  crime  ektff* 
upon  him.    "  Cook  was  not  to  be  ^^^^ 
at  lord  Harrowby's,  he  was  to  copmasd  tai 
party  thgt  was  to  go  into  the  city;  and  tb«» 
was  proposed  that  tl»ey  should  take  tbe  Bw* 
of  England,  and  plunder  it,  but  the  books  ^ 
not  to  be  meddled  with,  as  Thistlewood ibosgw 
by  preserving  them  they  would  oomnaw^* 
to  uiem  somewhat  more  than  they  *«**  >'^ 
of.    It  was  proposed,  that  the  P««"*  !J^ 
should  go  round  for  tbe  purpose  of  «>atf»*| 
eating  what  they  had  in  view  to  ^J'L 
ciales ;  Harrison  proposed  that  the  word  W*" 


1493] 


JbdatH  Tiddjvr  High  Trtatan. 


A.  D;  1899. 


i:i404 


• 

ihould  be  tW  coontanign ;  a  station  was  to  be 
procQfed  oear  Oxford-street,  by  Tyborn-turn- 
pike;  Uiemati  appointed  to  stand  tberewas 
to  pftMKraace  the  letters  6,  u,  U  the  other  was 
to  answer  f ,  •,  n.  and  on  his  doing  that,  he  was 
to  be  considered  as  a  mad  liiendly  to  their 
•bject;  after  making  this  arrangement,  we  se- 
parated for  the  purposes  of  preparatioa;  Da- 
vidson and  another  man  went  upon  the  watch 
at  six  o'clock;  it  was  proposed,  originally, 
tbflt  Udd  and  Brant  sbomd  go  upon  the  watch 
at  nine  o'clock  to  relieve  them,  and  they  started 
for  tfiat  purpose  but  Brunt  came  back  in  about 
five  minutes,  saying  tliat  Tidd  had  called  at  a 
house,  and  found  a  man  that  he  had  appointed ; 
tiiat  he  was  of  too  much  consequence  to  be 
left,  and  that  therefore  be  oonld  not  go  upon 
the  watch." 

Now^  that  there  was  a  watch  at  the  house  of 
lord  Harrowby,  is  proved  not  only  by  the  tes» 
timony  of  this  witness,  but  by  the  two  watch* 
men,  who  saw  persons  looking  about,  and  by 
the  gentleman's  servant  who  |£aiyed  at  dominos 
with  Brunt,  so  that  there  has  been  no  attempt 
mde  to  shake  that  part  of  the  testimony. 
llien  he  says,  **  in  consequence  of  that  it  was 
proposed  that  I  should  go  instead  of  Tidd,  and 
aoconiingly  I  went  with  Brunt;  we  saw  Da^ 
vidson  there,  and  relieved  biro;  we  did  not 
continue  in  the  square  all  the  time,  but  in  the 
course  of  our  watch,  we  went  into  a  public* 
house  at  tne  comer  of  die  mews,  at  the  back 
of  the  square ;  there  Brunt  played  at  dominos  ; 
I  went  into  the  square  again  at  eleven  o'clock, 
add  stopped  till  the  torn  of  twelve ;  I  found 
all  quiet,  and  I  then  went  home ;  I  reeelleet 
going  into  Fox^^conrt  on  Tuesday  aftomoon  or 
enreniog ;  on  going  up  stairs,  I  smelt  a  strange 
smet),  and  on  going  in  I  found  Edwards,  Ings, 
and  Hall  there ;  logs  and  Hall  were  employed 
in  making  ilhnnination  balls  to  set  fire  to  the 
buildings  with,  and  Edwards  was  employed  in 
making  touch- paper  for  the  grenades;  Hall 
was  laying  the  paper  on  the  floor  to  receive  the 
balls,  to  prevent  their  sticking  to  the  band ;  I 
went  away  almost  directly/*  He  then  pro- 
ceeds to  the  transactions  of  the  Wednesday ; 
lie  soys,  **  on  Wednesday  I  went  to  Fox-court, 
alMMit  two  o'clock ;  I  found  Brunt  in  his  own 
room ;  soon  after  I  went  Strange  came  in,  and 
two  or  Uiree  strangers  afterwards ;  I  saw  some 
pistols  lying  on  the  floor  in  Brunt's  privade 
room;  they  began  to  try  to  put  flints  into 
tkem ;  on  the  last  men  coming  in,  Bnint  pro- 
poeed  to  go  into  the  back  room,  which  they 
did."  Now,  you  will  bear  in  your  recollection 
wfiat  I  stated  as  to  the  confirmatioii  of  tho 
accomplice ;  have  you  any  confiimation  of  titis 
most  important  ftict  ?  Have  you  not  Hale  the 
apprentice  of  Brunt,  who  almost  in  words  and 
syllables  (though  he  has  had  no  opportunity  of 
hearing  the  testimony  of  Adams)  speaks  td 
persons  being  in  Brunt's  private  room,  to  one 
of  whom  he  gives  the  name  of  Strange,  and 
states  that  the  rest  were  strangers ;  that  they 
were  ftiating  the  pistols ;  that  they  conceived 
they  were  not  in  a  place  of  proper  security,  and 


that  they  went,  therefore,  idto  that  place 
which  had  been  made  more  secure  by  putting 
up  Mrs.  Brunt's  apron ;  in  this  he  is  confinned 
by  the  circumstance  that  they  removed  to  that 
room  in  consequence  of  being  engaged  in  some 
transaction  which  was  not  to  be  known^  and 
which  it  was  wished  should  be  concestfed: 
there  is  not  the  slightest  imputation  attempted 
to  be  thrown  upon  that  young  man,  the  ap- 
prentice of  Brunt,  who  gives  this  (probably 
you  will  think)  most  important  connrmatiou 
of  the  testimony  of  Adams.  Adams  proceeds, 
^  we  went  accordingly  there  with  the  pistols, 
there  were  no  other  persons  in  the  room  at 
that  time,  except  those  we  brought  from  Mr. 
Brant's  room;  Thistlewood  came  in  soon 
afterwards ;  Ings  came  in  in  the  course  of  the 
afternoon,  and  within  a  very  little  time  after 
he  came  in  he  began  to  equip  himself;  before 
he  came,  the  strangers  were  busy  in  fixing 
flints  to  their  pistols,  and  slings  to  the  cut- 
lasses that  were  in  the  room ;  when  TbistlC'* 
wood  came  in,  he  looked  round  and  said  this 
looks  something  like  as  if  you  were  going  to 
work ;  he  clapped  his  hand  on  my  shouMer, 
and  asked  me  how  I  did  ?  I  said  I  am  rather 
unwell,  and  very  low  in  spirits ;  in  consequence 
of  this^  he  proposed  to  Brunt  to  send  for  some^ 
thing  to  drink  to  put  me  in  spirits,  and  di^ 
rectly  after  he  proposed  that  there  should  be 
some  paper  fetcheo,  as  he  wanted  to  draw  op 
some  bills;  Thistlewood  gave  Brunt  some 
money,  and  said  he  wanted  such  paper  as  the 
newspapers  were  printed  on ;  I  proposed  to 
him  to  have  s6me  cartridge-paper,  which  was 
agreed  to,  and  Brunt  said  that  his  apprentice 
or  his  boy  should  fetch  it;  he  went  out  fo^ 
that  purpose,  and  the  cartridge  paper  was 
brought ;  a'  table  and  c^air  vrere  brought  iii 
from  Brunt's  room,  and  Thietiewood  sat  down 
and  wrote  three  bills.  The  words  writCed  in 
large  writing  letters  on  those  papers,  were 
these,  Your  tyrants  are  destroyea;  the  friends 
of  liberty  are  called  upon  to  come  forward*;,  the 
provisional  government  is  now  sitting*-— James 
Ings,  secretary,  February  23, 1820.*' 

As  I  pass  along,  let  us  ask  ourselves,  I  ought 
rather  to  say  you  will  ask  yourselves^  can  you 
receive  any  eonfirmation  of  this  part  of  Adsim's 
testimony,  of  the  scene  he  describes  as  to  per- 
sons assembling  and  midung  preparations,  for 
which  purpose  they  commence  in  Brunt's 
room ;  that  is  not  considered  secure  from  ob^ 
serration ;  they  are  advised  to  retire  into  ano- 
ther room,  and  they  do  so.  Hale  gives  you 
the  same  account.  Adams  teHa  you,  that  it 
btcame  necessary  that  something  should  be 
written,  and  Hale  tella  you  that  he  was  applied 
to  for  a  piece  of  paper,  and  that  he  carried 
that  into  the  room>  and  that  then  he  wao  de 
sired  to  fetch  some  cartridge  paper,  and  that 
that  was  carried  into  the  room ;  tnat  something 
was  wawted— a  table  and  chair— they  were 
carried  in  ;  he  cannot  give  you  any  forther  ac- 
count of  what  was  done  with  the  paper  in  this 
room.  The  learned  counsel  for  the  prisoners 
says,  I  wish  we  could  have  seen  this  procla- 


14951 


1  GEORGE  IV. 


Tria  ^JFtOtam  DandtoH  and 


[im 


mation,  I  could  tl^en  have  told  you  it  was  only 
a  riot  to  set  a  few  houses  on  fire,  or  destroy 
the  ministers.  The  language  of  Uiis,  if  it  is 
correctly  given,  is  unequivocal ;  it  is,  ''  Your 
tyrants  are  destroyed  ?"  Whose  tvrapts  ?  The 
tyrants  of  the  country.  '^The  friends  of  li- 
berty are  called  on/'  all  who  can  read  the 
English  language,  ''to  come  forward;"  for 
what  ?  you  will  answer  that  question  for  your- 
selves ;  but  if  you  want  any  thing  further  that 
is  answered,  "  The  provisional  government  is 
sitting.*'  You  do  not  want  Hale  or  any  body 
else  to  come  and  satisfy  the  requisition  of  the 
learned  counsel  that  he  saw  this  proclamation, 
which  I  should  apprehend  would  be  submitted 
only  to  the  confidential  and  supposed  safe  eye 
of  a  oo-conspirator.  Would  they  unfurl  these 
till  the  fires  were  lighted,  and  persons  began 
to  inquire  what  was  meant  by  fires  being  light- 
ed in  different  parts  of  the  metropolis  ?  Is 
there  any  requisition  for  the  means  of  prepar- 
ing something  of  that  kind  ?  the  testimony  of 
Hale  is  that  to  which  you  must  look  for  the  pur- 
pose of  answering,  whether  you  have  received 
Upon  that  important  point  confirmation  of  the 
testimony  of  Adams. 

Hien  he  says,  **  Thistlewood  was  writing  the 
third  bill;  and  on  my  looking  at  him,  I  per- 
ceived  him  to  be  very  much  agitated,  ana  he 
eould  not  write  any  more ;  he  wished  some- 
body else  to  take  the  pen,  and  proposed  that 
Hall  should  do  it,  which  he  renised.  There 
was  a  strange  man  in  the  room,  who  refused 
at  first  to  take  the  pen,  but  afterwards  took  it, 
and  proceeded  to  write  other  bills ;  these  bills 
were  to  be  stuck  up  at  the  side  jof  different 
buildings  that  were  to  be  set  fire  to,  in  ^order 
to  inform  tlie  public  of  what  had  been  done." 
What  necessity  was  there  to  take  means  to  io/" 
form  the  public  with  what  had  been  done,  if 
the  object  was  only  to  cut  off  fifteen  ministers, 
without  any  ulterior  purpose  7  the  public  would 
know  that  much  too  soon,  by  finding  some  of 
the  first  families  in  this  country  in  mourning, 
in  consequence  of  the  dreadful  explosion  which 
was  intended  to  have  been  made.  For  what 
was  it  to  be  communicated  to  the  public  (ex- 
cept for  the  ulterior  object)  that  the  friends  of 
liberty  were  desired  to  come  forward  now, 
that  the  provisional  government  was  sitting  ? 
Then  Thistlewood  described  himself  incapable, 
from  agitation  or  indisposition,  to  go  on,  but 
still  there  was  something  more  to  be  done,  and 
Hall  having  refused^  another  person  took  it  and 
wrote  soroetliing  by  the  dictation  of  Thistle- 
wood, which  I  understand,  on  one  of  the  ear- 
lier trials,  it  was  ruled,  could  not  be  received 
in  evidence,  and  therefore  is  not  offered  upon 
this ;  that  is  therefore  entirely  a  blank.  Tnen 
he  says,  ^'  Ings  accoutred  himself  by  putting 
his  belt  around  his  loins,  another  hanging  upon 
his  shoulder  to  support  a  cutlass  with,  and  a 
couple  of  bags,  like  soldiers  haversacks,  one 
over  each  shoulder ;  he  put  on  his  great  coat 
afterwards ;  the  belt  round  his  loins,  which 
was  to  contain  a  brace  of  pistols ;  on  viewing 
^imsel^  he  perceived  that  he  had  forgot  to 


bring  his  steel  vrith  him ;  he  prodneed  spos 
that  occasion  a  large  bntcher*s  knife,  round  &i 
handle  of  which  he  had  wound  wax-end,  wUck 
he  stated  was  for  the  purpose  of  preveBtiDg 
the  handle  of  it  slipping  when  be  was  doia; 
the  job;  he  said  he  bad  prepared  it  for  tint 
purpose;"  that  is,  the  purp<»e  of  cattiogflff 
the  heads  of  lord  Casttereagh  and  lordSid- 
mouth.    "  Bradbum  came  up,  saying,  be  vidb* 
ed  Thistlewood  to  send  some  penon  to  the 
men  he  had  collected  together  at  a  spot  vhoi 
they  might  be  more  handy.    Tidd  wu  ip* 
pointed  for  that  purpose ;  he  was  not  roj 
willing  to  go ;  he  said,  as  they  were  Imhnea, 
he  thought  it  would  be  better  for  one  of  tUr 
ovm  country  to  go,  as  he  would  do  bettervkk 
them ;  but  it  not  being  convenient  to  sendooe 
of  their  own  countrymen,  he  went    Palis  cane 
in,  and  as  Thistlewood  and  Brunt  were  ootio 
the  room  he  began  to  address  himself  to  the 
people  in  the  room,  saying,  gentlemen,  I  hope 
all  present  know  what  they  are  met  berew; 
I  hope  you  all  know  what  it  is,  and  (hat  m 
will  give  it  due  consideration ;  in  the  first  pbo» 
inform  yourselves  whether  the  assassinatincf 
ministers  is  likely  to  be  of  consequence  to  jmr 
country ;  if  you  think  it  vrill,  then  in  the  sen 
place  you  ought  to  come  to  a  detenninadoo  to 
stick  true  to  each  other,  for  unless  yoadoso 
you  can  do  no  good ;  and  if  any  man  ii  leea 
after  the  work  is  begun  to  show  the  least  sifBi 
of  cowardice,  that  man  ought  to  be  inn  tkn^ 
upon  the  spot.''    Here,  he  says,  he  wtsister* 
rupted  by  a  tall  man  in  the  room,  wilORBiBie 
he  does  not  know,  saying, ''  he  coshi  fvetty 
well  see  the  meaning  of  his  speech;  bat,  sayi 
he,  yon  speak  as  if  all  that  are  in  the  nan 
knew  what  we  are  met  here  for;  that  is  aot 
the  case ;  that  is  what  I  and  some  of  as  viat 
to  know ;  I  am  not  afraid  of  my  own  life,  psr 
should  any  man  that  turns  out  on  sncfa  a  thiag 
as  this  be  afraid  of  his  Ufe;  I  wiU  be  the  fist, 
if  I  see  any  man  a  coward,  to  run  him  throigk 
Palin  was  going  to  speak  again,  hot  at  tin 
moment  Brunt  came  in,  and  obsenriagy  "J 
suppose,  an  alteration  in  the  conntenancesof 
the  men  in  the  room,  wished  to  knov  the 
cause ;  the  tall  inan  replied,  that  there  sen 
some  in  the  room  who  aid  not  know  whit  t^f 
were  met  there  upon,  and  they  wished  tolawr 
what  they  were  going  to  do.    Brunt  dnaay 
said,  this  is  not  the  room  to  know  ^^[^ 
along  with  me  to  a  room  in  the  EdgewaiMOVf 
there  I  will  tell  you ;  and  any  man  that  g» 
along  with  me  I  will  treat  him  with  aooethiBJ 
that  is  good  to  drink,  in  order  to  put  him  ijto 
spirits  for  what  we  are  going  about.   *«  ^ 
man  replied,  I  hope  whoever  is  going  on  tw 
business  will  not  get  drank,  for  adninkw  »• 
in  such  a  business  is  not  fit  to  be  tn»tM; » 
will  run  Mmself  into  the  hands  of  his  cnemes. 
Brunt  then  began  to  put  his  men  into  iBcr»- 
ment  to  go  to  the  Ed ge ware-road,  sajffljJiWj 
Palin  would  want  that  room  to  bring  bis «» 
to.    I  did  not  sec  Davidson  at  fo^-^^V; 
the  lime  I  am  speaking  of,  but  he  was  J^ 
quently  at  the  meeiings  there;  he  was*?? 


1497) 


Richard  Tiddf&r  High  Tnaton. 


A.  D.  1820. 


[149« 


meeting  on  the  Sunday  when  this  meeting  was 
arrang^.  The  first  of  my  knowing  him  was 
on  the  10th  of  January,  before  I  went  to  prison. 
After  Brunt  had  put  his  men  on  the  move,  I 
went  up  Oxford-street,  and  met  Thistlewood 
in  the  £dgeware-road ;  Brunt  and  another  man 
were  with  me  at  that  time,  and  we  all  went 
together  to  the  stable  in  Cato-street.  When 
we  went  into  the  stable,  on  the  ground-floor, 
I  saw  Davidson  and  Wilson,  apparently  doing 
something  to  the  pikes."  Then  he  says,  ''  I 
went  up  into  the  loft:  the  number  I  found 
assembled,  including  those  that  were  below, 
were  about  six  or  seven,  or  there  might  be 
more.  There  was  a  bench,  like  a  carpenter's 
bench,  in  the  loft,  and  on  it  there  were  pistols 
and  cutlasses ;  there  were  more  men  came  in 
the  course  of  the  evening,  and  Thistlewood 
counted  them ;  there  were  eighteen  up  stairs 
and  two  below.  I  had  a  blunderbuss,  which  I 
took  off  and  laid  upon  the  bench,  and  a  broom- 
stick that  had  been  prepared  for  the  reception 
of  a  bayonet  for  Brunt ;  I  delivered  them  ooth. 
Tidd  was  not  there  at  that  time ;  Brunt  was 
up  in  the  loft  when  I  went  up,  and  Thistlewood 
went  up  before  me.  When  I  went  up,  This- 
tlewood and  Brunt  were  in  discourse  together ; 
Thistlewood  seemed  rather  agitated  for  fear 
(as  it  appeared  to  me  afterwards),  that  Tidd 
would  not  come ;"  you  will  recollect  that  Tidd 
had,  according  to  the  testimony  of  the  other 
witnesses,  imaertaken  to  conduct  some  other 
persons  who  were  not  arrived ;  that  according 
to  the  testimony  of  Hale,  other  persons  were 
expected  to  call,  and  did  call,  some  of  whom 
were  conducted  by  Hale  to  the  White  Hart, 
and  others  who  knew  the  White  Hart  had  been 
sent  there ;  and  it  appears  on  the  evidence  of 
Monument,  and  according  to  the  evidence  of 
his  brother,  which  is  unimpeached,  that  he 
was  to  meet  him,  and  did  meet  him ;  and  that 
when  he  arrived,  he  told  him  he  had  other 
men  to  wait  for,  but  would  not  wait  longer 
than  seven  o'clock ;  but  the  pledge  that  he 
would  come  there,  you  6nd  redeemed  by  his 
appearance  soon  afterwards,  attended  by  the 
witness  Monument ;  then  he  says,  *'  Ings  be- 
gan to  stamp  and  swear,  saying  he  hoped  they 
would  not  stop  now  for  if  they  did,  he  should 
either  hang  himself  or  cut  his  throat;  and 
just  after  this,  Tidd  came ;  before  Tidd  came, 
Brunt  turned  himself  round  to  the  bench, 
and  said  he  would  venture  his  life  that  Tidd 
would  come;  that  he  was  confident  of  it; 
and  shortly  after  Tidd  came  into  the  room.  I 
afterwards  saw  Tidd  talking  to  Thistlewood ; 
they  both  seemed  a  little  agitated ;  Thistlewood 
seeing  me  look  at  him  turned  away;  and  Tidd 
earoe  towards  me,  and  I  said  to  him,  Tidd,  do 
not  you  think  this  is  a  pretty  set  out ;  do  you 
think  it  is  possible  for  toe  men  here  to  do  that 
which  is  talked  of;  Tidd  said,  no,  it  never  can 
be  done;  Thistlewood  said,  I  hope,  for  God's 
sake,  you  will  not  think  of  dropping  the  con- 
cern now ;  if  you  do,  it  will  turn  out  a  second 
Despard's  job."  Gentlemen,  upon  the  subject 
0i  wliat  the  ultimate  object  of  the  conspiracy 


was,  take  this  declaration,  if  they  dropped 
the  concern,  then  it  would  be  another  Despard's 
job ;  if  you  believe  it  was  made  it  is  of^g^eat 
importance  at  this  period;  if  all  the  police 
officers  in  London,  supported  not  only  by  that 
gallant  officer  lieutenant  Fitzclarence  and  his 
piquet,  but  by  a  regiment  of  hussars  had  come, 
they  might  have  said,  why,  what  do  you  want 
with  us?  but  take  us  into  custody  if  you 
please ;  but  Thistlewood  said,  if  you  retire 
now,  it  will  be  another  Despard's  job.  If  the 
sole  object  of  that  conspiracy  was  to  kill  the 
ministers,  and  to  plunder  houses,  that  would 
not  be  high  treason.  What  was  Despard's 
job?  that  was  a  project  and  intention  to 
summon  London  from  St.  James's  to  Tower- 
hill,  constituting  the  crime  of  high  treason ; 
this  is,  if  you  believe  the  testimony,  for  I  have 
said  to  you  more  than  once  if  you  do  not 
believe  the  testimony  it  all  vanishes;  but 
I  desire  you  to  ask  yourselves,  what  the 
character  of  the  conspiracy  is;  is  it  a 
conspiracy  only  with  the  intention  that  they 
talk  of?  Is  it  to  destroy  the  ministers  only, 
(not  that  that  is  a  light  offence)  or  was 
it  from  an  idea  that  the  people,  as  they  repre- 
sented, were  desirous  of  a  change,  and  that  if 
they  could  strike  that  blow  they  should  succeed 
in  their  ultimate  objects  f  If  they  could  carry 
the  beads  of  the  ministers  through  the  streets 
at  the  tail  of  their  cannon,  did  they  propose  to 
themselves  any  thing  short  of  that  the  accom- 
plishment of  which  I  know  they  had  no 
rational  ground  for  expecting  ?  For  I  hope 
to  God,  the  constitution  established  in  this 
happy  land  stands  too  much  in  the  conviction 
of  blessings  enjoyed,  for  such  men  to  succeed 
in  the  extinguishment  of  the  government,  and 
the  bringing  about  a  revolution  ;  but  you  will 
have  to  ask  yourselves,  whether  this  was  not  a 
desperate  attempt  to  effect  that  most  desperate 
plan.  ''Then  Thistlewood  said,  there  are 
quite  men  enough  in  the  room,  but  you  seem 
to  be  frightened  for  fear  of  not  having  strength 
enough ;  he  said  supposing  lord  Harrowby  has 
sixteen  servants  in  his  house,  they  will  not 
be  prepared  as  you  are ;  but  not  only  that,  but 
they  will  be  terrified,  and  from  going  into  the 
house  to  coming  out  of  it  again,  will  not 
exceed  ten  minutes;  he  said  then,  that  he 
thought  fourteen  men  would  be  enough  to  go 
into  the  room ;  it  was  put  to  all  in  the 
room  whether  they  were  willing  to  go, 
and  on  their  consenting,  there  were  four- 
teen men  picked  out  for  the  sole  purpose 
of  going  into  the  room  to  do  the  murder, 
the  other  six  were  to  secure  the  servants, 
to  guard  the  stairs  and  the  area;"  then 
he  is  asked,  whether  any  thing  was  done  in 
the  way  of  separating  the  fourteen  from  the 
rest ;  and  he  says,  *'  the  men  stood  where  they 
were,  and  Brunt  produced  a  bottle ;  the  four- 
teen agreed  to  go  into  the  room ;"  he  then 
mentions  several  of  them,  but  I  am  not  sure 
that  he  mentions  them  all.  ''Thistlewood 
was  one,  Ings  was  another,  Brunt  was  another, 
Harrison,  Wilson  and  Davidson  alto  were  pro- 


1499]        1  GEORGE  lY. 


Trial  of  WilUam  Davidson  and 


[1500 


posed ;  Davidson  wm  not  at  thai  tine  isk  the  !  pose  of  altering  his  maDoer,  isd  do  nek 
rooUy  be  iraa  down  below ;  Bradbnrn  alM  '  adWoe  had  been  given  to  him ;  then  be  mjt^ 
was  one,  and  othen  whose  names  I  cannot  "  I  never  miied  ia  political  ndety  ii  wf 
now  recollect ;  those  were  then  separated  to  a  life  before  I  saw  ThisUewosd ;  I  hare  hi  wf 
different  part  of  the  rooA  from  the  rest^  and  political  opinions^  bat  never  joined  a  pnt^; 
while  the  sepaiation  was  foing  on  an  alanrm  i  never  thoaght  it  lawful  to  sweep  off  iStm 
was  given  below ;"  beiore  tto  time,  Brunt  bad  men  in  eokl  Mood  ;  I  thought  it  was  i  vs; 
addressed  those  who  did  not  exactly  know  cruel  act  ai  the  first  proposal ;  it  was  fiiM  pro* 
what  their  preparations  weie;  he  says,  Iftr.  '  posed  to  ase  on  the  2Dd  of  Januazy^  and  not' 
Brunt  made  an  address  to  the  people;  he  ,  withstandiBg  that  I  consented  lobe  introdieed 
turoad  round  to  the  bench  again,  and  said,  >  to  Mr*  Thistlewood,  ten  days  sfterwuds^tid 
**  yon  seem  to  think  there  is  not  solBcient  i  from  that  time  to  the  33rd  of  Febniaiy,lsi 
strength  to  go  there ;  he  declared  that  if  there  ,  continued^  attend  meetings  where thitontta 
were  not  more  than  eight  or  ninoi  he  himself  ,  was  debated  settled  and  detemiaed  osi  ai 
was  determined  to  go ;  he  directly  said,  if !  even  was  chairman  once  at  one  of  the  cb» 
there  were  not  more  than  five  or  sii  men,  he  mittees;  the  committee  had  no  nane;  Ike 
would  go ;  and  if  be  fonnd  himself  in  danger,  he  .  body  that  vras  together  in  the  roosi  at  CaiSi 
would  blow  the  house  down  over  their  beads ; ,  street  was  tbe  largest  number  I  eier  nv 


then''  be  says^  **  I  beard  a  sort  of  bustle  below 
stairs ;  directly  after  this,  at  the  bottom  of  tbe 
ladder,  the  word  was  given,  halloa!  shew  a 
light ;  and  on  this  Tbistlewoed  turned  to  the 
bench,  took  a  casklle  and  held  it  at  tbe  head  of 
the  ladder  ia  the  room;  he  looked  down^  and 
saw  persons  ^ooming,  «nd  then  turned  ronnd 
and  set  the  candle  upon  the  bench  again  ;  on 
this,  they  began  to  sidle  off  into  the  little 
loom ;  he  says  this  waa  the  first  time  I  saw  the 
little  room ;  oflkseis  came  np  the  ladder,  and 
look  the  comDHmd  of  tbe  room  with  tbeir 
pistols  presented;  Smithers  was  killed,  and 
the  lights  were  pot  out|  e  pisiel  went  off,  and  I 
made  my  escape ;  when  Thisilewood  said  that 
fourteen  men  wonld  be  sufficient,  Tidd  was 
present,  but  I  am  pretty  sare  that  he  was  not 
one  that  waa  to  go  into  tbe  room;  he  was 

Present  also  when  the  assent  was  given  to 
bistlewood's  proposal,  thai  they  should  go 
on  with  the  measure,  and  likewise  when  Brant 
made  his  speech ;  that  was  after  I  had  made 
the  remarii,  that  I  did  not  think  we  could  ao* 
conmlish  the  work.  I  was  first  apprehended 
on  Friday  the  25tb;  when  I  made  my  escape^ 
I  went  back  to  my  own  place,  and  remained 
there  till  I  was  apprehended.  I  was  after* 
wards  examined  at  Whitehall." 

Then  on  his  cross-examination,  he  says, 
^'I  abandoned  m^  religion  and  became  a  dis- 
believer in  Christianity  ;*'  he  had  been  •  eda-» 
cated  and  passed  his  life  up  to  the  age  of  forty- 
five,  as  a  Christian;  he  says,  ^I  am  now  a 
Christian,  I  came  back  to  the  belief  of  Chris- 
tianity about  the  34th,  but  I  was  convinced 
before  ;*'  the  34th  was  the  day  after  he  found 
himself  at  home,  after  this  meeting  in  Calo- 
etreet ;  he  says,  **  though  I  had  been  convinced 
before,  I  did  not  come  back  exactly  till  the 
^th;"  then  he  is  asked,  and  I  do  not  mean 
to  deny  that  the  form  in  which  the  question 
was  put  was  proper,  whether  the  fear  of  the 
baiter  had  not  some  effect  upon  him ;  he  says, 
-'^  I  do  not  mean  to  deny  that;'^  then  the  coun- 
sel asked  him,  whetb^  since  his  last  exami- 
«alion,  he  had  not  bad  some  advice  given 
to  him  as  to  tbe  altering  his  manner ;  he 
said  ao»  ha  was  out  of  heJth,  be  had  been 
Inqaenlly  examined,  that  he  had   no  pur* 


collected  together  to  my  knowledge  fhuft 
^  there  was  a  talk  of  a  vast  many  acre  mm* 
Uiag ;  I  could  not  have  brought  any  nm  iilo 
theMd;  aM  I  agreed  to  do  was,  tecoatiibM 
myself;  IhOee  in  the  comiMttee  kaev  whi 
was  going  to  be  done,  but  there  ^eie  sone 
that  attended  the  meeliags,  who  did  aetkaiv; 
I  knew  what  was  inteoded  lo  be  done;  ike 
saaae  party  that  were  to  do  the  wasted  jd^ 
weee  to  go  to  Gfa/s-iim  lane ;  when  ikecA* 
end  job  was  done,  which  wm  not  to  takeip 
abo^  ten  mionles,  the  same  party  eeic  to  p 
to  Gray's-ian-kne;  Cook  was  to  Jwid  tta 
patfty  to  take  the  cannon  at  the  AitilloT' 
gromd,  that  was  not  the  west-end-jobpsrt;,! 
did  not  know  where  Mr.  Cook's  psitf  «tf  lo 
come  from ;  I  have  seen  Mr.  Cook  tedf ; 
Mr.  Palin  and  otbers  were  to  fire  thetomt 
but  I  do  not  know  who  they  were,  dm  ^ 
they  consisted  of;  nobody  ol^ccted  to  the 
pioclamations ;  it  was  proposed  by  ^^''^ 
wood,  but  not  pat  from  the  diair,  tkat  w 
hand4iiUs  should  be  stock  up  agaiait  m 
houses;  I  do  not  know  what  beesme  of  thmr 
nor  who  were  to  stick  them  up;  Idoaotkoov 
Thomas  Chambers,  I  never  called  oa  bin, 
this  was  with  a  view  to  the  contradidioB  bf 
Chambers,  who  was  afterwards  examiaed.  1 
do  not  know  that  ever  I  was  aoqaaioted  vitt 
such  a  man.*'  In  answer  to  a  qeestioD,^ 
ther  on  the  night  of  the  S3rd,  he  and  Edvon 
celled  on  Chambers,  and  desired  to  1^**^ 
arms  with  him;  he  says,  ^' I  never  a*J«j 
wards  after  the  Wednoday  tne™'^»  ,x[ 
will  swear  I  did  not  call  on  Chamben;  I  d» 
not  know  Umt  I  erer  was  in  his  house;  ee in 
not  solicit  him  to  be  permitted  to  les^e  n^ 
there  ;  I  do  not  even  know  Healhcod-covt, 
which  was  where  Chambeis  lived;  •Iw* 
omitted  a  great  many  things  in  my  w^ 
to^^ay;  I  stated  befotre,  that  laenwg 
were  to  be  sent  to  the  out-fwrts,  topr^ 
any  gentleman  leaving  the  kingdom  ert^ 
am  order  fimm  the  provisional  go*<e^le<B^ 
and  Brighton  was  to  be  taken  t^fo"**  ^ 
the  seaports  were  X6  be  pbmdered,  if  tber  p0^ 
mitled  any  person  to  ga  out  of  tbe  kiagd^i 
I  cannot  si^  where  the  force  wss  to  ejJI 
from  to  do  thisi  but  they  expected  tbe  pesp 


1501] 


Eichard  Tidd/or  High  Treason: 


A.  D.  1820. 


C1503 


t»  join  them ;  I  was  not  A  Jeftder,  I  had  not 

.    tbiit  aiabiiiofi  iboJti  vie ;  I  did  not  expect  that 

they  MTould  bring  thiafs  ito  sueh  %  pass  ;*'  tiien 

b«i0  asked,  what  were  his  motirtt$;  a«d  be 

4fiy9, ''  I  bad  a  reason  for  it«  my  ^jeet  was,  to 

acarch  fofther  into  tbe  principles  of  Brunt;'' 

t^t  was  a  blaweable  curiosity  ;  lie  sRys,  **  I 

bad  a  fooliab  a«d  curiotis  i4e8,  and  every  naan 

may  ran  himsoU'  iolo  dasiger  by  that ;  that  was 

my  motife;  I  bad  not  been  long  acquainted 

^ith  Bnint,  before  X  thous^  Uiere  was  some-* 

UuDg  wipng  in  huD ;  llhat  was  my  reasfon  for 

jtfaaiag  ia  this  plot ;  I  do  not  know  a  person  of 

the  name  of  Whatman;"  that  turns  out  to  ba 

correct,  at  least  no  sncb  person  is  called. 

Then  he  is  asked,  whether  the  priscmer  Tidd, 

when  apjne  one  said  to  him  here  is  a  pretty 

bttsiaeas,  do  you  think  there  are  enough  here 

to  do  such  a  job,  did  not  reply  that  he  had 

baen  deceived  in  the  business,  and  that  he 

woaid  have  nothing  to  do  with  it;  and  he  says, 

^'Tidd  vnadfi  »o  such  observation,  but  his 

answer  wu,  no,  it  never  can  be  diooe,  and 

that  was  all  that  \ie  said ; "  he  says,  **  David- 

aon  was  not  at  the  meeting  on  the  23rd  ;  I  do 

not  recollect  semng  him  armed  when  he  was 

in  Cato-street,  I  saw  him  there  both  in  ^e 

fttable  and  up  in  the  loft ;  I  did  not  observe 

that  he  had  any  arms  ;  I  saw  that  he  waa  very 

busy  amongst  those  who  wme  preparing  thea^* 

selves  with  arms.'' 

On  bis  re-examination,  he  saya,  ^*  I  remem« 
ber  a  person  bringing  500  bnlleis  to  the  room 
in  Foz-<ourt ;  I  became  an  infidel  from  reading 
Paine's  Age  of  Reason,  which  I  received  from 
the  priaoner  Tidd  ;  Potter  and  Palin  wese  not 
in  Cfato-street ;  there  were  men  there  whom  I 
knew  nothing  about;  I  did  not  know  Cook's 
party;  Hall  was  in  the  room  at  the  time  the 
proclamations  were  written."  Hall  is  not  a 
prisoner  now  under  indictment,  and  the  ob* 
;ervation  mjsant  to  be  conveyed  to  yon  on 
:he  part  of  the  Crown  is  this,  that  if  the  ac- 
count given  by  the  witness  Adams  is  incorrect, 
ind  that  there  was  nothaafc  written  on  this 
lartridge  paper  in  the  form  of  proclamations, 
fall  DDigst  have  been  called  to  prove  these 
seta ;  and  as  it  has  been  urged  to  you  by  the 
ttonioy-geperal  in  his  reply,  it  is  undoubtedly 
1^ ;  be  could  have  been  called  to  prove  that 
•  was  not  one  of  the  party  so  assembled,  or> 
dmittiog  that  he  was  one  of  the  party 
>  aaseisbled,  that  no  such  prodamation  was 
rittfOo,  and  he  would,  aathe  Attomey^general 
aa  aaidy  have  subjected  himself  to  no  con- 
^quencea  such  as  were  supposed ;  be  mig^ 
Lve  objected  to  any  such  question  as  would 
Lve  .a  tendency  to  criminate  himself,  if  pro* 
>eed9  and  it  would  have  been  the  duty  of  the 
ourt  to  have  cautioned  him. 
Tbia  being  the  evidence  of  the  acoomplice^ 
be  receivod  as  you  have  been  told  on  aU< 
rmer  ocoaiions,  with  all  manner  of  jeah>u8y, 
th  conatderable  doubt,  to  be  acted  upon 
th  care»  they  now  proceed  to  call  witnesses, 
im  wh<nD  they  submit,  that  it  derives  most 
landant  confinnation* 


The  next  witness  is  Eleanor  Walker,  the 
servant  and  nieoe  of  Mrs.  Rogers,  of  No.  4, 
FoxHsourt,  Gray's-inn-4ane.  She  says,  ^  Brant 
lodged  there,  and  occupied  the  two  fnowC 
rooms  on  the  second  floor ;  there  was  a  back 
room  on  the  same  floor.  In  the  month  of 
January  last,  Brunt  introduced  Ings  to  take 
that  room,  and  it  was  afterwards  taken  un- 
furnished, ai  three  shillings  a  week ;  Ings  said, 
perhaps  he  might  bring  his  goods  in  in  a  week ; 
out  he  never  did  bring  any  goods  in.''  Tlds  is 
the  whole  of  her  evidence. 

Mary  Rogers,  the  mistress  and  aunt  of  the 
last  witness,  says,  *^  In  January  last,  the  two* 
pair  of  stairs  back-HroosB  was  Let  to  a  penMm 
who  tamed  out  to  be  Ings ;  he  occupied  the 
room  four  or  five  weeks,  leaving  one  week 
unpaid  ;  in  the  course  of  that  time  I  made  in<3 
qniry  of  Brunt,  who  and  what  Ings  was,  and 
he  told  me  that  he  was  a  butcher,  and  that  he 
knew  nothing  more  of  him  than  seeing  him  in 
a  poblio-honse,  and  hearing  him  ioquire  for 
a  lodging ;  he  never  brought  any  furniture  in.'^ 
She  says,  ^oa  one  evening,  I  saw  three  men  go 
up  stairs,  one  of  them  was  a  black  man ;"  she- 
was  not  asked,  nor  did  she  suggest  that  perw 
son  was  the  prieoner  Davidson,  hot  merely 
that  a  person  of  his  oompleaion  was  one  of 
the  man  who  went  up. 

Ibe  next  witness  is  that  important  one  ta* 
whom  in  passing  along  I  have   repeatedly 
called  your  attention,  Joseph  Hale,  the  a|>»' 
prentice  of  Brunt.    He  says,  ^  I  lived  witb- 
Bmnt  in  Fox-court;  he  occupied  two  rooms,- 
one  as  a  workshop  the  other  to  live  in ;  i  slept 
ia  the  workshop;  I  remember  the  backHWoom* 
on  the  same  floor  being  occupied  in  January 
last  by  Brunt  and  Ings ;  alter  they  had  looked 
at  it  together,  Brunt  said  to  Ings,  it  will  do,, 
go  down  and  give  them  a  shilling,  and  he' 
went  down ;  I  had  known  lags  about  a  fort- 
night before ;  I  saw  him  twice  with  Thistle* 
wood  in  Brunt's  workshop  in  the  course  of- 
that  fortnight;  when  Ings  had  taken  the  room,' 
in  the  evening  he  came  and  asked  Mrs.  Brunt' 
for  the  key,  and  she  gave  it  him ;  he  and  Hall 
cama  togather,  and  I  believe  other  persons 
came  thare  that  night ;  my  master  was  taken 
up  on  the  24th  of  February ;  from  the  time ' 
that  the  room  was  taken  till  that  time,  there* 
were  meetings  held  in  that  room ;  they  were 
mostly    held   about   seven    o'clock   in   the 
evening ;  at  those  meetings  I  have  seen  Thistle- 
wood,  lags,  Davidson  the  prisoner,  Brunt, 
Bradbom,  Adams,  Stmnge,  Potter,  Hall,  Ed- 
wards, and  Tidd.    Tidd  often  came  there.    I 
was  once  at  his  lodgings  in  the  Hole-in-the- 
wall  passage.  Brook 's-market ;  the  door  of  that  - 
room  at  Brunt's  was  sometimes  open  when 
I  passed  it;  and  upon  one  occasion,  I  saw 
some  long  poles  like  branches  of  trees,  rongh  ai 
they  came  from  the  tree  about  twenty  in  num- 
ber ;  daring  the  time  the  room  was  used  ia ' 
that  way,  I  have  heard  hammering  and  sawing 
in  it.    On  the  Sunday  before  my  master  was 
taken  up,  there  was  a  meeting  in  that  room 
in  the  morning ;  I  believe  it  was  a  larger  one 


1503]        1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  of  iViUiam  Davidson  and 


um 


thtn  usual ;  the  persons  whom  I  have  named 
were  there,  and  I  am  particularly  sure  that 
TIdd  was  there,  and  Davidson  also ;"  you  will 
bear  that  in  your  recollection,  not  only  as  it 
goes  to  confirm  the  testimony  of  Adams,  but 
as  it  will  assist  you  in  taking  into  consider- 
mtion  that  which  you  have  heard  to-day  from 
the  prisoners  at  the  bar  in  their  own  defence ; 
**  they  went  away  one  or  two  at  a  time ;  my 
master  was  in  the  room  with  them ;  and  aAer 
the  meeting  broke  up,  Strange  came  out  with 
him,  and  they  went  into  my  master's  room. 
There  were  meetings  on  the  Monday  and 
Tuesday  in  that  back  room,  and  on  the  Wed- 
nesday there  were  a  number  of  persons  there. 
About  two  o'clock,  Strange  and  a  person  whom 
I  did  not  know,  came  into  our  workshop;  they 
were  fiinting  five  or  six  pistols,  and  there  were 
persons  oreriooking  them;  the  stranffer  ob- 
served that.  Brunt  told  them  to  go  into  the 
back  room,  which  they  did."  Now  this  witness 
has  had  no  opportunity  of  concerting  any  story 
with  Adams ;  you  will  ask  yourselves,  whether 
this  b  not  a  most  important  confirmation,  not 
only  as  it  respects  the  general  story  of  Adams, 
but  as  it  respects  the  parties  engaged  in  this 
conspiracy,  and  the  share  they  were  takine  in 
it  in  the  course  of  the  night,  when  proceeding 
forth  to  the  rendezvous  in  Cato-street,  for  that 
mat  work  they  had  called  the  west-end  job. 
Then  he  says,  **  in  the  course  of  the  afternoon 
there  were  several  persons  in  the  back-room ; 
and  Thistlewood  came  out  and  asked  for  a 

Eiece  of  writing  paper,  which  I  gave  him,  and 
e  went  into  the  oadc  room  with  it.  After 
that  Brant  came  out,  and  told  me  to  go  and 
get  six  sheets  of  cartridge  paper.  I  went  and 
bought  them,  and  gave  them  to  him,  and  he 
took  them  into  the  back  room;  my  master 
went  out  about  six  o'clock;  after  this  my 
mistress  wanted  her  table  for  tea,  which  vras 
ordinarily  in  our  living  room."  They  had  in 
that  room  the  table  out  of  Brunt's  living  room 
which  on  ordinary  occasions  they  had  not,  and 
you  will  recollect,  that  he  tells  you  that  Thistle- 
wood  asked  him  for  writing  paper,  and  that 
tliey  had  at  that  meeting  cartndge  paper  also. 
**  After  some  of  the  men  were  gone,  my  mis- 
tress sent  me  to  the  back-room  to  get  the 
table."  He  did  not  go  in  and  get  it,  because 
he  knew  there  were  people  still  there.  ^  I 
knocked  at  the  door,  and  Potter  opened  it, 
and  gave  me  the  table  out.  After  this,  Tidd 
called,  and  came  into  Mrs.  Brunt's  room,  and 
Mrs.  Brunt  shewed  him  a  pike-head  and  a 
sword,  which  hung  in  one  of  the  cupboards, 
and  asked  him  what  she  could  do  with  them ; 
he  said,  if  she  would  give  them  to  him,  he 
would  take  them  away,  and  he  took  them  away 
from  the  front  living  room  into  the  back-room." 
He  says  '*  after  that  I  heard  persons  go  down 
stairs  from  that  room,  and  after  that  a  person 
came  and  told  my  mistress,  that  if  any  persons 
called,  she  was  to  send  them  to  the  White 
Hart,  which  is  a  publ icehouse  close  by ;  shortly 
after  that,  three  persons  came,  and  my  mistress 
directed  them  to  the  White  Hart ;  they  did  not 


know  the  way,  and  I  went  and  shentd  tita 
the  way ;  when  I  came  back,  and  had  becoat 
the  door  about  two  or  three  minutes,  Potter 
came  up,  and  I  directed  him  to  the  White  Hut 
also;  there  were  other  persons  with  him;  1 
did  not  go  with  them,  as  Potter  appeared  t9 
know  the  way ;   they  went  away.''   'Hus  ii 
the  whole  of  what  he  states  previoQs  to  thit 
which  we  now  know  to  have  been  the  tnsi- 
action    whidi    took    place    in  CUMtneL 
**  About  nine  o'dock  in  the  evening,"  be  w^ 
'*  Brant  came  home,  the  tail  of  his  great  cnt 
and  his  boots  were  very  muddy ;  he  said  tokis 
wife,  it  is  all  np,  or  vrords  to  that  effect;  be 
appeared  confused.    He  said,  he  bad  nved  hii 
life,  and  that  was  all ;  that  where  he  bad  ben, 
a  lot  of  officers  came  in.    Afterwards,  anotber 
person,  a  stranger  to  me,  came  in,  and  Bmt 
shook  hands  with  him,  and  asked  bio,  if  be 
knew  who  had  informed  ?  and  be  replied,  No, 
he  did  not.    From  the  manner  of  speaUigte 
each  other,  it  appeared  to  me  that  thej  bii 
been  together.    'Ibe  stranger  said,  he  had  bid 
a  dreadful  blow  upon  iiis  sidc^  and  tbathevii 
knocked  down ;  and  my  master  said,  then  i» 
something  to  be  done  yet.    After  this  coore^ 
sation,  they  both  went  avray  together;"  it«a» 
apparent  that  what  had  happened  to  eaeb  «f 
them  had  passed  at  the  same  place,  and  ibK 
the  conversation  as  to  who  had  iafonBed  re- 
lated to  the  same  transaction,  in  vhick  tkef 
had  both  been  parties,  so  that  this  nao  bid 
been  knocked  down  and  injured  at  the  phc^ 
where  he.  stated  that  the  officers  bad  cone  iiv 
•and  he  had  only  saved  his  life.    Theobesiys, 
'*  after  they  were  gone,  Mrs.  Brant  and  1  «at 
into  the  back  room,  and  I  saw  in  thecopboiid 
some  rolls  of  brown  paper,  with  tar  in  thest 
and  four  large  balls  made  of  striafr  tarred,  h 
big  as  my  two  fists,"  some  of  those  tbiop 
which  have  been  presented  to  yon  by  seijast 
Hanson.    ** I  have  heard  since  that  tbfftfc 
hand-grenades.    I  also  saw  some  flanoel  ba^ 
two  of  them  were  full  of  something,  dieetbai 
were  empty,  and  some  cartridge  Py^^J^J!" 
iron  pot  oelonging  to  Brant,"  for  die  pwpj* 
of  heating  the  materials.    '^  Mrs.  Bhut  asd  I 
left  them  where  we  found  them.    Braote'** 
home  about  eleven  o'clock  at  night;  hefiMbe 
went  to  bed,  he  told  me  to  get  up  ai ««« 
I  could  in  the  moroing  and  deao  hii  bo^ 
and  I  did  so ;  he  aftenvards  asked  ne^ « J^ 
knew  the  Borough  ?  and  I  told  him,  ya;  ■! 
then  asked  me  if  I  knew  SnowVfiefds?  twi 
said,  no;  he  told  me,  to  go  to  KirbjHrtitrti 
SnowVfields,  to  a  man  of  the  nameofPMlff; 
he  said,  I  was  to  Uke  the  things  thatweiew 
the  back  room ;    we  went  into  the  nwij  ^ 
gether,  with  two  rush  baskets ;  and  he  iwdj 
to  put  in  the  things  that  were  in  the  ^^V^ 
and  that  I  had  seen  there  before,  >ntt>"®*r 
baskets,  which  I  did.    After  that,  wjeofT 
baskets  was  tied  up  in  a  blue  apron  ^^•'^JSJ 
to  Mrs.  Brant,  which  had  for  some  ti»«  J'JJ 
been  used  as  a  curtain  to  the  window  ot 
back  room ;  the  other  basket  was  not  ti»J 
in  any  thing ;  we  went  into  Bni»t'>w**» 


^ 


14061 


tOthafd  Tiddjby  Mtgh  7V«w*ii. 


A.  D.  ISSOi 


[1S06 


«hil»  we  were  thei«  looking  out  for  some- 
thing to  ti6  the  other  basket  in,  two  oflBcers 
came  in  and  took  Brunt  into  custody ,  and  took 
possession  of  the  two  baskets  containiog  the 
things  ai)d  the  iron  pot."  I  think  that  is  the 
whole  of  his  evidence  in*chief. 

On  bis  cross-exaMination,  he  is  asked,  if  he 
knows  a  man  of  the  name  of  Dwyer?  atid  he 
says,  no ;  then  he  says,  <*  I  know  Adams  and 
-  Edwards ;  they  were  often  at  Brant's ;  bnt  I 
was  not  near  enough  to  hear  their  voices  when 
they  spoke.  When  the  others  addressed  Thistle- 
wood,  they  sometimes  called  him  T.  and  some- 
times Arthur ;  the  rest  used  to  call  each  other 
by  their  names.  I  have  often  heard  a  man 
e^led  by  his  christian  name,  and  sometimes 
by  the  hrst  letter  of  his  surname.  Edwards 
was  there  oftener  than  Adams." 

This  is  the  whole  of  the  testimony  given  you 
by  this  person :    and  no  attempt  is  made  to 
break  in  upon  h^  credit,  by  shewing  that  he 
had  been  let  into  the  dangerous  secret ;  but 
being  employed  iit  his  master's  business  as  an 
apprentice,  he  became  from  that  circumstance 
acquainted  with  the  feet  that  there  had  been, 
tot  a  considerable  time  before,  secret  meetings 
In  that  room,  taken  for  Ings  the  butcher;  that 
at  that  room  there  were  such  implements  as 
those  found  afterwai^s  at  Cato^street,  and  at 
the  lodgings  of  Tidd ;  that  there  w^re  pikes, 
band-grenades,  and  pike-staves,  and  that  there 
were  swords,  which  might  well  proceed  ftom 
some  persot^  engaged  in  the  preparing  them 
in  a  further  state  of  manuftictnre  to  make  them 
fit  for  use ;  the  sawing  off  their  ends,  and  pre- 
paring them  to  receive  the  pike  heads,  wnich 
nave  now  been  produced  before  you,  and  which 
appear  applicable  to  those  staves;   besides 
that,  he  shews  you  that  on  that  very  afternoon 
cm  which  they  were  proceeding  to  that  ultimate 
obfect,  whatever  it  was,  these  persons  were 
proceeding  exactly  in  the  manner  in  which 
Adams  has  stated.    Adams,  you  know,  was 
examined  not  in  hie  hearing ;  has  been  in  cus- 
tody ever  since  the  Friday ;  and  who,  there- 
fore,  has  had  no  intercourse  whate\'er  with 
tilis  ^iHfness.     He  has  confirmed,  almost  in 
words,  some  of  the  most  important  tmrts  of  the 
traiidtfclion  stated  by  Adams  to  nave  taken 
pface  flft  Bruntf 9,  on  more  occasitm^  than  one ; 
111  Will  be  ibv  you  to  ask  yonrtelves,  whether,  if 
tbe  dase  rested  here,  and  the  qtiestidtt  to  be 
propounded  to  you  was,  whether  you  believed 
the  stery  told  by  Adams,  it  had-  of  had  not 
received  such  confirmation  from  unsuspected 
^fnarters,  from  the  mistress  of  the  house  and 
her  servant,  and  from  the  apprentice  of  Brunt, 
air  to  itiduce  you  to  believe  that  it  was  true, 
and  tftat  it  was  not  invent^ -^invented  for 
t]topuff|M]8«of  implicating  in  guilt  eli^en  men, 
sHnd'  tfab}ectittg  them  to  the  forfeiture  of  their 
\hM» :  \t\9  fot  you  to  consider,  whether  it  be, 
Bir  it  is  presented  to  your  minds   and  con- 
sefetaces,  a  fiction  and  an  invention,  or  tiie 
ncirratien'of  tmth,  though  communicated  to 
f  ott  by  the  mouth  of  an  accomplice.    It  is  fit 
Lo-omerv«  on  that,  in  passing,  that  unless  by 
VOL  XXXIII. 


softie  spirit  of  intuition,  it  seemd  impossible 
diat  Hale  should  have  been  found  in  such  a 
coincidence  as  to  the  persons  present—^the 
things  exhibited-^the  transactions  on  the  va^ 
nous  days  on  which  those  persons  met — the 
instructions  with  respect  to  other  persons  ex- 
pected to  call,  persons  calling  afterwards,  and 
the  instructions  given  to  them  accordingly—- 
the  conducting  some  and  directing  others  td 
the  place  at  which  they  were  likely  to  Bnd 
those  for  whom  they  were  inquiring:  it  id 
impossible,  as  it  appears  to  me  (but  it  is  fo^ 
you  to  exercise  yoiir  jud?m^nt  upon  it),  that 
this  story  of  Hale's  shoum  have  so  wonderful 
and  extraordinary  a  coincidence  with  the  facts 
narrated  by  Adams,  not'  communicated  to  Hale 
down  to  the  moment  of  his  examination  before 
yon  on  trial,  unless  each  of  those  persons  were 
teHing  that  which  each  for  himself  observed. 

They  then  proceed  to  call  to  you  other  wit- 
nesses, in  order  to  give  confirmation  to  the 
te^imony  of  the  accomplice,  Adams ;  the  first 
is  a  person  of  the  name  of  Thomas  Smart,  a 
watchman  in  St.  George's,  Hanover-square ;  he 
tells  you,  that  on  Tuesday  the  22nd  of  Fe- 
bruary,  in  taking  bis  walks  in  Grosvenor-square, 
about  half-past  eight,  he  observed"  four  men ; 
he  says,  ^  they  were  looking  through  the  pa- 
lisades ;  they  stood  at  the  corner,  when  I  went 
up  to  them  at  Mr.  Maberie/s  house ;  they  were 
at  that  time  looking  abotit,  and  I  went  up  to 
see  what  they  wanted ;  they  asked  me  what 
o'clock  it  was,  and  I  told  them  it  was  near 
nine.  I  thought  they  were  Very  suspicious 
characters,  one  of  them  had  a  stick,  one  was  a 
man  of  colour ;  I  called  Bissix,  who  was  also  a 
watchman  there,  to  make  observation,  telling 
him  I  saw  some  suspicious  characters."  This 
witness  does  not  affect  at  all  to  ha\e  any 
knowledge  of  the  prisoner  Davidson ;  there- 
fore, it  might  be  for  any  thing  this  witness 
knows,  any  other  person  of  his  complexion. 

Bissix  vi  then  called,  and  he  tens  you  that 
he  was  a  watchman  in  Grosvenor-square  on 
the  night  of  the  22nd  of  February ;  be  says 
**  Smart  was  there  at  the  same  time ;  I  saw 
two  men  in:  the  square  that  attracted  my  notice, 
thev  passed  us  and  asked  what  time  it  was ;  we 
told  them  it  was  near  ftine  o'clock,  and  they 
passed  along;  they  took  particular  notice  of  lord 
Harrowb/s  house,  and  some  other  houses  in 
the  square;  and  one  of  them,  a  man  of  colour, 
bad  a  stick  in  his  hand,  larger  than  persons 
usually  have." 

The  use'  that  is  made  of  tfa!^  is  to  confirm 
the  narrative  given  yt>u  by  Adams ;  that  in' 
consequence  of  his  communication  of  the  im- 
pre^ion  whidi  Hobbs  had  instilled  intd  him, 
that  tlierewere  suspicions  afloat  in  the  minds  of 
the  police  officers  and  the  secretary  of  state, 
that  somethtng*  was  wrong,  it  was  dertermined  a 
watch  should  be  set  and  relieved  from  time  td 
time ;  Adams  tells  you,  that  the  prisoner  Da- 
vidson was  one  of  that  watch  ;  the  two  watch- 
men tell  you,  not  indeed  that  Davidson  was 
one  of  that  watch,  but  that  tliere  were  persons 
there  whose  appearance,  whose  conduct,  whose 

5D 


15071       1  GEORG£  IT. 


TruU^WUIumDrnmbMati 


CIS08 


denetnofy  created  suspicion  in  their  miDds, 
and  was  of  a  nature  indaciDg  them  to  beliere 
that  they  were  persons  watching  lord  Harrow- 
by  *s  house  and  other  houses,  to  see  what  was 
going  in  and  comine  out  of  those  houses,  cor- 
responding with  the  account  given  that  a 
watch  was  set  to  enable  the  committee  to  come 
to  a  determination  whether  they  were  betrayed 
or  not,  by  perceiving  whether  soldiers  or  police 
officers  were  introduced  into  that  neighbour^ 
hood,  aye  or  no ;  these  witnesses  prove,  that 
one  of  the  persons  on  that  watch  was  a  man 
of  colour,  who  might  have  bee'o,  but  is  not 
proved  to  be,  the  prisoner  Davidson ;  I  say, 
though  it  would  have  gone  higher,  if  they 
could  have  identified  Davidson  to  be  one  of 
that  watch,  yet  it  is  a  strong  confirmation  of 
the  witness  Adams,  that  there  was  a  watch, 
and  that  one  of  the  men  so  watching,  was  a 
man  of  colour. 

The  next  witness  that  they  call  to  you  is 
Heniy  Gillan;  he  says,  he  lives  at  No.  15, 
Mount-street,  Berkeley-souare ;  and  nobody 
has  urged  an  observation  tiiat  is  discreditable 
to  him ;  nobody  suspects  tliat  he  has  done  any 
thing  which  ought  to  bring  his  testimony  into 
discredit ;  jie  stands  before  vou  then  a  person 
as  well  entitled  to  credit,  for  anv  thing  that 
appears  in  this  cause,  as  any  one  otyou.  would, 
it  you  were  to  be  sworn  in  court.  "[Uie  account 
he  gives  is  that  he  sometimes  at  his  leisure 
went  into  a  public-house  called  the  Rising  Sun ; 
be  says,  *'  1  was  there  on  the  22nd  of  February 
last;  the  house  is  situated  at  the  comer  of 
Adams-mews  and  Charles-street :  I  was  there 
in  the  evening  between  nine  and  ten  o'clock ; 
I  saw  Adams  and  Brunt  come  in  :**  Now  you 
will  recollect  what  Adams  has  said  about  this; 
Tidd  was  to  have  gone  with  Brunt  to  relieve 
Davidson  and  the  first  watch ;  but  Brunt  came 
back,  and  said,  that  Tidd  had  met  with  a  man 
of  too  much  importance  to  part  with,  and  that 
therefore  somebody  ebe  must  be  substituted  in 
his  place;  I  was  the  man  substituted  in  his 
place,  and  I  went  with  Brunt ;  we  went  to  our 
watch,  but  not  thinking  it  necessary  to  be  upon 
the  watch  every  moment,  we  relieved  ourselves 
from^the  fatigue  of  that  watch  by  going  into  a 
public-house,  and  not  only  that,  but  to  avoid 
neing  ourselves  too  much  the  objects  of  ob- 
servation ;  we  had  some  refreshment,  bread  and 
cheese  and  beer,  and  Brunt  played  two  games 
of  dominos  with  a  young  man  in  that  house, 
who  was  a  stranger  to  Adams,  down  to  the 
very  moment  of  his  being  examined  here. 
Those  who  had  the  care  of  the  interests  of  the 
public  in  conducting  this  prosecution,  probably 
went  to  the  public-house  and  so  traced  out 
this  young  man.  He  says,  ^  I  saw  two  men 
there ;"  Who  were  those  two  men  ?  "  Brunt 
and  Adams.''  Did  Brunt  go  there  as  a  watch- 
man that  night?  Did  Adams  go  there  as  a 
watchman  that  night?  Were  they  there  during 
the  period  which  Adams  speaks  of?  Ask  this 
young  man,  an  unsuspected  witness ;  "  I  play- 
ed two  games  at  dominos  with  Brunt;  I  left 
the  house  at  near  ten  o'clock,  leaving  them  in 


diathouse.^  They  submit  to  yoa  on  the  putof 
the  prosecution,  that  this  is  a  most  impntiiit 
circumstance,  in  order  to  giveconfiimttkiitB 
the  testimony  of  Adams,  not  in  some  diai- 
stances  quite  collateral  to  the  subject  of  w 
present  inquiry,  bat  intimately  conoeclcd  vdl 
one  of  those  transactions  of  that  night,  vhid 
had  for  its  object  to  enable  the  coaspintMsto 
determine,  whether  they  should  go  on  to  the 
completion  of  their  object,  or  should  retire  (na 
it,  on  the  conviction  that  they  were  sospecHdt 
and  that  precautions  were  takeo. 

They  then  call  to  you  a  person  of  the  bum 
of  John  Hector  Morrison  ;---he  tetts  ]pwi  thttk 
is  a  journeyman  to  Mr.  Underwood,  of  Drof- 
lane,  a  cutler;  he  says,  ^  lags  biooght  aivod 
to  me  to  be  ground,  on  Christmas  eve ;  be  gui 
me  directions,  that  it  was  to  be  grooiid  inn 
the  heel  to  the  point,  and  also  the  back  to  be 
ground,  which  was  done  for  him ;"  be  siji, 
*'  he  fetched  the  sword  away  4iifflseif ;  be  cn> 
ployed  me  again  afterwards ;  he  biongk  k 
another  to  be  ground  as  the  first  was,  vhkh 
was  done  and  delivered  to  him ;''  it  vaiibaip 
to  the  extreme,  and  that  which  a  cutler's  art 
could  put  upon  it  appears  to  have  bees  ande 
still  more  destructive  and  more  miscbievoasby 
having  been  sharpened  highly  upon  a  stoae,  ir 
a  steel,  after  it  passed  out  of  his  hand.  Tbe 
Crown  submit  to  yon  that  thb  is  a  stroag  or- 
cumstand  to  support  the  testimooy  of  tbe 
accomplice ;  he  has  told  yon  lags  «ai  umI 
with  such  an  instrument  as  this,  and  tbe  eatkr 
tells  you,  that  he  received  it  from  lagit  ^^ 
this  remarkable  instruction,  and  that  be  after- 
wards brought  another,  which  has  bm  beea 
identified  before  you,  but  probably  yovwB^ 
have  been  directed  to  that  by  a  purt  of  die  ae- 
lancholy  transaction.  You  may,  perfaapSi  cob* 
jecture,  that  the  sword  used  in  the  deitnictiQi 
of  the  officer,  in  Cato-Atreet,  may  be  that  vbkb 
was  thus  sharpened,  and  you  nuiyt  ImH>^ 
think  it  not  difficult  to  account  for  tbe  aoa- 
production  of  it  here  to  day,  bysupposiof  tbat 
It  was  the  instrument  used  on  that  ocoaoa; 
it  is  not,  however,  proved  to  yoa  that  it  iMi 
nor  is  it  of  importance,  and  therefore  yoa  "9 
dbmiss  that  from  your  oonsideratioB. 

They  then  call  to  you  £dward  ^'H'^'fT 
he  says,  *'  I  am  corporal-major  of  theieflood 
regiment  of  life-guvds;  I  know  the  pnxiBtf 
Harrison  perfectly  well ;  he  was  in  tint  k!^ 
ment  upwards  of  five  years;  his  "l*?'*^ 
duty  made  him  acquainted  with  tbe  Kins* 
street  barradcs ;  there  were  five  viadovt  n 
those  barracks  looking  out  of  the  loft  "^^ 
Gloucester-mews;  they  are  Btopped np aoir; 
they  were  stopped  up  two  or  three  days  »* 
the  affair  in  Cato-street;  the  ktfks  cootaw^ 
hay  and  straw  chiefly,  and  by  throwiag  vtf 
thing  in  at  the  windovra,  particularly  ^W^ 
where  the  straw  was  lodged,  it  was  posB»J 
to  produce  a  fire;  there  were  two*** 
loaas  of  straw  there  at  that  tiaeattbeMiS 
in  a  situation  which  might  have  been  lascbN 
by  a  fire-ball  going  in  at  the  window,  asV9 
were  situated  about  four  feet  from  tbe  winds^* 


15091 


Richard  Tiddfor  High  Treason. 


A.  t).  1820. 


ri5io 


It  is  stated  by  setjeant  Hanson,  that  one  of 
thoM  fire^renades  thrown  into  the  window 
of  this  room,  which  would  have  bnrnt  for  three 


by  a  great  many  who  had  deceived  him,  but 
that  now  he  had  got  men  who  would  stand  by 
him.    He  asked  me,  whether  I  had  any  arms. 


or  four  minutes  in  a  blaze,  and  afterwards  have  •  I  said  no ;  be  said,  every  man  ought  to  have 
deposited  upon  the  hay  and  straw  a  red-hot '  arms,  all  of  us  have  arms,  or  to  that  effect ; 
body  of  fire,  would  have  been  vastly  more  than  some  have  got  a  sabre,  some  have  got  a  pistol, 
sufficient  to  have  destroyed  all  the  contents  of '  and  some  have  got  a  pike,  every  one  has  got 


the  lofts  of  that  barrack,  and  probably  to  have 
effected  that  purpose  which  is  stated  to  have 
been  recommended  by  Harrison,  and  to  have 
been  adopted  by  the  conspirators. 

Then  a  witness  of  the  name  of  Aldous,  says, 
*'  I  am  a  pawnbroker;  I  have  known  the  pri- 
soner Davidson  for  two  or  three  years;  he 
pawned  with  me  a  brass-barrelled  blunderbuss, 


something ;  he  said,  I  could  buy  a  pistol  for 
about  four  or  five  shillings.  I  told  him,  I  had 
no  money  to  buy  pistols  with;  and  he  said, 
well,  he  would  see  what  he  could  do.  He 
then  said,  that  the  man  he  brought  with  him 
was  in  the  same  line  of  business  with  myself, 
a  boot-closer,  and  that  he  lived  in  a  court  in 
Gray*s-inn-lane.    We  returned  into  the  room, 


and  he  took  it  out  of  pawn  on  the  23rd  of  Fe-  |  and  found  Brunt  there,  and  Thistlewood  and 
bniary  in  the  morning,"  the  day  to  which  your  Brunt  shortly  afterwards  went  away ;  I  lighted 
attention  has  been  so  constantly  addressed,  them  down  stairs,  and  Brunt  gave  roe  his  ad- 
^I  have  since  seen  it  in  the  hands  of  Mr.  dress.  On  Tuesday,  the  22nd  of  February,  Brunt 
Kuthven,  the  officer.**  It  is  produced  among  called  upon  me  withTidd,  the  prisoner;  I  said 
the  articles  found  in  Cato-sueet,  or  by  some  of  to  Brunt,  1  thought  I  had  lost  you;*'  he  had  not 
the  officers ;  he  looks  at  it  now,  and  he  identi-  seen  him  for  a  considerable  length  of  time,  a 
fies  it.  Tliey  desire  you,  upon  the  part  of  the  couple  of  months  or  more.  *'  He  said,  the 
prosecution,  to  ask  yourselves,  whether  this  king's  death  had  made  an  alteration  in  their 
affords  to  you  any  probability  that  the  testi*  plans ;  I  asked  him  what  plans ;  he  said,  there 
inony  of  Adams  is  true,  and  gives  any  corro- ;  was  to  be  a  meeting  the  following  evening  up 
boration  to  the  narrative  he  has  given  you.  at  lybum-turnpike,  and  we  should  hear  ail 
When  you  find  that  a  brass-barrelled  blunder-  about  it ;  then  he  turned  to  Tidd,  and  asked 
buss,  which  had  been  pledged  by  the  prisoner  him,  if  he  should  give  roe  the  word  ?  he  said, 
Davidson,  in  January,  and  redeemed  by  him  yes,  he  supposed  there  would  be  no  danger  in 
on  the  23rd  of  February,  formed  part  of  the  it ;  and  then  Brupi  iraid,  when  I  came  to  the 
magazine  intended  for  the  exploit  of  the  23rd  place,  Tyburn-turnpike,  if  I  saw  any  people 
<»f  February,  proceeding  from  Cato-street,  I  about,  I  was  to  say,  6,tt,f,  and  if  they  were 
think  you  will  probably  consider  that  a  strong  friends  they  would  answer,  <,o,n ;  he  said,  be 
confirmation  of  the  narrative  stated  by  the    should  be  at  our  house  the  following  moniing 

to  tell  me  all  about  it,  and  at  what  time  it  was 
to  take  place,  and  went  away  with  Tidd,  leav- 
ing me  and  my  brother  together.''  He  says, 
^  Brunt  came  alone,  about  half  past  four  the 
next  day;  my  brother  was  with  me ;  he  called 
me  down  stairs ;  he  said  he  wanted  me  to  go 
in  half  an  hour ;  I  told  him  I  could  not,  for 
that  I  had  some  work  to  finish,  which  must  be 
done  before  I  went;  he  asked  me  what  time 
it  would  be  done ;  I  said  about  six  ;  he  said 
he  could  not  wait  so  long  as  that,  but  that  I 
must  go  with  the  person  whom  he  had  brought 
the  day  before ;  he  told  me  that  his  name  was 
Tidd,  and  that  he  lived  at  Hole-in-the*wall 
Passage,  Brook's-market ;  I  went  to  Tidd*8 
lodgings  about  half-past  six,  and  found  him 
there ;  he  said  he  had  been  waiting  for  some 
more  men,  whom  he  expected  to  go  with  him, 
and  that  if  no  one  else  came  before  seven 
o'clock,  he  would  not  wait  any  longer;   he 


accomplice  Adams. 

They  then  call  to  you  a  witness  of  the  name 
of  John  Monument  ;~he  states  that  he  is  a 
prisoner  in  the  Tower ;  and  the  observations 
which  have  been  made  (and  which  cannot  be 
too  often  pressed  in  favour  of  prisoners  stand- 
ing in  this  situation)  applv  likewise  to  the  tes- 
timony of  Monument;  tor  though  you  vrill 
perhaps  think,  he  was  not  so  deeply  embarked 
in  the  conspiracy  as  Adams,  yet  still  he  must 
be  taken,  tor  the  purposes  of  this  inquiry,  to 
be  an  accomplice,  and  therefore  not  to  be  re- 
ceived but  with  jealousy  and  suspicion,  and  to 
be  attended  to  only  as  the  evidence  he  gives 
IS  corroborated  and  supported.  The  account 
he  gives  is,  that  he  is  a  shoemaker,  living  in 
Garden-court,  Baldwin's-gardens.  He  says, 
*^  1  know  a  person  of  the  name  of  Ford  ;  I  re- 
collect seeing  Thistlewood  at  Ford's,  it  was 
about  three  months  before  I  was  apprehended ; 
in  consequence  of  seeing  Thistle  wood  at  Ford's, 
be  afterwards  called  upon  roe  in  company  with 
Brunt ;  my  brother  and  my  mother  were  in  the 
room  at  the  time;  after  he  had  been  in  the 
room  some  short  time,  be  said  he  wished  to 
apeak  to  me ;  in  consequence  of  that  intima- 
tion, I  went  out  of  the  room  with  him,  leaving 
my  brother  and  Brunt  in  the  room ;  my  bro- 
ther's name  is  Thomas  Monument.  When  we 
got  ont,  Thistlewood  said,  great  events  were  at 
hand,  die  people  were  everywhere  anxious  for 
a  change ;  that  he  had  been  promised  support 


says,  no  more  did  arrive,  and  I  asked  him, 
where  it  was  we  were  going  to  ?  He  said,  to 
a  mews  in  the  Edgeware-road ;  Tidd  went  to  a 
comer  of  the  room,  and  took  a  pistol  out  of  a 
box,  and  put  it  into  a  belt  which  was  round 
his  body ;  he  took  also  about  six  or  eight  pike- 
heads,  wrapped  up  in  paper,  which  appeared 
to  me  to  be  three  square,  like  bayonets ;  then 
he  took  a  staff  of  about  fqur  feet  long,  with  a 
hole  at  the  end  of  it,  as  if  to  put  a  pike  in ; 
after  he  had  thus  provided  himself,  we  went 
out  together;   we  went  down  into  Uolborn^ 


151 1]       1  GEORGE  IV. 


Trud  of  WUHam  Dmddsm  md 


11513 


and  froM  thence  ioAo  Ozford-itraet ;  is  we 
Were  going  along,  I  asked  him  what  we  were 
going  about  ?  and  he  said  I  should  know  when 
we  got  there.  1  then  asked  him,  whether  we 
wfere  going  to  the  House  of  Commons  f  He 
said,  No ;  there  were  too  many  soldiers  near 
there.  I  asked  him  again,  where  we  were  go- 
ing to^  And  he  said,  to  Gfoaveaor-aquare. 
1  asked  him,  whether  any  one  in  panioular 
lived  there?  And  he  said,  there  was  to  he 
a  cabinet  dinner  there  that  erening }  I  under- 
stood what  he  meant,  and  I  asked  no  mere ; 
we  then  went  on  towards  the  £dgeware««oad ; 
we  came  to  an  archway  that  lea<ki  into  a  nar- 
row  street ;  we  went  under  the  archway,  and 
found  two  men  there ;  TIdd  had  some  conver- 
sation with  them,  and  then  we  went  into  the 
stable;  there  were  three  or  four  men  there; 
at  the  further  extremity  of  the  stable,  there 
was  a  ladder,  which  I  went  up,  after  Tidd  ; 
in  the  loft  above,  I  found  about  three  or  four 
and  twenty  persons ;  there  was  a  carpenter's 
bench  in  the  l6ft  covered  with  swonds  and 
pistols.  Thistlewood  vms  among  the  per- 
sons I  found  there ;  there  was  a  man  in  a 
brown  great  coat,  standing  on  the  other  side 
of  the  carpenter's  bench,  who  spoke  of  the  im- 
propriety of  going  to  lord  Harrowby's  house 
with  so  small  a  number  as  five  and  twenty 
men ;"  then  he  is  asked,  if  the  number  had 
been  mentioned  befoie  ?  and  he  says,  *'  Yes ; 
some  person  was  going  to  count  them,  and 
Thistlewood  said  there  was  no  occasion, — 
there  were  five-and-  twenty.  I  saw  the  prisoner 
Davidson  there  that  evening;  1  do  not  think 
he  was  there  when  I  first  went,  but  he  came 
in  afterwards ;  I  had  seen  him  at  one  or  two 
public  meetings  in  SmithfieM ;  I  am  sure  that 
Davidson  was  the  man."  He  says,  ^vpon 
the  remark  being  made  of  the  impropriety  of 
going  to  lord  Harrowby's  hoase,  Thistlewood 
said,  he  only  wanted  fourteen  men  to  go  into 
the  room,  and  supposing  lord  Harrowby  had 
si)[teen  men  servants,  that  number  would  be 
quite  sufficient;  upon  which,  the  man  in  the 
brown  great  coat  said,  when  we  come  out  of 
the  room,  there  will  be  a  crowd  round  the 
dt>or,  how  are  we  to  get  away?-  Thistlewood 
said,  you  know  the  largest  party  are  already 
gone ;  upon  which,  Davidson  told  the  man  in 
the  brown  great  coat,  not  to  throw  cold  water 
upon  the  proceedings.''  This  man  undertakes 
Dositively  to  state,  that  Davidson  was  present ; 
he  says,  he  had  seen  htm  at  some  of  the  public 
meetings ;  and  it  is  proved  by  some  of  the 
wttnesites,  that  at  one  public  meeting  at  least 
he  had  been  present;  that  is  proved  by  a  wit- 
ness for  the  defendant.  Then,  he  says,  that 
"  Davidson  said  to  the  man  in  the  brown  great 
coat,  if  he  was  afraid  of  his  life,  he  might  ko, 
— they  could  do  without  htm  ;•  and  Brunt  smd, 
that  sooner  than  they  should  so  from  the  busi- 
ness they  were  about,  he  vrould  go  into  the  room 
by  hiihself,  and  blmv  them  all  up,  if  he  perished 
with  them.  He  said,  ^ou  know  that  we  have  got 
that  iliat  can  do  it.  After  this  conversation,  pa^ 
ties  were  separated  fiiom  the  rest  to  go  into  the 


room.    Hie  man  in  die  brawn  gyeatccatmdi 
answer  and  said,  as  they  all  seencd  foi  it, 
thoadi  he  did  not  like  going  witk  ss  mmHi 
mimber,  he  would  not  be  agaimt  it;  asdk 
prcMposed  that  they  should  all  pot  theMdm 
under  Thistlewood's  orders ;  upon  vlMh|  Bih 
tiewood  said,  every  one  engaged  ia  thiibni- 
ness  would  have  tlie  same  hoaoar  at  Uaidf ; 
then  he  proposed  thai  thefborteenmatsiB 
into  Che  room  should  volunteer  fieoi  tkfo* 
sons  there  assembled,  and  that  thef  iboiM 
place  themselves  on  one  side  of  tke  lom; 
about  twelve  or  thirteen  voloBteered,  aidK-' 
parated   themselves   for   that  piiT]»9e,  and 
among  them  were  Tidd,  Braat,  Oaridsostti 
Wilson,  that  is  all  that  I  recollect;  TMh- 
wood  went  down  stairs  and  cane  vp  l^ 
and  said,  he  had  just  received  inteUigeBic, 
that  the  duke  of  Wellington  and  lenlSidMab 
had  just  arrived  at  loid  Harrowby's.*  Tta 
probably  arose  from  there  being  conpny  go- 
ing to  the  house  of  the  Archbishop  of  Yed, 
who  resides  next  door  to  lord  Hamywby.  T\m 
he  is  asked,   whether  shortly  after  tkat  m 
alarm  took  place  below  ?    And  he  ^tj 
did  not  hear  any  alarm  at  all,  till  I  pcwW 
the  men  at  the  top  of  the  stairs;  they  slid  dief 
were  officers,  and  bade  them surieodef ;  !«• 
taken  into  custody ;  there  was  an  officer  UW; 
but  I  did  not  know  who  it  wasliWefteJWiA 
You  have,  no  doubt,  during  the  coone  « 
these  trials  (which  from  a  domestic  tffetiooj 
had  not  the  good  fortune  to  attend)  ^^ 
by  the  highest  living  authorities  ^™1 
can  refer,  that  when  evidence  is  liidba«» 
jury  to  charge  a  certain  number  of  pfl*^." 
there  b  proof  that  tbey  hare  been  ^^^ 
a  conspiracy,  the  declarations  and  tcti  rf  a 
are  evidence  against  each ;  now,  theparticsw 
declarations  I  am  about  to  bring  to  T*"^ 
deration  are  those  of  the  great  ^^^j^ 
conspiracy,  as  he  probably  will  betliOBg«» 
be  by  you,  namely,  Thistlewood;  '^^^I^SI! 
declarations  to  be  taken  into  joureonadefr 
tion  as  it  respecU  all.    The  ^>*"*"*5J 
was  taken  into  custody  and  examined  at » aj 
hall ;  I  was  handcuffed  to  Thistlewoed  W» 
the  last  times  I  went.    Thistlewood  t*  ■« 
to  say  to  the  privy  council,  that  a  ""<|^!°: 
name  of  Edwards  had  led  me  to  the  a^ 
and  that  it  was  through  him  I  <«**fL 
You  will  he  so  good  as  to  recoUeet  tWtw 
appears  in  evidence  upon  the  exa»iM»w^ 
this  man  in  chief,  and  that  he  has  bees  flw 
cross-examined,  but  that  there  is  noi«||» 
suggest  that  he  has  been  at  wy"*?7j-. 
which  Edwards  was  present,  or  «*»'JJ*  fj 
saw  him  or  heard  his  name  heft>«;  JJJ'Jr 
course  of  the  case  has  been  to  ***«^2^ 
to  point  at  Edwards,  to  complain  thijBBJwj 

was  not  called,  to  suggest  thai  n  '^^ 
were  here,  it  would  turn  out  **JJ*|J^ 
great  deceiver  and  deluder,  8»^  !**  {vj,  a^^ 
cent  men  into  the  great  calamity  is  ''[J*.^ 
are  now  involved .  The  instmction  ^^^ 
from  Thistlevrood  was,  « if  I  was  «k« 'T 
led  me  into  that  business,  and  look  ae*^"" 


1513] 


lUchard-TiddJbr  High  Treason. 


A.  D.  1820. 


iuii 


meeting,  tfiat  I  was  to  aay,  it  was  a  man  of  tlie 
name  of  Edwards.  I  said,  how  cait  1  tell  soch  a 
falsehood  as  that,  when  you  know  very  well  I 
never  saw  the  man  f  Oh,  he  said,  that  is  of 
DO  consequence  at  all;  if  you  are  asked  by  the 
privy  council,  what  sort  of  a  man  he  ifi»,  tell 
them  he  is  not  much  taller  than  yourself,  of  a 
fair  completion,  and  that  he  used  to  wear  a 
brown  great  coat."  Gentlemen,  if  this  be  not  so, 
how  was  this  man,  Monument,  to  hare  given 
you  this  testimony?  he  swore  positively,  before 
you,  that  he  never  beard  of  Edwards  till  This- 
tlewood  mentioned  him;  that  he  never  was 
introduced  to  him  at  any  meeting,  public  or 
private,  and  never  heard  of  him  till  he  was 
handcuffed  to  Mr.  Thistlewood  at  Whitehall ; 
iie  has  had  no  opportunity  (being  closely  con- 
fined) of  knowing  that  there  was  such  a  person, 
or  that  any  person  h^d  suggested  that  Edwards 
was  a  guilty  person  ;  and  yet,  if  this  part  of 
the  story  is  not  true,  and  Thistlewood  did  not 
say  this,  he  has  introduced  something  which 
dovetails  expressly  with  every  thing  said  by 
every  body  in  eVery  stage  of  the  proceeding ; 
then  you  will  ask  yourselves  whether  that  does 
not  add  something  of  intrinsic  credit  to  the 
story  told  by  Adams. 

This  witness^  on  his  cros^-examination,  says, 
**  I  unwillingly  joined  in  the  plan  to  assassinate 
ministers,  and  through  fear,  as  it  was  said  by 
Brunt  when  he  called  upon  me  on  the  22nd 
of  February,  that  any  one  that  was  any  ways 
concerned  with  them  and  did  not  go,  should 
be  destroyed  .'*  He  says,  he  was  not  concerned 
with  them  before,  and  that  he  has  told  you  all 
he  can  recollect;  that  he  knows  nothing  about 
a  proclamation  or  a  plan  to  mise  rebellion  and 
levy  war,  but  only  the  plan  to  assassinate  mi- 
nisters ;  then  he  was  asked,  whether  Tidd  did 
not  tell  him  in  the  loft  that  he  had  been  de- 
ceived, and  persuade  him  to  go  away  with  him, 
and  leave  the  party,  and  he  says,  **  No,  he  did 
not ;  I  wish  for  his  own  sake^  as  well  as  mine, 
that  he  bad." 

It  IS  submitted  to  you,  whether  the  testi- 
mony of  this  witness  does  not  afford  confirma- 
tion to  the  prisoner  Adams ;  and  the  way  in 
which  this  is  put  is,  though  both  are  accom- 
plices, does  not  the  account  grven  by  Monih< 
ment  of  that  which  had  been  already  deCei^ 
mined  on,  of  that  which  led  to  the  operations 
of  that  particnlar  night, — that  they  were  to  go 
to  a  mews  in  the  Edgeware-road — that  they  were 
there  to  assemble^ that  they  were  to  proceed 
tb  lord  Haitowby's — and  tnat  they  were  to 
proceed  to  that  noble  ear^s,  because  there  was 
to  be  there  a  cabinet  dinner — confirm  the  evi^ 
dence  of  Adams  ?  They  say  that  is  a  story 
ifHrich  Monument  could  not  have  told  here  unless 
it  was  true,  on  any  suggestion  of  the  prisoner 
Adams ;  for  Monument  was  taken  into  custody 
iii  Cato*street,  and  has  remained  in  custody 
cfver  since,  without  any-possih^ty  of  commu- 
nicating witii  him ;  and  Adams  was  taken  at 
his  lodgings,  and  has  been  confined  at  another 
place,  without  the  possibiNt^rof  communicating 
with  him,  and  therefore,  each  may  derive  cre^' 


drt  to  the  story  he  tdls,  by  the  story  told  by 
the  other;  but  they  say  further,  that  the  testi- 
mony of  Monument,  if  it  stood  alone,  would  go 
to  prove  all  that  is  alleged,  so  as  to  constitute 
t^ie  crime  of  high  treason,  imputed  by  tliis  in- 
dictment, for  that  it  communicates,  that  the 
conspirators  were  assembled  for  the  purpose  of 
that  which  has  been  called  the  West^end  job; 
or  the  despatch  of  the  cabinet  ministers ;  that 
it  was  represented  that  a  large  body  of  them 
had  alreaay  gone,  and  that,  ^erefore,  no  great 
strength  was  wanted  for  that  purpose  for  which 
they  were  first  to  be  employed ;  that  it  had 
been  represented  by  one  of  the  conspirators, 
Thistlewood,  that  great  events  were  at  hand, 
and  that  the  people  were  very  anxious  for  il 
change ;  that  he  had  been  deceived  by  persons 
who  had  engaged  to  farther  his  projects,  but 
had  now  persons  on  whom  he  could  rely ;  that 
the  witness  had  been  introduced  to  Brunt  and 
to  Tidd,  and  had  thus  become  acquainted  with 
the  transactions.  It  is  not  suggested  that  he 
could  have  derived  knowledge  of  all  this,  but 
by  the  communication  made  to  him,  as  be  says^ 
by  the  persons  he  has  named. 

[A  note  UHU  handed  over^  and  presenied  to  M# 

Court]. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow* — ^Is  that  from  one  6f 
the  prisoners. 

[It  was  handed  to  his  Lordship,"] 

Mr.  Baron  Garrowj^At  is  an  application 
from  the  prisoner,  Davidson,  to  state  some  cir- 
cumstances which  he  has  omitted.  Though 
not  eonvenient  nor  regular,  Ood  forbid  that 
he  shall  be  prevented  doing  so.  Shall  I  read 
it  fi^om  your  paper? 

Daoidson, — ^If  your  lordship  pleases. 

Mr.  Baron  Ganvu?.— He  says,  **  There  is  a 
circamstanoe,  I  forgot  to  mention,  in  my  de'«* 
fence,  which  I  beg  the  indulgence  of  yoitr 
lordship  to  call  to  mind.  It  is,  that  ray  house 
has  not  only  been  searched,  but  even  pulled 
nearly  down,  but  no  circumstances  found  sup- 
porting a  censpiraey,  either  directly  or  indiv 
rectly.''  He  addresses  that  to  me  in  respectful 
terms,  requesting  I  will  direct  your  attention 
to  it ;  yen  will  consider  this,  as  added  to  the 
circumstances  already  stated  in  his  defence, 
that  a  most  diKgent  search  has  been  made  at 
his  house  (we  will  take  the  fact  to  be  so),  and 
that  no'  evidence  to  afford  any  charge  of  his 
having  been  guilty  of  a  conspiracy  is  brought 
against  him,  as  the  result  of  such  search ;  it 
may,  therefore,  fairly  be  taken  that  it  is  so ; — 
the  value  of  that  is  not  at  this  moment  to  be 
considered. ' 

I  was  observing  to  you,  gentlemen,  oft  the 
evidence  of  Monument,  whether  it  does  not 
derive  intrinsic  value  from  the  circmnstances 
stated  in  Hy  compared  with  circumstances  of  a 
similar  aatm-e;  the  two  persons  never  having 
bad,  since  this  cause  had  its  commencement, 
in  any  of  its  parts,  an  opportuni^  of  confer- 
ritigtogetber. .  Bvt,  on  the  part  of  the  prose- 


15153       1  GEORGE  IV. 

cntion,  they  saT  Ibrther,  UMt  the  tettimooy  of 
MoDumeoty  if  believed,  goes  to  prove  the 
whole,  namelyy  that  there  had  been  a  conspi- 
racy of  a  certain  number  of  persons,  of  whom 
these  persons  were  part,  by  force  of  arms,  and 
by  rising  in  the  town,  and  by  the  destruction 
or  his  roi^esty's  then  confideniial  ministers,  to 
compel  his  majesty  to  change  his  measures,  or 
to  brinff  about  a  destruction  of  the  constitution 
by  rebellion  and  revolution.  They  say,  yoa  may 
infer  this  from  the  testimony  of  Monument, 
if  for  the  moment  you  were  to  forget  altogether 
the  testimony  of  Adams,  remembering  always 
that  you  ought  to  deal  with  the  testimony  of 
Monument  as  you  have  been  advised  with  the 
testimony  of  Adams,— to  receive  it  with  care 
and  caution,  and  to  receive  it  only  as  it  is  sop- 
ported  in  such  manner  as  to  give  to  it  the  ef- 
fect of  truth,  and  not  to  convince  you  that  it 
is  not  the  result  of  invention. 

Now  to  support  his  evidence,  they  call  be- 
fore you  Thomas  Monument ;  with  respect  to 
whom  it  is  but  fitting  I  should  state,  that  there 
is  not  a  single  imputation  on  his  character. 
He  says,  **  I  am  a  shoemaker,  and  live  with 
my  brother;  I  recollect  Thistlewood  calling 
upon  him  at  his  lodgings,  accompanied  by 
Brunt  Thistlewood  said,  he  wished  to  speak 
to  mv  brother;  they  went  out  together;"  leav- 
ing Brunt  with  the  witness ;  **  they  returned  in 
three  or  four  minutes;  and  Thistlewood  and 
Brunt  went  away  together.  On  the  22nd  of 
February,  Brunt  called  upon  my  brother  in 
company  with  Tidd  the  prisoner;  nw  brother 
said,  I  thought  I  had  lost  you.''  Now  these 
brothers  had  had  no  opportunity,  since  John 
was  taken  into  custody  in  Cato-street,  of  com- 
paring notes,  and  yet  you  will  perceive  there 
u  an  extraordinary  coincidence  in  the  narrative 
they  give  of  the  visit  of  these  two  persons  to 
John  Monument.  ''Brunt  said  something 
concerning  the  king's  death,  which  had  made 
an  alteration  in  their  plans ;  my  brother  asked 
him  what  the  plan  wa^ ;  he  said  they  had  dif- 
ferent objects  in  view.  Brunt  asked  Tidd  if 
he  should  give  an  outline  of  the  plan ;  I  did 
not  hear  any  answer  to  that;  Brunt  said,  we 
were  to  meet  the  following  evening  at  six 
o'clock  at  Tyburn-turnpike,  and  he  gave  the 
pass  word  that  we  were  to  use,  the  letters 
hfUyt;  and  if  any  of  their  party  were  there, 
they  would  answer  ty  o,  n."  Mow  so  says  the 
accomplice  John  Monument ;  and  the  accom- 
plice John  Monument  tells  you  that  was 
so  communicated  in  the  presence  of  his 
brother,  when  these  persons  were  there  that 
evening.  I  have  already  told  you  these  two 
brothers  have  not  been  together  since  that 
evening ;  you  will  therefore  ask,  whether  the 
accomplice,  when  he  gives  that  account,  con- 
firmed as  he  is  by  the  other  witness,  is  giving 
you  the  language  of  falsehood  or  of  truth? 
"  Brunt  came  the  next  afternoon  between  four 
and  five  o'clock ;  my  brother  could  not  go  with 
him  as  he  had  some  work  to  finish.  Brunt 
then  said,  you  must  call  on  Tidd  in  Hole-in- 
the-wall  passa^e,and  he  will  take  you;  I  believe 


afWUKam  DaMUon  and 


[1516 


my  brother  went  about  seven  o'dock ;  I  did 
not  see  him  afterwards ;  I  did  not  go  nysdf." 
This  man's  character  stands  as  fair  in  tUi 
transaction  as  any  man*s  whatever.  Now,  ii 
the  account  John  Monument  has  been  giring 
to  you,  the  language  of  truth  or  not  ?  if  it  were 
necessary  to  prove  the  fact  that  John  Monu- 
ment was  invited  to  go,  that  he  was  directed 
to  go  to  Tidd 's  house;  that  he  had  tbewoid 
hUUm  given  to  him  as  the  pass  word;  tint 
they  were  directed  to  go  to  Tyban-tarppiU; 
if  they  were  to  sink  John  Monumeot  is  the 
bottom  of  the  sea,  they  could  prove  the  wUe 
by  that  brother. 

2W.— My  lord,  you  have  joit  obeemd, 
as  to  these  witnesses,  that  they  never  sswcsdi 
other ;  now  I  can  prove,  by  the  evidesce  of 
the  warden  of  the  Tower  of  Londoo,  that  they 
have  been  together  an  hour  or  two  together  io 
each  week. 

Mr.  Baron  Garrow. — I  am  very  glad  jw 
have  made  the  observation ;  if  thai  fact  be  i^ 
which  was  unknown  to  me,  that  iskes  off  the 
effect  of  so  much  of  the  observation  as  apoiiei 
to  the  similarity  of  manner  in  which  tbej  mfe 
told  the  story,  and  it  stands  just  the  same  as  if 
there  was  no  such  fact.  This  man  iscoofinned 
by  a  man  who  may  have  beard  it  fron  his  bro* 
ther,  but  who  comes  here  pledging  bis  oath, 
his  soul,  and  his  salvation,  and  that  which  he 
states  is  precisely  that  which  his  aooonpiice 
brother  has  stated. 

Davidton. — My  lord,  here  is  Mr.  Underwood, 
one  of  the  yeoman  warders,  can  speak  to  the 
fact  of  their  having  been  together. 

Mr.  Banm  Garrow.-^We  will  take  the  fact 
to  be  so.  You  will  observe,  gentlemeo,  M 
breaks  in  only  on  the  observation,  which  had 
struck  me  very  forcibly ;  as  to  Adams  sod 
John  Monument  it  stands  precisely  the  sane, 
but  you  will  take  it  with  the  circnmstance  the 
prisoner  has  mentioned,  though  it  is  not  proved: 
that  I  think  is  the  whole  of  the  evidence  ot 
Thomas  MonumenL  ,      . 

They  then  call  to  you  a  witness,  oertalDlyot 
the  highest  importance,  and  that  is  Tbootf 
Hiden ;  he  says,  that  previous  to  these  tiiM" 
actions  he  lived  in  Manchester-mews,  and  ** 
a  cowkeeper  and  milkman  there;  be  »!>» 
"  I  have  now  the  misfortune  to  be  a  pri*«f 
for  debt;"  he  is  brought  here  by  his  Dajestr' 
writ  of  habeas  corpus ;  "  I  went  to  priioa  » 
week  ago,  last  Saturday  morning;  I^'^^TJ!^ 
prisoner  Wilson  very  well ;  a  few  days  below 
the  23rd  of  February  he  met  me,  and  asked  oj 
if  I  would  make  one  of  a  party  to  destroy  « 
his  majesty's  ministers  at  a  cabinet  dinner;  be 
said,  every  thing  was  ready,  they  were  ^"^^ 
only  for  a  cabinet  dinner,  and  thai  ^^^Jjjj: 
got  such  things  as  I  never  saw  ;  that  thw  wej 
covered  with  tarpaulin,  and  bound  round  wiia 
coids,  filled  full  of  nails  and  other  thiap>  >^* 
of  them  made  of  tin,  and  veiy  strong  indewj 
he  said  the  strength  of  them  was  so  P^^ 
if  they  were  set  fire  to  and  put  under  the  *«» 


14171 


Richard  Tiddjitr  High  TfMMM. 


A.  Dw  1820. 


[1518 


of  the  houses  ia  the  street  where  we  were  then 
walking,  they  would  lift  them  up.    He  said, 
that  they  were  to  be  lighted  with  a  fuse,  and 
put  into  the  room  where  the  gentlemen  were 
at  dinner,  and  all  that  escaped  the  explosion 
were  to  die  by  the  edge  of  the  sword,  or  some 
other  weapon,  and  that  they  were  going  to  set 
fire  to  some  houses ;  that  they  were  to  bum 
down  lord  Harrowby's  house,   lord    Castle- 
reagh's  the  duke  of  Wellington's,  lord  Sid- 
mouth's,  the  bishop  of  London's,  and  another, 
that  I  do  not  recollect  the  name  of ;  that  by 
that  means  it  would  keep  the  town  in  a  state 
of  confusion  for  a  few  days,  and  it  would  be- 
come generaL    I  asked  him,  how  many  there 
were  to  be?  he  said,  I  had  no  occasion  to 
be  alarmed,  there  was  a  gentleman's  servant 
who  had  given  them  money,  and  if  they  would 
act,  he  would  give  them  a  considerable  sum 
wore.    I  told  him,  I  would  be  one.    I  had  a 
reason  in  so  doing.    After  telling  him  that,  I 
wrote  a  letter  to  lord  Castlereagh,  and  went 
to  his  lordship's  house,  two  or  three  times,  but 
did  not  get  access  to  him.    After  that  I  saw 
lord  Harrowby ;  I  followed  him  to  the  park, 
and  there  I  spoke  to  him,  and  delivered  him 
the  letter  I  wrote  to  lord  Castlereagh."    The 
letter  is  nut  into  his  hands,  and  is  shewn  to 
him,  and  he  says,  **  this  is  the  very  letter." 
And  it  is  afterwards  further  identified  as  the 
same  letter,  by  the  noble  earl,  when  he  is 
called  in  a  further  part  of  the  proceedings.    He 
saysy  **  on  the  next  day,  between  four  and  five 
o'clock  in  the  afternoon,  1  met  Wilson;  he 
said,  Hiden  you  are  the  very  man  I  want  to 
see ;  I  said,  what  is  there  going  to  be  ?  he  said, 
there  is  to  be  a  cabinet  dinner  to-night  at  lord 
Harrowby's,  in  Grosvenor-square.    I  asked  him 
where  I  was  to  meet  them  ?  he  said,  1  was  to 
come  up  to  the  Horse  and  Groom,  in  John-street, 
the  comer  of  Cato-street,  and  there  I  was  to  go 
into  a  public-house,  or  to  stop  at  the  comer 
till  I  was  shoved  into  a  atable  close  by.    I 
asked,  what  time  I  was  to  meet  them  ?  he  said, 
at  a  quarter  before  six  or  six  o'clock ;  he  told 
mci  that  there  were  to  be  four  parties,  one  in 
Cato-street,  another  in  Gray's-inn-lane,  a  third 
in  the  city  or  Gee's-court  I  am  not  certain 
which,  and  .a  fourth  in  the  Borough.    He  said, 
I  had  no  occasion  to  be  alarmed,  for  that  all 
Gee's  court  were  in  it."    Being  asked,  of  whom 
the  inhabitants  of  Gee's-court  consisted?  he 
says,  "  I  believe  it  to  be  generally  inhabited 
by  Irishmen?  he  told  me,  that  the  Irish  were 
all  in  it,  but  they  would  not  stir  till  the  Eng- 
lish had  begun  first,  as  the  English  had  so 
many  times  deceived  them.    He  said,  that 
there  were  two  pieces  of  cannon  in  Gray's-inn- 
lane,  that  were  easily  to  be  got  at  by  breaking 
iji  a  small  door;  that  our  party  was  to  go  to 
lord    Harrowby's,  in  Grosvenor-square,  and 
there  to  do  the  grand  thing/'  that  is  explained 
to  be — to  destroy  all  the  ministers.    *' After 
the  grand  thing  was  done,  all  the  parties  were 
to  meet  somewhere  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the 
Mapsion-4iOQse ;  he  told  me  I  was  to  be  sure 
10  cMDe,  or  the  grand  thing  would  be  over 


before  I  came;  I  went  to  J(^n-street  that 
evening,  between  six  and  seven  o 'clocks 
When  I  came  into  John-street,  by  the  comer 
of  the  post  to  Cato-street,  I  saw  Wilson  and 
Davidson  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  I  knew 
Davidson  well  before ;  I  had  known  him  a 
long  time  before.  Davidson  said,  you  are 
come  ?  I  said,  yes ;  I  was  come,  but  I  was 
behind  my  time ;  he  asked  me,  if  I  was  going 
in?  that  Mr.  Thistlewood  was  there;  I  told 
him,  no ;  I  could  not  go  in,  for  I  was  obliged 
to  get  some  cream  that  I  must  get,  if  possible, 
and  I  left  them  and  did  not  go  again.  He 
told  me,  that  they  should  go  away  about  eight 
o'clock ;  and  if  they  were  gone,  I  was  to  follow 
them  down  to  Grosvenor-square,  the  fourth 
house  from  the  corner  on  the  lower  side.  The 
last  words  Davidson  said  to  me,  were,  come, 
you  dog,  come,  it  will  be  the  best  thing  you 
were  ever  in  in  your  life." 

He  iscrosSi^xamined,tand  says,  ''I  did  not 
expect  any  plunder,  for  I  did  not  intend  to  go. 
I  have  known  Wilson  a  good  while ;  I  did  not 
think  it  at  all  surprising  that  Wilson  should 
address  me  in  the  way  he  did,  for  I  had  seen 
Davidson  the  black  before  at  a  friend's  house, 
and  he  said  to  roe  as  he  went  out,  Hiden  you 
do  not  come  forward  like  the  rest  to  support 
the  meetings,  and  I  told  him,  no,  I  coula  not, 
and  I  have  been  denied  to  him  by  my  family, 
because  I  did  not  wish  to  see  him.    It  was  at 
Clarke's  house  that  Davidson  said,  Hiden  yoa 
do  not  come  forward  as  the  rest  of  us  do,  to 
support  the  meetings ;  I  told  him  I  did  not^. 
my  business  would  not  let  me ;  he  told  me,, 
that  the  people  that  did  not  come  forward  to 
support  the  cause,  would  be  the  first  that  tliey 
should  murder,  and  I  said  I  would  go  for  my 
own  safe^.    I  kept  away  from  them  as  mncti 
as  I  could ;  I  never  went  among  them,  except 
twice,  to  the  shoemaker's  club ;  I  did  not  know 
what  their  objects  were,  except  what  Wilson 
told  me  on  the  day  I  have  mentioned.    He 
told  me,  they  had  got  hand-grenades,  and 
things  pf  that  kind ;  he  did  not  tell  me  of  any 
other  plots  they  had  in  hand,  except  about  the 
cannon,  and  what  I  have  stated.'^    Then  he  is 
asked,  whether  he  knows  a  man  of  the  name  of 
Bennett,  and  he  says,  ^  Yes,  I  do ;  I  never  did 
invite  him  to  attend  a  private  radical  meeting ; 
to  the  best  of  my  knowledge  I  never  did  tell 
him,  that  he  might  be  called  upon  to  take  up 
arms,  and  if  he  was  called  upon  he  must  do  so. 
I  will  not  swear,  that  I  did  not ;  but  I  never 
recollect  saying  such  a  word  to  him,  and  I 
never  made  use  of  the  words,  radical  meeting, 
to  him ;  if  I  knew  that  I  ever  had,  I  would  not 
deny  it." 

Then,  on  his  re-examination,  he  says,  ^I 
went  twice  to  the  shoe-maker's  club,  with  Mr. 
Clarke ;  I  saw  Davidson  and  Wilson  and  Har- 
rison there ;  the  club  was  held  at  the  Scotch 
Arms  public  house,  near  the  Strand ;  I  vras 
there  on  Sunday  evenings ;  Clarke  called  upon 
me,  and  iiMittced  me  to  go,  and  I  said,  I  dare 
say  Bennett  will  go ;  Bennett  did  go  with  me 
and  Clarke ;  that  was  five  or  six  months  ago." 


15100       1  GEORGE  IV. 


T9U  rf  WaSffm  DmndMom  amd 


tl&M 


il  has  hfm  nggesltd  lo  you  Uoit  tbe^tettiflMf 
of  dus  witness  ouglit  not  t(»  rceeiTe  credit  al 
yoor  hands.  I  have  Usteoed  with  all  the  atten* 
tton  which  it  is  my  dntj  lo  do,  ta  the  ▼eiy  able 
a^gunieat.  I  do  noi  say  that  as  a  word  of 
oowrse,  or  of  compliment ;  this  is  not  the  place 
so  to  deal  with  these  cases,  bnt  because  tt  is 
dva  to  the  great  exertions  made  ibr  these  un- 
happy men  to  aay  that  e^ry  thing  has  been 
done  which  great  care,  crreat  leamiag,  and 
gfreat  talest,  coold  do  ibr  them.  But  it  is  said, 
that  this  evidence  ought  not  to  recetTe  credit 
as  your  hands.  I  have  endeavoored  to  under- 
stand this  argument,  and  I  stste,  nnfeignedly, 
under  the  solemn  sanction  on  which  I  am 
called  to  perform  the  solemn  doty  cast  upon 
me  (the  same  sanction  under  which  you  are 
called  upon  to  discharge  the  duty  lying  upon 
jmi)  I  cannot  understand  the  argument.  If  it 
IS  suggested,  that  it  is  an  extraordinary  thing 
that  &  man  should  communicate  to  another  a 
plot  of  an  extraordinary  nature,  the  answer  to 
the  observation  is  upon  the  surface,  —  this 
was  a  thing  which  must  be  done,  if  at  all,  by 
nangr,  and  most. be  done  by  canvassing  many, 
soma  of  whom  may  become  accessaries  to  the 
thing  proposed,  and  others  may  decline  to  havo 
to  do  with  it }  but  a  man  does  not  purpose  to 
become  an  active  member  of  a  confederacy, 
but  wishes  to  be  acquainted  witb  it,  and 
having  got  informalion  of  it,  thinking  there  is 
danger  to  his  ow«  life  if  he  apfiarently  or 
avowedly  testifies  a  disposition  to  retract,  he 
ia  told  that  the  persons  who  may  retire  shall  be 
QMatdered ;  I  cannot  understand^  that  a  man 
who  shall  not  disclose  such  a  combination, 
shall  be  a  person,  vrho,  when  he  comes  under 
the.  exigencies  and  demands  of  justice,  and 
under  the  solemn  sanction  of  his  oath,  to  state- 
this  in  a.oouK  of  justice,  is  not  to  be  believed. 
But  in  what  situation  does  this  witness  stand  ? 
He  has  heard  this,  does  he  coooeal  it,  and;  as 
finr  as  depends  upon  him,  allow  is  to  have  com*' 
piete  effect  ?  With  an  anxiety  which  does  him 
ra&nite  credit^ — ^with  aa  anxiety  to  make  that 
which,  for  aught  he  knew,  might  be  the  only 
eemmunicatioQ  whieh  stood  between>  the  emi-' 
nent  peril)  of  the  destruction  of  those  eminent 
men,  and  the  aacpmpltshment  of  that  blow ; 
he  heeamo  ansioos  to  make  the  communica»- 
tiiM  to.  one  ofi  his  rnvjesty's  administratiOHy 
posbably  morelE9i(nni.to  hisLby  name,  because 
naare.  seen  as  the  minister  in  the  House  of 
Commons;  he  endeavours,  to  avail  hraoself  of 
any  op|iortuhity  of  delsvesing  a  lettev  to  lord- 
GMdereagh,  to  whool^.aa  we  may  suppose,  he 
made-iastthannee  his  preaant  communicattioH, 
for  we  cannot  look  at  that  letter,  not  being  able- 
Id  see  the  noble  lord  to  whom  the  letter  was 
ditectad;  ha  addresser  himeelf  to  lord.  Haiw 
somhyv  i9ith  respect  to  whom,  it  would  be  dis- 
lacing  him  to  suppose  snob  at  thing  as.  that  ho 
oould  tamper  with,  or  hold  any  improper  iiw 
tercousse  ;^nobody  suggests*  or  beiteves  any 
thing  of  the  sort.  This  man,  finding  the  diffi- 
culty of  commMiiioating  with  lord  Castloceagh. 
-^these  axienot  times  when  noblemen:  in.  ofllc« 


are  109  eny  of  acoeas  to  ftaipottumite  atrangeri, 
whose  business  is  mysterious, — he  finds  hit 
way  to  the  boose  of  lord  Harrowby,  nrgad  by 
the  desire  to  communicate  the  information  of 
this  grand  stroke  intended  to  be  struck  ;  there 
he  watdies  the  person  who,  l^  the  waiting^  of 
tmt  servants  at  the  door,  he  soppooes  to  be  the 
master  of  the  house,  and  he  vray*4ays  Mm  ia 
Ae  Park,  in  order  that  he  may  aoake  him  the 
medium  of  comnranication  of  his  letter  to  an- 
other of  the  cabinet  ministers.  My  lord  Hv^ 
rowby  receives  it,  and  with  the  eare  Mid 
tioD  which  belongs  to  all  meo  of  bonoeu*, 
a  letter  of  this  sort  he  does  not  proaogie  ie 
open  when  it  is  addressed  to  onotlier;  bat 
obserring  that  the  man  who  makes  tiHa 
munication  to  him  is  albnd  of  beitig  seen  m 
company,  lord  Harrowby  says,  I  will  oMet  yed 
t»-morrow;  and,  on  the  foilovring  ^y,  his 
lerddnp  passed  him  on  entering  the  f^it, 
and  went  down  to  the  sbrubbeiy ;  iw  die  neaa 
tkase  the  letter  had  been  opened,  and  bad  heea 
made  the  subject  of  communication.  ''What  itf 
the  comloct  of  this  man  f  He  discloses  ttr 
whole  of  the  conspiracy,  as  k  baa  eosae  to  Yarn 
knowledge,  of  the  imminent  peril  and  danger 
which,  according  to  him,  is  impending  only  by 
a  thread  over  the  heads  of  these  povsons,  and 
which  would  branch  out^  immediately  after 
that  catastrophe  has  been  effected,  inio  aft 
the  wide-spreading  ruin'  which  was  intended; 
is  it  to  be  said  of  such  a  man  as  this,  that  he  i& 
not  deserving  of  credit  ?  that  there  is  sooio- 
thing  vicious — something  deptmved — some- 
thing to  cut  down  his  credit  ?  if  It  be  so^  1 
should  beg  to  be  inttodaced  to  the  connast  of 
such  a  character,  to  learn  who  in  society  is  a 
meritorious  meniber  of  it. 

But  it  is  seggested  that  he  stands  here  prcK 
bably  with  a  degree  of  itrflneiioe  on  his  mlBd  x 
that  is  treated  with  ao  uncommon,  though  not 
an  improper  delicacv  by  the  leaned  connsel, 
they  are  obliged  t^  deal  with  it  widi  so  much 
delicacy,  that  it  is  almost  lost.  la  he  a  witness 
coming  here  to  earn  a  reward?  N«,  ilhat 
would  be  high  treason  against  the  chancfer  of 
erery  man  of  honour  in  society;  but  it  is- said 
the  man  thinks  he  has  done  the  stale  90  miodi^ 
service,  and  has  so  maoh  sserif  with  these 
nobbemea^  whose  lives  and  whoae  fiunihes  he 
has  saved,  that  he  probably  thinks  he  shall 
derive,  at  some  ftitore  period  of  hiaKle,  some 
reward  for  the  benefit  which  he  has  %ee» 
the-  instfument  of  Providence  in  eoniemngf 
upon  them.  Dbes  that  enable  l»m  to  iavetot  a 
fidse  story?  haa  that  enabled  hia  to  t^  die 
story  Adorns  has  Said,  or  Movramoiit  his  told, 
without  commoaioaAion  one  ^iridlr  tiHe  other f 
did  that  enable  him,  befofe  the  police  officei* 
turned  theis  atteutiDtl  to  dM^  stoMe  la  Ca«o> 
street,  or  the-  piequet*  under  the  comeaand  of 
lleutanaat  FitzeKhfeaos'  toraed  tbefr  steps  to- 
ward that^  piMev  \o»  invent  'the  plot  fot  the 
assassiuaciott  of  sit  thmw  petsons,  to  get  all' 
this  ammunition  together  in  that  place  ?  and 
did  this  nrilkmao  and'  dsSiyman  find  out  my 
loid  Casttonaghj'— No,  he  did  ndi,.  but  ho 


1521] 


Richard  Tiddjar  High  Trgason, 


A.  D.  1S20. 


L1532 


attempted  it,  and  .failing,  he  did  find  oiit  my 
lord  Harrowby  to  make  to  bim  a  communica- 
tion of  all  this ;  in  no  other  way  can  I  see  bow 
any  inroad  is  to  be  made  into  the  testimony  of 
Hiden,  to  whom,  under  Providence,  probably 
every  one  of  us  assembled  here  to-day  is  under 
no  small  obligation. 

The  next  witness  called  before  you  is  John 
Baker ;  he  says,  '*  I  am  butler  to  the  earl  of 
Harrowby ;  I  recollect,  on  the  18th  or  I9th  of 
February  last,  issuing  cards  of  invitation  to  tht 
cabinet  ministers  to  dine  at  his  lordship's  house 
on  the  23rd ;  before  that  time  the  cabinet 
dinners  were  suspended,  in  consequence  of 
the  late  king's  death,  and  that  was  the  first 
after  the  king's  death ;  the  dinner  was  pre- 
pared, and  the  preparations  went  on  till  after 
the  dinner  hour ;  about  eight,  the  dinner  was 
countermanded ;  up  to  that  time,  I  and  all  the 
servants  expected  the  dinner  would  take  place ; 
the  archbishop  of  York*s  house  is  adjacent 
to  lord  Harrowby's;  I  observed  carriages 
takingup  there  between  six  and  seven  o'clock." 

llie  next  witness  called  is  Richard  Munday, 
who  says,  **  I  live  at  No,  3,  Cato-street;  on  the 
23rd  of  February  last,  when  I  came  from 
work  in  the  afternoon,  I  saw  Davidson  walk- 
ing to  and  fro  in  the  gateway,  and  I  saw  him 
running  away  after  the  transaction  took  place ; 


the  stick  bad  a  place  in  it  as  if  to  receive  a 
socket;  I  went  into  the  st&ble  about  half-past 
eight,  o'clock ;  Ellis  and  Smilhers  were  with 
me;  I  observed  a  man  with  a  gun  on  his 
shoulder  ;  I  did  not  know  him ;  I  then  went 
up  a  ladder  which  led  to  a  loft ;  I  saw  a  bench 
with  arms  upon  it,  and  I  heard  a  clattering 
of  arms ;  I  suppose  there  were  about  four  or 
five-and- twenty  men  ;  I  said,  we  are  officers ; 
seize  their  arms.  Thistlewood,  whom  I  imme- 
diately saw,  seized  a  sword,  and  retired  to  the 
inner  room ;  he  stood  fencing  with  it,  endea- 
vouring to  keep  any  body  away  that  approached 
him ;  Smithers  approached  him,  and  Thistle- 
wood  stabbed  him,  and  he  died  immediately; 
after  this  a  pistol  was  fired,  and  the  lights 
were  put  out  instantly ;  I  heard  a  voice  from 
the  corner  where  Thistlewood  was,  call  out, 
kill  them,"  using  a  vulgar  expression,  *'  throw 
them  down  stairs ;  I  joined  in  the  cry,  and  got 
down  with  them  ;  I  got  out  into  John-street, 
and  met  the  soldiers,  and  returned  with  lieute- 
nant Fitzclarence ;  upon  returning  to  the  stable 
door,  I  saw  Tidd  endeavouring  to  get  away 
from  the  stable  door ;  I  said  to  somebody,  lay 
hold  of  him,  and,  as  I  spoke,  he  held  up  his 
arm,  and  then  I  saw  a  pistol ;  I  laid  hold  of 
that  arm,  and  turned  him  round,  I  fell  upon 
the  dunghill,  and  he  upon  me ;  the  soldiers 
but  I  had  seen  him,  between  that,  lighting  a  |  came  up  soon  afterwards,  the  pistol  went  oflf, 
candle  with  another  candle  in  his  hand.    I    butwhetherinhishandornot,  lam  not  aware; 


saw  him  push  the  stable  door  open  and  go  into 
it,  and  I  saw  Harrison  at  the  door  at  the  time  ; 
Davidson's  coat  flew  open  as  he  stooped  with 
his  hat  over  the  candle,  and  I  observed  a  cross- 
belt  round  him,  and  another  belt  with  two 
Sistols  and  a  sword,  or  something  I  thought  to 
e  a  sword ;  I  heard  a  nailing  up  in  the  after- 
noon, and  I  looked  up  and  saw  some  sacking 
being  nailed  up  over  the  railing  over  the  door ; 
I  thought  it  was  to  keep  the  place  warm,  being 
cold  weather,  but  it  would  keep  any  person 
from  looking  into  the  room ;  the  stable  had  been 
for  some  time  empty;  the  cows  were  taken 
away  before  Christmas ;  when  I  passed  by  I 
saw  two  men  go  in  and  three  come  out." 

If  Iliden's  evidence  wanted  confirmation — 
if  the  presence  of  Davidson  at  this  place  at 
this  time,  needed  to  be  confirmed,  the  testi- 
mony of  Munday  goes  the  full  length  of  that 
confirmation. 

George Caylock  is  called,  he  says, ''  I  live  in 


he  was  secured,  and  I  conducted  him  into  the 
public-house ;  he  was  searched,  he  had  a  leather 
belt  round  his  waist,  and  a  ball-cartridge  in 
his  pocket;  before  I  had  finished  searcliing 
him,  Bradbum  was  brought  in;  I  searched 
him,  and  found  a  string  twisted  five  or  six 
times  round  his  waist,  and  soase  ball-cartridges 
and  six  balls  loose  in  his  pocket ;  Wilson,  and 
the  black,  Davidson,  were  afterwards  brought 
in,  but  I  did  not  search  either  of  them ;  David- 
son cursed  and  swore  against  any  man  who 
would  not  die  in  liberty's  cause;  that  he 
gloried  in  it,"  and  he  sang  part  of  that  popular 
song  which  has  obtained  so  much  celebrity, 
*  ScoU  wha'  ha'  wi'  Wallace  bled ;'  «  Wilson 
said  it  was  all  up,  he  did  not  care  a  damn,  they 
might  knock  him  on  the  head  now.  I  returned 
to  the  loft,  and  there  were  some  soldiers  there, 
and  three  of  the  prisoners,  Strange,  Cooper, 
and  Gilchrist,  and  one  who  has  been  a  witness. 
Monument;  I  found  two  swords  myself,  and 


Cato-street;  I  saw  Harrison  there  on  the  23rd  1 1  saw  some  pistols  found,  and  a  gun  or  two. 


of  February ;  I  had  known  him  before ;  I  saw 
him  go  into  the  stable,  he  told  roe  he  had  taken 
two  chambers  there,  and  was  going  to  clean 
them  up ;  I  saw  from  twenty  to  tive-and-twen- 
ty  other  persons  go  in  and  out  of  the  stable 
that  evenmg." 

Then  Ruthven  the  officer  is  called,  he  says, 
**  I  am  one  of  the  constables  of  Bow-street ; 
on  the  23rd  of  February,  I  went  to  Cato-street ; 
I  went  first  in  the  afternoon,  and  then  again 
at  six  o'clock;  I  went  into  the  Horse  and 
Groom,  and  saw  Cooper  and  Gilchrist  there, 
with  a  mop-stick  or  broom-stick,  which  he  left. 
there ;  Gilchrist  came  back  for  it,  but  I  had  it; 

VOL.  XXXIII. 


Then  he  speaks  of  the  hand-grenades,  and 
other  things  found  there,  which  I  will  enume- 
rate by  and  by ;  he  is  asked  whether,  on  search- 
ing Tidd,  he  did  not  say  there  was  nothing  but 
a  tobacco-box ;  and  he  says,  **  No ;"  that  was 
in  answer  to  a  question  put  to  him  by  the 
prisoner  Tidd. 

llien  the  Earl  of  Harrowby  is  examined,  and 
his  lordship  says,  **  I  am  one  of  his  majesty's 
privy  council,  and  one  of  his  majesty's  minis- 
ters ;  cards  of  invitation  were  issued,  by  my 
direction,  for  a  cabinet  dinner,  on  the  23rd  of 
February;  the  members  of  the  cabinet,  with 
their  respective  offices,  are  the  lord  chancellor ; 

5E 


Ift33]       1  GEOBGE IV. 


TrMo 


Damitrntttnd 


[im 


lord  Westmorekuid^  Ihe  lord  fiirf  Mai ;  the 
taii  of  LiYerpoo),  first  lord  ot  the  Treasury; 
Mr.  Vansittart,  the   chancellor  of  the   Ex- 
chequer;  lord  Caatlereagb,  the  secretary  of 
state  for  the  foreign  department ;  lord  Bathurst, 
secretary  of  state  for  the  colonial  departmetit ; 
lord  Sidmouthy  the  secretary  of  state  for  the 
hone  department ;  my  lord  Melville,  first  lord 
of  the  Admiraltv;  the  duke  of  Wellington^ 
master-general  of  the  ordnance ;  Mr.  Canning, 
president  of  the  India  hoard ;  Mr.  Robinson, 
president  of  the  board  of  trade;  Mr.  Bragge 
Bathurst,  chancellor  of  the  duchy  of  Lancaster; 
Mr.  Wellesley  Pole,  roaster  of  the  mint ;  the 
earl  of  Mulgrave ;  and  myself,  as  president  of 
the  council,  fifteen  in  number ;  in  consequence 
of  his  late  majesty's  death,  the  cabinet  dinners 
were  postponed ;  the  noblemen  and  ^^ntlemen 
I  haTe  mentioned,  are  all  privy  coottallors,  and 
compose  what  is  called  the  cabinet  council. 
I  recollect  riding  in  the  Park  on  the  day  pre- 
ceding that  on  which  the  cabinet  dinner  was 
to  take  place ;  I  was  accosted  by  a  person  near 
Orosvenor-gate ;  he  gave  me  a  letter;''  and 
On  the  letter  being  shewn  to  his  lordship,  he 
replied,  ^  that  is  the  letter, — it  is  addressed  to 
lord  Castlereagh ;  the  person  told  me  it  con- 
tained intelligence  of  (freat  importance  to  his 
lordship  and  myself,  and  desired  I  would  have 
it  communicated  to  lord  Castlereagh ;"  by  the 
rules  of  law,  we  cadnot  inquire  into  the  con- 
tents of  the  letter.    **  I  asked  him  whether  he 
had  put  his  name  and  address  to  it?  he  said 
he  had  not"  (as  I  observed  before,  lord  Har- 
rowhy  did  not  propose  to  open  Uie  letter) ; ''  he 
expressed  a  wish  to  have  some  further  conver- 
sation with  me ;  I  said,  if  I  was  to  commnni- 
cate  vrith  him,  'it  would  be  necessary  I  should 
know  his  name  and  address,  and,  upon  that. 
he  gave  me  a  card  containing  them ;  when  I 
knew  what  were  d)e  coDtents  of  the  letter,  I 
made  an  appointment  to  meet  him  in  the  Park 
the  next  morning  at  eleven  o'clock ;  the  letter 
was   produced    by  lord  Castlereagh   at    the 
council ;  I  met  the  same  person  the  next  morn- 
ing in  the  young  plantations,  near  the  ring ; 
I  appointed  that  spot,  because  he  was  ex- 
tremely apprehensive  of  being  seen  with  me, 
when  I  met  him  the  day  before  near  Orosve- 
nor-gate ;  in  consequence  of  my  having  seen 
this  man,  the  dinner  did  not  take  place ;  pre- 
parations were  made  for  it,  and  went  on  until 
I  wrote  a  note  from  lord  Liverpool's  house, 
between  seveti  and  eight  o'clock,  which  must 
have  reached  my  house  about  eight  ;^  the  pre- 
parations went  on  past  the  usual  hour  of  hold- 
ing the  cabinet  dinner,  so  that  none  of  his 
lordship*^  establishment  would  be  informed 
that  it  was  not  to  take  place  until  between 
seven  and  eight ;  "  that  was  the  first  commu- 
nication I  made  to  my  servants  that  it  was  not 
to  take  place.^ 

The  next  vritness  called  is  James  Ellis,  one 
of  the  officers  of  the  patrole  at  the  Bow-$treet 
oflRce.  He  says,  **  I  went  to  Cato-stneet  on 
the  eveninof  of  the  28rd  of  February,  with 
Kuthven ;  I  went  into  the  stable  about  half- 


past  eight  o*clock ;  I  saw  a  man,  whom  I  be- 
lieve  to  be  Davidson,  abovt  hslf  way  betweei 
the  foot  of  the  ladder  and  the  door  of  fin 
stable ;  he  had  a  carbine,  or  something  of  dM 
kind,  in  his  right  hand,  and  a  swoid  it  bii 
left  side ;  he  appeared  as  if  he  was  vattisf 
sentinel ;  he  had  white  cross-belts  oo ;  thoe 
was  another  person  in  the  fortber  stall  of  (he 
stable,  nearest  the  ladder,  whom  I  did  mt 
know ;    when  I  entered  the  stable,  I  took 
Bavidson  hy  the  collar,  turned  hiiabdf  roind, 
and  looked  iir  his  fiice,  and  I  saw  he  wis  • 
man  of  colour ;  I  took  him  into  costody  in 
about  Bye  mitHites  afterwards;  be  wss  ifam 
dressed  in  exactly  the   same  way  nlM 
observed  him  before;  he  had  awhitecrase- 
belt,  a  carbine,    and  a  swoid;  I  foUsatd 
Ruthven  op  the  ladder,  into  the  loft;  I o^ 
served  a  number  of  people  fklliDg  btck  to  tbe 
back  part  of  the  room ;  there  appeared  to  be 
about  four  or  five-and-twenly  altogether  j  sow 
of  them  were  apparently  attempting  to  cater 
a  small  room  adjoining ;  as  I  weatap,  Tbiith- 
wood  brandished  his  sword  at  ne;  he  vat 
advancing  rather  towards  me,  when  I  (old  Ua 
to  desist,  or  I  would  fire,  at  the  saiM  tine 
holding  up  a  pistol  with  one  hand,  and  vj 
staff  with  the  other ;  upon  that,  he  retreated 
back  towards  the  door  of  the  little  loon; 
Sraithers  followed  him,  and  Thistlewood  Mde 
a  push,  and  stahbed  him  in  or  near  bis  rigM 
breast;  he  fell  back,  and  I  fired  at  Thistle- 
wood,  but  without  effect ;  Smithen  «^W"*' 
against  me  and  fell ;  a  general  nsb  in  eoa- 
fiision  then  took  place,  and  I  was  pmbed  den 
the  ladder,  into  the  stable ;  I  then  tXimm 
to  get  into  the  door-way,  into  Cato^^eet;  I 
remained  in  the  doop-way  for  a  few  seeoad% 
when  two  or  tliree  shots  were  fired  ^  *  ■*! 
standing  under  the  ladder ;  I  then  atteaiptel 
to  go  outside  the  door,  when  some  *ots ««« 
fired  from  the  window  of  the  little  room,  dol- 
ing into  Cato-street ;  they  were  fired  u^aw 
the  door ;  I  then  heard  a  ety  of  stop  bin;  ^ 
saw  Davidson  running,  and  I  paisaed  v^ 
and  took  him  into  custody ;  when  I  ^^ 
up,  I  eaught  him  by  the  collar,  and  **.■•*]} 
cut  at  me,  but  I  was  too  close  tohiia,Jw 
Gill,  another  officer,  came  up,  and  «*"7  * 
disarming  him;  he  had  the  carbine  udtte 
cross-belu  when  I  took  him;  after  I^^ 
him  in  the  custody  of  others,  I  retainadtott^ 
stable,  and  assisted  in  securing  tw>o«v"a 
others." 
They  then  can  to  you  Robert  Chapi»«»  ** 

of  the  Bow-street  patrole;  he  sap,  "^Vi 
appointed  to  go  to  Cato-street  on  theyw* 
February;  I  went  to  the  Horse  and  Oieajjj 
with  Lee,  the  constable ;  I  saw  ^''*2'"f 
Cooper  come  in,  and  imother  maa,  ^^J* 
believe  to  be  Gilchrist ;  they  stood  otoewi| 
us  for  some  time,  and  we  Aen  v»ent  aw^ 
Davidson  had  a  larg^  drab  great  cm*  W5« 
then  passed  on  to  Molyneaux-«treet,  and  tba» 
towards  Queen-street.  IsawthewagaiaJ^ 
ing  backwards  and  forwards;  Cooper «»* 
should  go  in,  and  have  some  beer;  and,  «l"^ 


\S26] 


HkkariTidd/vr  High  Tmuon. 


A.  D.  1820. 


C1AS6 


passed,  they  looked  as  in  the  fooe,  as  if  observ- 
ing who  we  were.  After  this,  when  we  were 
at  the  Queen-etreet  end  of  Cato-etreet,  I  heard 
the  report  of  a  pistol ;  in  consequence  of  Uiat, 
I  ran  up  Cato-street,  and  persons  were  then 
running  very  fast  out  of  the  stable,  and  there 
was  a  Bring;  two  short  men  ran  down  the 
•tteet,  and,  as  I  had  just  overtaken  them,  I 
heard  a  piece  go  off,  and  I  turned  round,  and 
beard  somebody  say,  stop  him ;  I  saw  a  man 
with  his  hand  up ;  I  went  up  to  him,  and  he 
struck  at  me  with  a  sword ;  Ellis  laid  hold  of 
liim  by  the  coUar,  and  he  and  I  took  him 
Against  the  wall ;  he  had  also  a  carbine ;  the 
man  was  Davidson,  but  he  was  dressed  quite 
.  4iiferently  then  to  what  he  was  when  I  saw 
him  before;  we  took  him  into  a  chandler's 
ahop ;  he  had  a  eouple  of  pistol  flints  in  his 
|)ocket." 

On  his  cross-examination,  he  aays,  "  I  did 
«ot  go  into  a  publio-house  with  Davidson ;  he 
remained  in  my  custody  from  the  time  he  was 
•overtaken  till  I  went  back  with  him  to  the 
stable ;  he  was  not  taken  into  any  publio* 
jboiise;  then  Benjamin  Gill  came  up,  and  took 
4be  carbine ;  he  also  strack  Davidson  on  the 
eword-hand,  and  look  the  sword  from  him ;  I 
•aw  that  done."  Then  he  is  asked,  whether 
the  carbine  was  not  at  some  distance  from  him 
iwhen  he  was  taken  ?  and  he  says,  «  No^  I  think 
not ;"  thii  was  to  contradict  the  testimony  of 
Authreo.  On  the  testimony  of  the  witness 
Chapman,  and  of  lientenant  Fitzclarenoe,  who 
says  4hat  he  conducted  him  to  Bow-street,  and 
that  he  was  not  in  a  pablio-hoose  while  in  his 
custody,  it  is  supposed,  that  Ruthven  has  pui^ 
fiosely  or  accidentally  made  a  mis-statement ; 
how  that  is  I  am  at  a  loss  to  say.  Ruthven 
states  this  fact,  and  it  rather  stands  on  the  tes- 
limony  of  lieutenant  Fitadarence  and  of  Chap- 
man, that  he  was  not  in  a  public-house,  but 
only  in  that  small  shop  in  Cato-etreet,  but  each 
apeahs  only  to  the  time  Daridson  was  in  dieir 
feepective  custody. 

On  his  re«examination  he  sayt,  ^  I  oooduoted 
bim  to  a  chandler's  shop,  and  afUrwards  to  the 
alable,  with  a  file  of  soldiers.  I  afterwards 
gave  him  np ;  and  whedMr  he  was  taken  into 
a  publio-house,  or  not,  i  cannot  tell,  but  I  do 
not  think  that  he  was ;  I  do  not  know  one 
way  or  the  other." 

William  Lee  is  a  Bow-street  patrole ;  he 
says,  *^I  went,  on  the  23rd  of  rebroary,  in 
company  with  Chapman,  about  hal^past  six, 
near  the  door  of  the  Horse  and  Groom.  I 
observed  Davidson,  Gilchrist,  Cooper  and 
Harrison ;  in  a  short  time  we  walked  away, 
and  Thistiewood  loUowed  us;  he  came  ana 
stared  us  in  the  face ;  and  I  said,  it  was  very 
rude  to  stance  us  in  the  fece.  Chapman  answer- 
ed, I  suppose  the  gentleman  thinks  he  knows 
us*  Thistiewood  said,  it  is  a  mistake ;  and  he 
tttfned  on  his  heel  sml  went  away.  I  and 
Chapman  had  been  sent  as  officers  less  known 
than  eome  others.  I  took  a  turn  and  came 
afBJv  into  Cato-street,  and  then  1  saw  David- 
son ieave  the  stable,  and  come  to  the  comer ; 


at  that  time,  Gilchrist  and  Coq>er  were  under 
the  gateway,  I  will  not  be  sure  of  Harrison 
being  tliere  at  that  moment,  but  I  saw  him 
there  soon  afterwards ;  they  were  talking  to  a 
man  dressed  like  a  baker ;  at  half-past  eight  I 
entered  the  stable  with  the  party  that  accom- 
panied Ruthven  and  Ellis.  Ruthven  and  Ellis, 
and  one  or  two  more,  went  up  the  ladder.  I 
heard  a  firing  and  confiision  up  there,  and  they 
were  hastled  down  again ;  the  lights  appeared 
to  be  put  out;  there  were  several  afterwards 
fell  down  the  bdder.  Ruthven  desired  me  to 
slop  vnder  the  gateway;  there  were  some 
shots  fired  from  tl»  window  of  the  loft ;  shortly 
afterwards  the  miliUury  came  and  entered  the 
stable.'' 

The  next  witness  they  call  to  you  is  a  per- 
son of  the  name  of  Benjamin  Gm,  who  is 
one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole ;  he  says,  '^  I 
formed  one  of  Westcoatt's  party  that  went 
to  Calo«etreet.    I  cannot  state  exactly  what 
time  we  arrived.    I  went  into  the  stable; 
Rnthven  and  Ellis  were  there  before  me ;  there 
was  a  light  in  the  stable.    I  saw  a  man  stand- 
ing at  the  bottom  of  the  ladder,  of  a  dark  com- 
plexion, short,  thick  and  stout ;  he  had  book 
arms  but  I  cannot  say  what    Ruthten,  Elli?, 
and  Smitben  went  np,  and  I  followed  Nixon ; 
he  was  oa  the  ladder;  he  was  near  the  top, 
and  I  was  aj  close  to  him  as  I  conld  possibly 
get.    I  heard  the  ttgoMl  of  a  pistol  or  some- 
thing in  the  loft«    Ellis  came  tumbling  down ; 
be  knocked  Nixon  down,  and  Nixon  fell  upon 
me  in  the  comer ;  there  was  a  rush  from  the 
loft ;  I  got  near  the  door,  and  by  a  sudden 
rush  I  was  pushed  into  Cato-street ;  when  I 
got  there  I  saw  Davidson  coining  out  (^f  the 
door  with  a  carbine;  he  was  running  out  and 
he  discharged  the  carbine  right  at  me,  and 
passed  me.    I  then  saw  that  he  was  a  man  of 
colour?  he  had  also  a  large  sword ;  I  ran  after  him 
and  cried  out,  stop  him,  stop  htm  I  I  had  veiy 
neariy  reached  him  when  he  made  a  back  cut 
at  me  with  the  sword^  and  then  he  advanced 
forwards  again.    He  was  stopped  by  Ellis.    I 
struck  him  with  my  truncheon  on  the  wrist,  and 
made  a  grasp  at  the  blade  of  the  sword  with 
my  left  hand.    I  found  it  very  sharp ;  it  cut 
my  fingers,  and  I  let  go  of  it  again.    I  think 
it  was  fastened  to  his  hand,  or  he  would  ha?e 
dropped  it  when  I  struck  him.    I  think  it  was 
twirled  round  his  wrist  bv  a  cord ;  the  iWord 
fell,  and  I  ptdced  it  up.  I  took  the  carbine  out 
of  the  other  hand.    EHis  and  another  man  had 

f)%  hold  of  him  when  I  picked  up  the  sword  ; 
never  lost  sight  of  him  after  I  saw  him  with 
the  sword ;  he  was  taken  over  to  a  little  shop 
in  Queen-etreet.  I  took  the  carbine  with  me, 
and  left  the  swoid  with  Ellis.  The  sword 
and  the  carbine  are  both  forth  coming,  and  I 
shall  know  them  again."  The  carbine  is  then 
produced  to  him.  He  identifies  that  and  the 
lon^  sword,  which  was  produced  as  being  that 
which  was  found  upon  the  person  of  Davidson, 
with  which  he  cut  at  him,  which  appears  to 
have  a  lealJiem  thong  round  it.  The  carbine, 
he  says,  was  the  fame  as  was  fired  at  him ;  that 


1527]        1  GEOEGE  IV. 


Trial  of  WiUiam  Davidson  and 


11538 


he  tried  it,  and  found,  when  he  took  it  to  Bow- 
street^  that  it  was  one  which  had  been  recently 
discharged,  for  there  was  the  moisture  pfo- 
duced  by  a  recent  discharge. 

Then  John  Muddock  was  called,  and  he 
stated,  ''I  am  a  soldier  in  the  Coldstseam 
regiment  of  guards ;  I  was  one  of  the  party 
that  went  to  Cato-street ;  I  recollect  seeing  a 
man  near  the  stable  door ;  I  saw  him  the  next 
day  at  Whitehall,  and  I  found  his  name  to  be 
Tidd  ;*'  then  he  pointed  him  out ;  '^  he  pre- 
sented a  pistol  at  lieutenant  Fitzclarence ;  he 
fired  it  off,  and  I  saw  seijeant  Legg  secure  him 
afterwards ;  after  thb  I  went  towards  the 
stable  door,  and  I  saw  a  person  cut  with  a  i 
sword  at  lieutenant  Fitzclarence ;  he  went  in  1 
again,  and  I  did  not  see  who  he  was,  and  ; 
afterwards  Mr.  Fitzclarence  attacked  them,  and 
went  in  at  the  door,  and  I  followed  him  in ; 
after  I  had  got  into  the  centre  of  the  room,  the 
prisoner  Wilson  presented  a  pistol  at  my 
breast ;  it  flashed  in  the  pan  but  did  not  dis- 
charge ;  I  made  a  stab  at  hiin  with  my  bayonet ; 
I  secured  him,  and  took  him  to  a  publio-house, 
where  I  looked  at  him  by  a  light;  I  now  see  the 
same  person  at  the.  bar. 

Tlien  William  Legg  is  called ;  he  says,  "  I 
am  a  seijeant  in  the  Coldstream*guards ;  I  was 
one  of  the  party  that  went  under  the  command 
of  lieutenant  Fitzclarence  on  the  night  of  the 
23rd  of  February  to  Cato-street ;  I  observed  a 
man  standing  with  his  back  against  the  wall, 
between  the  gateway  leading  out  of  John-street 
find  the  stable  door;  he  had  a  pistol  in  his 
hand,  and  he  levelled  it  at  lieutenant  Fitz- 
clarence, who  was  about  a  yard  and  a  half  at 
4he  ^ead  of  me ;  upon  my  observing  that,  1 
knocked  the  pistol  aside  with  a  pike,  and 
seized  the  muzzle  end  of  the  pistol  with  my 
left  hand ;  a  scufHe  upon  that  ensued  between 
the  man  and  me,  and  the  pistol  went  off  in  the 
scuffle ;  whatever  the  pistol  was  loaded  with, 
tore  the  sleeve  of  the  jacket  of  the  right  arm ;  as 
soon  as  the  pistol  went  off,  he  let  it  go  easily, 
and  I  secured  him,  and  delivered  him  over  to 
the  police  officers ;  that  man  was  Tidd  ;  I  saw 
him  afterwards,  and  I  have  seen  him  since ;  I 
then  went  into  the  stable,  and  up  into  the  loft ; 
the  persons  who  were  in  the  loft  had  sur- 
rendered when  I  got  there  to  part  of  the 
piquet;  I  assisted  in  securing  some  of  the  arms 
that  were  taken  in  the  loft.'^ 

Then  Lieutenant  Fitzclarence  is  called,  who 
says,  '*  I  am  a  lieutenant  in  the  Coldstream- 
^uards ;  I  was  applied  to  on  the  evening  of 
the  23rd  of  February  to  send  a  piquet  to 
John-street;  I  accompanied  that  piquet;  when 
I  got  to  John-street,  my  attention  was  attracted 
by  the  report  of  fire  arms;  I  brought  my 
piquet.forwards  towards  Cato-street;  on  get- 
ting to  the  archway  leading  into  Cato«>street,  I 
met  a  police  officer,  wjio .  was  calling  out 
^  soldiers,  soldiers  1  the  stable  door  V  I  made 
towards  it,  and  the  moment  I  got  to  the  door 
I  met  two  men,  one  of  them  presented  a  pistol, 
and  the  other  cut  at  me  with  a  sword ;  we  ex* 
f^hanged  several  ^uis ;  he  seeing  the  body  of 


the  piquet  coming  op,  ran  into  the  stable,  sod 
I  followed  him ;  on  entering  tiie  stable,  I  cause 
up  to  one  man,  who  said, '  do  not  kill  me,  and 
I  will  tell  you  all,'  it  turned  out  afteniaids 
that  that  was  Monument ;  **  I  gave  \m  in 
charge,  and  then  returned  and  took  out  another 
man,  and  the  soldiers  took  him  away ;  I  thea 
led  the  men  up  into  the  loft,  and  therelfoond 
three  four  or  five  men,  and  a  large  quaotitj  of 
arms,  consisting  of  blunderbusses,  pistols,  and 
pikes ;  I  assisted  in  securing  the  p^soas  in  the 
loft,  and  the  arms." 

Upon  his  cross-examination,  be  sajs,  "I 
took  Davidson  into  custody  ;  he  was  taken  to 
Bow-street,  having  been  first  brought  into  the 
stable  in  Cato-street;  I  do  not  know  that ii 
proceeding  from  the  stable  he  was  taken  into 
any  public-house,  or  any  other  house;  1  viH 
not  be  certain  that  he  was  not  taken  into  the 
Horse  and  Groom ;  Tidd  and  another  peeoa 
were  there ;  but  I  think,"  lieutenant  Filr 
clarence  added,  '<  he  was  not  to  my  knovledjei 
in  the  Horse  and  Groom,  nor  in  a  pabiic- 
house,  till  he  was  carried  to  Bow-street'' 

Thenext  witness  called  is  William Westcoatt, 
who  says,  *<  I  am  one  of  the  Bow-8b«et  pat- 
role  ;  I  went  to  Cato-atieet  on  the  33ni  of 
February ;  on  going  up  I  saw  logs,  one  (]f  the 
prisoners,  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder." 

Then  John  .Wright  is  called,  who  says, ''I 
am  one  of  the  Bow-street  patrole;  I  veotap 
to  the  foot  of  the  ladder  in  the  stable  in  Cato- 
street;  I  saw  a  stoutisb  man  standing  there; I 
took  from  him  a  butcber*8  knife  and  asvoid; 
there  was  wax-end  twisted  round  the  handle 
of  the  knife ;  that  knife  is  in  the  posseaiottof 
the  officer;  immediately  afterwards  I  ni 
knocked  down,  and  received  a  stab  in  my  tight 
side,  and  that  man  made  his  escape  fromaie; 
Ings  was  immediately  afterwards  brought  bad 
in  custody/' 

John  Champion,  who  is  also  one  of  the 
Bow-street  patrole,  says  "  I  was  at  the  suUe 
in  Cato-street  on  the  night  of  the  23rd;  I  saw 
Ings  at  the  foot  of  the  ladder;  on  tke  officeis 
appearing,  he  said,  ^  look  out  above  iheie';he 
afterwards  made  his  escape;  Brooks  afienranb 
came  up,  bringing  him  in  custody;  ve  not 
him  to  Mary-le-bone  watcb-hoase,  sod 
searched  him  there  ;  we  found  two  hsTeisat^ 
slung  across  his  shoulders  under  his  great cot^ 
a  tin^ase  nearly  full  of  powder,  three  }isx»^ 
balls,  a  knife  case,  and  a  belt  round  his  breast  i 
the  knife-case  was  made  of  olotb,  for  ft  ^ 
knife ;  there  is  a  knife  wrapped  rouod  vitb  wit* 
end,  which  fits  it,  and  which  is  in  it  now. 

Then  W^illiam  Charies  Brookes  iscaNj 
he  says,  "  I  am  one  of  the  Bow-street  patwj; 
I  met  a  man  running  in  John-street  on  the 
night  of  the  23rd  ;  he  presented  a  pistol  at  oe 
and  fired  it;  the  ball  went  thrwgh  my 
clothes,  bruised  my  shoulder,'  and  graied  dJ 
neck ;  I  staggered  into  the  street,  and  Uiemaonft 
on  ;  he  was  afterwards  laid  hold  of  by  Moayi* 
watchman ;  I  searched  him  in  the  watcMjwjJ 
and  took  from  him  two  haversacks,  a  beK***} 
his  body,  and  a  tin  case  nearly  foUof  po«dtf  > 


1530] 


Richard  Tiddjor  High  Treasdn. 


A.D.  1820.     » 


[1530 


I  asked  him  how  he  came  to  fire  at  me,  a  man 
he  had  never  seen  before  ;^nd  he  damned  me, 
and  said  he  wished  he  had  killed  me,  as  he 
^vanted  to  do.'' 

They  then  called  Samnel  Hercules  Taunton, 
another  of  the  officers,  who  says,  **on  the 
morning  of  the  24th  of  February,  I  went  to 
Brunt's  lodgings,  to  apprehend  him ;  I  took 
him  in  the  front  two-|^ir  of  stairs  room ;  I 
found  there  two  rash  baskets,  an  iron  pot 
and  a  pike-staff;  1  asked  him  about  the  back 
room,  and  he  denied  its  being  his  apartment ;  I 
then  called  up  the  landlady,  and  asked  her 
whose  it  was ;  ^he,  in  his  presence,  said  the 
lodgings  were  let  in  his  presence  to  a  man,  but 
ahe  did  not  know  what  his  name  was ;  I  asked 
Brnnt  who  he  was,  and  he  said,  he  had  only 
seen  him  once  at  a  publio-hotse,  and  he  did  not 
know  who  he  was ;  I  then  went  to  Tidd's  lodg« 
ing,  in  Hole->in-the-wall  passage,  and  found 
some  articles  of  ammunition ;"  which  are  now 
lying  on  the  table,  and  enumerated  in  that  list 
which  I  shall  by  and  by  state  to  you. 

Daniel  Bishop,  another  Bow-street  officer, 
teUs  you  that  he  apprehended  Thistlewood  on 
Thursday  the  24th  of  February,  between  ten 
and  eleven  in  the  morning ;  he  says,  **  I  found 
him  al  the  house  of  a  Mrs.  Harris,  No.  8, 
White-street,  Moor-fields ;  he  was  then  in  bed, 
with  his  breeches  and  stockings  on,  and  his 
coat  and  waistcoat  by  the,  bed -side ;  in  the 
pockets  I  found  three  leaden  balls,  a  ball-carl* 
ridge,  two  flints,  and  a  small  silk  sash  ;  I  took 
him  to  Bow-street,  and  then  to  the  Secretary 
of  State's." 

On  his  cross-examination,  he  says,  that  se- 
veral of  the  patfole  went  with  him  to.  appre* 
hend .  Thistlewood,  and  that  they  surrounded 
the  house  before  they  entered  it,  for  fear  of 
mischief.  This  was  all  the  evidence  given  to 
you  yesterday. 

Then,  gontleroen,  they  have  this  day  again 
called  berore  you,  Rotfaven,  the  officer,  who 
says,  ''  there  are  now  upon  the  table  the  arms 
and  ammunition  found  in  Cato-street;  there  were 
six  more  hand-grenades  than  there  are  here, 
which  have  been  opened  in  the  course  of  the 
investigations;  the  pike  staves  were  ferruled 
at  the  time  they  were  found ;  but  some  of  the 
ferrules  have  dropped  off,  in  consequence,  as 
I  suppose,  of  the  greenness  of  the  wood  ;  some 
of  the  pike-heads  are  files  sharpened,  and 
others  are  bayonets ;  the  poles  are  bored  for 
the  pike-heads  to  screw  in ;  the  hand-grenades 
were  all  fitted  with  fuses."  Then  he  points 
out  the  haversacks  and  the  belt,  the  knite  and 
the  knife-case,  found  upon  Ings.  He  then 
verifies  a  list,  which  he  says  he  made  out,  of 
the  various  articles ;  thirty-eight  ball-cartridges, 
firelock  and  bayonet,  one  powder-flask,  three 
pistols,  one  sword,  six  bayonet  spikes  and 
cloth  belt,  one  blunderbuss,  pistol,  fourteen 
bayonet-spikes  and  three  pointed  files,  one 
bayonet,  one  bayonet-spike  and  one  sword 
scabbard,  one  carbine  and  bayonet,  two  swords, 
>  one  bullet,  ten  hand-grenades,  two  fire-balls, 
one  large  grenade  and  bayonet,  rop^ladder, 


one  sword-stick,  forty  ball-cartridges  and  one 
bayonet,  three  loose  bails;"  these  were  aH 
found  in  the  lofl.  *'  In  the  stable,  in  the 
pocket  of  Bradbum,  six  ball-cartridges,  three 
balls  and  some  string  put  round  him  to  act  as 
a  belt;  the  pistol  which  it  is  alleged  that 
Tidd  fired,  the  pistol  which  it  is  alleged  that 
Wilson  attempted  to  fire,  blunderbuss,  sword, 
belt  and  scaobard,  one  pistol,  one  sword, 
twelve  sticks  with  ferrules.  In  the  pocket  of 
Tidd,  two  ball-cartridges,  and  round  him  a 
leather  belt;  two  ball-cartridges  fiicing  the 
stable,  and  ten  ditto  in  Newnbam-street ;  one 
musket  cut  down,  and  one  sword  from  David- 
son, one  haversack,  cross  belts,  one  pricker, 
bayonet,  scabbard,  cartouche-box,  and  a  belt 
round  his  body ;  two  haversacks,  one  belt  and 
tin."  The  remainder  of  the  enumeration  of 
the  articles  I  would  read  to  you,  if  there  was 
au^  thing  in  it  that  tended  to  the  benefit  of  the 
prisoners;  but  my  learned  brother  suggests, 
that  probably  you  have  so  good  a  recollecticm 
of  the  enumeration  of  the  articles  which  are 
exhibited  before  yoo,  that  you  may  not  perhaps 
think  it  necessary  that  I  should  go  through  it 
again. . 

Foreman  of  the  Jury, — No,  my  lord,  it  is  not 
at  all  necessary. 

Mr.  Baron  Oomni;.— -Then,  gentlemen,  thi* 
being  the  enumeration  of  the  articles,  the  wit- 
ness says,  ''  the  stick  that  was  found  in  the 
public  house  was  the  one  left  by  Cooper,  and 
afterwards  asked  for  by  Gilchrist." 

John  Hector  Morison  is  then  called  again, 
and  a  sword  being  shewn  to  him,  he  says, 
'*  this  is  the  sword  that  was  brought  for  me  to 
grind ;  my  directions  were,  to  grind  it  on  both 
sides,  and  to  make  the  point  as  sharp  as  a 
needle ;  it  is  particularly  sharp."  I  asked  him 
if  that  was  the  one  he  called  a  scimitar,  and 
he  says,  "  they  are  both  of  a  similar  shape  ;'^ 
then  he  says,  ''  since  it  left  me  the  edge  has 
been  made  much  keener  by  sharpening  it  with 
a  steel  or  a  stone,  I  cannot  exactly  say  which .^ 

Then  Benjamin  Gill  is  called  again,  and 
selects  the  carbine  and  sword  taken  from  Da« 
vidson,  from  the  arms  which  are  upon  the 
table;  he  had  stated,  that  he  believed  there 
was  a  string  attached  to  the  sword  taken  from 
Davidson,  and  the  one  produced  has  such  a 
string  ;  '*  the  carbine  was  not  loaded  when  I 
took  possession  of  it,  because  he  had  dis- 
charged it  at  me  before  I  took  it  to  Bow-street, 
it  was  quite  damp." 

Iluthven  is  again  called,  and  be  says,  ^^  the 
greater  part  of  Sie  fire-arms  were  loaded  when 
we  took  them ;  we  had  them  drawn  for  the 
purpose  of  being  produced  here ;  they  were 
ioaaed  with  ball,  with  the  exception  of  one 
gun,  which  had  large  shot." 

Then  Mr.  Aldous,  the  (yawnbroker,  is  called 
again,  and  having  looked  at  the  blunderbuss 
produced  to  him,  he  states,  that  he  believes  it 
to  be  the  same  that  was  taken  out  of  pawn  by 
Davidson,  on  tbie  23rd  of  February.  Being 
asked  by  the  the  priatoner  Davidson  whether 


1S31]       t  GEORGE  IV. 


Trial  qflPttliamDa^idioi^  and 


nsss 


li«  did  not  i^eoUect  biftMjriiog,  wbeii  lie  fdodf^ 
«d  it,  tb«t  it  was  not  bis  owo»  he  says  the 
•prisooer  might  make  that  observatioDy  but  he 
does  not  recollect  it. 

Taunton*  the  officer,  is  then  called  again, 
nnd  he  ennmerates  the  articles  found  in  the 
rush  baskets  at  Bnint's;   he  siysy  ^Mn  one 
basket  there  «t«tn  aioo  paper%  with  ropei^m, 
tar»  and  other  ingredients ;  those^^  he  snys,  ^are 
what  are  eaUed  fire4Mlis ;  there  were  also  some 
steel  filings  in  a  paper,  nbont  hnlf  nn  onnce ; 
in  the  other  basket,  which  was  wrapped  up  in 
4he  bhie  apmn,  there  wereienr  grenades,  three 
papers  of  rope-yarn,  tar,  end  otfwr  iogredienls»'' 
that  is,  Baoce  fire-balls ;  ^  two  bags  of  powder, 
one  pound   weight  each,  they  sm  mode  of 
flnanel  ("  ihese  are  made  up  in  the  best  ma»- 
laer  they  can  be  made  for  cartridges  for  cannon 
by  a  peraott  not  hvring  a  mould  for  the  gun, 
nod  petfoetly  answering  the  purpose  of  a  move 
legolar  cartridge ;  ''  five  flannel  bags  empty, 
•ae  paper  of  powderi  one  leather  bag,  sikty- 
three  balls,  one  iron  pot|'*  it  appears  that  tar, 
€t  some  such  substance  hae  been  heated  in  it, 
'^a  pike-handk;''  these  were  alt  the  things 
that  were  found  at  Brunt's ;'  he  says,  **  the 
haud-grenades  found  in  Cato-street,  and  those 
found  at  Brunt's,  are  of  the  ftinie  description ;" 
then  he  savs,  ''at  Tidd's,  there  were  found  in 
A  hayenact^  434  hallSy  171  baU-cutridgei,  69 
hall-cartridges  without  powdar  in  theni,  thine 
fMninds  of  powder  in  j^eper^  tnd  ako  in  a 
ooarse  eanfass  cloth  (en  grenades,  ^evnn  bags 
of  powder,  one  pound  eick^**  of  the  same  sort 
with  those  found  at  Btunt's ;  ^  ten  hag9  empty, 
a  small  bag  with  a  tin  powder  flask  with  some 
powder,  stzty^^eight  balls,  four  flints^  twenty^ 
eeren  pifce-himdlieB^  of  the  same  dnsoription  as 
those  mnd  in  Cato-street^  forrukd  ana  bored, 
and  a  box  containing '  965   balUcartridgoa,'' 
which,  he  ai^,  are  made  up  in  parcels  of  five 
each ;  then,  upon  a  question  being  put  by  one 
of  you,  gentlemen,  whether  that  box  was  etreng 
enough  to  remoi«  them  from  plnce  to  plaoe, 
fie  says, ''  it  was  tied  up  strongly  when  I  found 
it  under  the  bed ;  it  was  strong  enough^  cer- 
lainly^  to  be  removed/' 
•   Then  they  call  Serjeant  Hanson,  who  says, 
^lama  seij^eant  in  the  royal  aitilleiy,  and 
acquaintBd  with  such  things  as  are  now  before 
me.     The  flannel  bags  of  gunpowder,  con» 
taining"  one  pound  each,  I  suppose  were  meant 
ibr  cartridges  for  a  six-pound  gun,  they  wouKl 
answer  that  purpose;  they  are  made  difier* 
ently  from  what  a  military  man  of  experience 
would  make  tbeas,  be  would  make  them  in  a 
monkl  fitted  to  the  gun.    The  ingredients  of 
those  fire^mlls  are  neariy  all  alike ;  they  am 
made  of  oaknm,  4ar,  resio  and  brimstone ;  one 
was  withont  brimstone,^'  that  he  supposed  had 
been  intended  for  the  bottom  of  a  lMUid-gre« 
node;  "  tfa^  wooM  be  eflectusA  in  setting  a 
building  on  fire,  and  if  one  of  them  was  thrown 
into  a  hay  loft  with  two  or  three  loads  of  hay 
and  straw»  it  would  most  anufedly  bum  it 
down,  or  dnvwn  into  eny  building  and  resting 
on  wcbdy  it  «o«dd.sel  it  oo  fire  ^  it  wodid  bum 


for  three  or  four  minvtes.  In  the 
nades  I  have  opened,  there  is  a  small  boa  of 
tin,  containing  about  three  ounces  and  a  hilf 
of  gunpowder,  vith  a  fose  brazed  into  it;  I 
weighed  the  gunpowder  in  oae^  nod  they  afl 
appear  to  be  Uie  same,  that  is,  aaore  than 
ctent  for  a  niuMaeh  slwU ;  fint  there  is 
yarn,  then  paper,  then  more  ropB»fnin»  then 
the  tin-box,  with  a  number  of  pieees  nf 
tied  tight  round  it.  I  found  as  i 
fivo  pieem  of  iron ;  if  these  were  tbsoi 
a  room  where  fifteen  persons  were 
it  would  be  dischaiged  in  about  half  a 
and  piebably  be  attended  with  dealii 
annetiea  to  all  the  pemons  in  the  loon. 
he  opens  one,  and  gives  you  a  desctiption  of 
its  content! ;  he  says,  "the  powder  is  veiy 
good;  the  hand-grenailes  are  wot  anadeasa 
military  man  would  make  then,  Imt  Hiot  am 
constructed  so  as  to  he  very  effectwnl  and  ^^ 
stractive;  the  regular  hand-igrenadee  have  a 
shell  which  can  only  be  obtained  nft  a 
der's ;"  the  one  he  opens  has  nuiy  four 
of  iron  in  it,  but  he  says  he  fomnd  in 
twenty-^ve ;  they  vary  according  to  the  dm 
of  the  pieces. 

This  is  the  whole  of  the  evidence  ob  the  part 
of  the  preeecntion.  You  have  been  addressed 
by  the  learned  ooonsel  for  the 
the  subject  of  the  case  which 
submitted  to  you,  and  yon  have  sinee 
nddtened  by  the  fmsoners  themsalvei.  i 
aot  at  present  state  to  you  at  any  kngth  tiie 
observniioes  which  have  been  made  hf  ibe^ 
or  by  the  other,  but  shall  follow  the 
chief  baron,  who  presided  at  the  <nilf  trial  at 
which  I  have  been  present  hare,  hy  desiring 
you,  upon  whom  the  speeches  of  coumel 
most  peooHsuly  calculated  to  m^e  a  deep 
lasting  impression,  to  give  the  fodiest  efieet 
all  the  observations  that  were  addieesed  to 
I  diall  raeommend  to  you  to  pay  the  wtmost 
attention  to  what  has  been  said.  I  haene  a 
reason  for  not  foing  much  at  laofe  into  the 
observations  whii^  yon  have  heard,  wlodb  pen- 
bably  yon  wttl  give  me  credit  for  beUeiaug  is 
not  one  oreatid  by  a  feeling  olh< 
humane  towards  the  priscnere  at  tftm 

On  the  part  of  the  prisonem  there  hnare  been 
called  to  yoa  as  witnesses  two  pereooa  to  foela; 
the  first  of  these  is  Mary  Badcer,  who  leKi  ye«B, 
she  is  the  dai^ter  of  the  prisoner  Tidd ;  that 
she  knows  Edwaeds  and  Adams ;  that 
about  a  fortnight  l>efare  the  afihir  in 
left  at  her  father's  lodgings  some  hand^greimdw 
and  powder ;  she  says,  **  AdaoM  left  the  huge 
grenade;  Edwards  asked,  if  he  mighit  .lenve 
them  for  a  little  while ;  they  were  not  to  re^ 
main  there,  they  vrere  to  be  called  for  again ; 
Edwards  took  them  away  once  to  finish  them, 
iml  brought  them  hack  again;  this  wm 
albont  a  week  before  the  Cato-eaeet  aftir ; 
they  were  taken  away  again  on  the  23id  by 
Edwards,  and  l»onght  back  on  the  t4tii| 
about  an  homr  before  the  officer  eame;  the 
person  who  brought  them  hack  was  an 
stmngerte  «ie ;  there  w«8  a  ooided  boa. 


1533] 


Rkkard  Tidd for  High  Trtaim. 


A.  D.  182a 


tl/K»4 


Other  tblttgB,  left  at  oor  bouse,  whiekwaem, 
to  m/'kiiowtedge,  uocordled  during  the  tiae  it 
remained,  wbkh  was  till  the  morniDg  cf  the 
34tb,  when  the  officers  took  it  away ;  what  it 
contained  I  do  not  know/'  Yon  wiU  piobably 
not  wonder,  that  the  learned  oounsel  fiw  the 
Grown  did  not  address  any  qaestUm  to  the 
witness,  becanse  it  was  otidoubledly  trae,  as 
was  staled  in  the  replyi  that  if  the  case  had 
fenained  short  on  the  part  of  the  proseeution, 
muoh  confirmation  would  be  derived  from  the 
testimony  of  this  unhappy  penon,  oalled  in 
Mder  to  effeet  the  security  of  her  near  relatiTe; 
I  shaU  make  no  further  observation  upon  it; 
that  is  undoubtedly  well  justified. 

Thomas  Chambers  is  the  next  witness ;  he 
eays^  *^  I  live  at  No*  3,  Heathcook-coort,  in  the 
Strand  ;  I  know  Adams  ;  I  remember  the  day 
when  the  people  were  taken  up  in  Cato-street| 
lie  ealled  upon  me  twice,  about  a  week  before, 
in  company  with  Edwards ;  Edwaids  asked 
me,  in  the  presence  of  Adams,  if  I  would  go 
along  with  them ;  I  asked  them  where ;  he  said 
I  was  not  such  a  fool  as  not  to  know  there  was 
something  on  foot;  I  replied,  I  did  not; 
Adams  sud,  we  are  going  to  kill  his  mnes^s 
ministerB,  and  we  will  have  blood  and  wine 
Ibr  supper ;  Edwards  replied,  by  God,  Adams^ 
you  are  right,  it  shall  be  so."  He  sirfs,  ^  on 
the  Monday  before  the  Catcvstreet  disoovery^ 
they  both  came  ;  they  bad  a  beg  with  them ; 
they  asked  me  to  let  them  leave  it  there;  I 
asked  what  it  contained,  and  Adams  said,  only 
a  few  pistols  and  such  like;  a  man  named 
Tunbridge  was  there  at  the  time*  I  refheed  to 
let  them  leave  it,  and  I  nee er  saw  them  afte»* 


floBse  questions  are  addtessed  to  him  en 
«TOss-«SBmtnallon,  and  in  answer  to  them,  he 
says,  **  I  do  not  knew  what  book  I  was  swoni 
upon ;  I  never  took  an  oath  hut  once,  belbre  I 
came  here  the  other  day ;  this  is  the  thtvd  tiuM^ 
k  is  a  Prayer-book,  I  sbeuld  suppose.  I  am 
a  churchman ;  I  Mieve  In  Christianity,  and 
have  always  said  so ;  I  always  believed  in  the 
Bible,  and  was  brought  up  to  the  church ;  I 
sever  saw  Paioe's  worksv  I  know  both  Uie 
prisoners  at  the  bar ;  I  have  known  Davidson 
Sttoee  about  the  time  of  Mr.  Hunt's  proeession; 
I  have  onfy  known  Tidd  in  the  trade>  we  are 
brother  shoemakers ;  I  cannot  say  how  long  I 
have  known  him,  whether  twelve  or  nine  or 
six  months.  I  dnd  not  paiticularly  knew  him 
at  the  time  of  Hunt's  procession.''  Upon 
being  pressed  as  to  how  long  he  had  known 
him,  he  says,  **  it  mi^t  be  at  some  of  the 
meetings  in  Smithfleld ;  I  attended  every  rneel^ 
ing  that  was  held  openly  in  the  air ;  I  carried 
bannen ;  I  cannot  say  but  that  I  might  have 
walked  in  the  processiOD  with  some  of  the  pri- 
«onen  who  are  indicted  •  I  know  lugs  and  finint 
and  Wilson,  and  I  know  H^urtison  very  well ;  I 
do  not  know  Bradburn  so  well,  hut  I  do  know 
him."  llien  he  is  asked  vriiether  he  went  to  any 
of  the  Smithfield  meetings  in  company  with  any 
of  these  persons,  and  he  says,  ^  I  cannot  say, 
Aey  might  be  there;  I  had  no  weapon  at  the 


SmithAeld  meeting ;  I  carried  no  pistol  in  my 
pocket,  nor  do  I  know  that  any  body  else  had 
any ;  I  have  known  Thistlewood  ever  since  Mr. 
Hunt's  procession ;  he  has  been  at  my  place 
repeatedly  since,  for  I  took  home  the  ^ags, 
and  he  has  been  there  to  fetch  them,  and  to 
distribute  them  to  those  who  were  to  take  them* 
i  have  seen  him  sinoe,  on  one  Sunday  evening, 
at  the  Black  Dog  in  Oray's-inn«lane.  I  know 
the  White  Don  in  Wych-street  very  well,  I 
have  attended  meetings  there ;  there  is  no  name 
to  the  meeting,  except  that  it  is  a  meeting  o^ 
Mibrroers;  I  had  no  number  or  section.  I 
saw  Thisdewood  at  the  Smithfield  meeting, 
when  Mr.  Hunt  was  in  the  waggon ;  I  wa« 
always  in  the  vraggon ;  I  cannot  say  who  else 
Was  diere,  there  were  thousands  I  believe ;  I 
do  not  think  I  saw  Davidson  there»"  Then  he 
is  asked  whether  he  thought  they  were  sucfar 
ferocious  monsters  as  were  going  to  commit 
assassination,  and  he  says,  *'Yes,  but  I  did 
not  consider  they  would  get  fools  enough  to 
do  it ;  I  considered  myself  a  fool,  but  not  s» 
big  a  fool  as  that;  I  never  heard  a  man  say  a 
word  against  his  majesty's  ministera,  except 
those  men,  Edurards  and  Adams ;  I  thoumit 
the  thing  so  preposterous  and  absurd,  that 
no  man  would  oe  found  foolish  enough  to  do 
it.  I  first  met  with  lags  at  a  shop  where 
pamphlets  were  sold ;  I  enfy  read  Mr.  Colv* 
bett's  wo^ ;  I  have  got  plenty  of  them." 

Tlien  they  called  another  witness,  John 
Bennett;  he  says,  **l  live  at  No.  4,  Little 
Park-lane,  New-street,  Mary-4e-bone ;  I  am  a 
bricklayer  by  tiude;  I  know  Hidea,  he  ban 
oaltod  upon  me,  and  asked  me  to  accompany 
him  to  privute  radical  meetings ;  he  has  en-i 
duaiROufed  to  persoada  me  to  accompany 
him  more  than  ten  times ;  he  did  not  tell  bm 
any  thing  was  to  be  done  there,  but  only  ra« 
quested  me  to  go  with  him,  and  I  might  sit 
and  see  and  hear,  and  say  nothing  unless  I 
^ose ;  I  never  did  accompany  him,  nor  evet 
went  to  any  radical  meetings,  either  private  oe 
public.'' 

This  is  all  the  evidence  called  on  the  part 
of  the  prisoners  to  any  facts. 

They  then  proceed  to  call  witnesses  to  the 
respective  characters  of  the  prisoners.  For  the 
ptsoner,  Davidson,  the  first  witness  they  caU 
IS  Isaac  Cook,  who  savs  ^  I  live  in  Chariotte* 
street  Blackfriars'*road;  I  have  known  David* 
son  about  six  years ;  about  six  years  ase 
he  worked  as  a  journeyman  for  me  in  the 
cabinet  Hue,  and  he  has  since  occasionally 
called  at  my  house  in  the  way  of  business ;  at 
the  time  he  worked  for  me,  he  was  a  very  honest 
hard-^rorking  industrious  man,  but  I  have  not 
known  sufficiently  of  him  since  to  speak  to  kiM 
character.'' 

For  the  prisoner  Tidd,  they  call  Stephen 
Hales,  who  keeps  a  grocer's  shop  at  No*  IT^ 
Bell-court,  Gray'84nnr>lane ;  he  si^  ^  I  have 
known  Tidd  about  fifteen  months,  and  during 
that  time  I  never  saw  any  thing  in  km  condnot 
treasonable,  or  that  lo^ed  Hke  conspiracy) 
he  wes  a  very  piadeot  and  industrioas  maa^ 


15351        1  GEORGE  IV- 


,THal  of  fVUUarn  Davidson  and 


[1536 


always  at  hii  work  when  he  had  any  to  do ; 

and  when  he  bad  none  he  took  a  walk  with 
his  family,  or  employed  his  time  in  reading." 

Then  William  French  is  called,  and  he  says, 
"  I  am  a  carpenter  and  undertaker,  living  at 
No.  18,  Union-court,  Holbom  ;  I  have  knovm 
Tidd  nearly  three  years,  he  was  a  lodger  and 
tenant  of  mine  ;  during  that  time  he  has  borne 
the  best  character ;  he  appeared  a  very  indus- 
trious and  honest  man,  and  was  always  a 
punctual  paymaster;  I  never  wished  for  a 
Detter  tenant." 

Samuel  Lands  says,  '*I  live  at  No.  11, 
Charlea-street  Hatton-garden ;  I  am  a  boot* 
maker;  I  have  known  Tidd  turned  of  three 
years ;  he  has  borne  a  very  good  character  to 
the  best  of  my  knowledge ;  he  always  appeared 
to  be  an  honest  and  industrious  roan ;  he  has 
worked  for  me  the  whole  of  that  time,  and  has 
deserved  my  good  opinion." 

Then  on  the  behalf  of  Davidson,  Robert 
Wood  is  called,  and  he  says,  "  I  am  a  tinman 
and  braxier,  living  at  No.  5,  £Uiott's-row  near 
Lord's  Cricket-ground  ;  I  have  known  David- 
son upwards  of  three  years,  and  during  that 
time  he  has  appeared  to  be  a  very  industrious 
sober  man." 

This  is  the  whole  of  the  evidence  which  has 
been  laid  before  you  in  the  course  of  these 
two  laborious  days,  upon  this  most  important 
and  anxious  trial ;  and  before  I  proceed  to  any 
other  subject,  I  would  observe  upon  that  which 
has  been  the  last  topic  of  evidence — the  cha- 
lacter  of  the  prisoners ;  I  think  you  may  take 
it  upon  that  which  has  been  proved  by  the 
witnesses  on  their  part,  that  they  have  received 
from  them  unexceptionable  characters — then  I 
address  you  in  the  language  of  all  judges  upon 
such  subjects,  by  saying  to  yon,  that  if  the 
case  imputed  to  the  prisoners  remains  in  any 
doubt,  you  ought  to  give  them  the  full  benefit 
and  advantage  of  character,  and  that  ought  to 
turn  the  scale  in  their  favour ;  but  if  the  case 
admits  of  no  doubt  whatever,  character  ought 
noty  cannot,  and  it  would  be  most  preposter- 
ous that  it  should  operate  to  find  a  man  not 
guilty,  where  the  evidence  is  clear  against 
him. 

In  the  course  of  this  inquiry,  it  has  been 
suggested  to  you,  that,  with  all  the  evidence 
which  you  have  heard  from  the  testimony  of 
witnesses,  pure  and  impure,  it  is  impossible  for 
any  men,  who  expect  to  have  any  attention 
paid  to  their  observation,  to  hesitate  in  admit- 
ting fully,  broadly,  up  to  the  fullest  extent,  that 
a  conspiracy  of  many  persons,  characterized  by 
those  who  have  spoken  of  it  as  of  a  most 
diabolical,  detestable  nature,  such  as  is  a  dis- 
grace to  any  civilized  coublry,  has  taken  place. 
It  has  been  admitted,  that  it  is  impossiole  to 
deny  that  the  persons  included  in  tnis  indict- 
ment have  each  of  them  had  their  respective 
shares  in  that  conspiracy ;  but  it  is  said,  we 
must  not  confound  criiAes,  that  it  was  a  con- 
spiracy which  in  point  of  moral  guilt,  in  point  of 
diabolical  turpitude,  in  point  of  cold-blooded  | 
wickedness,  nothing  can  oy  possibility  exceed ;  • 


and  the  gentlemen  have,  in  a  mamier  aljil 
nobody  could  doubt  for  a  single  momeDt  «ii 
a  candid  and  fair  declaration  of  that  nhck 
they  were  feeling  at  their  hearts,  stated,  that 
they  could  not  for  a  single  momeat  be  tk 
apologists  of  such  crimes  as  those ;  bat  dut 
horrid  and  detestable  as  they  were,  tbef  did 
not  amount  to  the  crime  of  high  treasoa  ww 
charged.    What  is  the  conspiracy,  then,  wliitk 
these  gentlemen  ask  you  to  adopt  in  the  place 
of  that  which  the  prosecutor  says  was  a  cos- 
spiracy  to  subvert  the  government,  to  depes 
the  king,  to  levy  war,  to  produce  rebellioBaiii 
insurrection  in  the  country?    Wkatisittke^ 
give  you  in  the  place  of  this?  why,  acw- 
spiracy  to  destroy  by  the  most  destractivend 
horrible  means  by  which  human  life  has  em 
been  taken  away  by  any  assassins  in  anj  boe 
or  in  any  country,  fifteen  persons,  whose  onei 
and  stations  have  more  than  once  been  itatsd 
to  you ;  but  feeling  that  it  would  be  impo«- 
ble  to  induce  any  men  of  your  ooder^aod- 
ing  to  believe  that  was  quite  all,  beaoseit 
woold  be  difficult  to  induce  any  man  or  bdb- 
ber  of  men,  who  had  no  common  intereit,  m 
common  cause  of  complaint,  no  comoxHi  lo- 
timent  of  malice  or  revenge,  by  any  sedndtoo, 
by  any  temptation  of  reward,  by  any  po«Ue 
means  to  procure  their  accession  to  ssdi  a 
transaction — ^to  engage  in  it  merely  for  ^ 
purpose  of  taking  off  such  men  as  tbo«— I 
speak  of  those  fifteen  persons  only  as  v«  ^ 
them  in  the  evidence-— this  is  not  the  phc^  if 
I  had   the  honour  of  intimate  aoqoaintasce 
with  any  of  those  noble  personages,  for  me  to 
introduce  that  as  a  topic  tor  vour  consideiatioi 
—I  speak  of  them  only  as  the  erideooeiDtlni 
case  and  the  history  of  the  ooontry  pnxM 
them  to  you  ;  were  those  the  only  penoos  vh> 
were  to  be  destroyed  according  to  ike  testi- 
mony which  bears  so  strongly  on  the  esse  (bit 
which  the  gentlemen  say  cannot  expect  any  cre- 
dit with  you,  but  that  which  the  wimessAdasB 
has  told  you  was  the  construction  of  bis  ovo 
invention,  and  not  the  invention  of  the  cof* 
spirators). — Were  those  fifteen  per»n$tb««2 
piersons  who  were  to  become  the  victitis  « 
these  attempts  ?    No ;  there  was  one  otter, 
and  that  was  another  who,  when  the  naiatB 
pronounced,  wHl  furnish  a  strong  clae  tt  i*- 
certain  whether  the  destruction  of  mioi^^ 
and  the  plunder  of  houses  wras  the  only  o^ 
in  view,  or  whether  it  had  ulterior  objeeuot 

wide-spreading  destruction. 

You  will  not  fail  to  recollect  that  the  fire- 
balls, which  were  to  light  up  the  illumioatioij 
of  the  metropolis,  to  intimate  to  the  friends  ot 
liberty  that  now  was  the  time  for  them  to  co^ 
forward,  for  that  their  tyrants  were  destroyed, 
and  that  a  provisional  government  was  sitiu^ 
were  to  destroy,  among  others,  the  boose » 
the  bishop  of  London.  J  believe  I  may  ay  w 
that  person,  that  of  all  the  learned  and  ex- 
cellent inen  who  have  ever  presided  in  the«e 
of  London,  there  never  was  a  man,  and  I  oe' 
lieve  I  may  venture  to  say  there  nenx  w 
exist  a  man,  so  utterly  incapable  of  givaV  "* 


16«T1 


ItkA^rd  TidAJor  Wgh  Tmm. 


A.  D,  iwa 


[15St 


•UghtesI  offiRM  to  any  bumftB  creature ;  or  i^ 
I  may  U9«  ao  expretaion  which  sometimes  haa 
been  employed  upon  sueh  subjeetSy  of  giving 
uneaainess  evea  to  the  worm  under  his  foot — 
the  creature  of  benevolence— €t  man  whose 
character  and  conduct,  in  public  and  private 
life,  have  conciliated  the  esteem  and  affection 
of  all  who  know  him»  and  of  whom,  I  believe  it 
may  be  truly  said,  it  is  impossible  he  should 
have  one  enemy ;  and  yet  this  prelate,  with  his 
interesting  infant  family,  and  every  thing  that 
ia  dear  to  him  in  this  world,  were,  according 
to  the  account  you  have  heard  of  that  which 
was  to  be  accomplbhed  on  the  23rd  of  Febru- 
ary, to  be  included  in  that  which  it  is  admitted 
was  one  of  the  purposes  of  this  conspiracy,  to 
destroy  the  lives  of  ministers  and  to  burn  the 
houses. 

But  was  there  no  ulterior  object  ?  yes,  it  is 
admitted  there  was ;  there  was  an  object  of 
pillage  and  plunder,  and  it  was  said,  they  were 
to  kick  up  a  row,  for  they  were  too  poor  to  wait 
longer.  Gendenen,  forget  for  a  moment  that 
there  was  such  a  man  as  Adams  in  the  world— 
forget  for  a  moment  that  there  was  such  a  roan 
as  John  Monument  in  esustence,  take  the  ac- 
count you  have  heard  from  Hale,  from  Hiden, 
from  lieutenant  Fitzclarence,  from  the  officers, 
from  lord  Harrowby,  from  his  butler,  from  wit* 
nesses  upon  do  one  of  whom  the  least  stain  is 
attempted  to  be  fixed ;  look  at  the  apparatus 
upon  your  table,  and  at  the  ammunition  which 
has  been  carried  away  to  a  place  of  safety,* 
and  ask  yourselves,  what  more  was  there  of 
conspiracy  here  i  and  had  it  for  its  only  object 
the  destruction  of  the  lives  of  ministers,  and 
some  plunder?  Men  accommodate  their 
means  to  their  object ;  then  according  to  oiw 
diaary  experience,  we  may  expect  to  find  these 
persons  going  forth,  if  plunder  is  tbtir  object, 
as  pluaderers  usually  ao,  in  all  the  possible 
security  arising  from  the  stillness  of  the  night, 
aad  they  will  not  add  murder  to  plunder,  un« 
lass  mnrder  becomes  necessary,  in  an  attempt 
to  prevent  detection ;  but  these  men  are  to  cut 
aff  the  heads  of  fifteen  of  his  raajest/s  cabinet 
miaisiers,  and  to  plunder;  and  it  was  said  to 
you,  ''oh,  the  carrying  the  haversacks,  with, 
the  accompaniment  of  the  butcher's  knife,  was 
aot  lo  cut  off  and  bring  away  the  hand  and  the 
heads  of  his  majesty's  roinislers;  that  was  a 
wicked  diabolical  invention  of  Adams.*'  If 
yoa  ask,  say  the  leanied  gentlemen,  what  they 
were  all  for,  they  were  for  the  carrying  away 
tilt  plunder.  You  have  seen  these  things, 
gCBtleaMn,  what  was  the  plunder  which  might 
Have  been  expected  at  the  house  of  one  of  his 
majesty's  ministers?  probably  an  extremely 
Talnable  service  of  plate  to  the  amount  of  four 
or  five  hundred  poinds  or  more,  much  of  it  in 
aiaasrve  articles.  We  shall  find  persons  going 
eat  to  plunder  with  the  means  of  carrying  away 
the  plunder  when  they  have  got  it,  but  shaU 

*  The  gunpowder  and  other  comhustible 
naUer  had  heea  removed  out  of  court,  at  tha 
cqmI«MO0  (9f  the  evidenoB  fi>r  the  foroteciition. 

VOL.  xxxiir. 


we  find  them  encumbered  with  things  which 
will. not  enable  them  to  carry  it  away;  shall 
we  find  the  party  with  only  two  haversacks 
over  the  shoulder  of  one  of  the  men  ?  and  yet 
that  Is  the  only  object  to  be  accomplished. 
What  is  to  become  of  them  afterwards  ?  The 
project  is  to  relieve  their  dire  necessities ;  they 
are  in  want,  they  can  wait  no  longer ;  why ; 
there  is  no  article  they  could  have  found  any 
where  \ess  convertible  to  the  immediate  pur^ 
po'^e  of  life,  than  a  service  of  plate  off  a  nobler 
min's  sideboard,  unless  the  crucible  was  air 
ready  prepared  to  melt  it  down,  and  some  per- 
son ready  to  sell  the  ingots  produced ;  but  bor 
sides  that,  they  would  want  theaccommodatioa 
for  carrying  away  plunder.  What  was  re- 
quired for  the  destruction  of  the  cabinet  min«i 
isters  of  the  king  ?  Were  the  articles  on